Japan in EU4: The formible nation that makes little sense

[Molossus]

The two decisions to form Japan abolish the Shogunate government and make you an Empire. This makes little sense. If this Formible Japan is modeled after the Tokugawa Shogunate, then the Shogunate(government) should NOT be abolished. When Japan was united, the shogunate didn't just vanish, and the Shoguns didn't just kick the little hat of the emperor's head and say "Well, I get that you, Emperor, are descended from godhood and we are your servants and protectors and all, but I am the emperor now because I don't want to be shogun now that I have all of Japan." Let's say the emperor still stayed the figurehead, and there were somehow two emperors. WHY WOULD HE NOT still BE SHOGUN?

If the country of Japan in eu4 is based on Meiji Japan, why does the daimyo/shogun's dynasty stay? In my mind, there is absolutely no way it can possibly be based on this.

What if the Japanese nation is based on neither of those? Still wouldn't make sense. The emperor is sacred to Shintoism. No actual Daimyo or Shogun would ever outright replace the Emperor unless he wasn't Shinto himself, and did not like the Emperor.

But from a gameplay only perspective, why should the unique Japanese features in eu4 go away because we FORMED JAPAN? Is it balance? Because I really don't see how forming Japan is really any different from owning the Island as whoever you took it as, other than the rank change. Why should anyone ever form Japan unless they are going for 2 achievements? It seems there is NO POINT OTHERWISE.

The shogunate government is extremely strong, and I see absolutely no reason to sacrifice this for Emperor government rank, a fairly good idea set, and a feudal monarchy. Not to mention each daimyo has a really cool and situational idea set. If paradox wants us to play with and use Japanese governments, why are we only allowed to use them for 50 years or less if we decide to form Japan?

The player really shouldn't choose not to form Japan logically. It's like an England not forming Great Britain or a Castille not forming Spain.



The solutions are really simple either:

1. Don't abolish Shogunate upon forming Japan
   

or

2. Represent the Emperor as an aspect of Japan, possibly just like the Gurus of Sikhism.

or

3. Add a new government that has a fixed dynasty of Yamato while Japan. ( a la Meiji)



The first option is infinitely easier and better in my opinion. If they wished to keep the penalty for being a kingdom and not an empire, then have the shogunate government not be locked to Kingdom, but have the exact same penalties as being one. That way the continuity of being a Japanese Empire still exists, as well as the concept of Shogunate, which only went away outside the game's timeframe.

TLDR: Japan shouldn't lose Shogunate, because it makes no sense and nobody ever should form Japan outside achievements in the current patch.

 

[ChiRho]

I think if you wanted to emulate Japan during the Edo period, the idea is to not take the decision to unite Japan.

Though I agree, Japan as a tag should be updated a little bit. The government is a little too similar to Western Europe (especially if you convert to Catholicism). Plus, you have to sacrifice the beautiful crimson red Oda color for the Fruit Roll-up red Japan color with the low-res flag. Only worth forming for the achievements.

After Empire, and update focusing on Japan, Southeast Asia, and Indonesia would be sublime

 

[Molossus]

I think if you wanted to emulate Japan during the Edo period, the idea is to not take the decision to unite Japan.

Though I agree, Japan as a tag should be updated a little bit. The government is a little too similar to Western Europe (especially if you convert to Catholicism). Plus, you have to sacrifice the beautiful crimson red Oda color for the Fruit Roll-up red Japan color with the low-res flag. Only worth forming for the achievements.

After Empire, and update focusing on Japan, Southeast Asia, and Indonesia would be sublime

It's not too outlandish to stay as a Daimyo tag I guess. Seeing as Timurids, Ottomans, and various SEA and Indian nations are named after their dynasties.
Although I feel a lot of that is really old name leaks from CK2. As certain cultures in that game made your country name=your dynasty name.
Japan is as outlandish as Italy and Germany, which is to say, real and does happen, but not in EU4's timeframe, so I'm not too upset that it shouldn't really be formed. However, just like Italy, it has some quite balanced and interesting Ideas and mechanics if you don't go Katana Gatling guns as Oda, or Japanese Crusader State as Otomo. Thankfully afaik the missions don't change or any new ones get added upon formation.

I really hope that South East Asia gets a rework, because I think it hasn't been touched since probably Common Sense if you don't count Burma, Oceania, or the Philippines.
However I seriously doubt they will redo Japan (as much as I want it) because it had an update a few years ago, so I doubt it's first on the list.

I'm sure I wouldn't be hard to fix it a touch if they rework SEA, but I think I'd rather have a west and east Africa rework more. As those areas were quite legendary and difficult to conquer IRL, yet are pushovers and bland in-game .

 

[BloodshotPixel]

I feel as though a system to gradually reform from a shogunate to a centralized empire would greatly improve the current situation. Currently Ashikaga slowly centralizes Japan in a method more akin to the Tokugawa. A daimyo should look to overthrow the shogun, taking the banner for themselves, and centralizing Japan for the sake of the Emperor. A method of reforming the government, likely through choosing different government reforms, would more sense for a gradual transition to either keeping the military rule of the Shogun, or restoring the Emperor, the shogun of which should have a variety of downsides in relation to management of foreign vassals, where the Emperor could better manage an Expansionist Japan.

 

[Kapi96]

It makes perfect sense.

The Japan tag merely represents a united Japan, there are no more feuding Daimyo. Your leader's title remains Shogun. He doesn't replace the Emperor, he doesn't become an Emperor, he remains Shogun. It's basically Tokugawa Japan where the Daimyo have no real power and the government is centralised with the Shogun being the sole sovereign authority of the country. The Emperor technically still exists (and is separate from the Shogun) but has no power whatsoever. Besides the part where your Shogun/Daimyo don't actually replace the Emperor anyway, his role in Shintoism didn't really come to the fore until the Meiji restoration anyway. To be honest, religion as a whole isn't really done that well in Japan at the moment. Shintoism wasn't really that organised during that time period and Buddhism should be much more prominent than its basically non-existent current state.

As for your options;
1. Semantics, but it technically doesn't abolish the Shogunate. You lose the government form, but retain the title of Shogun. Now whether that's optimal from a gameplay perspective is a separate matter, but from a historical perspective it works fine as is. From the unifcation under the Tokugawa Shogunate until the Meiji restoration the title of Shogun was for all intents and purposes the same as the title of King in a European country. So it using the same government form and mechanics makes perfect sense. If it's based off the Tokugawa Shogunate then it SHOULD be a feudal monarchy with the title of Shogun rather than King/Emperor (which it already is).

2. Why? The Emperor was basically a non-factor throughout the entirety of the game's timeframe. There could be some random events maybe that give stability or something? He was still a cultural icon, but in terms of governing the nation I'm not aware of a single time the Emperor actually influenced anything.

3. Again, why? The Emperor's role had been a purely ceremonial one for centuries already so why would any Daimyo that managed to unite Japan simply give it all up and hand it over to the Emperor? An Emperor that had no experience running a country, had no experience in warfare, never expected to be thrust into the position where they were suddenly in charge of everything and would likely just be used as a puppet by someone else? So why give the entire country over to an Emperor that's likely to lose power almost immediately when they could run the country themselves as Shogun, avoid any wars over who gets to control the Emperor, and finally bring about an era of peace?

 

[Molossus]

It makes perfect sense.

The Japan tag merely represents a united Japan, there are no more feuding Daimyo. Your leader's title remains Shogun. He doesn't replace the Emperor, he doesn't become an Emperor, he remains Shogun. It's basically Tokugawa Japan where the Daimyo have no real power and the government is centralised with the Shogun being the sole sovereign authority of the country. The Emperor technically still exists (and is separate from the Shogun) but has no power whatsoever. Besides the part where your Shogun/Daimyo don't actually replace the Emperor anyway, his role in Shintoism didn't really come to the fore until the Meiji restoration anyway. To be honest, religion as a whole isn't really done that well in Japan at the moment. Shintoism wasn't really that organised during that time period and Buddhism should be much more prominent than its basically non-existent current state.

As for your options;
1. Semantics, but it technically doesn't abolish the Shogunate. You lose the government form, but retain the title of Shogun. Now whether that's optimal from a gameplay perspective is a separate matter, but from a historical perspective it works fine as is. From the unifcation under the Tokugawa Shogunate until the Meiji restoration the title of Shogun was for all intents and purposes the same as the title of King in a European country. So it using the same government form and mechanics makes perfect sense. If it's based off the Tokugawa Shogunate then it SHOULD be a feudal monarchy with the title of Shogun rather than King/Emperor (which it already is).

2. Why? The Emperor was basically a non-factor throughout the entirety of the game's timeframe. There could be some random events maybe that give stability or something? He was still a cultural icon, but in terms of governing the nation I'm not aware of a single time the Emperor actually influenced anything.

3. Again, why? The Emperor's role had been a purely ceremonial one for centuries already so why would any Daimyo that managed to unite Japan simply give it all up and hand it over to the Emperor? An Emperor that had no experience running a country, had no experience in warfare, never expected to be thrust into the position where they were suddenly in charge of everything and would likely just be used as a puppet by someone else? So why give the entire country over to an Emperor that's likely to lose power almost immediately when they could run the country themselves as Shogun, avoid any wars over who gets to control the Emperor, and finally bring about an era of peace?

The Emperor as an icon to Japan has always been quite sacred, especially to the nobility. But you are right, it didn't get to real worship until the Meiji Era
My biggest issue is that the Shogun, despite being shogun, isn't a shogunate. Japan might be one of the worst formible nations in the game at the moment, next to Germany and Scandinavia. I think that upon forming Japan we should have a decision to abolish the Shogunate government if we choose to, but it forces you to abolish it currently. This might make a tiny bit of sense if all game we just sat on the home islands and went isolationist, never expanding outside. But the world is bigger than that archipelago. So the whole feudal monarchy doesn't make much sense, as the Shogunate is a feudal system.

I really don't think it is supposed to represent the Tokugawa shogunate, because I believe that if you go through the EU4 Historic dates Japan never exists IIRC. Just Oda and Tokugawa.

In-game japan both lacks historical and strategic reasons to form.

 

[EquilinT]

If the country of Japan in eu4 is based on Meiji Japan, why does the daimyo/shogun's dynasty stay? In my mind, there is absolutely no way it can possibly be based on this.

It IS based on Meiji Japan, and the shogun dynasty taking over is the one that is off. Most of the national ideas reference it, "Unification under the Emperor" "Modernization" "Great Power Diplomacy", and as we know the flag is the Emperor's symbol.
I agree that forming it sucks right now and it should be given some more look. Maybe some events or missions giving developments/coals and encourage expelling europeans from asia?

 

[Kapi96]

The Emperor as an icon to Japan has always been quite sacred, especially to the nobility. But you are right, it didn't get to real worship until the Meiji Era
My biggest issue is that the Shogun, despite being shogun, isn't a shogunate. Japan might be one of the worst formible nations in the game at the moment, next to Germany and Scandinavia. I think that upon forming Japan we should have a decision to abolish the Shogunate government if we choose to, but it forces you to abolish it currently. This might make a tiny bit of sense if all game we just sat on the home islands and went isolationist, never expanding outside. But the world is bigger than that archipelago. So the whole feudal monarchy doesn't make much sense, as the Shogunate is a feudal system.

I really don't think it is supposed to represent the Tokugawa shogunate, because I believe that if you go through the EU4 Historic dates Japan never exists IIRC. Just Oda and Tokugawa.

In-game japan both lacks historical and strategic reasons to form.

Why isn't it a Shogunate? Because it doesn't have the Shogunate government form? Semantics.

The Shogunate/Daimyo government forms only represent the disunified decentralised situation at the beginning of the game. Post unification there's no functional difference between the Shogunate and any feudal kingdom, so why should there be mechanical differences? There shouldn't.

 

[Question]

Why isn't it a Shogunate? Because it doesn't have the Shogunate government form? Semantics.

Thats like saying a nation can be a pirate republic even if they have the monarchy form of government.

Japan as a whole just makes no sense the way its implemented in game. They didnt even bother to copy paste some of the tributary state code over to make it closer to the way it was in history. Main issues being :

-Shogun starts with a ridiculously large force limit when they were actually really weak at this point of time and had to rely on daimyos for help

-Stab hits for either declaring war on the shogun or declaring war on a daimyo as the shogun, which obviously did not happen in history and does nothing to simulate the warring states period where everything was fair game

-Shogun being able to diplo annex Daimyos 10 years from game start. This obviously never happened in history (at least till the Tokugawa era)

-Shogun cant do anything to save a daimyo from another daimyo, they cant even offer condotierri because its hardcoded to work for tributary subjects only. They cant enforce peace or do anything, except sit there with their massive army impotently. Seppuku doesnt end the war by the way, so thats not a solution.

-All daimyos being the shogun's vassal swarm, even if they are disloyal, makes no sense whatsoever. Especially as the shogun was supposed to have little to no control over the daimyos at this point.

-Shogun being able to ally with Ainu to get them to help defend Kyoto. ???

It doesnt emulate the warring states era or the relatively stable Hideyoshi era shogunate when the country was unified enough to invade Korea. The worst part is that the game already has code in place to make it work properly, they just needed to copy paste the code from elsewhere so that the shogun can do things like enforce peace or offer condotierri to daimyos. But they just made the it like the HRE after the emperor vassalizes everyone, except that the vassals can fight each other.

 

[Kapi96]

Thats like saying a nation can be a pirate republic even if they have the monarchy form of government.

Japan as a whole just makes no sense the way its implemented in game. They didnt even bother to copy paste some of the tributary state code over to make it closer to the way it was in history. Main issues being :

-Shogun starts with a ridiculously large force limit when they were actually really weak at this point of time and had to rely on daimyos for help

-Stab hits for either declaring war on the shogun or declaring war on a daimyo as the shogun, which obviously did not happen in history and does nothing to simulate the warring states period where everything was fair game

-Shogun being able to diplo annex Daimyos 10 years from game start. This obviously never happened in history (at least till the Tokugawa era)

-Shogun cant do anything to save a daimyo from another daimyo, they cant even offer condotierri because its hardcoded to work for tributary subjects only. They cant enforce peace or do anything, except sit there with their massive army impotently. Seppuku doesnt end the war by the way, so thats not a solution.

-All daimyos being the shogun's vassal swarm, even if they are disloyal, makes no sense whatsoever. Especially as the shogun was supposed to have little to no control over the daimyos at this point.

-Shogun being able to ally with Ainu to get them to help defend Kyoto. ???

It doesnt emulate the warring states era or the relatively stable Hideyoshi era shogunate when the country was unified enough to invade Korea. The worst part is that the game already has code in place to make it work properly, they just needed to copy paste the code from elsewhere so that the shogun can do things like enforce peace or offer condotierri to daimyos. But they just made the it like the HRE after the emperor vassalizes everyone, except that the vassals can fight each other.

It's more like saying a Kingdom, Sultanate and Tsardom can all be the same government form. They're all basically monarchies, they could share a government. Having unique ones for certain cultures/religions is cool, but not required. The Shogunate was basically a monarchy too, at least during the Tokugawa era, so it doesn't really need a unique government form. And while the current Shogunate government form represents the initial weak Shogunate, it doesn't really make sense for a Japan that's united under the Shogun. So even if you think a unified Japan should still have a unique government form, it shouldn't be the same as the pre-unified Shogunate government.

I do agree with a lot that you've said there though. It does make some sense at least, but there is still a lot that could be improved. The Ashikaga Shogunate should definitely be a lot weaker than it is now.

You mentioned it being like a post vassalisation HRE and actually something like the HRE system would probably work quite well. How about something like...

-All Japanese Daimyo's are automatically in the "Japanese Empire". There's no option to join/leave the Empire.
-Everybody, including the Shogun, uses the Daimyo government form. That way the Shogun's force limit, income etc. is calculate the same way as everyone else so a weak Shogun really would be weak.
-The Daimyo government form prevents ALL diplomatic relations with foreign countries (Colonial nations would still be alright if they're Japanese, but no allies, vassals or tributaries). And ALL Daimyo are automatically called to war if any of them is attacked by a foreign country.
-The title of Shogun is taken by controlling Kyoto. Being Shogun allows the current special actions as well giving monthly prestige, a "respects the Shogun" opinion boost with smaller Daimyo and a negative "desires the Shogunate" modifier with equal or stronger Daimyo.
-Unifying Japan requires being the Shogun and either having all Daimyo as allies (with high relations)/vassals or there being no other Daimyo.
-Once united the "Empire" is removed from the game, the Shogun's tag changes to Japan and government form changes to Shogunate (although all the Shogun/Daimyo mechanics are now tied to the "Empire" rather than the government form).

Then the Ashikaga actually would be weak and vulnerable, but also free to ally any Daimyo and aid them if they wanted. Plus diplo-annexing would be impossible until they actually vassalised some Daimyo. There's no way foreign countries could be directly involved in any conflict within Japan. But all the Daimyo would still unite to fight off foreign invaders (as they would have in real life) which also prevents Japan from being a sitting duck to an expansionist Ming or Korea. It also weakens the government form to the point that unifying and having access to foreign relations again becomes desirable, but permanently staying a Daimyo is also still an option if you want a challenge.

 

[viola]

The way I always understood the Japanese unification in this game is that the Shogun doesn't replace the Emperor, the Emperor stays the Emperor but he's not represented in-game due to his lack of practical power. Unifying Japan means to break the power of the Daimyos for good and replacing it with a new centralized form of government that should still be controlled by the Shogun (I think the title of the ruler of a unified Japan remains "Shogun", not any kind of Imperial title). I guess that the removal of the Shogunate mechanics is done purely for balancing reasons, not flavour ones.

Not that I'd mind further polish being given to the region.

 

[Battlex]

To OP, if you wanted to be historical, you wouldn't form Japan and you wouldn't integrate all the Daimyo, and you wouldn't expand much.

It's not too outlandish to stay as a Daimyo tag I guess. Seeing as Timurids, Ottomans, and various SEA and Indian nations are named after their dynasties.
Although I feel a lot of that is really old name leaks from CK2. As certain cultures in that game made your country name=your dynasty name.
Japan is as outlandish as Italy and Germany, which is to say, real and does happen, but not in EU4's timeframe, so I'm not too upset that it shouldn't really be formed. However, just like Italy, it has some quite balanced and interesting Ideas and mechanics if you don't go Katana Gatling guns as Oda, or Japanese Crusader State as Otomo. Thankfully afaik the missions don't change or any new ones get added upon formation.

I really hope that South East Asia gets a rework, because I think it hasn't been touched since probably Common Sense if you don't count Burma, Oceania, or the Philippines.
However I seriously doubt they will redo Japan (as much as I want it) because it had an update a few years ago, so I doubt it's first on the list.

I'm sure I wouldn't be hard to fix it a touch if they rework SEA, but I think I'd rather have a west and east Africa rework more. As those areas were quite legendary and difficult to conquer IRL, yet are pushovers and bland in-game .

The dynasty naming isn't because of ck2, if nothing else its for them being that in eu3, although that was mainly based upon Histiography. Yes the timurids and byzantine empire aren't endonymns, but they do help you understand what the person is talking about quickly.

 

[iClipse]

Don't know anything about the history of Japan, but gameplay wise, they'd make a whole lot more sence if their +10% discipline they used to have was still around.

Also, one of the redeeming factors of forming Japan is the fact that they're able to reach 100+ absolutism without court and country due to their mission tree. They're one of the few countries making that threshhold.

Still, losing your ability to have unlimited vasals sucks.

 

[Molossus]

Don't know anything about the history of Japan, but gameplay wise, they'd make a whole lot more sence if their +10% discipline they used to have was still around.

Also, one of the redeeming factors of forming Japan is the fact that they're able to reach 100+ absolutism without court and country due to their mission tree. They're one of the few countries making that threshhold.

Still, losing your ability to have unlimited vasals sucks.

I don't think the mission tree changes if you form Japan, the game doesn't say so upon reformation. Correct me if I am wrong.
So a Shogunate government can get that from the mission tree, as well as shogunate government gives +5 (I think) possible absolutism.

 

[iClipse]

I don't think the mission tree changes if you form Japan, the game doesn't say so upon reformation. Correct me if I am wrong.
So a Shogunate government can get that from the mission tree, as well as shogunate government gives +5 (I think) possible absolutism.

It doesn't change, but you can't complete the mission tree without forming Japan. The mission 'Unite Japan' requires you to be playing as Japan which makes you lose out of several permanent modifiers:
1) +1 diplomatic relationship
2) -10% Stability cost
3) +10 absolutism
4) +1 merchant
5) +5 mercantilism

+ some monarch power, and development.

All in all, Japan has quite a powerful mission tree. It's just that unlimited vasals is unbeatable in general.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

I'm closing this thread due to its age.