The thing about revolts in this game tho is that they spawn different nations.
So if you have active rebels it’s technically not a WC.
It’s why i think Cultural Capacity will actually be the biggest limiting factor.
- 1
-
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.
So if you have active rebels it’s technically not a WC.
It’s why i think Cultural Capacity will actually be the biggest limiting factor.
Yes geography geography, geography. Who is closer the the old world? An Empire spanning on 3 continent and being located at the "centre of the old world" or one that is located at the corner?
Unlike common misconception, Ottoman ships could sail in the deep sea. They reached Aceh and had plans to create bases across the indian ocean, something which the Ottomans deemed feasable in the 16th/17th century. Despite Portugese and Spanish intervention. To begin with trade to india was opened by the Ottoman navy (formerly blockaded by Portugal), so your point of the Ottomans not reaching the Americas or being unable to take them, is not only objectively false, but also without any bases. Eventually the europeans built better ships, but not for the most part of the game's timeperiod.
And unlike the Ottomans and the spanish, the Golden Horde is well versed in the steps and would most definetly have a better chance to create and maintaine an Empire stretching across the Eurasian plains.
Mind you, even the han chinese are a good contentor. They did create the largest fleet humanity ever saw in the (I believe) 14th century. Reaching all the way to eastern Africa.
Furthermore, India is absolutely massive. It is about 80% of the size of Europe. A nation controlling such a huge territory is most definetly also capable of expanding more. Especially with progressing technology. Historically there was just very little reason to do so.
This euro-centric view is utter nonsense. The iberians were not centuries ahead in ship-building nor were they the only people conquering vast amount of land across multiple continents.
Hmm, unlikely. The Pacific is far harder to navigate than Atlantic, and by the time you get there it's much harder to find a proper place to establish yourself.
Would the Chinese be able to overcome that if they tried? Maybe, they didn't largely because of their inwards-looking culture, and it's a whole other dillema on how you'd want to represent that
They (the Ming) sailed all the way to eastern Africa. Where do you get the idea that they would have a hard time sailing to the Americans if they really wanted to?
Btw I am not saying they should. Historically there is very little reason to do so. Gameplay wise as well, but it is nonsense to make alt-history regarding the Yuan and Spanish and deny the same for the rest of the world because reasons.
Look at the map of Zheng He's voyages, notice that
- He took several stops on his way, as a part of his mission was visiting various rulers and demonstrate the strength of Emperor to them
- He has never quite traveled through open oceans
If you wanted to travel in a straight line from east Asia to Americas you'd find yourself having to travel close to Bering Sea, not that far from the Arctic Circle. That is not a fun place to be in
If you wanted to take a safer path, you'd find yourself having to extend the length of your travel, that even in the best case scenario is significantly larger than the path Columbus took to Bahamas
He still sailed through deep sea. So the Ming were capable of navigating long-distances and return back all without a long lasting naval tradition, which is the entire point. The iberians saw the need to travel even further and longer and adjusted their ships accordingly. The chinese didnt and still managed long distances. What makes you think that they would have been incapable of doing what the portugese did, if the chinese emperor sat his mind to it?
There is really no argument to speak against such a scenario. It would cost money, sure, but they were not really lacking.
Or you sail towards Siberia/Alaska and from there to the Americans. Mind you, even if we follow your weird argument that the chinese are incapable of building long-distance ships, they could still build outposts in Manchu/Ainu as well as siberia and sail from there to the new world. With multiple stops.
Which is in no form or shape an argument to why the chinese are incapable of reaching the Americans. This is absurd considering that the same somehow doesnt apply to the spanish. They suddenly can travel and even project power in China? It is euro-centric bs. Long-distance was hard for everyone and also possible for everyone. There was just very little reason to do so for various nations.
you seem to have completely misunderstood the point my post.
Making alt-history content for the tags, or about technology or whatelse.
It’s simply about the gameplay mechanics we currently know.
As a PLAYER, it is more efficient to use the resources in the Americas to conquer the rest of the old world than vice versa.
In 1337 if you start as the ottomans(who will 100% be nerfed btw) you first have to deal with your imediate threats. Maybe snaking to west africa will be a viable strategy but i doubt it because of control. By the time you reach the americas most games the Iberians will have colonized it.
The exact same thing applies to all other old world countries.
Yuan has the following advantages: diplo annexing through Mandate of Heaven IO, easy access to the Americas via Kamchatka -> Alaska -> rest of the Americas.
Conversely Castille has the advantages: Diplo Annexing the HRE and possibly rest of Europe. Easy access to the Americas + Conquistadors.
We’ve yet to see many of the different special units, and i doubt they’ll have that huge of an impact, but in the 16th century(when new world wealth can start being used to conquer the old world) the Tercios should probably be amongst the strongest units in the game.
Also of you’re going for a WC why would you waste time going from Yuan -> Ming when you can just stay as the Yuan???
Did you read your title and what it suggests? You are not saying "Currently it is very likely that Spain and Yuan are the only countries capable of doing WC", but "WC should probably only be possible as Castile or Yuan". Your statment makes especially very little sense, when we consider the fact that we know that gameplay mechanics are going to lead to a Yuan collapse at the very begining of the game.
Which historically didnt happen. We also have to see how profitable colonies are going to be and wether you can get any units out of them. If colonies only provide money, then you are still bottlenecked by manpower. Your continental population. I also highly doubt that it is more efficent to create entirely new colonies in far away land than to lewi existing populations in the old world. Somehow a colony in Brazil is more efficent than conquering Morocco? Hard no.
And the Spanish and Yuan have none? Mind you the Ottomans are most definetly going to outpace Castile. Especially in player hand. I am absolutely confident that I can unite most of Anatolia and Greece (at the bare minimum) before the century even ends.
And for Castile and Yuan control wont be an issue for magical reasons.
Because we have actual gameplay evidence of that? I can reach the americans before the spanish in EU4 if I want. But somehow with even more of a buffer, it is impossible in EU5? We are also not talking about a race to the new world, but about world conquest. You make it sound like getting the new world auto-wins you the old world, which is utter nonsense. I would aruge that conquering most of the old world makes it much likelier to conquer the entire world than the other way around.
This is entirely speculation on your side btw.
Even if you survive the initial Red Turban Rebellion(something I hope is borderline impossible personally, or at least requiring you to have to regroup to cover only a chunk of China and reconquer from there), keeping China secure as the Yuan should still be difficult going forward. You've just got over the most difficult early game rebellion out of the way but even if you crush the rebels there should still be difficulties in the future. You should not be rewarded with like a "You crushed the Han, +20% satisfaction from pops for 50 years/till end of game/increased chinese cultural acceptance/Mongol is now part of the Chinese group!" or what have you. Your reward should simply be "We have stopped the empire from collapsing". That's it, it should not give you bonuses beyond just taking away any maluses applied during the Red Turban Rebellion. Both from fractuous mongol politics and from new generations of Han you should have difficulty going forward, and expanding your territory to Korea, Japan, SEAsia, Central Asia etc. should only exacerbate that.
- 1
I never said "impossible" or "Chinese are incapable". But they were historically much much less likely to even try, and it was harder for them than for Europeans. I never even mentioned any ship-building capacity. This is not an argument from the point of view of either civilization being "superior" in some way, but rather that geography dictated different conditions for the two.
Spain being able to project power in Asia did not include them having to travel 8000km through open seas. The entire point of Portuguese exploration in XIV-XVth century was to find a path alongside African coast that you could use to reach Asia. Europeans had various settlements covering the entirety of the way to India and further.
No matter how you frame it, it would've been significantly harder for China to attempt exploring and colonizing Americas, and they also had much fewer reasons to try. Compared to Europeans, China wasn't in urgent need of finding places to expand into and to bring resources from a world apart.
- 1
No idea. No idea. If I knew the answer I would be able to tell you, yes.
- 2
We are not talking about what is historically likelier to happen, but what is potentially possible under OP's claim. If we want to go by history, no country should be able to do a WC. Not even half a WC. You need medical and technological advanced of the late 18th century to attempt it, which is about when the game ends.
None of which changes the fact that distance was an issue. You make it sound like the spanish armada could just pop up infront of China in the 16th century. European control in the indian ocean was also contested and not dominated. Sure they had settlements, but does that mean that the settlements were used for large-scale ship buildings or as a small stops for resupplies?
If it is the latter, why cant other nations do the same? They obviously can. People in this forum dont want railroading and vehemently reject it, but then when it comes to european "supremacy" we got nuts by 9000% regaring why distance didnt play a role for the iberians? There is really 0 reason to argue why indians, chinese or turks (or anyone else for that matter) cant have overseas settlements. The player should most definetly be able to do it.
Hence WC is either possible for everyone or possible for none.
If WC is possible, period, then it will be possible with every country. I've watched Florry migrate to the Americas and be an OPM in a 1/1/1 province by 1600, then turn around and do a WC from that start point. Give this playerbase enough time, and it will happen.
- 2
- 2
I feel like we actually agree, just that you keep reading my "unlikely", "harder" and such as "impossible", and I did, I guess, misinterpret your first post as one talking from the perspective of "historically feasible" rather than "what player can do". I don't want EU5 to be eurocentric, quite the opposite.
Note though that there's parts of the whole "historically possible" that still seem to be a bit of an open-ended question. There's two aspects of history that seem to be just impossible to recreate; specifically, historical rulers not having foreknowledge of how the world looks and how history unfolded, and that historically a lot of events or movements were initiated by underlying structures of a country, that in other cases could also prevent things from happening, whereas the player in EU games is just an unstoppable force that can make things happen at will.
China was culturally a very inward-looking country. Should the player be able to just take over and day1 start making decisions that run counter to that? If so, should the AI also be likely to make such decisions?
Honestly, I don't know.
I am open for both (personally leaning more towards historic accuracy). I just reject the idea of limiting WC to specific countries. WC in itself is a fictional thing in this time period. Either these fictional things are possible for everyone or not at all.
If you want historic accuracy, you need mission trees for the AI to follow. Otherwise they will go stupid.
I thought you were talking about WCs, not WC speedruns?
- 2
I mean imo if a WC is possible before 1837(if that is the end date) the game has failed in it's objective of being a simulation.
I mean ideally it shouldn't be possible, but if it is it should only be possible In the last year, or decade (so post 1830), so WC or WC speedrun kinda like the same thing.
- 1
- 1
The main limiting factor should be that an empire with a core region of 10M pops max should in no way whatsoever be able to hold the entire world.
- 2
That's bc EU4 is a deeply unbalanced game with positive feedback loops sufficient to overcome every obstacle
You never end up in a situation where you're overstretched handling threats on multiple fronts because the game simply doesn't have the capacity to portray that. If we end up in the same situation here I'll be disappointed