The Case for, Eventually, China

[diegosimeone]

The main issue with China is that they'd be isolated. So it might take 200 years to reach Central Asia or India for a Chinese game, assuming that you first have to unite China and go through the 'Indochina' region. And then people will want Japan to be included as well.

I'd love for China to be part of the game but I have to take the side of the developers here despite my initial disappointment. The map seems large enough for this game.

A standalone Chinese region game would be ideal. Probably with a different start date.

 

[Thure]

The main issue with China is that they'd be isolated. So it might take 200 years to reach Central Asia or India for a Chinese game, assuming that you first have to unite China and go through the 'Indochina' region. And then people will want Japan to be included as well.

I'd love for China to be part of the game but I have to take the side of the developers here despite my initial disappointment. The map seems large enough for this game.

A standalone Chinese region game would be ideal. Probably with a different start date.

It was not isolated just because they didn't had direct contact. They had indirect contact with everyone else:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiongnu

 

[Austregisel]

What's the difference with every other empire in this game? The whole game is about empire forming and blobbing and deal with internal issues.

Blobs do not deal with internal issues, it's unnecessary, it's just micro.

 

[diegosimeone]

It was not isolated just because they didn't had direct contact. They had indirect contact with everyone else:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiongnu

Of course there was contact.

But this is a military/imperialistic game. They didn't have that kind of contact.

 

[Thure]

Blobs do not deal with internal issues, it's unnecessary, it's just micro.

Blobs and interal issues/civil wars/etc are already part of the game! That's the whole game. Maurya, Seleucids etc. all are blobs.

 

[ChaosOnline]

I strongly agree. Honestly, I'm sad it wasn't included from the start. I've always loved Chinese history, and it would be so interesting to see how it plays out in this era.

 

[icedt729]

That's probably how it would come down. I for one can't understand why people would like the Rome of Classical Antiquity when he Rome of Late Antiquity is infinite more interesting and much more things are going on. But I think that the quoted text above pretty much nails it. It will be up to modders let us try to save our empires painstakingly created in the 300 BC to 0 AD period from the internal rot and decay of the system and ambitions of selfish generals.

I would absolutely love to see a Late Antiquity game. My only concern is that it would be very difficult for one single game to model the rapid expansion of the period up to about 1 AD, then the relative stability of the period up to about 200 AD, to the restructuring and eventually fragmentation from 200 AD onwards. Not impossible, but definitely a serious design challenge.

But the point that bothers me the most about this is that when the player unifies China, there is no way he can stop, there are no mechanics that reproduce the decadence of the empire, so I think I: R finishes so early in the beginning of the first century, because when the Empire was formed, you have little time to conquer the world, unless you did it well before, it would be an infinite blobing, just as I unify China in Imperium Universalis (EUIV)

Considering the late-game Han empire had roughly the same population and land area as the late-game Roman Empire, this is already a concern whether China is included or not. But EU4 is the blobbiest of PDS's grand strategy games so I would expect I:R to handle this better than an EU4 mod is able to.

The main issue with China is that they'd be isolated. So it might take 200 years to reach Central Asia or India for a Chinese game, assuming that you first have to unite China and go through the 'Indochina' region. And then people will want Japan to be included as well.

Historically, Han armies were in Central Asia's Ferghana valley by mid-game, sacking one of Alexander the Great's colonies there. Earlier than that we have the Yuezhi (Tocharians) losing their lands in northwest China to Xiongnu expansion, with the greater part of them migrating west and toppling the Greco-Bactrian kingdom. From mid-game onwards you effectively have one regional power (the Tocharian Kushanas) bordering Parthia, the Han as well as the states of Northern India.

This is to say nothing of other possible historical outcomes. Say a new alliance blocks Qin in China, and instead they turn west in the early game. Or the Greco-Bactrians go after the Tarim Basin and find themselves in conflict with the Xiongnu. Or the Mauryas and Seleucids clash over the routes east. China, India and Central Asia are no more locked into a certain outcome than the Mediterranean is.

Regarding Japan and Indochina- there have already been other posts in this thread by people more knowledgeable about those regions than I am. But in terms of the historical and archaeological evidence available these regions are more like Inner Europe or the steppe than like the Mediterranean or India. They could be included but are less essential.

 

[diegosimeone]

I
Historically, Han armies were in Central Asia's Ferghana valley by mid-game, sacking one of Alexander the Great's colonies there. Earlier than that we have the Yuezhi (Tocharians) losing their lands in northwest China to Xiongnu expansion, with the greater part of them migrating west and toppling the Greco-Bactrian kingdom. From mid-game onwards you effectively have one regional power (the Tocharian Kushanas) bordering Parthia, the Han as well as the states of Northern India.

This is to say nothing of other possible historical outcomes. Say a new alliance blocks Qin in China, and instead they turn west in the early game. Or the Greco-Bactrians go after the Tarim Basin and find themselves in conflict with the Xiongnu. Or the Mauryas and Seleucids clash over the routes east. China, India and Central Asia are no more locked into a certain outcome than the Mediterranean is.

Regarding Japan and Indochina- there have already been other posts in this thread by people more knowledgeable about those regions than I am. But in terms of the historical and archaeological evidence available these regions are more like Inner Europe or the steppe than like the Mediterranean or India. They could be included but are less essential.

I don't disagree that there is potential and that it'd be way better to have China than not.

But you're also agreeing with me by saying that it's like 150 years in game or so until a military contact is made. It's gonna be 100-200 years for every save, assuming there's an intent for either side to reach there. And even so, there will be saves where China will be an isolated story of its own with the Warring States and whatnot. I'd love it, but I understand that it's something the Devs do not want to go deeper on.

As long as there's trade with China in some way in the game, I'm not going to be disappointed. I agree that completely ignoring China takes away from the game. But I also see the PoV of the Devs here. Even as Maurya it's gonna take a long while before reaching China.

And since you're well versed in the Chinese history, you also accept that when we say China in the game we mean the main states and not the modern borders, right? Which is even deeper towards the east.

 

[icedt729]

I don't disagree that there is potential and that it'd be way better to have China than not.

But you're also agreeing with me by saying that it's like 150 years in game or so until a military contact is made. It's gonna be 100-200 years for every save, assuming there's an intent for either side to reach there. And even so, there will be saves where China will be an isolated story of its own with the Warring States and whatnot. I'd love it, but I understand that it's something the Devs do not want to go deeper on.

As long as there's trade with China in some way in the game, I'm not going to be disappointed. I agree that completely ignoring China takes away from the game. But I also see the PoV of the Devs here. Even as Maurya it's gonna take a long while before reaching China.

And since you're well versed in the Chinese history, you also accept that when we say China in the game we mean the main states and not the modern borders, right? Which is even deeper towards the east.

My issue with this line of thinking is that I think it reflects a double standard- Rome doesn't even leave the Italian peninsula until a century into the game, and most of their conquests in the Eastern Mediterranean happened during the last third of the game's three-hundred-year run. By giving us the Iranian Plateau, Central Asia, and India, I:R is already marking out a much more global focus than EU:R's, and Han, Yuezhi and Xiongnu all occupied parts of the current map during the current timeframe with very direct impacts on Iranian, Indian and Hellenistic states.

 

[diegosimeone]

My issue with this line of thinking is that I think it reflects a double standard- Rome doesn't even leave the Italian peninsula until a century into the game, and most of their conquests in the Eastern Mediterranean happened during the last third of the game's three-hundred-year run. By giving us the Iranian Plateau, Central Asia, and India, I:R is already marking out a much more global focus than EU:R's, and Han, Yuezhi and Xiongnu all occupied parts of the current map during the current timeframe with very direct impacts on Iranian, Indian and Hellenistic states.

That I could agree with. But the problem is that the game itself is pretty much called 'Rome' Even if the most interesting starts are with the Diadochi for example, it makes sense that there'd be more focus in regions where Rome prevailed, such as northern Europe and Britain, over places that were more advanced in that era such as pretty much whatever the Persian Empire consisted of.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

If anything, the areas that should be cut first are Scandinavia and the North Eastern Europe regions. If you want to argue what should or should not be included based in their interactions with Rome, those areas had less contact and interaction than China did.

 

[Lord Hoosier]

If they can add India + Tibet to Crusader Kings II, they can add China + Indochina to I:R, if they really wanted to. And we really want them to!

 

[Lord Hoosier]

They should also add Taoism, Confuscianism, Mohism, Legalism (I know it's a philosophy, but it would be best represented by a religion within the game's mechanics), and Chinese Folk as religions to mess around with. Maybe add a Mandate of Heaven system too. Also a few Rice Kingdoms in Japan (with Shinto of course) and Indochina & Burma for China and India to Duke it out colonially.

 

[Lord Hoosier]

North Vietnam at the at the time the game takes place was rule by Văn Lang a Austroasiatic language speaking kingdom in the south which has a largely mythical history but did exist by the games starting Period’ and in the north by Nam Cương Kingdom which spoke a Tai–Kadai language and was part of the Âu Việt an ancient conglomeration of Baiyue tribes living in what is today the mountainous regions of northernmost Vietnam, western Guangdong, and northern Guangxi. Around 258 BC or 257 BC an alliance of Âu Việt tribes lead by Thục Phán invaded Văn Lang and established the Âu Lạc kingdom ruled until 207 BC when a Qin warlord Triệu Đà (pinyin: Zhao Tuo) established his own independent kingdom Nam Viet in the area of north Vietnam, Guangdong and Guangxi. In 111 BC Han China invaded and established territories in the area.

Apart from north Vietnam which was conquered by China during the timeframe of the game (and is the only area of south east Asia that should or could be included in a China dlc) there is very little known about south east Asia for the time the game takes place. The earliest Pyu city-states formed in Burma in the 2nd century BC. The first known states outside of the ones mentioned above is Funan in Cambodia that formed in 1st century AD through Influence from the Indian Sub-continent. Which is to late for the games timeframe.


For some of the places in southeast Asia language cloud be used to try to reconstruct the groups of people that lived in southeast Asia at the time.

South Vietnam was inhabited by the
Sa Huynh culture who were the predecessors of the Cham people, who migrated from Borneo to south Vietnam by 1000 BC.

Thai were not present in the modern region of Thailand at the time the game takes place instead the region would have been inhabited by groups related to the modern Mon and Khmer people. The Thai people migrated from the Chinese province of Guangxi in 8th-10th centuries CE. Though there was the Nam Cương Kingdom that spoke a Tai–Kadai language and tribes in parts of northern Laos that possibly spoke a Tai–Kadai language at that time.


Burma at the time was probably inhabited by the Sino-Tibetan Pyu people along the Irrawaddy River in upper Burma. Though the first of the Pyu city states wouldn’t form for 100 years after the games start. There were probably other Sino-Tibetan groups that inhabited the mountainous regions that divide India and Burma. Lower Burma was inhabited by the Austroasiatic mon people. There’s also the legendary Arakanese Dhanyawadi kingdom for which there’s no Historical evidence for and Definitely did not exist. The Burmans migrated from the Kingdom of Nanzhao in southwest China to Burma from the 8th-10th centuries CE assimilating the Pyu culture and forming the Kingdom of Pagan.

Austroasiatic/Mon-Khmer language family most likely formed along the Mekong river. By the time of the game most people in mainland southeast Asia probably spoke an Austroasiatic language.


There also could have been more Negrito peoples in southeast Asia at that time. Negrito is a broad term for the indigenous peoples that inhabited Southeast Asia before the migrations of peoples from Southern China. Negrito peoples are distantly related to the Papua New Guineans and Australian Aboriginals.


Here a list of information about south east Asia for the iron age.


Sites:


https://www.soas.ac.uk/sbbr/editions/file64275.pdf


http://factsanddetails.com/southeast-asia/Myanmar/sub5_5a/entry-2995.html


https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour.../6D02C584F0EA67B366D3EC5E13D668BA/core-reader


http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2017/04/hanoi-haifa-maritime-tin-route-meluhha.html


https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/ht/04/sse.html


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buni_culture


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igorot_society


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa_Huỳnh_culture


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funan


http://journals.lib.washington.edu/index.php/BIPPA/article/viewFile/9966/9768


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Thailand


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Văn_Lang


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Âu_Việt


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_of_Jars


https://pia-journal.co.uk/articles/abstract/10.5334/pia.15/

Or they could have most of it outside of Viet Nam uncolonized like what they did with Ireland and Germania. Remember that that is a thing in this game.

 

[Elendir]

Something to consider, when we talk about adding China to the game, is the great amount of historical data for that region in the game era.

We already have a fair knowledge of the country and its political, administrative and socio-economical realities, and we wouldn't need to fill the blanks with fictional liberties.
I see posts, here, rooting for the inclusion of areas of which we know very little, and, while this could be fun, imagine how much more immersive would be to have a historical well researched area added to the game.

 

[stavern]

https://www.totalwar.com/total-war-three-kingdoms
Already a game about that time period due in 2 months

 

[viola]

https://www.totalwar.com/total-war-three-kingdoms
Already a game about that time period due in 2 months

...

I don't see how this has anything to do with the conversation here.

 

[salszar-1]

I think it will be difficult to make China.

 

[salszar-1]

And how to make it better is a problem

 

[Pete0714]

I don't have a problem with people wanting this, I just wish they would keep that part of the map off for people who don't want it. Make it an expansion that truly does not exist , map and all, in the game for vanilla players who don't want it. I think that would resolve a huge chunk of this debate.