Concerns about adding China

[Ihavenobrain24]

Whilst my biggest surprise about the new DLC announcements is admittedly that we are getting all/most of Asia before the return of playable Merchant Republics, my greatest concern is how China will be represented in the game. Whilst I know many people have wanted this addition for a long long time, many having wanted it since India was added in CK2, I maintain my fear that it is not practical without serious implications for balance or perhaps more worrying that China will not be represented in a way that actually represents the power and might of its Empire in the CK3 time span.

As someone who spends most of their time studying and researching China, albeit mostly in regard to contemporary international relations and security, I understand that my concerns may be more niche. However, I think it is important to point out that China in this time period was leagues above any other civilisation on the planet in terms of demographics, military power, economic strength, and technology. The start date for the Viking age is a comparative period where much of Europe still relied on bog iron whilst China had functioning Blast Furnaces and the capability to mass produce steel. It is a country that was capable of raising armies in the hundreds of thousands, tens of thousands of which were professional soldiers, led by military leaders who attended the equivalent of Staff Colleges. The wealth China had access to throughout this period was utterly beyond compare in Europe and most of India.

Which is the source of my mains concern; how do you represent that without destroying the games balance? With the existing style of play for the AI alone China should represent a force that would quickly and easily conquer anything on its borders. For a player at the helm free of the limitations of the AI it would be even more powerful. Which in turn leads to the other concern, in that the two most obvious solutions to that are to either mechanically limit the expansion of China to force the historical Middle Kingdom focus that led to China not pushing past what it saw as its natural borders, or secondly to not represent China with its historical capability. The first solution being my greatest fear, as if that is the case it might as well not be on the map. The second solution not being much better in that regard, and additionally it would further feed into both the existing Eurocentrism of the game (yes I know its called Crusader Kings, but the Crusades are already inherently a Eurasian event) and potentially outside of mechanics further fuel some of the less delightful elements of the player base that use the power of Europe in the game to feed their own racist and supremacist ideas.

This is not to dismiss the ambition of the expansion, I am incredibly impressed by the scope - and can only hope that the depth is there to back it up. But it is difficult to explain in such a short format simply how powerful China was in this time period compared to everything else in the Old World. Something which has already been acknowledged to some extent by the needs to add a new tier of title. But getting that representation right within the existing mechanics of the game does not seem feasible unless there are massive overhauls to most of the games mechanics and balance coming along with it; it is why on post about adding China I have always supported a game focused wholly within China.

I know Dev diaries regarding this are a way off, so it is of course all speculation (unless any Devs randomly fancy addressing the concerns of an obsessive academic beforehand) but I fear that at best China simply will not be represented correctly, and at worst it could actively harm the game.

 

[Miraiteko]

This game lacks a supply line system. In fact, if the Chinese emperor wanted to conquer Europe, the Himalayas and the Gobi Desert would be a logistical nightmare. Such a high-cost conquest would cause the emperor to lose the support of the people, leading to the downfall of the dynasty.

 

[greywulfos]

Broadly, CK3 just has trouble representing the fact that the bigger a realm already is, the more difficult it is to marshal support for giant conquests - this is hardly unusual for a Paradox game, however, and of the various Paradox games I think CK3 is the best positioned to try and fix it. It would essentially just involve a greater need for the player to get support from vassals for wars than they currently do in order to succeed in war - and the best way to do that would be to extend existing systems for vassals lending MaAs to all government types, alongside a general reduction in the size of armies you get from your desmesne.

This way, states that have lost the support of their vassals will be weakened in a way that feels realistic, and it would create large problems for a state like China, where getting all governors on board for a war that might be incredibly distant from them would be very difficult and expensive.

 

[peteoj]

This game lacks a supply line system. In fact, if the Chinese emperor wanted to conquer Europe, the Himalayas and the Gobi Desert would be a logistical nightmare. Such a high-cost conquest would cause the emperor to lose the support of the people, leading to the downfall of the dynasty.

I have absolutely no doubt that we'll see absurd borders like chinese border gore in Iberia because they got a small chunk of land there somehow and spread out because everyone who bordered that enclave was weaker than them. The game lacks any sort of system limiting odd expansion like that, its always been an issue and i think its gonna ramp up with not only more factions being added but a powerful chinese Empire that'll probably just blob everywhere without any consideration for supply lines or the fact that administrations often hold very little control of lands far away from their center.

 

[Vernichtere]

This game lacks a supply line system. In fact, if the Chinese emperor wanted to conquer Europe, the Himalayas and the Gobi Desert would be a logistical nightmare. Such a high-cost conquest would cause the emperor to lose the support of the people, leading to the downfall of the dynasty.

Yes, one point is logistics. The other point are constant rebellions. The peaceful China is a myth. It was most of the time busy to crush Internal enemies. When you have big armies, it's also means that the local governor or the peasant rebels can also run a big army.

The Chinese borders are indeed more about imperial overstretch than d about some middle kingdom ideology. Of course you need at some point a explanation why you don't conquer everything. But it's a explanation, not the reason.

Very hard to model. The steppes will work. But who will save fir example Japan?

 

[filip133]

Naval invasion on Europe? Or, for example, the invasion of China by the Kingdom of Sweden? Should there be an added increase in fleet costs with greater distance and time of using ships?

 

[Miraiteko]

Yes, one point is logistics. The other point are constant rebellions. The peaceful China is a myth. It was most of the time busy to crush Internal enemies. When you have big armies, it's also means that the local governor or the peasant rebels can also run a big army.

The Chinese borders are indeed more about imperial overstretch than d about some middle kingdom ideology. Of course you need at some point a explanation why you don't conquer everything. But it's a explanation, not the reason.

Very hard to model. The steppes will work. But who will save fir example Japan?

The sea is also a logistical obstacle. Unlike countries around the Mediterranean, China has no natural need to maintain a fleet, so maintaining a fleet is difficult. This made the conquest of Japan very inefficient.

Similarly, because the Central Dynasty did not raise too many horses (whose manure was not suitable for fertilizer), it was difficult for them to cross the steppes.

 

[Vernichtere]

The sea is also a logistical obstacle. Unlike countries around the Mediterranean, China has no natural need to maintain a fleet, so maintaining a fleet is difficult. This made the conquest of Japan very inefficient.

Similarly, because the Central Dynasty did not raise too many horses (whose manure was not suitable for fertilizer), it was difficult for them to cross the steppes.

I mean just that the game has mechanic to hinder the expansion into the steppes. You need to build castles until your death or you lose the land again. But there are no mechanics to make pushing into Japan, Vietnam, Korea or Tibet difficult.

 

[Weyird]

I am also concerned. It might be that they are adding ALL of asia as a way to balance china. China was historically focused on those other east-asian nations. It was called the middle kingdom because it was in the middle. Its borders were already enourmous and it didnt make sense to try and invade its neighbors to conquor them directly, but having its neighbors gice lip service (and tribute) about how china was the best let them feel like they had control over their neighbors and borders.

So by adding the other asian countries, that might be how they are balancing it.
As opposed to only adding china, but then with nothing at their back that would have allowed them to just expand in the only direction available.

 

[klopkr]

I have absolutely no doubt that we'll see absurd borders like chinese border gore in Iberia because they got a small chunk of land there somehow and spread out because everyone who bordered that enclave was weaker than them. The game lacks any sort of system limiting odd expansion like that, its always been an issue and i think its gonna ramp up with not only more factions being added but a powerful chinese Empire that'll probably just blob everywhere without any consideration for supply lines or the fact that administrations often hold very little control of lands far away from their center.

I do not see this happening in games very often.

There is an issue that if they get some far flung duchy they might hold onto it forever. But the AI isn't really capable of expanding into random locations without a border or nearish sea connection. Just like we never see the Indian empires in Europe and vice versa we will not see china in europe (unless the mongols with their OP bonuses put them there).

Will china be able to just conquer its way to europe? Over a long period it'll probably blob a lot just like Byzantines do. But mostly in the steppe and south east asia. They might get into India and Tibet, but further than that only in extreme late game probably past the end date.

CK3 empires might get pretty big but they rarely get big enough to cross the map or take entire continents without running the game waaay past the late game.

The Do It for Bruce youtube channel is good at showing the extent of how the AI blobs or not in all sorts of scenarios and often in vanilla.

I think these fears are overblown and playing the Asia expansion mods, it's not a common issue.

Worst case scenario they just have to make the steppe much harder to hold for non nomads (which the new DLC should be doing though i'm not convinced) and more impassable terrain should be added in the mountains and jungles surrounding China. Problem easily solved.

A player could obviously easily conquer the whole map, but a player can already do that with pretty much every realm and becoming emperor or the size of china isn't even the hard part. The slog of conquest is.

 

[luo]

I think a universal mechanism to restrict the excessive territory of a country is better than a purely customized restriction mechanism for China. Otherwise, corresponding mechanisms need to be added for the excessive expansion of other AI countries, such as Byzantium or the Mongol Empire.

 

[Miraiteko]

I mean just that the game has mechanic to hinder the expansion into the steppes. You need to build castles until your death or you lose the land again. But there are no mechanics to make pushing into Japan, Vietnam, Korea or Tibet difficult.

Vietnam might be divided into two kingdoms: the northern Giao Chi Prefecture and the southern Champa Kingdom. The Giao Chi Prefecture was a historical ruling area of China. Even after gaining independence, it maintained close ties with Chinese dynasties. The Champa Kingdom was culturally closer to Southeast Asia and was a target of conquest by the rulers of northern Vietnam. Perhaps a colonial agent mechanism could be designed, allowing northern Vietnam to receive the task of ruling Southeast Asia from Chinese dynasties.
The situation in Korea is similar, and it is necessary to distinguish between Goguryeo, Silla, and Baekje.

 

[Miraiteko]

I am also concerned. It might be that they are adding ALL of asia as a way to balance china. China was historically focused on those other east-asian nations. It was called the middle kingdom because it was in the middle. Its borders were already enourmous and it didnt make sense to try and invade its neighbors to conquor them directly, but having its neighbors gice lip service (and tribute) about how china was the best let them feel like they had control over their neighbors and borders.

So by adding the other asian countries, that might be how they are balancing it.
As opposed to only adding china, but then with nothing at their back that would have allowed them to just expand in the only direction available.

Yes, ruling a vast empire has already overwhelmed the Chinese emperors, who typically had no desire for expansion. An exceptional case was Goguryeo, a hegemonic power in Northeast Asia, which posed a threat to the Chinese emperor. Consequently, the Chinese emperor destroyed Goguryeo and granted its lands to Silla which later became Korea.

 

[zeruosi]

I think a universal mechanism to restrict the excessive territory of a country is better than a purely customized restriction mechanism for China. Otherwise, corresponding mechanisms need to be added for the excessive expansion of other AI countries, such as Byzantium or the Mongol Empire.

Agreed, restricting China alone is unnecessary and foolish. When everyone is crazily devouring clay, it is quite unfair that China can only be trapped in the land at the beginning.

 

[luo]

Yes, ruling a vast empire has already overwhelmed the Chinese emperors, who typically had no desire for expansion. An exceptional case was Goguryeo, a hegemonic power in Northeast Asia, which posed a threat to the Chinese emperor. Consequently, the Chinese emperor destroyed Goguryeo and granted its lands to Silla which later became Korea.

The Chinese emperor will actively destroy forces that have the potential to destroy the order of MoH, ensuring that neighboring countries do not pose a threat to himself, although such examples are very rare in terms of China's size. before its been destructed by the Tang Dynasty, Goguryeo was developed for nearly 600 years, it's posing a serious threat to the security of Liaoning region.

 

[hardom]

The Viking Age start date had very big differences in state organization and technology when both Europe and India had rougher economical periods are also bigger periods of instability in China, where warlords overwhelm the Tang dynasty and later it fragments; in later start dates the economic technology gap isn't as much, so I think it's a problem that should fix itself in part.

AI absolutely cannot handle size at least.

Edit: Also a lot of China's borders are the various Steppe societies, the Tang did domesticate them essentially but again the earlier start date is roaring in a period of more internal factional fragmentation in China, and the Song were absolutely incapable of dealing with the steppe tribes. The steppes being this buffer zone of high attrition low profitability land with strong soldiers, if done well by the 2nd DLC of the Chapter, should also fix this somehow by itself.

I hope for the dignity of creating actual flavour outside of Europe (there's some half baked flavour in persia and that's it) that they make the Tang specific flavour in both ways, the warlords are good at taming the steppes but they also propose bigger instability to the Dynasty. In that sense a trade off mechanic which can be used for the sorta administrative-imperial polity where more power given to warlords means stronger armies and more control against raids, pillages and less nomadic armies building up at the borders, also makes the state somewhat more fragile to those generals. I feel something can be toyed with it without castrating China uniquely

And yeah supply lines should be a thing, for a steppe they need less supply line connection and they can resupply stronger in plains and steppe, for a settled society like the Abbasid or the Chinese drawing that huge line from their farmlands/floodplains to the other side of the steppe/gobi desert/whatev, very difficult; I don't think you need a complex mechanic for that: just a line from location of interest to location of the army, where farmland floodplain provinces produce more, and locations with more investment produce more, and this gives a first supply score, which gets modified negatively by the distance of the location from the army location in a sorta multiplicative manner, so the supply score of the supply produced in kaifeng in jingzhao is roughly half that of henan, and by the gobi desert the supply score increase of kaifeng is a quarter or an eigth

 

[luo]

Yes, ruling a vast empire has already overwhelmed the Chinese emperors, who typically had no desire for expansion. An exceptional case was Goguryeo, a hegemonic power in Northeast Asia, which posed a threat to the Chinese emperor. Consequently, the Chinese emperor destroyed Goguryeo and granted its lands to Silla which later became Korea.

And, a mistake: After the Tang Dynasty destroyed Goguryeo, it did not give the territory there to Silla, but established the Andong Protectorate there. After the Tang Dynasty and Silla won the war against Baekje and the Japanese coalition forces, Silla obtained the original Baekje territory. After the decline of the Tang Dynasty, the Andong Protectorate moved its headquarters to Liaodong, and Goryeo occupied part of the original Andong Protectorate's territory at this time.

 

[Miraiteko]

And, a mistake: After the Tang Dynasty destroyed Goguryeo, it did not give the territory there to Silla, but established the Andong Protectorate there. After the Tang Dynasty and Silla won the war against Baekje and the Japanese coalition forces, Silla obtained the original Baekje territory. After the decline of the Tang Dynasty, the Andong Protectorate moved its headquarters to Liaodong, and Goryeo occupied part of the original Andong Protectorate's territory at this time.

Thanks for you correction.

 

[Prometheus_1]

.................. China in this time period was leagues above any other civilisation on the planet in terms of demographics, military power, economic strength, and technology.

Sorry but this is not true, China was not leagues ahead of other civilizations in the period, ther where many civilizations that were technologically more advanced than China in many fields while in others where behind, to have an advancement on a field doesn't put China ahead of the time or above all others, infact there were as well developed , scientifically advanced and equally technological civilizations also elsewhere, like Byzantium, Medieval Italy , Middle east, India and so on , each area was ahead in some fields and backward in others depending also on what their culture focused more on in the period.
Like Seafaring expertise of Vikings was unknown to Chineese , or the development of heavy cavalry in Europe was unknown in middle east , Steel was produced too in India and so on.

 

[Lohcoh]

Sorry but this is not true, China was not leagues ahead of other civilizations in the period, ther where many civilizations that were technologically more advanced than China in many fields while in others where behind, to have an advancement on a field doesn't put China ahead of the time or above all others, infact there were as well developed , scientifically advanced and equally technological civilizations also elsewhere, like Byzantium, Medieval Italy , Middle east, India and so on , each area was ahead in some fields and backward in others depending also on what their culture focused more on in the period.
Like Seafaring expertise of Vikings was unknown to Chineese , or the development of heavy cavalry in Europe was unknown in middle east , Steel was produced too in India and so on.

I think that whether technology is a secret or a knowledge is the criterion by which we evaluate technology in history. China's smelting technology does not depend on special mineral deposits or local resource conditions, but is widely present in all parts of the country where metal needs to be smelted, and there are state agencies to regulate production.
By the way, of course, China also has nautical knowledge, and you may not notice that China also has a huge maritime culture because of your orientalist thinking, or you think that "the symbol of the West is the sea and enterprise, and the symbol of the East is land and conservatism".
The Chinese were quite active on ocean routes and established numerous settlements in Southeast Asia, predating the Javanese who are now considered "natives of Southeast Asia."

I think that's probably why your senator can't tell the difference between Singapore and China.
The Chinese Singaporeans and other Chinese living in Southeast Asia are the remnants of that maritime China.