• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

EU4 - Development Diary - 27th of August 2019

And now for something completely different.

Introducing 1.29: Manchu!

manchu loading screen.png


Think always of your ancestors,
and cultivate virtue.
Always strive to accord with the Mandate,
and seek for yourself many blessings.
Before Yin lost their multitudes,
They were in accord with the High Di.
Look to Yin as you would a mirror,
The great Mandate is not easy to keep.
- The Book of Odes

The 1.29 Manchu update will include not only the long-awaited 64 bit upgrade, but also a hefty chunk of free content for North-East Asia. Over the next few weeks I’ll be laying out what you can expect from the Manchu update; our focus is of course on Manchuria itself, but the update also has a huge impact on Mongolia, China, Japan, Korea, and parts of Central Asia.

Before we get to that, I’ll say a word about how Manchu came to be. Early in the year we set our programmers to work on tech debt (explained here by our own @MatRopert ), while @Groogy and @DDRJake were busy laying out the design for next years’ European update and expansion. With the design for the future at such an early stage it didn’t make sense for Team Content Design (at the time consisting of myself, @Ofaloaf, and @Caligula Caesar) to begin working on Europe just yet. And so we decided to use this time to create a free content update. We had originally planned to release Manchu somewhat earlier in the year, but various factors beyond our control prevented this from happening and we’ve finally secured a September release. While Manchu will contain some bug fixes, it won't contain the quality of life features we've been talking about lately - those will come with the Europe update next year. So to reiterate: the time we spent working on Manchu did not take any time away from our work on the European update.

With that out of the way, let’s talk about China!

Many players, including myself, haven’t been happy with the balance of Mandate of Heaven’s Emperor of China mechanics and the way they affect the experience of playing in East Asia. What we typically see in 1.28 is a perpetually stagnant Ming and by extension a stagnant East Asia. Players are averse to taking the Mandate of Heaven even as Qing because it is seen (somewhat justifiably) as more trouble than it’s worth. Players starting as Ming are offered very little challenge in their campaign.

We decided to use the Manchu update as an opportunity to revisit these mechanics. We want the Mandate to be desirable while still presenting a unique challenge and gameplay experience for both Ming and those who would usurp the Mandate. What follows is a list of the changes we’ve made to Mandate of Heaven’s Empire of China system:
  • Neighboring non-tributary nations no longer cause Mandate loss.
    • This prevents Mandate loss from bordering large nations such as Russia.
    • It also means that nations that take the Mandate from Ming no longer experience crippling Mandate loss from non-tributaries.
    • The Empire will still gain Mandate from having tributaries, so it is still rewarding to surround the Empire with Tributary states.
  • For each 5 loans the Empire loses -0.03 Mandate per month. Bankruptcy causes a -0.05 Mandate loss per month.
    • The Emperor is expected to bring prosperity to China, not poverty and ruin.
    • Opponents of the Empire now have the option of target the Chinese economy in all manner of creative ways in order to reduce its Mandate.
  • Passive Meritocracy decay has been increased to -2 per year
    • In 1.28, simply having low skill advisors is enough to maintain maximum Meritocracy at all times, so there is no need to ever worry about low Meritocracy.
    • This makes Meritocracy a more scarce resource that will take more time to accumulate.
  • For each 5 Corruption, the Empire loses 0.05 Mandate per month
    • Speaks for itself. A corrupt Empire is not a healthy Empire.
  • -100% Mercenary Availability at 0 Mandate changed to -200%
    • At 0 Mandate Ming shouldn’t be able to hire mercenaries. With Ming’s huge forcelimit, any positive modifier to Mercenary Availability (e.g. Administrative Ideas) allows them to hire a large mercenary army.
  • Low Mandate now has a scaling Global Manpower penalty, up to -50% at low Mandate
    • Ming has a gigantic Manpower pool. Wearing it down is difficult, especially when they take Quantity ideas (which again they often do). Their sheer numbers can help them overcome opponents that they historically struggled to defeat.
    • Dynasties in periods of economic or political decline struggled to raise large or disciplined armies. This was another indicator that the Dynasty was at risk of losing the Mandate.
  • High Mandate now reduces monthly War Exhaustion, up to -0.03 per month
    • This rewards a strong Empire with the ability to sustain itself in wars for long periods of time. It broadcasts that attacking the Empire at a time of strength may be unwise.
    • When a dynasty is perceived to clearly and firmly possess the Mandate, the people are assured that the hardships of war will pass and the Emperor will be victorious.
  • Two new Ruler Personalities have been added, exclusive to the Emperor of China. Humane gives a bonus to Mandate while Petty reduces it.
    • Based on the Confucian concept of ‘ren’. A morally virtuous Emperor is the center of a harmonious Empire.
  • Not owning and controlling Beijing, Nanjing, and Canton reduces Mandate by -0.05 per month each.
    • This adds new tactical and strategic elements to both playing and fighting the Empire. You can damage the Empire’s Mandate by sieging key cities, and even further by taking them in a peace deal. The Emperor must take care to defend these key provinces.
  • The Unguarded Nomadic Frontier disaster will now account for the development of the subjects of Horde nations
    • It is no longer necessary for a Horde that wishes to challenge the Empire to directly control massive swathes of land. Vassals and Marches can be used to increase your power for this purpose.
  • Low Meritocracy now causes Corruption, up to 0.1 per year at 0 Meritocracy. High Meritocracy reduces corruption to the same degree.
    • A player-led Qing or Ming will likely be expansionist. This reduces the impact of corruption from territories. And can be a means to reduce Mandate loss from high corruption.
    • Meritocracy represents the efficiency of the Confucian bureaucracy. Corrupt bureaucrats (which in Ming was extremely common) did not administer efficiently.
  • The Empire gains 0.05 Mandate per month while using the Unite China CB, and new Emperors gain +0.05 monthly Mandate for 20 years. Countries that seize the Mandate begin with 60 Mandate and 60 Meritocracy.
    • This helps countries that have recently gained the Mandate an early source of Mandate, a common issue when playing as Qing or Yuan.
  • We’ve rebalanced a number of Chinese historical events. I won’t go into the details now but an important focus was adding Mandate effects to many event options.

In addition, we’ve designed two new highly impactful event chains to shake up the Chinese world.

dd_ming_crisis.jpg

The Mandate is not easy to keep;
May it not end in your persons.


Though the Ming dynasty was ultimately defeated by the Manchu conquest, its collapse had already begun before the invasion. Disaster and mismanagement within the Ming dynasty were the catalyst for a major peasant rebellion in the 1630’s led by Li Zicheng. Li Zicheng was extremely successful; his forces won many battles against the Ming armies and he captured Beijing in 1644, proclaiming himself Emperor of the Shun Dynasty. Only then did the newly-united Manchus invade, initially under the pretext of defeating Li Zicheng’s rebellion. We’ll talk more about the Manchu invasion next week, for now we’re interested in Ming’s internal crisis.

The Crisis of the Ming Dynasty is a new Disaster that will challenge Ming players and very often lead to the collapse of an AI-controlled Ming. The Disaster can begin any time after the Age of Discovery if Ming has low Mandate or has lost the Mandate entirely. When the Disaster hits they’ll immediately receive penalties to Land Morale, Technology Cost, and Global Unrest, as well as taking a flat hit to their Stability, Mandate, and Corruption. Events will periodically spawn Peasant rebels. This is going to be a very difficult time for Ming. Ming must restore their Mandate by any means necessary or face dire consequences. If rebels manage to occupy 10 provinces in a single Chinese region (North China, South China, and Xinan), an event will fire that immediately spawns breakaway nations. In Xinan the Yunnan Protectorate (represented by the nation of Dali) will demand self-rule, which can be accepted at the cost of Mandate or denied at the cost of a bloody war. In the South, local governors will take matters into their own hands, defying the authority of the Empire and raising their own armies to restore order. Wu and Yue will be spawned on the map, and once again the choice to accept their independence or fight against them will be presented. In North China there will be no such choice. Rebels will seize power in the region and declare that Ming has lost the Mandate of Heaven, proclaiming the Shun Dynasty and immediately declaring war on Ming for the Mandate. The southern revolter states can play a role in the rise of the Qing later in the game, representing the Three Feudatories which we’ll talk about more next week. Ming players must now guard their Mandate jealously lest they fall into ruin and despair.

dd_tumu_crisis.jpg

In this playthrough Esen Taishi managed to get himself killed in battle, but Kundelung Kirghiz has taken up his mantle.

Another challenge to Ming rule came much earlier in our time frame. By 1444 the Oirats had consolidated their power under the ambitious warlord Esen Taishi (more about the Oirats next week). In 1449 he led an invasion of China, captured the Emperor in battle, and came close to winning the siege of Beijing. These events are known as the Tumu Crisis, and they’re now an event chain in EU4. As the Oirats begin the game refusing to pay tribute to the Ming Emperor, they often find themselves in an early war. When this happens Ming receives an event informing them that the Emperor has decided to lead his armies personally, converting the Yingzong Emperor into a (very inept) general. If the Oirats defeat a Ming army commanded by the Yingzong Emperor in a battle an event will immediately fire granting the Oirats combat and siege bonuses, while Ming receives an event reduces their Mandate and Stability, as well as forcing them into a temporary Regency Council. From here the goal for the Oirats is to capture Beijing before the Emperor dies and before Ming appoints a new Emperor to the throne. Should the Oirats succeed the rewards are great: they’ll immediately occupy every province in the North China region owned and controlled by Ming, resulting in a huge amount of warscore which they can use to secure an advantageous peace deal. The capture of Beijing will also cause huge Mandate loss for Ming, though their beloved Emperor will be returned safely to the throne. By pursuing the goals presented in this event chain an Oirat player can make a powerful opening move in their campaign, potentially paving the way for a restored Yuan dynasty.

We’ve had a long time to observe the impact of our work in this region and we’re very satisfied with the results. In 1.29 Ming survives “intact” to the end of the game in less than 1⁄3 of hands-off tests, with the remainder of cases having a variety of results such as a powerful Qing dynasty, a perpetually shattered China, the rise of a new Chinese dynasty (Shun and Wu are the most common), and opportunistic European conquests that exploit China’s internal troubles. I’ve even seen Mughal China a couple of times. The result here is a much more dynamic and much less predictable political situation in East Asia. In the hands of a player Ming is still by far the most powerful nation in the game, though it faces new challenges to its dominance.

It’s great to finally have the chance to talk about 1.29 Manchu after so many months. I’ll be back with more over the next few weeks building up to its release in September. Our next development diary will hone in on the 3 M’s: Maps, Manchus, and Mongols!


Manchu will be a free update to EU4 with new content and the 64 bit upgrade. The European Update and DLC will be coming in 2020.
 
Last edited:
While we're on the subject of weakening Ming, have you considered representing the negative impact of the sea bans on Chinese trade?

I would argue that Ming should start with a negative modifier affecting it's tradepower or trade income, that would go away upon passing the second Mandate reform (Reform the Seaban). That way China would be slightly less obscenely rich at the start and the player would have a stronger incentive to pass the reforms and risk the negative effects of low mandate. This could also interact with the Wokou pirate events, as the sea bans contributed to the spread of piracy (even though they were meant, among other things, to contain it).

This is actually a really good idea.
 
This sounds like a really great patch! The history of Mongol people was very much connected to the Mandate throughout history. Is there any plan to also make Mongol Empire something you will want to form, not to avoid. Starting as a steppe nomand country, form Mongol Empire, claim Mandate should be one of the most difficulty yet rewarding experience in the game.

Will there be events related to Khalka and Zunghar? I don't think I've seen those two tags, ever, whilst as a human there's absolutely no reason to form them.


one day before eu5 do a oceania australia polynesia update please.

Maori as a revolter tag and maaaybe Tonga/Hawaii are valid, but Australia? It wasn't colonised until the EU4's end and before that there were only very primitive stone-age peoples.


These changes sound really interesting and good for gamebalance. It really seems the (almost) year long break of updates/DLC's was a good decision. The quality of 1.29 and 1.30 patch looks very promising.
It is a shame we have to wait for these updates since I, and no doubt many others, suffer from ''I can no longer play without these'' syndrome, but it will be worth the wait.

Will the longer time between patches become the new standard or was it mainly to take time to solve tech debt issues?

Anyway have a good week and keep up the good work!

If this is the new standard, I'm more than happy with it. 2017-2018 were rough years for the game to say the least, GC was the last straw for many people. But credit to Paradox here, they do appear to have listened to their fanbase.
 
Last edited:
Another thing I'd like to say about community feedback, and I hope you'll forgive me if this sounds a little harsh, is that we're primarily thinking in terms of common sentiment rather than the loud voices of any individual or small group.

Please do keep this in mind whenever you see whining about territorial corruption, religious conversion costs, or anything else that forces WCers to face a little complexity. The vast majority of us support the direction you're moving in.
 
If Manchu and Qing are going to survive then Korea needs to be handled. These days they pretty much blob over all of Manchuria.

I hope I will.
North East Asia has the rather odd dilemma of simultaneously having Korea be extremely weak compared to pretty much every other country (I remember doing the math on it on a post long ago, Korea was the second worst in terms of population=>development, behind only the Ming. I mean, the Joseon capital of Hanseong has 10 dev, same as uncolonised provinces out in Indonesia) and the Jurchens ridiculously strong (for the inverse reason) compared to their IRL situations. The Jurchen weren't an actual threat to either the Ming nor Joseon until Nurhaci unified them in the 17th century after events elsewhere prevented Chinese and Korean interference in Jurchen affairs (various rebellions in the Ming Empire, the Imjin War and recovery in Korea).

The main issue lies not in Korea being overly powerful (because it's really lackluster in the region and in general, in terms of population=>dev and NIs. Japan, which lost the naval side of the Imjin War handily to the Joseon, has better naval ideas and the Manchu alphabet, a dead language that was superseded by Mandarin Chinese, provides more of a tech discount than Hangul, a scientifically created script meant for educating the common Korean) but rather in the absence of the conditions that prevented Joseon domination of southern Manchuria in the fashion of the Kingdoms of Goguryeo and Balhae.

Issues
The Joseon were interested in dominating the Jurchen but were hobbled by 1. the Ming interceding on behalf of the Jurchen and placing them under their own control, rather than risk the Joseon making the Jurchen their own tributaries, 2. the economic costs of maintaining the forts to control the region, 3. the expansion of the already porous border crossed frequently by Jurchen raiders and smugglers, 4. the Joseon's internal politics.

Simply put, there's just no punishment for expansion into Manchuria, whereas the Joseon historically had plenty disincentives that meant internal development (playing tall, as it were) was a preferable option.

Solutions
Allowing nomads to go raiding, like in CK2, would go a long way to making the Central and North Asian tribes a way bigger threat than they are now and properly punish aggressive expansion (because coalitions aren't going to stop Ming, honestly) into the vulnerable steppe. More land to defend with more revolt risk, higher cost to garrison, etc.

Giving Korea a meritocracy based government form that likewise suffers when provinces are devastated and corruption rises would punish Korean expansionism and encourage both maintaining the defensible border Korea has held IRL for nearly 600 years now and playing a bit taller (though, unfortunately, most of the meat of Joseon history revolved around internal politics, not external affairs). Add to that events focusing on factional struggles and Korea ends up worse off by trying to expand without player foresight. And it would make sense; the Joseon government was bureaucratic, more like the Chinese than Europeans, and they didn't have to deal with feudalism (that had ended with the Goryeo centuries prior, IIRC).

Having the Ming warn Korea to start with in 1444 would be helpful for keeping the Jurchen alive and be fairly historically accurate. The Joseon were a bigger concern than the Jurchen were at that point, after all (the Goryeo were on the brink of war with the Ming only about 50 years ago).

Jianzhou shouldn't have the full extent of horde shock penalties on mountains, especially when most of their land is mountains or forest. That's the real killer for them, especially when their economy doesn't really afford replenishing cavalry. Reduced penalties, especially for their own lands, would keep Korea from blobbing northward quite so easily.


Any ways, any discussion of NE Asia during the period probably ought to include the Imjin War, what with its overall fallout all over NE Asia (delaying Japanese mainland ambitions for over 260 years, crippling the Joseon to the point that the Manchu could ride roughshod over them and force them to abandon the Ming and become their own tributary, destroying Joseon royal authority with the events leading to and following Injo's Coup, allowing the Jurchen to unify without the Ming or Joseon getting involved). And that entails discussion regarding the power balance between the Joseon, Japanese, and Ming (on one hand, the Japanese swept through Korea rapidly. On the other hand, the Joseon army was focus up north and the situation in the south was basically having everything mothballed and the army on minimum funding, since the Joseon king didn't expect war until the Japanese reached Hanseong. And the war went into a stalemate within a few months once the Joseon reorganised, the Ming sent over 40k troops, the Joseon navy assaulted the Japanese fleets, and the Righteous Armies harried the Japanese forces relentlessly). But that's worth a different post altogether.
 
Please do keep this in mind whenever you see whining about territorial corruption, religious conversion costs, or anything else that forces WCers to face a little complexity. The vast majority of us support the direction you're moving in.
When I criticize the changes in 1.26-1.28, I am speaking for myself, not for some imaginary "vast majority of players". Unless you have access to a representive study about the preferences of EU4's player base, I would ask you to do the same. (And if you do, I'd love to see that study)

And apparently this bears repeating: TerrCorr did not increase the complexity of WC runs, it only reinforced the already superiour expansion path: "Go for TC land, specifically India, first". I don't think I've seen anyone complain that WCs have been made too complex or difficult in 1.26, so you're refuting a made-up sentiment there.
 
While I'm inclined to agree that was an unwarranted leap, it's a bit ironic to ask us to avoid jumping to conclusions when we've seen ample evidence of changes in recent patches that have clearly NOT been tested extensively (e.g., conversions and the AI's current inability/unwillingness to do them).

For that matter, the continued silence regarding conversions is somewhat baffling. I doubt I'm alone in wondering if you'd care to comment on when/whether/how that particular issue will be fixed? Or is the current situation truly working as intended?
This is correct.

@neondt can you provide us with the dev diary you wrote when *new* Ming was released? Everyone agreed that this would be broken (and you finally admit it, by nerfing it), yet you were telling, as i can remind, that this was not unbalanced, and would not change drasticly the face of Asia.

I'm more than happy about that free patch, and i dont care if the case would have been delaying Europe update for some weeks, but your communication that Always is overpositive in the dev diary is boring tbh. On steam, we can understand, on that forum, with low fréquentations, we all play extensively EUIV and i think we would appreciate a more honest communication. Imperator Rome (i regret the pre order) and the last EUIV DLC (the only one i havent bought) rants were also due to this.
 
Please do keep this in mind whenever you see whining about territorial corruption, religious conversion costs, or anything else that forces WCers to face a little complexity. The vast majority of us support the direction you're moving in.

Like this comment in particular is one such that should be ignored entirely, imo.

The fact is that outgrowing territory corruption threshold isn't so easy unless your goal is explicitly expansion and you have some basic idea how to do it. Yet, the proponents of it don't know, and therefore they've never played a game with territory corruption. As such, it's merely envy which dictates that comment that they are happy with it, when in fact they just don't have it in their games.
 
I think paradox is one of the most player friendly companies ever, devs I follow in forums are always kind and they hear us.

By the way I somewhat liked the idea of harder religious conversions, but territory corruption is too harsh, I wish they could increase default number of states limit for everyone.

To stay on topic, are we gonna see province increase in other regions? I saw mainland China won't have more, what about Manchuria or Korea or Middle Asia and Siberia?
 
@neondt can you provide us with the dev diary you wrote when *new* Ming was released? Everyone agreed that this would be broken (and you finally admit it, by nerfing it), yet you were telling, as i can remind, that this was not unbalanced, and would not change drasticly the face of Asia.
Are you talking about the Mandate of Heaven release?

If so, neondt wasn't with the team back then.
 
@neondt can you provide us with the dev diary you wrote when *new* Ming was released? Everyone agreed that this would be broken (and you finally admit it, by nerfing it), yet you were telling, as i can remind, that this was not unbalanced, and would not change drasticly the face of Asia.

I'm don't recall writing anything like that.
 
This is correct.

@neondt can you provide us with the dev diary you wrote when *new* Ming was released? Everyone agreed that this would be broken (and you finally admit it, by nerfing it), yet you were telling, as i can remind, that this was not unbalanced, and would not change drasticly the face of Asia.

I'm more than happy about that free patch, and i dont care if the case would have been delaying Europe update for some weeks, but your communication that Always is overpositive in the dev diary is boring tbh. On steam, we can understand, on that forum, with low fréquentations, we all play extensively EUIV and i think we would appreciate a more honest communication. Imperator Rome (i regret the pre order) and the last EUIV DLC (the only one i havent bought) rants were also due to this.
Might be difficult, given how Dev Diaries back then were written by DDRJake and Trin Tragula. But of course, you know that, they can easily be found via the Wiki. Noone would post just to troll without checking first, right.
 
That said, I'd like to offer a different perspective on what we mean by listening to community feedback. It was never our intent to run EU4's development as a "fan democracy"...
I seriously doubt anyone thought this was a "fan democracy".

Another thing I'd like to say about community feedback, and I hope you'll forgive me if this sounds a little harsh, is that we're primarily thinking in terms of common sentiment rather than the loud voices of any individual or small group.
It would be useful to separate community feedback about questionable design choices (e.g., trade company buffs) and feedback about implementation that has clearly broken a previously working system (e.g., religious conversion by the AI).

Again, it would be useful if ANY dev could confirm whether they intended for the AI not to convert? If not, when/if they plan to fix the system? I gather that the failure to convert in the New World is, indeed, working as intended, despite the bizarre, ahistorical results. But that failure throughout the rest of the world is more problematic.
 
@RobRoy3

We are unsatisfied with the AI's ability to convert, particularly subjects. This is a high priority for fixing in the update.

(not that I would blame anyone for not seeing a response on page 8 of last week's dev diary)
 
I can see that, but it just seemed quite extreme. Ming on 25 mandate, which is a logical number after passing a reform would have both a 25% global manpower reduction and generally would not be able to recruit mercs. If you say, it's intended, alright. At this rate, AI Ming will probably often implode because of them shooting themselves into the foot which just seems odd.
That's the point. Ming imploded in real life and the Manchus took advantage of it. I love Mingplosion, makes east asia more dynamic instead of Ming blobbing up all the time.
 
So Mandate is now tied to the Chinese economy?

So seeing as Ming's economy is the strongest in the game by far, and now it dosen't have to Tributary everyone, we'll see Mingblob every single game now instead of a Ming that is a sleeping dragon?

I'm sure that'll be even more fun for playing in the region, should Ming ever get an Expansionist ruler, you get invaded by an expansionist juggernaught of over 1,000 development.

Also taking the Mandate shouldn't feel bad, but you better have Beijing; Canton and Nanjing before you take that Mandate... otherwise it's gonna feel REALLY bad.
How about you actually read what the devdiary explained
 
Indeed. It takes every ounce of restraint I can muster not to abandon my post and create the South-East Asia update of my dreams.
I hope it will happen one day. Majapahit will have some sick mission tree no doubt to restore their glory days. And Palembang can have a mission tree to restore the Srivijayan kingdom too, it is the capital of Srivijaya after all before its collapse.