MING: INWARD PERFECTION IS GONE.

[Te. Kenzo]

Nice

Will you ever change the kinda offensive "flavor" text that make absolutely no sense about a so called temple faction wanting a larger supply of buddhists to persecute them ?

Just call it the Generals faction and make it about the military leaders (which was an actual faction, which was overshadowed by the eunuchs and the scholar-officials during much of Ming dynasty) rather than a fictitious "temple faction" that never existed.

In pretty much all chinese dynasty the power struggle was between theses 3 factions, i still don't understand why you had to invent one.

More that the fact if is offensive or not, what concern me is how twisted is all the text, cause me an headache

 

[Grand Historian]

I have completely ceased to take complaints about horde nerfs seriously at this point. It's become more a weird forums cult than anything.

It's only 'weird' because people imagine we have some agenda to make playing hordes as miserable as possible. Since that has never been a
anything more than internet hysteria, it's actually not weird at all.

I can completely agree. Byzantium, on the other hand...

 

[Knibis]

not saying i am negative to this but, wasnt there a historical reason for the "inward perfection" in the first place..?

 

[Denkt]

Will Ming without the bureaucrats have super expansive or even useless forts because that could represent their historical decision of scrapping the treasur fleet?

 

[Knibis]

I think people should play the game a bit before raging so much, just sayin´.

you hit the nail on the head right there

 

[tobias.mb]

not saying i am negative to this but, wasnt there a historical reason for the "inward perfection" in the first place..?

There was no historical reason for it to nerf ming though.

 

[Golladan]

not saying i am negative to this but, wasnt there a historical reason for the "inward perfection" in the first place..?

The modifier was there for gameplay. To keep the power of Ming down so that they didn't go on a conquest rampage over Asia.

 

[Grand Historian]

not saying i am negative to this but, wasnt there a historical reason for the "inward perfection" in the first place..?

Yes, for both gameplay and historical reasons. 50% Autonomy Cap can probably simulate that well enough, though.

 

[kitemasaki]

Yes, for both gameplay and historical reasons. 50% Autonomy Cap can probably simulate that well enough, though.

It isn't there for historical reasons at all. It is purely gameplay. Most historians agree that the Ming dynasty was one of the most centralized and efficient governments the world has ever seen. The fact that the dynasty collapsed is not a reflection of its entire rule. France doesn't start with horrible tax rates in 1444, even though this was the case until Louis XIV's reforms. Again, the game is inspired by history, not a representation of history.

 

[Denkt]

Ming had enormous problem with its economy, they could not afford the treasure fleet so it had to be scrapped. The enormous cost to help Korea fight back the Japanese invasion was so costly that it is often considered to be a major reason why Ming fell, several decades after the war the cost was still felt.

Ming controled large amount of territory and people however it was not notworthy efficient at taxation.

 

[jebates]

The hardest part of coding China/Hordes is trying to simulate that these guys were the toughest, but lacked an ideological notion of that je ne sais quoi that animated the Western world to colonize and conquer. I mean, this is how things are at game start.

One of these guys discovered America.

 

[thecryptile]

Inward perfect!tion reflects how China largely abandoned exploration following Zheng He's epic journeys. Anything foreign was suspect, The Middle Kingdom was self sufficient and outsiders a dangerous threat to stability.

 

[Magean]

I remember, back in EU3, when Ming routinely made in into the Western steppes and reached Ukraine. The first check implemented was a -50% tax modifier attached to Confucianist provinces, because money fueled research and Ming would snowball too much without such a malus. With the Divine Wind expansion (which I never played), that was changed and replaced with the faction system.

At EU4 release, Ming apparently inherited most of its specific flavor from Divine Wind. Needless to say, the faction system combined with Inward Perfection that I could experiment in EU4 was a huge improvement over the tax malus : at least there was some flavor and added gameplay depth that made more sense than "Confucians are bad at running a state, period" and had some historical basis.

However, if the devs found a way to remove the biggest hurdles while keeping Ming in sane proportions (at least in most games, I wouldn't mind seeing Mings back in Ukraine once in a while ), all the better.

 

[Denkt]

But they ruinous expansive, like the choice was pretty much between having a working defence or a large fleet and it is obvious which choice is the better one.

 

[Giacomo1405]

if the Ming had the best taxation system ever conceived or an extremely inefficient one or any degree in between those, is of relative relevance...

what is relevant is that mechanics must be put in place to avoid absurd result in all of east asia...
and since the complexity of the real-world "nerfs" that must have hold china back and make it crumble are too hard to represent,
arbitrary (even ahistorical) modifiers must be put in place in order to achieve a better balance
and this change (huge buffs to ming) may have bad repercussions on the balance of all of Asia.

we'll see how it works out but it's very likely that some kind of nerfs (additional to the authonomy) must be added to achieve a desirable outcome.

 

[kitemasaki]

I remember, back in EU3, when Ming routinely made in into the Western steppes and reached Ukraine. The first check implemented was a -50% tax modifier attached to Confucianist provinces, because money fueled research and Ming would snowball too much without such a malus. With the Divine Wind expansion (which I never played), that was changed and replaced with the faction system.

At EU4 release, Ming apparently inherited most of its specific flavor from Divine Wind. Needless to say, the faction system combined with Inward Perfection that I could experiment in EU4 was a huge improvement over the tax malus : at least there was some flavor and added gameplay depth that made more sense than "Confucians are bad at running a state, period" and had some historical basis.

However, if the devs found a way to remove the biggest hurdles while keeping Ming in sane proportions (at least in most games, I wouldn't mind seeing Mings back in Ukraine once in a while ), all the better.

Exactly. The maluses have nothing to do with history. It is for gameplay balance. Those of us who played previous versions saw this steroid Ming. People on here can go on historical tirades all they want, but the fact is that the bonuses/maluses given are for balance. The tooltip descriptions are attempts to immerse the player into the setting with historical inspiration.

 

[Magean]

The hardest part of coding China/Hordes is trying to simulate that these guys were the toughest, but lacked an ideological notion of that je ne sais quoi that animated the Western world to colonize and conquer. I mean, this is how things are at game start.

View attachment 129453

One of these guys discovered America.

Seeing that picture is always entertaining, but... being able to build gargantuan ships doesn't mean you have the technology to navigate in high seas (meaning oceans). Besides, are ships such as Zheng He's admiral ship really useful in asserting sea power against foes that share more or less your technological level ? As far as I know, Zheng He's expeditions achieved a lot by frightening the locals in South-East Asia with their floating mountains. However, he encountered less advanced naval designs on his way. Now, the Europeans, and the Ottomans as well, certainly achieved at some point the technology required to build such monsters (perhaps they could have done it in the XVth century, I'm not exactly sure), but never did, for a reason : they aren't really practical.

 

[toroltao]

Seeing that picture is always entertaining, but... being able to build gargantuan ships doesn't mean you have the technology to navigate in high seas. Besides, are ships such as Zheng He's admiral ship really useful in asserting sea power against foes that share more or less your technological level ? As far as I know, Zheng He's expeditions achieved a lot by frightening the locals in South-East Asia with their floating mountains. However, he encountered less advanced naval designs on his way. Now, the Europeans, and the Ottomans as well, certainly achieved at some point the technology required to build such monsters (perhaps they could have done it in the XVth century), but never did, for a reason : it's not practical, at all.

The model is comparing an average treasure ship to the Santa Maria, which was only 19 meters long. Is a 60 meter long ship really "gargantuan"? Zheng He's ship was supposedly 140 meters in length, which would be more than twice the size of the ship shown in that picture. The model makes the Chinese ship look humongous, but it's actually the Santa Maria that is puny.

 

[Denkt]

The game is very poor at telling us why countries made the choices they did in real life, many such choices may be very poor in the game.

In reality Ming tried to expand but was beaten back every time as they could not afford the cost of the army in the game you make positive income while having a powerful army, that seldom happened in real life.

 

[Magean]

It isn't there for historical reasons at all. It is purely gameplay. Most historians agree that the Ming dynasty was one of the most centralized and efficient governments the world has ever seen. The fact that the dynasty collapsed is not a reflection of its entire rule. France doesn't start with horrible tax rates in 1444, even though this was the case until Louis XIV's reforms. Again, the game is inspired by history, not a representation of history.

That said, didn't Ming have a lot of corruption issues in their administration, so that outer provinces only brought back in tax a tiny fraction of what they were supposed to pay ? I have no source for that other than a discussion on the History forum here with a guy who documented that, but I can't remember what thread it was.