• 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 - 31st January 2017

Hello everyone, and welcome to another Europa Universalis development diary. Today we’ll take a deep look at the Manchu tribes.

As we added support for country & province modifiers for culture and culture-groups, we have tied the new unique paid mechanic for Manchu to the manchu culture itself.

If you are primary culture Manchu, in our next expansion, you will be able to raise Banners from states that have manchu cultures provinces. Each manchu province provides 1 banner for each 10 development it has, but it is all calculated on a state level, so several low development provinces together can add enough support for some banners, even if they individually can not support a banner.

Banners are required from the State Interface, and and the cost for a banner to be raised, is purely corruption. For each banner you gain 1 divided by your force limit.

Banners do not use manpower at all, but reinforce at normal monetary cost. If they reach 0 strength, the regiment is disbanded, just like mercenaries.

Banners are raised instantly at 100 men strength, so it will take a while for them to reinforce fully.

Banners are raised so that you get enough cavalry for your cavalry to infantry ratio, and the rest is raised as infantry.

If a state can no longer support enough banners, it will convert banners to regular troops at the start of a new month.

During the Absolutism Age, if you are Manchu or Qing, you can unlock the ability to increase the amount of banners you can raise by 50%, if you gain enough Splendor.

So what makes banners cool, except for having a nice purple background and not costing manpower to raise or reinforce? Well, each banner also have a +10% discipline while fighting.

The Eight Banners idea for Manchu increases the amount of banners you can raise by 25%, but if you don’t get the expansion, it will be 5% discipline still.

Another thing that’s cool with us adding banners is that we now have a nice flexible category system in the code, with normal, mercenary and banners as unit categories, and can expand upon that in the future.

If you compare the map of Manchuria compared to 1.19, you’ll notice a fair amount of tweaks as well..

eu4_14.png



Next week, we’ll be back to talk about State Edicts and the new State Interface..
 
  • 100
  • 36
  • 5
Reactions:
sounds like revisionism

This is really a big word.

It's not the best source, but there is an article on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civic_nationalism
(Not the word I used, perhaps it'll be better to search for an accurate translation before litterally translating concepts.)
A link in french use the same expression, it's a short lesson on nationalism: https://www.philisto.fr/cours-54-nations-et-nationalismes-au-xixe-siecle.html

If you want to see how it works, read some Constitution/Fundamental law/Law/Whatever the country have... they generally describe how someone get the nationality, you can see "objective nationalism" when it don't depend on people's will, it's often the "jus sanguinis", it's now the case in the majority of Europe (and perhaps the world?). And you can see "subjective nationalism" when it depends on people's will, it's now often by marriage with someone from this nation, it was also the case when there was no legal definition of citizenship (US Constitution before the enacting of the XIVth Amendment), or if the crieria were really cheap (french Constitution of year I, you could have become french if you adopt a child, or if you give food to poor people; there were many ways, anybody could have became french).
 
Last edited:

Yeah it's civic identity, in Portugal it's treated has part of or a component of nationalism, though it was used has such by every one, well turns out I'm wrong. To give some context in Portugal, history is constantly the target of revisionism (for political purposes) , which in turn means that many people simply get the facts wrong or have an "incomplete" idea of what happened, I was not accusing you of committing revisionism, more that you're a victim of it, sorry if it came out accusatorial.