EU4 - Art of War - Dev Diary 4 - Army Planner, Rebel Relocation and China

[Golladan]

Hm...
At first I also think it has been changed, but because I can't point out what has been changed, I come to conclusion I am just mistaken...
Care to point out the changes?

Looks like most natives were reduced to OPM...

 

[Morboth]

In the hopes that a dev sees this, I'm pasting this link...

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...equest-La-Plata-fine-tuning-and-Uruguay-as-CN

 

[mgoetze]

Cantonese is a Chinese dialect

Yeah, in about the same way that Spanish is a dialect of French.

 

[Mingmung]

Cultures are a mess anyway, they need a massive overhaul in general.


I personally kind of hope that cultures can't be converted in the future, because I like my empires to be multi-ethnic. Only territories which were historically culture-changed should shift by event Most would disagree though, which I understand.

But, yeah, Cantonese should go.

 

[DC123456789]

Yeah, in about the same way that Spanish is a dialect of French.

Well, it's more like in the same way Spanish is a Neo-Latin dialect.

Your point still stands though, it's a significantly different language and a distinct culture. Though I would prefer to see more Chinese cultures, not just an oversimplified, inaccurate North-South dichotomy.

 

[outis]

Some here. I can't see the necessity to change Korea Bay into Bohai, unless PI divide that water into two.

In my understanding, Korean Bay is the water between Liaoning and Korea. Bohai is the water surrounded by Liaoning and Shandong. For now, PI put these two bays in one sea province. It means that either Korean Bay or Bohai is correct.

For Oirat, I think it's nothing to say. The map is suspicious. I never trust the external boundaries of the Atlas.

Moreover, by common sense, Oirat was still very strong when Russian first stepped into that area. So, if Oirat was controlling that area, Russian might face strong resist from Mongol. We all knew the history.

There is another reason -- perhaps more compelling in term of the game. In EU4 map, 8 provinces (and much more historically significant) provinces border Bohai, while 6 borders Bay of Korea. And when you, for example, blockade that particular sea, chances are that you are trying to blockade provinces bordering Bohai, rather than Bay of Korea.

Per Oirat -- it's important to remember that the Chinese are the only one with historiographic tradition around that area, and much of that exist only in Chinese archive -- so if you are only using Western sources, then you may be missing something. Despite what you claim of bias, an academic would not put down anything that cannot supported from at least one citation. Unless someone already track down the historical source of that map can debunked it, I would tend to believe him because he has done the research and you may not have. A possibility of bias does not equal to definite falsehood -- that can only be established by peer review.

If I remember correctly Oirat was already broken into 4 by the time Russian got into the area, common sense would imply that Oirat would be weakened, compared to before.

 

[Te. Kenzo]

Is strange see the perfect new shape of west africa, and the old gross shape of the rest of the continent, that nice little coastal region and ugly big ones following.

From the screens seems that South America, Europe, and Eastern, Central and South Africa are out of a revamp. Personally, I can't imagine that the things remain this, becouse is too strange see a world only half reworked. So for me is a work in progress, and maybe will be completed with a patch for a next expansion after art of war, i hope but i don't know if they upgrade these part in the next month before the relase of the expansion.

 

[Osman Pasha]

It has no sense to make a separate Cantonese area. Cantonese is a Chinese dialect, not a culture or ethnic group. Cantonese people are all ethnic Han. There is no reason to make Han and Cantonese as two separate culture at the same level.

I would say:

Solution 1: Make Ming a cultural union like HRE/Germany/France. Divide Han culture into subgroups based on dialects, e.g. Mandarin, Wu, Min, Hakka, Cantonese...

I don't quite like this solution because it's ahistorical. At Ming period there was no such "nationalism" based on just dialects. The empire was so centralized and all the people consider them as ethnic Han and they don't think dialect a problem.

2. Delete Cantonese and make most of Ming provinces Han culture. Some remote provinces should be changed to minor culture like Sisongbanna, which was not traditional Chinese territory but an area that Ming inherited from Yuan Empire. Some remote places were quite decentralized at that time. Actually these places were something like Manchurian provinces at that time.

Also, it maybe a good idea to have two Manchurian culture: one is Jurchen in Altaic group, one is Manchu in East Asian group (or Chinese group for solution 1). Manchurian provinces start with Jurchen culture. If Ming controls all of Manchurian provinces, or any Manchurian Nation formed Qing, then change all Jurchen provinces into Manchu culture via events. This can represent the historical assimilation of Manchurian culture into Chinese culture.

NO, leave Cantonese, but add Hokkien, Zhuang, etc... if Austrian can be a culture, then Cantonese has all the right to exist...

 

[ericyuen]

There is another reason -- perhaps more compelling in term of the game. In EU4 map, 8 provinces (and much more historically significant) provinces border Bohai, while 6 borders Bay of Korea. And when you, for example, blockade that particular sea, chances are that you are trying to blockade provinces bordering Bohai, rather than Bay of Korea.

Per Oirat -- it's important to remember that the Chinese are the only one with historiographic tradition around that area, and much of that exist only in Chinese archive -- so if you are only using Western sources, then you may be missing something. Despite what you claim of bias, an academic would not put down anything that cannot supported from at least one citation. Unless someone already track down the historical source of that map can debunked it, I would tend to believe him because he has done the research and you may not have. A possibility of bias does not equal to definite falsehood -- that can only be established by peer review.

If I remember correctly Oirat was already broken into 4 by the time Russian got into the area, common sense would imply that Oirat would be weakened, compared to before.

I have presented the reason why the map is not trustworthy. You ignore it and blame me. Then, what can I say?

Irkutsk was founded around 1660s. At that time Zungar, one of the Oirat, was at its peak. They unified Oirat and defeated Altan Khan and Tsarist Russia. Some Oirat fled to the west and settled down by Volga freely. So, the common sense is, even Oirat was at its peak, Russian could still founded city around Baikol. It means that Baikol was not, at least not directly, controlled by Oirat.

Yes, Oirat was divided to 4. Zungar and Dorbod were both Choros and they were the core of the Zungar Khanate (Oirat). Torgut fled to Volga. Khoshut invaded Tibet and finally caused the raise of Dalai Lama. They were much more influencial than before.

 

[Qoff]

These tons of new provinces will be related to the new patch or to the DLC?

 

[sermaciej]

I personally kind of hope that cultures can't be converted in the future, because I like my empires to be multi-ethnic. Only territories which were historically culture-changed should shift by event Most would disagree though, which I understand.

If you want your empires to be multi-ethnic, then just don't convert.

 

[derly2004]

For these information you have found I want to say:"Nicely done!" As you know, the Mongolia empire(Most of the nomadic empire in history) cover around the Lake Baikai. However, In EU4 Mongolia/Nomandic tribes lose those territories, it is so weird. Some of people in here do not believe Chinese history ancient recording. They would rather believe modern western guy's research. They always use just one reason that "the Communist Party change the history" to doubt all of Chinese history resources.(It is so Prejudice) However, most history resources come from ancient history books. Like Twenty-Four Histories, or 明史.......

You seemed to have missed my point. What I have said in my previous post is that while there seem to be sources pointing to the Oirats controlling territory around the southern tip of Lake Baikal, it is less clear whether they controlled Lake Baikal itself and the territory north of it. I still stand by my view that the current EU4 map has already sufficiently represented the Oirats.

Since you have seen fit to mention the Twenty-Four Histories, I would like to say that they may be quite biased in their content, since the books were often edited by court officials in the succeeding dynasty. For example, the History of Ming was complied by Zhang Tingyu, who was a court official in the Qing dynasty. Therefore the contents may be more biased towards the Qing court, them being the current ruling dynasty. I do not doubt Chinese history sources because they are "changed by the communist party", I doubt it because there is a clear conflict of interest and potential bias, the authors and editors often being court officials themselves.

 

[Mingmung]

If you want your empires to be multi-ethnic, then just don't convert.

but then the AI converts regions I want, (Austrian Netherlands come to mind) resulting in a weirdlooking culturemap.

Anyways, the culturemechanics just don't do it for me right now.

 

[oblio-]

These tons of new provinces will be related to the new patch or to the DLC?

Provinces in patch, templates probably in DLC.

 

[Osman Pasha]

To add on to fixing the polish teutonic border, fix the Moldavian border as well

 

[drxero]

These province changes are overwhelming me a bit tbh.

Anyway, I'm really impressed with the map changes so far, HOWEVER I'm a little disappointed by the dlc features (assuming the map changes will be in the patch).

 

[oblio-]

These province changes are overwhelming me a bit tbh.

Anyway, I'm really impressed with the map changes so far, HOWEVER I'm a little disappointed by the dlc features (assuming the map changes will be in the patch).

We don't even know which features are in the DLC and which are not

We're just guessing. At this point I'm not sure even Paradox knows, except for new provinces, local autonomy and unrest, which are kind of obvious content for a patch.

 

[Fryslan0109]

Cultures are a mess anyway, they need a massive overhaul in general.


I personally kind of hope that cultures can't be converted in the future, because I like my empires to be multi-ethnic. Only territories which were historically culture-changed should shift by event Most would disagree though, which I understand.

But, yeah, Cantonese should go.

I don't disagree with the general idea of unchanging cultures - I would leave changes up to events - it seems wrong in the direct control of the player.

 

[grommile]

These tons of new provinces will be related to the new patch or to the DLC?

New provinces in the patch, because it would be insane to ship two versions of the map and toggle betweeen them based on the DLC activation state.

 

[Baalshazar]

Asia getting love thank you. Thank you. I am always hoping for more Asian/Middle East(not Ottoman) love. Now I haven't read the full diary entry nor have I read the thread. But I really hope Japan has a more difficult time becoming, well, full Japan. Honestly I wish there was no "Japan" in the game, but all small shogun states. But I understand why it's there. Also an event when Japan is formed to declare war against Korea would be cool as well.