loss of mandate is proportional to the development of the country you borde
Of course it is. Its just stupid that the tiniest isolated border counts against the full thing.
Itused to be different, but as always some 5 people "exploiting" it warrants a change for everyone.
Now the whole Mandate thing is even worse than it was before.
I did form Yuan from Uzbek, but i would have been better of just forming the Mughals and leaving the whole EoC thing aside.
Would have been much stronger.
For a mechanic that big its really boring, really tedious and with a disappointing payoff.
you can border a lategame +2K Dev nation, like the Ottomans, and once the war started the penalty is lowered, and lowered again when you just grab all his juicy provinces
If you start as Ming it might work that way, but who wants to do that.
Rinse, wash, repeat, and you should never be under 90 Mandate.
I took EoC around 1580 and it took me until after 1760 for the last Reform.
That was with most of Europe, including everything small in the HRE diplotributized.
Making a single Colony in America easily costs like 0,10 Mandate a month for several years until your CN finally takes it.
Oh, and, devastation will tank your Mandate aswell. Not the one in your land, oh no.
The land you just took, that got devasted in the war you just fought for 3 years, because the AI refuses to peace out. That one.
If anything country on truce shouldnt counts against Mandate.
Or isolated exclaves count based on their development compared to your Capital area development.
Something.
Just being Eastern Religion or Horde insteadof EoC, just so you can Diplotributize is much stronger than being EoC
because Tributaries are unbelieably broken.
I have never had such an easy time conquering the HRE.