EU4 - Development Diary - 7th of July 2020

[Shahanshah759]

That would require the removal of the Malacca > Burma connection though, and I'm not sure that's something good.

I think you mean "Malacca > Bengal" as there is no "Malacca > Burma" connection. I don’t think this would necessarily be a bad thing. Trade could flow "Siam > Malacca > Burma > Bengal" or "Burma > Bengal"; a player in the Bengal node would have more incentive to protect trade in upstream nodes (or expand into Arakan and Pegu).

 

[Blackwhitecavias]

I think you mean Malacca > Bengal as there is no Malacca > Burma connection. I don’t think this would necessarily be a bad thing. Trade could flow Siam > Malacca > Burma > Bengal or Burma > Bengal; a player in the Bengal node would have more incentive to protect trade in upstream nodes (or expand into Arakan and Pegu).

I did indeed miss the addition of a burma node seperate from Bengal. so a burma > siam connection would be possible

 

[InZaneGames]

As someone with Khmer family and who plays EU4 in SEA frequently, I'm loving the much needed attention this area is getting. I love the additional provinces everyone is getting, but especially Khmer. I do think moving Mon into the Burmese culture group is funny and Cham into the Viet-Khmer group is strange. The justification of language and culture not being equivalent, while true in whole, is not true for SEA. Language knowledge is what defined 'citizenship' in this area and time period. One generation may have originally been Khmer, moved to Siam, and two generations later were only speaking Thai. In the time and context, those grandchildren were Thai and no longer Khmer. However, if a different family continued to speak Khmer under Thai rule, they were still Khmer. Mon and Khmer are part of the same language group and, before being split by the Thai migrations, exhibited similar architectural techniques and patterns. There were also several Mon-Khmer client states. Similarly, Cham is a Malay language and the Cham had more in common culturally with their insular counterparts being a maritime trade civilization. The Cham and Khmer despised each other at the start of EU4 time period. Prior to EU4's time, both tried to conquer each other, and succeeded temporarily, but were both overthrown by local revolts due to each's nonacceptance of the other. As a game developer, I can see where these changes make for better map painting gameplay, but they take away from the complexities that are mainland SEA at the time that would make more intricate and focused gameplay early on when playing as Champ or Khmer.

Don't get me wrong, I love the attention this is getting. I'm super looking forward to the update! The inclusion of the Annamite Mts as impassible terrain and hill tribes between Khmer and Champa is beautiful! So is the idea of increased vassalization and super-cities mechanics, because that is how this region worked. I'd love to see some reciprocal obligation events for vassal and overlord. But, the cultural decisions being made here will limit the gameplay possibilities of historical plausibilities in this region.

 

[InZaneGames]

Cambodia can have the releasable/formable nation of Cochinchina. In about 1600, Nguyen lords were granted Prey Nokor (Saigon) by Khmer King Chey Chettha II. Gradually, the Nguyen expanded their territory around Saigon, then, through wars, the Mekong Delta and Tuek Khmao. By 1802, Cochinchina conquered the other Viet states forming Vietnam. Ultimately, the Viet conquest of Phnom Penh, the French annexation of the Cochinchina area, and the sustained vassalization of Cambodia by Siam led Cambodian King Nodorom to peacefully join the French Indochina Union (after a little war between France and Siam).