Did Paradox go overboard with nerfing Ming?

[TheDanish]

It's pretty bad if you consider the fact the total income of Ming is only eight ducats higher than France in 1444(the total income of France was around 15 ducats and 23 ducats for Ming).

This is because Ming's initial merchant setup is suboptimal. If you switch to the Eunuchs, fiddle with trade flows and build some light ships, by 1448 you're making enough money to support a troupe of +3/+3/+2 advisers.

 

[darthfanta]

Might as well say over 50% more?

Anyway, balancing nations with respect to their neighbors is much more important than balancing them against a remote power that will not see them until decades later. I'll have to see how AI Ming does in practice – player Ming can definitely steamroll its neighbors and westernize to wealth.

Too little. This is a heavily weakened France that's feudal we are talking about.Ming is a massive,heavily centralized empire with more than 60 million subjects in 1444.

 

[Less]

Still OP in player hands, a laughingstock in AI hands.

 

[kitemasaki]

Still OP in player hands, a laughingstock in AI hands.

A testament to Paradox being hypocritical about railroading nations in a sandbox game. They are against putting up barriers for something like Spain colonizing Canada or Siberia, but are ok with making sure 1 nation in the game is always ruined or a joke.

 

[ChildeR]

This is because Ming's initial merchant setup is suboptimal. If you switch to the Eunuchs, fiddle with trade flows and build some light ships, by 1448 you're making enough money to support a troupe of +3/+3/+2 advisers.

Yeah. Just letting the AI play for a year their income is over 40/month.