What makes northern vietnam a suitable part of the scope of the hegemony for you?
- 2
- 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.
The Thousand Year Rule and the Factual Rule of Tang Empire
This is longer and tighter than Alsace-Lorraine for Deutschland
- 2
- 1
The what?
just because its a fact that the tang ruled over them, doesnt mean it should be so for all chinese empires
But its more continuous for Germany than Northern Vietnam is for Chinese empires
- 2
- 1
Vietnam was a part of China since the pre-history until Song dynasty, Viet Nam people also believed they are Chinese, they even tried to sinilize Camboadian and Laos, force them to take Chinese style name and wear Chinese style clothing.
- 5
- 3
Because the amount of land required to create a new dynasty depends on the size of the hegemony area, you propose making it much harder for a player to reform China, and also make it harder to create and maintain a new dynasty.
This will make the chaotic periods last much, much longer, giving a player more time to play with the chaos features before the stable period locks down the gameplay to the “administration” part of the game.
What you propose, keeping China stuck in periods of chaos for this game span, it does sound like fun. However, outside of what Wikipedia says, I don’t know the history of this part of the world. Is this historical?
Edit - How do you propose to balance the change?
Set a specific number of empires and specific duchy holdings required? You lose the hegemony title if another entity can take and hold this subset of land? If you set the requirements at 50%+1, you could have two dynasties trading the hegemony title every other year. If you set the percent higher, now if someone takes the Tarim basin and Yue lands in the south, you can exploit the system to prevent anyone from ever holding a dynastic title.
Of course, this is precisely how I would play the game, I would start as a Pagan ruler, and gobble up the periphery of the hegemony to keep China divided and forever vulnerable to my invasion plans.
With the game designed around keeping China divided, as you propose, this is the ideal game strategy. The divided and weak Han lands would never stand a chance against an outside player if you make the hegemony lands as large as possible.
Norse Asia, for the win?
Of course, this is precisely how I would play the game, I would start as a Pagan ruler, and gobble up the periphery of the hegemony to keep China divided and forever vulnerable to my invasion plans.
With the game designed around keeping China divided, as you propose, this is the ideal game strategy. The divided and weak Han lands would never stand a chance against an outside player if you make the hegemony lands as large as possible.
Norse Asia, for the win?
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
First of all - it is. The Roman Empire has only the eastern part as it's de-jure (because "byzantium" IS the roman empire)
Second - restoring Roman Empire, if i recall correctly, only absorbs empires you hold. So you only get full de-jure if you actually conquer all of it, it's not a given. Sure maybe china could get some "protectorate restoration" events that make them de-jure. Although we dont know if protectorates even exist in game at all.
- 3
What period do you mean by pre history? Because iron age China doesnt always rule Northern Vietnam, and that era has some decent documentation.
- 1
- 1
- 1
The line of thinking is wrong. What you should've said is "making it much harder for THE AI to reform China"
Because players are fine, they can manage that, players are quite good, you usually dont have to take them into account if you make things such as AI can do them first.
i do agree making characters conquer tarim basin to reinstate china would be weird.
- 4
"My lord, you have conquered all of China, all the Han look toward you as having the mandate"
"Time to become the Emperor of China, and begin a new dynastic cycle"
"Sorry my lord, but Sogdian and Ughyurs protest, saying you have not conquered them, so history books can only title you as King of Dong"
- 5
- 3
- 1
Well, according to Vietnamese mythology, their ancestors, the Văn Lang people, defeated the Shang Dynasty's emperor during the Bronze Age and thereby gained independence.
So the prehistoric period could extend all the way back to before the Bronze Age. lol
- 1
Good point. Player implies human. I was thinking both AI players and human. My fault for not being precise.
Either way, being forced to conquer the maximum extent of historical China every single time a dynasty wants to form sounds unrealistic to me. It appears the Chinese players above are claiming this is how it worked in history, that the hegemony borders are too small.
I had another thought. A hegemony in English is more accurately known as the extent, including other countries, you can maintain control over, the extent of your power, and it is not the land you have claims to. But the game splits de jure and de facto control in a specific and arbitrary way for game purposes.
Maybe it’s a translation issue AND a game state issue. Maybe you just need to force the country in the Tarim basin to defer to your authority rather than conquer the land. In that case, all a dynasty needs to form is for the founder to convince the political power on the other side of the mountain pass to agree to call him emperor.
- 1
- 1
Prehistory is the time before recorded history, iron age China is within written history not prehistory
- 3
- 1
I'm aware of that, which is why I specified the Bronze Age rather than the Iron Age. Moreover, this myth isn't recorded in historical records—it's purely a legend. Therefore, it belongs to the prehistoric era.
- 2
I always thought that was a weird requirement. I know they went with important duchies and that's how it ended up this way. But they really should've just required kingdoms.I mean strictly speaking "Rome" in CK3 is defined as just 15 duchies, You can have the title E_Byzantium and only these 15 duchies and form Rome and be a hegemony. Here is the what that would effectively look like...
I also wish it was an certain amount of important kingdoms instead of just eastern ones.
If I own France, Belgium, Spain, England and Italy and the rest of Byzantium I should get to reform a rome too I think.
- 1
I just chalk it down more to game jank, Yes you can technically just hold only these duchies to form Rome but I think the intent is you are supposed to conquer the ERE + Italy then its just you basically saying "**** the Pope and his Shenanigans. We are Rome, we own Rome! We own the ERE I'm the new Justinian and I'm not letting you Germans off with your larp.
- 1
- 1
I think it's just a holdover from CK2. Where it was mostly done to avoid de_jure drift issues and to keep the tool tip mildly smaller.
But both those things are kind of irrelevant now.
Literal 1000+ year rule over Northern Vietnam shared between many different dynasties. The Ming Dynasty itself would briefly conquer and rule it for a few decades. Even after de facto independence, Northern Vietnam continued to pay tribute to whoever controlled China, tried to emulate the Chinese governing system, culture,philosophy and fashion. For a long time even used the same writing. I'd say more realistic for Northern Vietnam to be part of the Chinese hegemony than say Northern Africa or Britain part of Roman hegemony for a game starting in 867.
Last edited:
- 4
- 2
The issue there is North Africa is required to form Rome to begin with...
- 1
It's something of an automated decision. Once conquered, you can immediately form Rome. Why does North Africa suddenly automatically get drifted into Rome's hegemony immediately after conquered instead of waiting say 100 years first?
- 1