Carving the Chinese melon

[unmerged(6073)]

I wonder how they'll handle China in this period?

For those who don't know, China from the 1830's on increasingly found itself the victim of Western Imperialism. However, I doubt it would ever count as fully 'annexed' to any power, even in part. My understanding is that the Western powers carved out spheres of influence, but MOST of those areas were dominated through trade and "unequal treaties", not military force (Hong Kong, Manchuria, Kowloon etc. not included.)

So what is to be done? Should China be carved up into a bunch of 'mini-Chinas', with each being a 'vassal' to their respective great power? Seems a bit far fetched considering China was still under Manchu rule, if only just barely.

On another note, I wonder if they'll make Opium a trading commodity, or if it will all be simulated via events?

 

[unmerged(9422)]

Hmmm.. Interesting. Perhaps you will be able to "influence" certain provinces in China and then in the game's diplomatic system you will be able to get certain things that the western powers really did.. It is an interesting question how China will be handled.

I am thinking: Perhaps in the game's diplomatic system, perhaps there will be many more options than in the previous games (Europa Universalis II, Hearts of Iron), and so perhaps in a war against China, one could get the unequal treaty advantages, etc. over other nations so that one can get tribute from someone. And perhaps a territorial claims on areas depending on influence on province idea could also help here..

 

[unmerged(10128)]

it's pretty hard to imagine China would be simulated decently especially in this period without the historical knowledge, which paradox seem to lack.

giving more diplomatic options would be a good idea, but i think even better would be to do a much better trade system model. what the west really wanted from China was trade. all the opening of free ports, building railways, pressuring administration etc are motivated by trade. in fact the underlying cause for China being victim of western domination was trade. The West (Britain mainly) was losing a lot of wealth (silver) to China because of trading deficit until they decide to introduce a poisonous drug (Opium) into China even at the risk of illegal smuggling so as to recover the trade deficit. by the 1830s Opium alone accounted for more than half of Britain's trade with China. China's ban on that drug "forced" Britain to go to war against China.

so i think a better trade system would simulate China much better. even the opening of free ports can be simulated where the more ports China open, the more demand for the product, soBritain gets more income from exports.

 

[unmerged(6160)]

Well Infact, only parts of cities were controlled, they would have a French District, a British District, a Russian District, etc.

In Manchuria however, Russia basically annexed this territory.

But I wonder how Victoria will handle the Boxer rebellion.

 

[unmerged(6073)]

Originally posted by historycaesar
But I wonder how Victoria will handle the Boxer rebellion.

Unless they've added something startingly new to the engine, probably just an event or two.

 

[unmerged(2036)]

Originally posted by Sun_Zi_36
it's pretty hard to imagine China would be simulated decently especially in this period without the historical knowledge, which paradox seem to lack.

On what grounds do you base that statement?

 

[unmerged(5367)]

Originally posted by mrmister


On what grounds do you base that statement?

Chinese nationalist-fundamentalist?

 

[unmerged(5664)]

The other interesting aspect is how at least a few other pieces of China were sliced off by the various imperial powers (Nepal, Tibet, some of what was Soviet Central Asia, Mongolia)...

 

[unmerged(6465)]

They should have spheres of influence, that are like mini-CoTs. They would providence size, or 'region' size since we now have 3 levels of land distrabution. And you get the benifiet of having a market to sell finished goods and have a place to buy raw materials like it really was. If you gained a 'monopoly' in your sphere of influence, you could could get free military access.

This would allow nations to exist (Like India or China, etc), but have semi-puppet states in the area by the Western Imperialists.


I can't wait to crush the Boxer rebelion.. and fight the Opium Wars... mmm.. Opium...

 

[unmerged(10128)]

Originally posted by mrmister


On what grounds do you base that statement?

do you mean the first part or the second part? for the first part, it's not hard to see from the discussion already gone on. for the 2nd part, i base it on opinion from many people about how paradox simulated China in EUII.

Originally posted by The camel
Chinese nationalist-fundamentalist?

is that a ground or just a type of attitude (which is not a ground)? anyway, i m not a Chinese national.

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by Sun_Zi_36
do you mean the first part or the second part? for the first part, it's not hard to see from the discussion already gone on. for the 2nd part, i base it on opinion from many people about how paradox simulated China in EUII.

Perhaps it's not lack of historical knowledge of China (which I disagree - Paradox has plenty of history resoruces), but rather the difficulty in trying to simulate China in the first place, which this thread also amply demonstrates.

 

[unmerged(2036)]

Originally posted by Sun_Zi_36
do you mean the first part or the second part? for the first part, it's not hard to see from the discussion already gone on. for the 2nd part, i base it on opinion from many people about how paradox simulated China in EUII.

Unfourtunately, my knowledge on chinese history is not as deep as it could be , however.....
I believe that the (assuming your statmente of poor representation in EU2 of chinese history is correct ) lack of details concerning China are rather a choice of focus of manhours, rather than a lack of knowledge (or the means of obtaining said knowledge).

(The statements of this post is based on the overall attention to historic detail, that I fell EU delivers )

 

[crazy canuck]

Originally posted by BarristerBoy
Perhaps it's not lack of historical knowledge of China (which I disagree - Paradox has plenty of history resoruces), but rather the difficulty in trying to simulate China in the first place, which this thread also amply demonstrates.

I agree. Certain accomodations have to be made when making a game which spans the world during a sigificant period of time.

The social political and economic history of China would make an interesting game in and of itself. But the trick is to make a game that will not be mired in detail.

Those people who are unhappy with the way in which China is modelled in EUII can do something about it. There has been a number of contributors to revising the way in which EUII deals with Hungary. Perhaps those people who think Paradox got it wrong with China could do the same.

 

[Kevyinus]

I hope all the British China territory can become Britiah. People think Britain just own Hong Kong in China, but oh no, they owned:

Join Concessions:

Shanghai International Settlement (GBP Currency)
British Concession of Tientsin

Colony's:

Hong Kong Island :: 1841 - 1 July 1997
Kowloon Peninsula (merged w/ Hong Kong) :: 1860 - 1st July 1997
Wei Hai Wei :: 1 Jul 1898 to 1 Oct 1930

il be interested if you have to conqur these or you will be given them in events.

 

[Grosshaus]

Of course it was hard to incorporate non-European nations to a game based originally on Europe.

China will truly be a hard nut to crack and a system of different kinds of vassals might help, so there could be economic vassals (like China+parts of India) representing colonial rule and true political vassals of Europe.

 

[unmerged(5845)]

Of course, the bloodiest conflict of the 19th century occurred in China during this era: The Tai'ping Rebellion.

 

[unmerged(10128)]

Originally posted by BarristerBoy
Perhaps it's not lack of historical knowledge of China (which I disagree - Paradox has plenty of history resoruces), but rather the difficulty in trying to simulate China in the first place, which this thread also amply demonstrates.

Originally posted by mrmister
I believe that the (assuming your statmente of poor representation in EU2 of chinese history is correct ) lack of details concerning China are rather a choice of focus of manhours, rather than a lack of knowledge (or the means of obtaining said knowledge).

well, i agree, to some extent it is a choice of focus. but from what i observe over time working on improving the EU2 game for China and opinions of others which agree with me, we dont agree a number of things that paradox had done for China. and that is not just the detail and structural stuff, it's more plain stuff like borders of nations, cultures, even names of provinces that we think is off by a rather substantial margin. even Japan had more events than China in EU2. i havent said it's not a lack of focus that caused the lack of knowledge. it may well be that they do not aim to devote much into getting info for China to gain the historical knowledge in the first place.

Originally posted by BarristerBoy
Those people who are unhappy with the way in which China is modelled in EUII can do something about it. There has been a number of contributors to revising the way in which EUII deals with Hungary. Perhaps those people who think Paradox got it wrong with China could do the same.

thats what i m doing. but like u said, if the game accomdates more of China's social, political and economic history, it is much easier to modify that to be accurate than have little to no way to model something and try to think of a way to get around it.

and i of course agree it's hard to make a simple model that also accomodates China. I doubt it would be possible to physically conquer and occupy ceded ports (Hong Kong, Wei hai wei), let alone leased areas within a city (Shanghai). Germany, France, Russia, US, and Portugal also owned certain ceded ports or lease areas inside coastal cities. such places are so small that creating them would probably introduce too much detail. maybe they could be represented by something equivalent to military access in EU2 but only for naval units and only for a certain province.

 

[Avernite]

Well, there was an idea here somewhere that you could have a tradepost in provinces where other powers had only tradeposts. Maybe this could be expanded into allowing you to build tradeposts in other nations' territory, possibly only when you obtain a right to do so.

 

[unmerged(7537)]

Originally posted by Avernite
Well, there was an idea here somewhere that you could have a tradepost in provinces where other powers had only tradeposts. Maybe this could be expanded into allowing you to build tradeposts in other nations' territory, possibly only when you obtain a right to do so.

Yea, I'd really like to see a diplomatic option "ask for/give trade access" or something like that.

This could even be combined with some sort of unequal "trade agreement" where you'd gain a)most favored status and b)the right to set up trading posts in their territory.

Or you'd be able to make trade agreements only with Europeans and/or nations you have borders (both naval and land) with, forcing the colonial powers to obtain bases bordering China.

 

[Nikolai]

I am not very deeply into the history of China at this time, but I've understood from my history classes that the US was responsible for China's survival, ie that they wasn't split up like for example Africa. The US didn't want the European powers to split up China, since that would be against their interest. In which way they acted to accomplish this I don't know. But I guess some of you know?