Let's talk about Chinese technological inferiority.

[cpm4001]

For one Zheng He's voyages are probably embellished considering that the ships he used are not technologically possible.

Uh...what? We have proof not only that the treasure ships actually existed but that Chinese fleets of those ships made multiple voyages between India, West Africa, and the Spice Islands (and, if you buy some theories, Australia). Granted, they were hardly practical ships, but they were hardly not technologically possible.
Anyway, Chinese technological inferiority in-game is pretty much crap.

 

[shadowcry]

The biggest problem with Eu4, is that it cannot accurately represent geography and logistics. The Ming (or any Chinese empire prior to the Qing) couldn't keep an army in the Steppe for longer than 30 days. The Steppe, Manchuria and Tibet should be nigh unconquerable until the 1700s due to logistics alone. Similarly, European nations shouldn't be able to colonize or conquer countries halfway around the globe if realism is meant to serve any purpose.

The only problem with imposing geographic and logistic constraints is the game tends to not be any fun - as anyone who remembers Magna Mundi can attest to.

 

[Gnomi]

I think tech groups costs should be based on the percentage of global trade the group controls.

Early on, most groups would be relatively equal, except for the native Americans which have terrible trade values at the start, but as the Europeans colonize the Americas, Africa, and Asia, they'll control more and more of the world's trade and their tech group will get a bigger tech bonus while other tech groups fall behind.

This way tech costs aren't a matter of ahistorical "westernization", its a matter of controlling world trade. Generally the Europeans should monopolize world trade and thus techonological development, but in some games the rest of the world might be able to hold off the Europeans and maintain technological dominance themselves.

Tech groups would represent a cultural sphere where ideas are shared between closely related cultures. The more economically vibrant the cultural sphere, the bigger tech bonus.

I think it is a good start -- it is better to think about the factors behind Europe's rapid development, instead of using the artificial tech group penalty. The only problem is that nobody (I mean, no academics) agree what are the deciding factors....

While we are at it, I also like to point out that it is as absurd that England and Spain see the technological development at the same speed, as well. There is no way that England in 1800 and Spain in 1800 could be considered equal. In fact, as of now, there is no real within-techgroup difference in EU4, which is absurd. If we are talking about China, China in 1440 would have "better techs" than Japan, while it would be flipped around in 1800 -- but in EU, they stay equal. This is something that Vicky handled much better (in fact, Vicky does everything better, as long as it is related to society or economy; though it is debatable if they made it a better game -- it is much more ambitious, but bit stale as a game, at least for me). But for EU timeframe, we will need a different implementation.

 

[Russkish]

This game doesn't have any historical accuracy. Already you shouldn't take any historical info from this game with seeing it as a history base. This game is just a strategy game which has piece of crap history. Already, non-european suggestions doesn't have any importance in this game. So, just open your Eu4 and play your overpowered France. Or don't play like me.

 

[Nostalgium]

VERY LONG TEXT

Nothing to contribute to the discussion, but I really enjoyed that read. Props to you!

 

[Novacat]

Another thing people are forgetting is that China, up until 1.8, got a 15% Tech bonus with eunuchs, reducing their 60% tech malus to 45% which was reasonable. IMO, the Celestial Empire should probably get 15% tech cost reduction as a base government bonus, if only to get that back.

The Manchus on the other hand are fine because they can get 10% tech cost reduction with their NIs, and an additional 20% (30% total) from an event in 1700 if they border either Portugal or Spain and they have Jesuits. Given, your likely to be westernized at that point and the event wont fire for westernized Manchu.

 

[j4freeman]

This game doesn't have any historical accuracy. Already you shouldn't take any historical info from this game with seeing it as a history base. This game is just a strategy game which has piece of crap history. Already, non-european suggestions doesn't have any importance in this game. So, just open your Eu4 and play your overpowered France. Or don't play like me.

Look, I don't mean to be rude, but did the Ming not exist in 1444? Did Constantinople not fall to the Ottomans in 1453? Was the Hundred Years War a myth? I realize what your trying to say, but please phrase it better in the future. Extrapolating "no historical accuracy" from the fact that the game doesn't always exactly mirror history when playing it is impossible. I'm sorry for arguing semantics, but present fallacies as fact.

 

[VolitionNewlove]

You mean 'genetic reasons'.
Europeans have the explorer genes so they go off an explore. A successful one comes back rich and has tons of offspring.

China's one explorer was a unich(castrated) so he never passed on his explorer gene.

What's with these forums and weird racial theories..?

 

[TolHydra]

Imjin War

I loved reading it!

So would it be too much of a stretch to ask, cheaper tech or military ideas for Japan in comparison, even by a little?

 

[panda_Express12]

oh look it is this thread again

 

[Rey]

I was contemplating on the fact that Chinese who were historically more advanced than any European countries in 1444 start with an inferior technology than nomads in EU4.

I thought I would share this sentiment of oddity with the rest of the community by going over Zheng He's expedition in 1405 ~ 1433

3. The world had never seen such a projection of maritime power, and would not see its like again until World War. The fleets certainly dwarfed anything Europe had at the time. The Europeans were only starting to venture out of the Mediterranean, and their ships were tiny and unsophisticated in comparison to Zheng He’s gigantic ships.

OP ever heard of Arab traders? Those from whom the Chinese learned that route?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Islam_in_China#China-Arab_Trade_relations

 

[Grand Historian]

Nothing to contribute to the discussion, but I really enjoyed that read. Props to you!

Thanks. I think I got just a tad carried away there...

 

[Grand Historian]

I loved reading it!

So would it be too much of a stretch to ask, cheaper tech or military ideas for Japan in comparison, even by a little?

Thanks.

I think the "Batch of Western Arquebus" event and Western Trade both give a slight discount on military technology. Though I do think Western Trade needs to be buffed a bit; remove the Missionary Malus if you convert, spread the Tech Bonus to all fields and give a slight bonus to trade power at the cost of some slight unrest.

 

[kiwimaster]

I've always found it odd that the devs felt that they had to make the tech rate slower as you go from west to east outside of Europe. Were the Muslims really so much more advanced than the Indians, and the Indians compared to the Chinese to justify the 10% tech cost increase? Is this even necessary to favouring a historical result? This bugged me a lot more when there were successive westernizations that EU3 forced you to undergo if playing a far east nation.

And especially now with Sub-saharans of all groups getting the same tech cost as the Chinese? Sure, it's great fun playing as an African nation now that it's easier than ever, but I really do have to wonder what sort of historical or gameplay justifications are behind these decisions.

 

[SacredDatura]

I've been doing some reading on the Ming, and there are a few interesting theories about why Zheng He's voyages were not built on. One is that it was a casualty of the fall of the eunuch faction from power, another that it was part of a larger policy to prevent the emergence of a new merchant class in the provinces that could challenge central authority, yet others imply that it was scrapped due to the financial strain of pacifying the nomad threat from the steppe frontier. What's interesting about these theories in the context of our discussion is that neither the causes nor even the voyages themselves can be satisfactorily represented by EU4's mechanics.

How, for example, do you represent the appeal of stamping out potential alternate power bases in your empire in a way that will make it seem like a rational or attractive choice, or represent the volatility and untamability of the steppe frontier?

I guess what I'm saying is that this is one of those places, like the sub-Saharan Africans, that the EU4 mechanics simply can't depict very historically.

 

[Arcaul]

Uh...what? We have proof not only that the treasure ships actually existed but that Chinese fleets of those ships made multiple voyages between India, West Africa, and the Spice Islands (and, if you buy some theories, Australia). Granted, they were hardly practical ships, but they were hardly not technologically possible.
Anyway, Chinese technological inferiority in-game is pretty much crap.

Well that is what sources are for. This shows, on page 44, that technologically that the ships as described are unlikely to have existed. Wooden ships of that size are possible they just didn't have access to the proper types of wood and they built the hull the wrong way to make it feasible. That entire article however does not in anyway dispute that the voyages happened. Like I said they happened they were probably just embellished in the sense that the fleet wasn't the size it is described as so that calls into doubt how big it must have truly been. Doesn't mean it didn't happen and you could still have the whole adventure happen with just one of those ships honestly.

And if you are entirely curious on page 47 they discuss the different types of ships and their possible uses. This is using modern shipbuilding combined with historical accounts just to look at whether or not they could do what they were supposed to. Basically they weren't great ocean going vessels and kinda lacked space but their historical roles are most likely accurate.

 

[Dracolithfiend]

Well that is what sources are for. This shows, on page 44, that technologically that the ships as described are unlikely to have existed. Wooden ships of that size are possible they just didn't have access to the proper types of wood and they built the hull the wrong way to make it feasible. That entire article however does not in anyway dispute that the voyages happened. Like I said they happened they were probably just embellished in the sense that the fleet wasn't the size it is described as so that calls into doubt how big it must have truly been. Doesn't mean it didn't happen and you could still have the whole adventure happen with just one of those ships honestly.

And if you are entirely curious on page 47 they discuss the different types of ships and their possible uses. This is using modern shipbuilding combined with historical accounts just to look at whether or not they could do what they were supposed to. Basically they weren't great ocean going vessels and kinda lacked space but their historical roles are most likely accurate.

+1 this

Also comparing the largest ship of the Chinese fleet to Columbus' ships makes no sense. Columbus was not given the largest ships in all of Europe to cross the ocean. He wasn't even given the largest ships at the port he sailed from. I could show you the largest tank Germany ever made (Panzer VII Mouse) and prove it was larger then any tank Russia fielded at Kursk. Does that matter? No because the Russian Tsar tank was much larger despite not being used in one particular event in history.

 

[ahyangyi]

OP ever heard of Arab traders? Those from whom the Chinese learned that route?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Islam_in_China#China-Arab_Trade_relations

Hmm, it's also worth noting that Zheng He was born a Muslim, and his father and grandfather made pilgrimage to Mecca before...

 

[Opiu18]

Perfect. This way (hypothetically) China could start at Tech Level 3+, but not be overpowered.

However, I do think that China should get a tech malus, with all the erasing of knowledge by the emperors. China did kind of stagnate for a long time, but there is potential for sure. My suggestion is that if the Emperor has less than or equal to 3 in a point, they get a 50% tech penalty for that area.

However, it will (probably) never happen due to the complexity. Also, how would westernisation work?

Maybe they should instead use triggers for China's tech. For example the tech malus would depend on the stats of the monarch, if you have a crappy ADM, MIL or DIP monarch, your tech will suffer in that section. That could simulate China, since the technological stagnation seems to have been brought upon by a bunch of shitty mcshit monarchs

 

[solidprice]

Im for giving Ming tech 3. Maybe even the plus tech bonus back somehow. like ming changes now but usually that means they fail.

Orait plus Manchu allies can rip apart Ming for at least the first 50 maybe even 100 years. which can happen more than you think.

Their god-tier general who is as epic as Shan Yu from mulan face rolls Ming. No mulan to save you china!:rofl:

*fun side fact*
A fully united japan can solo Korea and Ming on land,with very careful play. dat discipline!hmy:
Getting Orait/Manchu to jump in makes it France easy.
and he was a good guy greg orait and gave me the land in the peace deal i wanted!:wub: