After Dharma, China should be buffed with 2k dev to keep parity

[Dutchman251]

Well, the point is fairly simple... India gets some extra 1k dev in the next patch, of which it is clear that it was longer overdue since India was very rich. However, China is in a comparable situation: it's also an Asian country, it's huge, and got neglected in map updates and development additions. So I really feel that China should get a 100 new provinces and 2k dev to remain on equal footing with the Indian superregion.

And maybe it is then also time to add some real empire mechanics, that make holding an empire together costly and more difficult? Instead of some pitiful extra corruption?

 

[gronak]

PDS’s Qing never include Tibet any more, its development should be quite less than PRC.
As for Yuan, it doesnt have Sinkiang and the tibet might not be drawn as land of Yuan, but it has more land in Siberia and Mongolia.

As you can see, both these empires have both more provinces and development than PRC, like I said. Granted, the Yuan borders around the western hordes could be a little off, it was as close as I could get from looking at various sources while looking at the in game provinces. Not enough of a difference at least to bring it under the development of PRC.


Edit: I added the PRC china (Beijing) so it's easier to compare.

 

[Canute VII]

As you can see, both these empires have both more provinces and development than PRC, like I said. Granted, the Yuan borders around the western hordes could be a little off, it was as close as I could get from looking at various sources while looking at the in game provinces. Not enough of a difference at least to bring it under the development of PRC.


Edit: I added the PRC china (Beijing) so it's easier to compare.

I have a feeling that you shouldn't compare development per tag ("Yuan", "Qing"), but rather compare it per super region or even per culture group ('cause "cultural union", you know).

If compared per super region, china would have less development than in your tag-leaning demonstrations.

If compared per culture group, china would be clearly overpowered... (at least judging from the culture map in the wiki).

 

[gronak]

I have a feeling that you shouldn't compare development per tag ("Yuan", "Qing"), but rather compare it per super region or even per culture group ('cause "cultural union", you know).

If compared per super region, china would have less development than in your tag-leaning demonstrations.

If compared per culture group, china would be clearly overpowered... (at least judging from the culture map in the wiki).

The point in the tag comparisons is to show the areas of 'china', to show how much development 'china' has. It's not really fair to compare 5 regions in India to just 3 regions in China. Unless you count the region Korea and Japan as China, since they are in the "china far east" super region. So in order to compare "super regions", it'd be this:

Going by culture groups then the chinese one is doubtfully the most OP group.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Add provinces to RTW is always a problematic topic by a series of reasons:

DEVELOPMENT:
- Seems to be an abstract mix of population, density, GDP, infrastructure and the providential hand of devs to balance the game.
- The balance part is also an easy solution to the failure of the AI and technological system. Since AI´s european powers cant handle oversea wars and make good use of their military adventage, the higger province density and development keep european powers strong vs the Chinese behemoth. Ironically the current Tech system make RTW ahistorically advanced at end game.
- Now a bigger number of provinces make any region deterministically stronger, at least if it have many tags to spent their "mana" points and money in development. In this scenary the game and history concur, because an unified China have a lower proportion of points by province to use, while a fragmented Europe have more points by province.
-This determinism (like the immovable trade routes) brake the "alternate history" gameplay. I mean it looks pretty reasonable to me that a "westernized" China or India (even if it took a couple of centuries and many revolts) should be at least as developed and capital destination that Europe, and remember Im not talking about some absurd Iroquois world conquest that is actually possible on game (to be honest it should be impossible to any nation to do world conquest but I suppose is the final objetive of the game).

EUROPE "MUST BE THE STAR":
- The classic argument about the game name EUROPA universalis, you know bacause it was the beginning of Europe as the more influential regions of the World. But for some reason these people ignore the part of UNIVERSALIS, I mean the power projection of Europe can has its real measure only if the RTW is represented in all their true magnitude.
- MARKET. Now this one is the more obvious and logical reason, because the biggest part of Paradox fan base is european or with euro-roots, so there is the money.
- SOURCES. The historical information about Europe is more accessible for Paradox.

HISTORICAL POTENTIAL:
- POPULATION density looks as a good reason to have more provinces. For example the more populated areas of Europe tend to be more detailed (even fi some like Italy are falling behind), while some even more dense RTW regions like east China lacks provinces.
- FRAGMENTATION is another factor that can explain micro provinces like the ones in the HRE that were small but divided in many different, densely populated and independent states (again Italy become a forgotten region). The RTW also have other examples of this fragmented "mini worlds" like the warring states of Japan, India, Southeast Asia, Guinea, the Horn of Africa and Mesoamerica (each one relatively dense, fragmented but at the same time contained, culturally diverse and in constant conflict).
- MOBILITY. All those small islands that are to far away, sparsely populated regions like deserts, jungles and tundras, and notorious / strategic terrain features like mountain ranges, marshs, etc. Are added to allow more realistic and interesting armies movements, and to regulate the way and time of colonization.

PERFORMANCE:
- The more provinces and tags are added to the game the more are required to the game´s engine and player´s PC.

 

[Mingmung]

The 'it's called Europa Universalis' and 'most users are from Europe'-arguments don't hold at all. The one about sources doesn't hold up, either, as modding experts (usually from certain backgrounds) have targeted the regional updates in most cases. Fryz targeted China in Art of War, for example. Performance is also not a real issue anymore when it comes to amounts of provinces.

Can people please look up their info instead of pulling it out off thin air? The above is almost all hear-say and misconception.

As Trin and I have said here, can we stop with the talk about development and just focus on WHAT to fix about China in a hypothetical future?

 

[BuchiTaton]

The problem with China is that the average player dont want to deal with any form of powerful China. So the solution is as easy as these:
1) For AI, make some kind of "historical" focus restriction to AI´s China to not even try to do something outside of their historical region.
2) For single play as China. Restrictions and revolts every where! (that to avoid permanently fragmented China dont apply to AI, because AI cant handle it).
3) For multiplayer, just dont expect any "balanced" match if a player is using China.

 

[cub298]

Well right now I have a game as Japan going, here is a screenshot.
https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd....658/638B8BB58C5C174AF56B435D7593556E5169828A/

This is after the first war, that was offensive, that I ended up taking land. There was at least two wars before hand they had attacked me and I milked them for money, being defensive, with mainly fleet battles and few land ones. Manpower was never even fully drained with no Merchs. I noticed that the devastation was not really effecting their Mandate at all. Fleets even less though (should for sure be more since when Europeans come, that will be their only real way to deal with China). I just figured I put this here to help this out more and just so you all know, it is current patch. It really isn't that hard, just wish that China could be weakened more with something like that.

 

[NaiveCarto]

The 'it's called Europa Universalis' and 'most users are from Europe'-arguments don't hold at all. The one about sources doesn't hold up, either, as modding experts (usually from certain backgrounds) have targeted the regional updates in most cases. Fryz targeted China in Art of War, for example. Performance is also not a real issue anymore when it comes to amounts of provinces.

Can people please look up their info instead of pulling it out off thin air? The above is almost all hear-say and misconception.

As Trin and I have said here, can we stop with the talk about development and just focus on WHAT to fix about China in a hypothetical future?

Dear Mingmung
Thank you for your comments in this arguing post, I have no time and vitality to argue with these guy indeed and from this argue I know actual appearance of them. I dont want to waste my time...

Also, from this argue I learn because DEVELOPMENT has no standard( population, GDP, etc...), every argue about development finally leads to Meaningless Argument.

In fact, I would like to invite a method of what DEVELOPMENT should represent:
1 development= 0.1 Land/Naval force limit

From this, we could calculate the development of each countries if have data:
For Ming, it had 2.7 million weisuo(army) soldiers, while generally speaking, only 30%-40% soldiers should go for defend and war, others seem to be serf/villein, so Ming has about 900K army before Weisuo came to decline.
After Weisuo Decline, Recruitment system is gradually used, even only consider the army in Nine Border area:
Zhengtong11:257,152 Hongzhi18:281,261 Zhengde16:371,374 Jiajing10:448,974
Jiajing20:470,592 Jiajing28:466,895 Longqing6:664,319(at this year, Ming has army about 845,000)
Early Wanli:680,608 Wanli10:295,765 Wanli31:590,000(860K in paper) Wanli48:688,355(Wanli46: total army 1,160,000) Chongzhen: 590,574 Chongzhen2:661,762(may in paper, 500,000 in fact)

*.This data is from an essay in Chinese;
*.From a table in English:"Increase in Military Manpower, 1470-1710"
in 1470, Spain has 20K troops, France has 40K army,England has 25K army: the number is close to EU4 Vanila 1444 scanerio.

 

[gigau]

Even when not agreeing, let us all remain calm and civil.