Is there any hope for 1.20 China Patch?

[Zerodv]

As a Chinese player, I am not worried that no DLC for EU4 to repair the east asia, even not one for China, there shall be one for Japan( like DW ) and we Chinese would share the glory from Japan.
（And for the relationship of Paradox and the "10cent Empire", the possibility of a new DLC/Expansion for East Asia should be higher than the EU3 Period, I guess)

In fact, I could understand the difficulty of PDS to design the Oriental Gaint Power, the region is the most populous area in the world and even more than the whole India , this area was often discribied as extremely wealthy, and China has too many features of an early modern country even with the possible characteristic of the nation country after Tang Dynasty, this country should have the power over 8 France Kingdoms in 1444 Scanerio, during Yongle Period Ming indeed did it, with a similar mililary policy of Themes in byzantine Empire, over 2800K soldiers are raised.

Then, Why China Dynasties have not expansioned like the Mongols or annexed those states in indochina ? Why the centralized country often meet the fate of split or got invasion by North people and have a maximum lifespan of about 300 years? Why the peace and wealthy country with many progressive factors to modernization has not lead the World Advance? Why Europe, not China? this is the biggest problem the PDS has to face if PDS want to make a possible solution,.

"Why Europe, not China?" is of course the biggest issue that Chinese "Folk Historians" have to face, which is called" Needham Question " The answers are abundants, but not of the current mechanism in EU4, in EU4 the points and institutions are more important, the institutions system can be a reply of this question by PDS but still untenable. While, the PDS still have not made a good explanation why the Ming collepsed, I think the MT have made a good change( but too horrible of AI Ming and dynasties in China).

In my eyes, I do not mind these nerfs and limits to Ming/China, I only hope the developments in the world shall be redone, the balance of development is just like the political correction to me, I still believe the development system should be removed to a simplified provence population system and a shallow prosperity system, the recent development system is of course a stupid core mechanism to me, and I still get sad that PDS make development system more unreal.In fact, provinces in China now are lacked, the province in China now are too huge compared with every corner in the map, and also provinces' number in Japan is too tiny to reply the Sengoku Period. This is a shame to a serious historical game yet for the historical administrative divisions are easily to fetch in East Asian for the common tradition.

As a modder, I have researched the population of each counties in Ming Dynasty, I am happy that 70% population data of counties in Hongwu Period are available, though my research is much unscientific and full of estimate and even guess, while I am pride of what I have done. If I have more time, I would make a map mod about East Asian region, I hope China and India shall have a huge number of provinces and I could have 480 provinces in China(PRC and ROC today) .

In my estimation, Ming in 1444AD shall have about 100 Million People, To my research, the Total Europe( without East Slavic and Russia today, Sweden, Finland, Scottland+Ireland) should have a conversion of population and development: 12.5K people= 1 development, then Ming in 1444AD shall have 8000 developments, Ming have been nerfed to 1/7 according to my calculation, the India totally been nerfed to its 1/6 to 1/5.(The nightmare of rebalance)

When it comes to choose history or balance, I choose history.

While China could use some more provinces, it doesn´t follow that development would be based on direct population, it just wouldn´t work with the game. And is not "history" or not, development is not population and is not meant to directly represent it. Even if there was a different way to increase development is far from population.

Same argument goes for provinces, it doesn´t really follow you have the number of provinces dependend on population, more so when the politcs are different and less internal fracture is present.

 

[Zerodv]

I'm not going to get into a large debate about it right now, but I can assure you that, no, Europe was by no means economically backwater compared to Asia in the first half of the game - or really since the Fall of Rome. Asia having raw goods that Europe didn't have isn't proof it was more of an economical powerhouse, it's proof that Europeans wanted those goods and had the economic power to sail across the globe, seize and hold enclaves, create and maintain colonies, and trade for goods the Asians wanted to get them.

Let's be careful to not go too far the other way - yes, Asia's severely underrated and underdeveloped, but we don't need to dismiss or downgrade Europe to make our case stronger. In a way, it's like Byzantophilia; Byzantium is indeed underrated and deserves more attention than the average person gives it, but the lengths that some people go to make it so is beyond absurd.

Byzantium is so famous, I wouldn´t call it underrated. Given their situation at the start they are quite played(14th I think)

 

[Grand Historian]

The Ming "ban" on trade wasn't too effectively enforced (unlike Qing). Most of the Spanish gold and silver in Americas ended up flowing into China.

I'm referring to how the Ming more or less banned oceangoing vessels for their own merchants, not trade with the foreigners. This also explains why most Woku were ethnic Chinese operating out of Japanese islands.

Honestly not sure what you meant by that
Do enlighten me please, if there is there a good mod for far-east out there. I don't care for ironman.
If it's one of the two big ones, alas, too heavy for my taste.

Sadly, not one yet.

Byzantium is so famous, I wouldn´t call it underrated. Given their situation at the start they are quite played(14th I think)

They're well played by people who know who they are, not because Byzantium is famous or is around today and has thousands of citizens chomping at the bit to digitally recreate its 'glory' - most people probably haven't even heard of the Komnenian Restoration or even the Justinian Code.

 

[Zerodv]

They're well played by people who know who they are, not because Byzantium is famous or is around today and has thousands of citizens chomping at the bit to digitally recreate its 'glory' - most people probably haven't even heard of the Komnenian Restoration or even the Justinian Code.

Most people don´t know about the Hapsburg, Valois, Prussia, HRE or most of the not totally obvious stuff. But it depends on what exact people we are spekaing.

 

[Grand Historian]

Most people don´t know about the Hapsburg, Valois, Prussia, HRE or most of the not totally obvious stuff. But it depends on what exact people we are spekaing.

Most people do know who the Hapsburgs were, have an acceptable knowledge about medieval and renaissance France, know the HRE was a thing and that Prussia was a dominant power in Germany. Byzantium is obscure.

 

[Zerodv]

Most people do know who the Hapsburgs were, have an acceptable knowledge about medieval and renaissance France, know the HRE was a thing and that Prussia was a dominant power in Germany. Byzantium is obscure.

What exactly makes you think that? I think people do know about the Roman Empire and its division more than they know about Hapsbrug or Prussia. Having done it in school doesn´t translate in remembering it a month or years later.

 

[Grand Historian]

What exactly makes you think that? I think people do know about the Roman Empire and its division more than they know about Hapsbrug or Prussia. Having done it in school doesn´t translate in remembering it a month or years later.

Because Austria and Prussia are better well known than Byzantium to the average person because they played larger roles in more recent events - most people are also more familiar with the term Eastern Roman Empire than they are with Byzantium.

But this is getting off topic.

 

[Dakka]

They're well played by people who know who they are, not because Byzantium is famous or is around today and has thousands of citizens chomping at the bit to digitally recreate its 'glory'.

Still chomping at the bit to recreate US in all its historical glory in this time period. Oh wait....

 

[KlinkerFyren]

Some more East Asian stuff would be nice. I love playing in the China region. Granted most often as Manchu/Qing. I wish there were more events and mechanics for Confucian nations.

I once proposed some kind of mechanic where a Confucian/Chinese (maybe also Shinto nations?) would be able to patronize and favor a certain philosophy/religion within his realm. Akin to the fetishist cult system. One emperor might favor the philosophy of Legalism, another emperor might favor Buddhism, another might patronize Neo-Confucianism, another might favor Christianity (when they eventually show up).

However I have no idea if this would be horribly unhistorical, I am not an grand expert supreme on East Asian history.

 

[wingzero890]

As a Chinese player, I am not worried that no DLC for EU4 to repair the east asia, even not one for China, there shall be one for Japan( like DW ) and we Chinese would share the glory from Japan.
（And for the relationship of Paradox and the "10cent Empire", the possibility of a new DLC/Expansion for East Asia should be higher than the EU3 Period, I guess)

In fact, I could understand the difficulty of PDS to design the Oriental Gaint Power, the region is the most populous area in the world and even more than the whole India , this area was often discribied as extremely wealthy, and China has too many features of an early modern country even with the possible characteristic of the nation country after Tang Dynasty, this country should have the power over 8 France Kingdoms in 1444 Scanerio, during Yongle Period Ming indeed did it, with a similar mililary policy of Themes in byzantine Empire, over 2800K soldiers are raised.

Then, Why China Dynasties have not expansioned like the Mongols or annexed those states in indochina ? Why the centralized country often meet the fate of split or got invasion by North people and have a maximum lifespan of about 300 years? Why the peace and wealthy country with many progressive factors to modernization has not lead the World Advance? Why Europe, not China? this is the biggest problem the PDS has to face if PDS want to make a possible solution,.

"Why Europe, not China?" is of course the biggest issue that Chinese "Folk Historians" have to face, which is called" Needham Question " The answers are abundants, but not of the current mechanism in EU4, in EU4 the points and institutions are more important, the institutions system can be a reply of this question by PDS but still untenable. While, the PDS still have not made a good explanation why the Ming collepsed, I think the MT have made a good change( but too horrible of AI Ming and dynasties in China).

In my eyes, I do not mind these nerfs and limits to Ming/China, I only hope the developments in the world shall be redone, the balance of development is just like the political correction to me, I still believe the development system should be removed to a simplified provence population system and a shallow prosperity system, the recent development system is of course a stupid core mechanism to me, and I still get sad that PDS make development system more unreal.In fact, provinces in China now are lacked, the province in China now are too huge compared with every corner in the map, and also provinces' number in Japan is too tiny to reply the Sengoku Period. This is a shame to a serious historical game yet for the historical administrative divisions are easily to fetch in East Asian for the common tradition.

As a modder, I have researched the population of each counties in Ming Dynasty, I am happy that 70% population data of counties in Hongwu Period are available, though my research is much unscientific and full of estimate and even guess, while I am pride of what I have done. If I have more time, I would make a map mod about East Asian region, I hope China and India shall have a huge number of provinces and I could have 480 provinces in China(PRC and ROC today) .

In my estimation, Ming in 1444AD shall have about 100 Million People, To my research, the Total Europe( without East Slavic and Russia today, Sweden, Finland, Scottland+Ireland) should have a conversion of population and development: 12.5K people= 1 development, then Ming in 1444AD shall have 8000 developments, Ming have been nerfed to 1/7 according to my calculation, the India totally been nerfed to its 1/6 to 1/5.(The nightmare of rebalance)

When it comes to choose history or balance, I choose history.

Nice post. However I think it's more important to make sure insignificant villages like Ribe and Dithmarschen are on the map with unique governments rather than make the map in Asia better (I'm kidding)

We will see next week what Paradox plans, since apparently they are going to reveal 'the biggest feature to date' in the next dev blog. Hopefully, that feature is an Asian map and government form rework and not something silly like unique government forms for one province minors.

I have always believed that united China should be at least half as much development as a united Europe- right now it is on par with united Germany. I have also always believed that it is ridiculous that united Japan has less development than England does in 1444. United Japan should be comparable in strength to united germany (and also just as hard to achieve). There were more matchlocks being produced in Japan in the 1500s than Europe, for example...

Now for game balance reasons, Ming can't simply start off as a one tag 8000 development country. Internal mechanics, similar to the holy roman empire, should be introduced for China which would restrict its growth, and also make it an interesting and fun region to play in and not simply 'pick ming, win' like it is right now. If China was represented as a collection of regional tags that were sworn to the Emperor, realistic or not, it would be much more interesting especially once mandate of heaven was lost and the dragon throne was up for grabs.

Another problem which is a broader issue for the game in general is how there really are no real attrition or supply mechanics. So Ming, or anyone really can walk their armies halfway across the world just fine. This gives problems for areas like Mexico and Africa too, which can be conquered quickly by a modest 20k stack of troops- which never suffer supply or reinforcement troubles as they attack into dense unknown jungles. Which I think is part of the reason that there has been so many restrictions on Ming, to avoid EU3 situations where they were invading Europe.

 

[NaiveCarto]

Nice post. However I think it's more important to make sure insignificant villages like Ribe and Dithmarschen are on the map with unique governments rather than make the map in Asia better (I'm kidding)

We will see next week what Paradox plans, since apparently they are going to reveal 'the biggest feature to date' in the next dev blog. Hopefully, that feature is an Asian map and government form rework and not something silly like unique government forms for one province minors.

I have always believed that united China should be at least half as much development as a united Europe- right now it is on par with united Germany. I have also always believed that it is ridiculous that united Japan has less development than England does in 1444. United Japan should be comparable in strength to united germany (and also just as hard to achieve). There were more matchlocks being produced in Japan in the 1500s than Europe, for example...

Now for game balance reasons, Ming can't simply start off as a one tag 8000 development country. Internal mechanics, similar to the holy roman empire, should be introduced for China which would restrict its growth, and also make it an interesting and fun region to play in and not simply 'pick ming, win' like it is right now. If China was represented as a collection of regional tags that were sworn to the Emperor, realistic or not, it would be much more interesting especially once mandate of heaven was lost and the dragon throne was up for grabs.

Another problem which is a broader issue for the game in general is how there really are no real attrition or supply mechanics. So Ming, or anyone really can walk their armies halfway across the world just fine. This gives problems for areas like Mexico and Africa too, which can be conquered quickly by a modest 20k stack of troops- which never suffer supply or reinforcement troubles as they attack into dense unknown jungles. Which I think is part of the reason that there has been so many restrictions on Ming, to avoid EU3 situations where they were invading Europe.

Thank you for your reply, indeed I also agree the new addition to game mechanism is much more important than the map expansion and development change to East Asia, for we could make mods about map and development easily but much harder if we touch the core game mechanism. ( only agree it )

Look at my name" Naive Cartographer", I still can not endure the tiny province number in East Asia (even more bigger than those in Siberia) than the ugly mechanism in East Asia, for it could be harder for PDS to redone the mechanism than the provinces, to my opinion, the recent Ming mechanisms are OK if the Decline of Heaven removed and new mechanism to make China union easily added. As for mechanisms in Japan, I guess you have your opinion, I think this is a totally s**t , even the DW way is better.

The mechanisms of East Asia and the totally game shall be disuccssed again:

1, I still not agree with the idea to decrease one country's development for gameplay(like France and China,Japan,Korea and Hindu), of course the PDS use cunning method to disconnect the development and population or GDP or anything else, while to my opinion, only population shall be the measure of development for nothing else could be better, for the meaning of development, I believe any nerf on development level are naive.

2,Your idea to move the subcountry to EU4 to restrict the expansion of Ming was thought by one modder in China, yes, they are interesting at all, for AI it could be a great idea while for players this can be painful at all if no control of armies of subcountry. This could be a new idea for huge countries in EU4 which might be introduced in next diary, I guess.Though local governments/subcountries are unreal in history, they have not the function of a normal operated country especially for the centralized Empire Ming/Qing.

3, As for supply mechanisms, I have dreamt for it from EU3 period, it should be into strongly consideration of PDS, by changing any value, we can simulate a restricted local supply and a shallow supply mechanism can be simulated by increased buildings, while the PDS shall be able to do one but nearly impossible to save the silly AIs from the harder calculation.

I look forward to the coming biggest feature announced next week, I guess it won't be the replacement of point system, if so this will make a new game(looks like EU5), while it could be nearly impossible for PDS today. Now, I hope the development system replaced by population system, while it looks like never possible from the diary of this week.


Hope that our urge could be listened by PDS stuff.

 

[Sir Pellew]

1) England
2) France
3) Ottomans
4) Castile
5) Brandenburg
6) Austria
7) Muscovy
8) Portugal
9) Poland
10) Great Britain (presumably mostly from continued saves)
11) Sweden
12) Teutonic Order
13) Papal States
14) Byzantium (yes, you made the top 20)
15) Prussia (presumably mostly from continued saves)
16) Spain (presumably mostly from continued saves)
17) Japan
18) Hungary
19) Denmark
20) Ming
21) Netherlands (presumably mostly from continued saves)
22) Commonwealth
23) Burgundy

This might change radically wit a far east patch

I mean no wonder that European and HRE nations are played pretty often as the machanics match the country, which is not the case for the far east ....

And where the heck is Ulm in the list

 

[Zerodv]

I would say China deserves up to 50% more provinces(or 50 provinces given their usual 100), I also think development should at least be double, and the subsequent internal mechanics would make blobbing way harder than it could seem, IMO China should be made fair to play also in MP, somehow.

 

[wingzero890]

To all of the silent disagrees: please explain how in any sane world China should have the same amount (or even less) development as united Germany. Please explain how Japan should have less development than 1444 England.

That's right, you can't. Salt intensifies. East asia is begging for content.

 

[Zerodv]

To all of the silent disagrees: please explain how in any sane world China should have the same amount (or even less) development as united Germany. Please explain how Japan should have less development than 1444 England.

That's right, you can't. Salt intensifies. East asia is begging for content.

Yeah while one(me, at least in the context of Vanilla mechanics) might disagree with having China have 7 times development of Germany or France having Germany have MORE development than China at any point.

For Japan you could use France as a comparison, it should probably be about double their current development.

 

[NaiveCarto]

To all of the silent disagrees: please explain how in any sane world China should have the same amount (or even less) development as united Germany. Please explain how Japan should have less development than 1444 England.

That's right, you can't. Salt intensifies. East asia is begging for content.

Hello, I search for wiki and found the estimative value of population of Japan in 1444 Scanerio shall be about 10 Million if the data in wiki that in 1150AD Japan has 6.84 Million people and in 1600AD Japan has 12.27 Million people is generally true and then I set the population development during 1150 to 1600AD should have the same speed. How do you evaluate it, is it tooo high or too small yet?

The population in Korea is controversial, the population recordion held by Japan shows that the official population recordion held by Korea is problematic, according to the population recordion in 1940s and accord to the estimative value seen in English Wiki, I select 11.92 Million as the estimative value of population of Korea in 1600AD, and then I choose 7.75 Million as the estimation in 1444AD, how about your suggestion?

 

[Zerodv]

Hello, I search for wiki and found the estimative value of population of Japan in 1444 Scanerio shall be about 10 Million if the data in wiki that in 1150AD Japan has 6.84 Million people and in 1600AD Japan has 12.27 Million people is generally true and then I set the population development during 1150 to 1600AD should have the same speed. How do you evaluate it, is it tooo high or too small yet?

The population in Korea is controversial, the population recordion held by Japan shows that the official population recordion held by Korea is problematic, according to the population recordion in 1940s and accord to the estimative value seen in English Wiki, I select 11.92 Million as the estimative value of population of Korea in 1600AD, and then I choose 7.75 Million as the estimation in 1444AD, how about your suggestion?

Korea seems way to high, the only thing I´ve found on internet is this:

https://books.google.com/books?id=-35xCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=korea+population+1600&source=bl&ots=4mm1MohRlC&sig=OLgd5C65gWAcUKHD6CA0mrs_g8M&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi--dWNpOfQAhUF8RQKHTflDxc4ChDoAQg4MAY#v=onepage&q=korea population 1600&f=false

Now you have high numbers in 1000 AD but Korea didn´t really have a good time in the later era(in a sense they did but the aftermath of the Mongol invasion and the later Manchu invasion made it only temporary), so the 1600 could have only temporary. In any case I dobut they had their population so close to the Japanese numbers.

 

[Grand Historian]

I would say China deserves up to 50% more provinces(or 50 provinces given their usual 100), I also think development should at least be double, and the subsequent internal mechanics would make blobbing way harder than it could seem, IMO China should be made fair to play also in MP, somehow.

Ming already starts out as the only nation in the world with a development in the four digits. I'm not opposed to China getting more provinces, but bloating them to an even more ridiculous level than they already are - especially without any inhibiting mechanics - would completely destroy gamebalance.

Please explain how Japan should have less development than 1444 England.

That's right, you can't.

Actually I can; Population =/= Development. Development is a combination of population, local education, quality of the terrain, and most importantly, quality of life.

Japan was backwater before and after the Sengoku - between a stifling caste system, overcrowding, the fact that most of the nation is un-arable mountain, and that they even officially banned the wheel for anything other than religious purposes, it is rightfully backwater compared to England, which has much better terrain, education, more social mobility, agricultural technology, and a strong reliance on mechanical power.

Granted, all of East Asia needs a development buff.

 

[Grand Historian]

Korea seems way to high, the only thing I´ve found on internet is this:

https://books.google.com/books?id=-35xCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=korea+population+1600&source=bl&ots=4mm1MohRlC&sig=OLgd5C65gWAcUKHD6CA0mrs_g8M&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi--dWNpOfQAhUF8RQKHTflDxc4ChDoAQg4MAY#v=onepage&q=korea population 1600&f=false

Now you have high numbers in 1000 AD but Korea didn´t really have a good time in the later era(in a sense they did but the aftermath of the Mongol invasion and the later Manchu invasion made it only temporary), so the 1600 could have only temporary. In any case I dobut they had their population so close to the Japanese numbers.

In 1600 they were suffering from the aftershocks of the Imjin War, which decimated the country.

 

[Zerodv]

Ming already starts out as the only nation in the world with a development in the four digits. I'm not opposed to China getting more provinces, but bloating them to an even more ridiculous level than they already are - especially without any inhibiting mechanics - would completely destroy gamebalance.



Actually I can; Population =/= Development. Development is a combination of population, local education, quality of the terrain, and most importantly, quality of life.

I know but I mean, it´s just overboard to have the Chinese at the same level of the Germans(Germanic is the biggest culture in terms of development). I was thinking that any following dev and map changes would have some mechanics inhibiting it, from making it harder to exponentially grow your economy out of buildings(that should be something general though) or making events require you to spend money on or making Chinese enemies more stronger, harder to core or conquer.

Japan was backwater before and after the Sengoku - between a stifling caste system, overcrowding, the fact that most of the nation is un-arable mountain, and that they even officially banned the wheel for anything other than religious purposes, it is rightfully backwater compared to England, which has much better terrain, education, more social mobility, agricultural technology, and a strong reliance on mechanical power.

Granted, all of East Asia needs a development buff.

In the preindustrial era a person is a person, production and income from taxes is going to change only to a certain level. England was far from its golden Age at this time and it wasn´t exactly a powerhouse. The capacity of Japan in any case is like you said limited by warfare(devastation now) and division. To also change development is tackling that problem 2 times having 2 times the effect it should have.

The terrain argument is a bit silly because the population supportable by Japan is higher than the one England can support(otherwise you couldn´t have it).

In any case double dev is not that much, of course given one represents the historical background to why the East didn´t exactly steamroll through Indonesia into Oceania and eventually India and New World.