EUIV - Ming is Over Powered - and Institutions Should be Improved

[calebman]

Since the Mandate of Heaven Ming has become significantly over powered. Not only do they lead the world economically and militarily, but they also seem to never lose mandate. I have never seen them lose mandate in my many EUIV games. I am thinking that you should incorporate a troubled times system, where, at some point in time, perhaps 1500's Ming would have a troubled times era. In which losing the Mandate would be much more likely. Of course there is a chance that the ai could get out of it if they manage themselves properly. Another solution could be by fixing the institution system by incorporating westernization (from way back when) into institutions. Westernization would change how the tech system works and make it more sensible. Institutions would still be spawned and embraced however, as the game progresses, if you are not western you would get institution spread and cost penalties if you don't westernize. With this system Ming would naturally fall behind in tech like in reality instead of Ming always embracing (or being birthplaces of) institutions and being even further ahead in tech that Europeans because of their INSANE wealth (to buy advisers). I would like to add that the westernization system would fix a HUGE amount of issues with "primitive" nations being stronger than Europeans just because of a silly institution system. Institutions should remain the same however, westernization should be re-implemented (however improved, instead of the old and bad westernization system that would cripple your nation) so that the game can progress in a more natural, sensible, realistic, and balanced way. Westernization could be embraced through bordering a western nation and paying a certain amount of ducats (probably based on national income) and a certain amount of adm points. This would result in the West slowly surpassing the East in time. Say bye to Uber Ming every game!

 

[Elminster12]

I wouldn't say Ming is terribly overpowered. The tag, I mean. The problem lies entirely with other things. The first and most relevant is that the Mandate mechanic, as it exists, gives the Emperor of China(that is, Ming) all sorts of free buffs, and basically all it has to do to get them is exist. Which, I mean, you'd expect, say, states like Korea, Ryukyu, and Dai Viet to be tributaries no matter what, but even much more distant states like Malacca are tributaries and never consider breaking the relationship. If Ming does really well, you can see tributaries pop-up in Central Asia and India, and it's really weird that they're willing to pay tribute indefinitely AND that Ming is willing to throw its entire army into defending them.
Basically, Ming should have to actually actively maintain tributary relationships, and the business with them reflexively defending their tributaries against non-tributaries needs to be fixed. It should probably work like a guarantee, but with a distance penalty to acceptance.
And, speaking of tributaries, it's weird Ming just kind of shrugs when one of its tributaries attacks another. It's unlikely the Emperor would care enough to launch a military campaign, but some sort of penalty(dip rep? trade efficiency?) that scales on how strong the Emperor is would make sense(it would never be particularly bad, of course.)
Some ideas about toning this down:
-The Emperor should suffer a mandate penalty if there are insufficient tributaries. It shouldn't be enough to tank a stable Emperor, but enough to make passing reforms difficult
-Hordes should probably be much more willing to end tributary relationships. AI Ming should also be somewhat less interested in taking land from Hordes
-Ming should not get a CTA from a tributary at all if the attacker is a tag unknown to Ming. This would allow European powers like Portugal, Spain, etc. to seize land more easily, particularly in Malaysia and Indonesia
-The arrival of European armies and traders should probably disrupt the tributary system in some way, as they represent alternative power centers that don't play by the rules
-Speaking of which, having any particularly large neighbor should hurt the Emperor's mandate. The bar should be higher for settled Asians, but the existence of any power that can rival Ming should be disruptive.

The other issues are with the stability of large states in general, and Ming's essentially infinite money supply allowing it to bury rebels(and exasperate human-played hordes) under an avalanche of troops, even if it has zero manpower.

 

[durbal]

Tributaries are all kinds of messed up and Ming is pretty easy to beat since it just sits there. It collapses after a single war against it and you don't even really have to fight it -- it just passively loses tons of mandate when you have tons of dev and border it, making its armies paper. Then you declare war, take some provinces, declare war on a tributary immediately (which it accepts the defensive call to arms for again) and take more clay from Ming and rinse and repeat until they don't exist.

Mandate of Heaven didn't do much of anything to improve East Asia since it's all pretty static and tributaries are extremely gamey. The silliest thing is that taking the mandate makes you weaker in a lot of ways so it's best to just keep roflstomping Ming until you decide to take the mandate when they pretty much no longer exist.

 

[TenshiN]

Well, this is pointless. Ming (and its successor of Qing) WAS a superpower in history and it didn't fall apart magically because its way of life was somehow inferior. It fell apart because of external pressure (first the nomads and the Manchus, added to already existing revolt, then the european traders/missionaries/whatever, culminating in the Opium Wars). In short, it had CAUSES. If causes are not in place, then it should not fall apart whatsoever and getting huge revolts out of nowhere just because it is "past 1500" does not really make for engaging gameplay.
The current system is good, because the rules are clear and whoever is Ming can actually do something to prevent his own collapse, and whoever is not knows what to do to achieve his objective of destroying the juggernaut.
Although i can somewhat agree that the rules should be somewhat more clear.

 

[svennnnnnnnnnnn]

Well, this is pointless. Ming (and its successor of Qing) WAS a superpower in history and it didn't fall apart magically because its way of life was somehow inferior. It fell apart because of external pressure (first the nomads and the Manchus, added to already existing revolt, then the european traders/missionaries/whatever, culminating in the Opium Wars). In short, it had CAUSES. If causes are not in place, then it should not fall apart whatsoever and getting huge revolts out of nowhere just because it is "past 1500" does not really make for engaging gameplay.
The current system is good, because the rules are clear and whoever is Ming can actually do something to prevent his own collapse, and whoever is not knows what to do to achieve his objective of destroying the juggernaut.
Although i can somewhat agree that the rules should be somewhat more clear.

For me the problem isn't necessarily stability, but relative power. Ming was a huge power, but with several serious deficiences. The biggest problem in the game is technology. By spamming tributaries for monarch power Ming can comfortably keep pace the with the european powers regardless of institutions. Since it will defend tributaries tooth and nail, the Europeans can't slowly erode it's sphere of influence gradually like they did historically without going to war on another continent against a enemy with equal tech and greater development.

The real Ming administration struggled with maintaining a vast and populous realm. In-game however Ming is drowning in so much power, manpower and gold it can not only fight enemies with overwhelming numbers but also with far greater quality than most local rivals and equal to most of the distant western powers.

Maybe I would prefer a system where ming has to balance between outside influences and stability, if they have no/few non-tributary neighbours they suffer penalties to institution spread, embracement cost and possibly a straight up tech penalty, representing the administration being too comfortable and not seeing a need for change, but if they have many powerful non-tributaries they suffer in the stability department instead of tech, representing the administration struggling to reform to cope with these new neighbours.

 

[TenshiN]

For me the problem isn't necessarily stability, but relative power. Ming was a huge power, but with several serious deficiences. The biggest problem in the game is technology. By spamming tributaries for monarch power Ming can comfortably keep pace the with the european powers regardless of institutions. Since it will defend tributaries tooth and nail, the Europeans can't slowly erode it's sphere of influence gradually like they did historically without going to war on another continent against a enemy with equal tech and greater development.

The real Ming administration struggled with maintaining a vast and populous realm. In-game however Ming is drowning in so much power, manpower and gold it can not only fight enemies with overwhelming numbers but also with far greater quality than most local rivals and equal to most of the distant western powers.

Maybe I would prefer a system where ming has to balance between outside influences and stability, if they have no/few non-tributary neighbours they suffer penalties to institution spread, embracement cost and possibly a straight up tech penalty, representing the administration being too comfortable and not seeing a need for change, but if they have many powerful non-tributaries they suffer in the stability department instead of tech, representing the administration struggling to reform to cope with these new neighbours.

It comes with the specifics of the game. Deficiency in tech leads to paper armies you can shred in millions, leading to scenarios of, lets say, 2 stacks, 40k each, destroy the entirety of Ming's army over and over again. You might say that it is exactly what happened in history, but, again, it doesn't lead to engaging gameplay for Ming itself, because it would not be able to force tributary on its potential european colony neighbours without conquering all the way to Europe (naval attrition is harsh, after all). And that makes the game pretty deterministic: Europeans arrive - you start to magically fall behind in tech. I think that the current mechanism is close to being the best one that the basic game mechanics could allow.

 

[Mr. G]

The main problem now is that countries like Morocco and Granada can become tributaries and then sit out the rest of the game never being attacked. That is not how it worked in reality and some kind of exploit that should be fixed.

 

[WeissRaben]

The real Ming administration struggled with maintaining a vast and populous realm. In-game however Ming is drowning in so much power, manpower and gold it can not only fight enemies with overwhelming numbers but also with far greater quality than most local rivals and equal to most of the distant western powers.

You know you can substitute "Ming" with "any nation large enough" in EU4, yes? It's a huge, gaping fallacy in the game itself: expanding only gets easier. Administration of the country is nonexistant (even the state system is wholly ineffective in that regard, the numbers are just too large). Distance is a nonfactor. Rebellions are a minor annoyance. And, in the mind of the devs, as the players obviously only want to blob, not only they must be able to blob, but the AI must blob as well.

I haven't played a lot of EU4 lately. That's the foremost reason.

 

[BoomKidneyShot]

The main problem now is that countries like Morocco and Granada can become tributaries and then sit out the rest of the game never being attacked. That is not how it worked in reality and some kind of exploit that should be fixed.

What you need to add is a distance based acceptance to defending them. Sure, Ming will take their money, no problem, but defend them? Nah.

As an aside, I know I've seen Brunei ally someone in Europe and send their fleet/army over when their ally is attacked, even if it does over a year to do so. It's the same sort of issue, isn't it?

 

[Mr. G]

What you need to add is a distance based acceptance to defending them. Sure, Ming will take their money, no problem, but defend them? Nah.

As an aside, I know I've seen Brunei ally someone in Europe and send their fleet/army over when their ally is attacked, even if it does over a year to do so. It's the same sort of issue, isn't it?

Precisely.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The assertion that primitive nations are stronger than colonizers is not credible.

Mandate is super easy though, and tributaries are bugged in a number of ways that causes some pretty broken outcomes in the game.

 

[calebman]

A lot of the points mentioned here are ones I agree with. 1) I think institutions should be reworked so that the colonized nations will naturally fall behind unless they take drastic measures to keep up. In the case of Ming, it retains its hegemony through the fact that it will always be ahead or up to date on tech. Its vast income allows it to hire insane advisers and embrace institutions quickly. 2) The tributary system is fundamentally flawed. Because of Mings wealth and subsequent strength, it will enforce tributary status on any nation that borders it which causes some problems as well. Not only do the tributaries prevent player nations from attacking and expanding as they did in reality (looking at you Russia) but tributaries also give vast amounts of wealth and monarch points, allowing Ming to continue the circle of problems already discussed. As someone else also said, with Ming defending distant tributaries, Ming should have a join war penalty based on how far the tributary is.

 

[calebman]

Currently in my mp game Ming has a forcelimit of 620k men and is always ahead on tech. Ming always seems to go quantity which is pretty ridiculous. Their vast income allows them to build up all their buildings and even build level 8 forts before any of us players have. I'd like to mention that Ming built level 8 forts on all of their fort provinces and their discipline is also not that bad, being around 115%.

 

[alphamikefox]

The assertion that primitive nations are stronger than colonizers is not credible.

...you're saying this about Ming China...?

 

[wildbillhdmax01]

I'm Sorry but Ming is unbelievably powerful. In My Japan Game they are the single most powerful nation on earth. Not only that but they have better tech/even tech with western nations, and more ideas. Then add all the money, and manpower. I'm about to play a game as them myself to see for myself. Also the tributary system has them have every single nation in all Asia, Oceania, and parts of India as a tributary. Which makes it hard for anyone outside to attack any of those nations.

 

[Stratagyfan101]

Emperor of China should NOT be able to recruit mercenaries. None.

Secondly, Paradox needs to make War Enthusiasm based almost entirely on the percent of manpower reserves left. once that number hits zero, the AI should draw up a peace deal based on its current War Score.

 

[svennnnnnnnnnnn]

It comes with the specifics of the game. Deficiency in tech leads to paper armies you can shred in millions, leading to scenarios of, lets say, 2 stacks, 40k each, destroy the entirety of Ming's army over and over again. You might say that it is exactly what happened in history, but, again, it doesn't lead to engaging gameplay for Ming itself, because it would not be able to force tributary on its potential european colony neighbours without conquering all the way to Europe (naval attrition is harsh, after all). And that makes the game pretty deterministic: Europeans arrive - you start to magically fall behind in tech. I think that the current mechanism is close to being the best one that the basic game mechanics could allow.

My suggestion is the opposite, instead off falling behind in tech once the Europeans come over, Ming start trying to catch up, sacrifcing stability for progress. They fall behind when they are left to themselves because then they would see no need to change.

 

[svennnnnnnnnnnn]

You know you can substitute "Ming" with "any nation large enough" in EU4, yes? It's a huge, gaping fallacy in the game itself: expanding only gets easier. Administration of the country is nonexistant (even the state system is wholly ineffective in that regard, the numbers are just too large). Distance is a nonfactor. Rebellions are a minor annoyance. And, in the mind of the devs, as the players obviously only want to blob, not only they must be able to blob, but the AI must blob as well.

I haven't played a lot of EU4 lately. That's the foremost reason.

Well nobody else starts as a behemoth. Even the Ottomans have powerful enough neighbours that they get halted or even shut down every now and then, especially if the player is in charge. Ming on the other hand obliderates any opposition, swims in monarch power from tributaries, and only the lazy AI stops it from world conquest. You are right, blobbing is way too easy for most nations, but this is far beyond the rest. They start immensly powerful and end up getting even worse.

On a side note, Do you think using Admin power instead of gold for state maintenance (scaled with distance, development), Diplomatic power for keeping cultures accepted (scaled with relative size of culture) and Military for the drafting of manpower would work for limiting expansion? They'd have to increase base power gain, but it would but a big damper on big powers, since keeping an overstretched empire together would drain power that would otherwise go towards tech, ideas, development. This would give younger and more centralized powers an edge, as in history.

 

[Lord Beverage]

Only a week ago facing an overwhelming looking Ming I would've agreed, but after a few successive wars against 2+x1 numbers I'm not so sure. Yes, they get a ring of tributaries as buffer states, but they can hurt Ming in surprisingly strong ways if used against them properly. In order for Ming engage you they have to traverse all those buffer states to reach you on the outside, most of which contain wide swaths of very high attrition terrain. What I did was support independence of the Tibetan plateau vassals of a tributary giving Ming a defensive call to Arms. Once in that war, they do not honor defensive calls for other tributaries. Keep enough forces behind to win one-sided defensive battles and pacman the other small tributaries. White peace when done - don't even think about trying to enter Ming-proper.

Get a shared border through mountains or jungle from tributaries in the first war and repeat as their mandate tanks. No amount of superior numbers or monarch points can save them then.

Unfortunately I didn't get screenshots of the end, but it was something near 200k+ attrition casualties alone out of 450k total when the first white peace was signed. They had over 200 mercs then as well. What's still scary is that they could afford that many mercs without going into debt and had only 4 war exhaustion.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

...you're saying this about Ming China...?

He used "primitive" in the opening post. There are two ways you can look at this:

1. He was tacking on the idea that other nations should have to westernize (particularly those considered "primitive" by the game), which from a cost perspective is a non-starter in game terms.
2. He was asserting that Ming and those surrounding it are primitives.

I took interpretation #1, since Ming being "primitive" in this period is a silly notion, but it's reasonable to conclude that in gameplay terms it's not credible regardless.

Also, I meant what I said when I claimed tributaries are broken. They have poor interactions with other mechanics because they're mostly independent subjects, so you can do some nonsense:



And yet the tributary mechanic is crucial to the function of post-mandate Ming. It's not going to be pretty for a while, but institutions aren't the problem here.