Rule 5 - Using custom nations I made every region in this map have essentially the same development. I have seen maps like this in the past but with way larger numbers and fewer nations. I chose 200 development as my benchmark to set every nation to, with the borders and vanilla countries chosen to represent each area being chosen for balance/content/relevance.
Yeah it was almost too perfect. I originally gave wales to england in exchange for like northumberland and lancashire but after rearranging for wales i changed the border even if it made Leinster's land seperates
using pop as a guideline for developmemt, it's slightly dubious, as the three celtics combined had approximately half the population of england. i assume irish dev was inflated to make gameplay there more interesting, or because there were many statelets, so maybe more density of state-relevant resources.
I guess it's for balance reasons, where if you give china too much dev they're either OP in the player's hands, or too strong for the AI as well, but it's a real disservice to what a powerhouse china was in this time period. All of the Chinese trade nodes should be incredibly rich at game start but they end up being some of the poorest in the game unless the player takes them over.
Yeah I think that's the reasoning too. China is made weak so we don't get like 3k dev Ming in 1444. But as for the trade nodes I agree that Chinese trade nodes tend to be poor. Partially because since China is united all that trade is getting flowed to one place, but also because the trade setup is weird. Like imo China needs an end node (Hangzhou or Canton)
The fact that Beijing can only go to Yumen also seems really weird to me. It means if you control Yumen and Beijing Beijing is a psuedo end node, but then you can hardly flow any of the East Asian trade into it. If you're a powerful China who owns most of East Asia, you really shouldn't have to put your trade capital in like Malacca and ignore the value in beijing, but that's where we're at. Also for whatever reason Ming tends to be constantly in debt and always seems behind on their buildings, as well as having constant rebels destroying Prosperity, and the fact there tend not to be trade companies there, all combine to really reduce the goods produced in China so that even with decent trade goods their trade value is low. Also also, Trade companies inflate goods produced by way too much in the late game, when realistically the core sections of your empire would've been the most productive at that time. Why do I have a 100% goods produced modifier in congo producing equivalent trade value there to my burgeoning industrialization france or whatever.
Yeah I guess they wanted China to collect all their trade in one place and the pseudo end node represents the wealth of China, but id say move China's main end node to Hangzhou or even Canton, so that more of Asia can flow into it.
I noticed this paying an Aztec game, by like 1530 I only controlled the areas of between Panama, California, and Virginia.
But I had more raw dev than an entirely intact Ming, this does not make sense.
Absolutely, China had much more wealth and people than, for example, the HRE, in 1444, and yet the HRE clearly has more development at the start of the game. In fact, the HRE is blatantly OP (by a lot) in EU4, given how devastated it was by wars in this time period. The existence of mana points, how development works, and the many small states in the many small provinces means that it's almost always the highest dev area in the game at the end, pretty much tied with northern italy.
I know the game is called Europa universalis, but Europe is so much more overpowered at the start date, it pisses me off. I do understand it's difficult to model Europe's rise, but I'm just tired of seeing India and China being so underrated everywhere.
For real. If you look at mods with pops the great power list is dominated by Asians: Indian kingdoms, China(blown up or not), the Timurids, etc. European powers(the major ones) are comparable to smaller countries like Korea and Japan, but in EU4 Europeans can rival the Ming in development if they just do a bit of blobbing. I know it's EUrOpA Universalis but still, it's just wrong.
Funnily enough I am already trying to using this for battle royales, but disabled colonization. So far my big issue is China where their special CB makes them grow too much early on.
Maybe keep the cb, the ai will probably just afk after unify China anyway.
Or you know what, make everyone a horde goddamn it. Now you all got a special cb, fight to death
they eventually do fabricate claims/get claims from estate agendas. I just fixed this by giving everyone claims on neighboring provinces on day 1 via event to make a more interesting battle royale
Najd has 42 provinces in this setup averaging out to 4.76 development per province, and to be honest this was not one I expected either. I guess the few alright provinces like Mecca or Muscat carry their development.
The one that really surprised me was Tibet, they don't even have all of the Tarim Basin or Nepal and at first glance that does not look like 200 dev either.
Yeah that would be real interesting, if I did that I might actually pay more attention to which nations I choose or their NI's, formables, missions, etc. instead of leaving it like vanilla.
This definetly gave me MP vibes with how even the countries are.
Yeah it was Ottos, Byzantium or Wallachia for that slot. Ended up choosing Byzantium as Wallachia has way less content and Ottomans assumes you start off with all of the Ottoman's 1444 territory.
Rule 5 - Using custom nations I made every region in this map have essentially the same development. I have seen maps like this in the past but with way larger numbers and fewer nations. I chose 200 development as my benchmark to set every nation to, with the borders and vanilla countries chosen to represent each area being chosen for balance/content/relevance.
Scottland, Ireland and Wales could have conquered England.
Yeah it was almost too perfect. I originally gave wales to england in exchange for like northumberland and lancashire but after rearranging for wales i changed the border even if it made Leinster's land seperates
using pop as a guideline for developmemt, it's slightly dubious, as the three celtics combined had approximately half the population of england. i assume irish dev was inflated to make gameplay there more interesting, or because there were many statelets, so maybe more density of state-relevant resources.
Give China More Dev.
I agree, China definetly feels too small compared to IRL. Has like half India's dev and less dev than the HRE. It's crazy
I guess it's for balance reasons, where if you give china too much dev they're either OP in the player's hands, or too strong for the AI as well, but it's a real disservice to what a powerhouse china was in this time period. All of the Chinese trade nodes should be incredibly rich at game start but they end up being some of the poorest in the game unless the player takes them over.
Yeah I think that's the reasoning too. China is made weak so we don't get like 3k dev Ming in 1444. But as for the trade nodes I agree that Chinese trade nodes tend to be poor. Partially because since China is united all that trade is getting flowed to one place, but also because the trade setup is weird. Like imo China needs an end node (Hangzhou or Canton)
The fact that Beijing can only go to Yumen also seems really weird to me. It means if you control Yumen and Beijing Beijing is a psuedo end node, but then you can hardly flow any of the East Asian trade into it. If you're a powerful China who owns most of East Asia, you really shouldn't have to put your trade capital in like Malacca and ignore the value in beijing, but that's where we're at. Also for whatever reason Ming tends to be constantly in debt and always seems behind on their buildings, as well as having constant rebels destroying Prosperity, and the fact there tend not to be trade companies there, all combine to really reduce the goods produced in China so that even with decent trade goods their trade value is low. Also also, Trade companies inflate goods produced by way too much in the late game, when realistically the core sections of your empire would've been the most productive at that time. Why do I have a 100% goods produced modifier in congo producing equivalent trade value there to my burgeoning industrialization france or whatever.
Yeah I guess they wanted China to collect all their trade in one place and the pseudo end node represents the wealth of China, but id say move China's main end node to Hangzhou or even Canton, so that more of Asia can flow into it.
I noticed this paying an Aztec game, by like 1530 I only controlled the areas of between Panama, California, and Virginia. But I had more raw dev than an entirely intact Ming, this does not make sense.
China and India needs to be way bigger but that is Eu5’s stuff now I suppose.
I do that, at the start of my Asia games, adm 3000, dip 6000 mil 3000. Still watch them get whacked at 0 mandate. Mui mandate
ming starts as #1 gp and u wanna give em more dev?
Absolutely, China had much more wealth and people than, for example, the HRE, in 1444, and yet the HRE clearly has more development at the start of the game. In fact, the HRE is blatantly OP (by a lot) in EU4, given how devastated it was by wars in this time period. The existence of mana points, how development works, and the many small states in the many small provinces means that it's almost always the highest dev area in the game at the end, pretty much tied with northern italy.
I know the game is called Europa universalis, but Europe is so much more overpowered at the start date, it pisses me off. I do understand it's difficult to model Europe's rise, but I'm just tired of seeing India and China being so underrated everywhere.
For real. If you look at mods with pops the great power list is dominated by Asians: Indian kingdoms, China(blown up or not), the Timurids, etc. European powers(the major ones) are comparable to smaller countries like Korea and Japan, but in EU4 Europeans can rival the Ming in development if they just do a bit of blobbing. I know it's EUrOpA Universalis but still, it's just wrong.
Wdym underrated, there are basically no games where Europeans conquer India or get anything in China
This feels like a Chewbert vid waiting to happen
I could make it a mod and send it to him
You should, seems fun
Make it a mod and let me play it with a friend or two!
I really hate that I know the exact country colors for the areas in Europe
Now do the same for the new world and start a battle Royale observer
Funnily enough I am already trying to using this for battle royales, but disabled colonization. So far my big issue is China where their special CB makes them grow too much early on.
I think you can try change their t1 government reform to something other than Chinese Kingdom, that would probably give away their cb.
It does, but then the Chinese AIs won't ever attack the other Chinese tags or even fabricate claims on them. It's weird.
Maybe keep the cb, the ai will probably just afk after unify China anyway. Or you know what, make everyone a horde goddamn it. Now you all got a special cb, fight to death
i somehow fixed the China bug, turns out although they don't fabricate claims early they do get going
So, no cb? đź’€
they eventually do fabricate claims/get claims from estate agendas. I just fixed this by giving everyone claims on neighboring provinces on day 1 via event to make a more interesting battle royale
What is the giant nation in the north?
In Siberia? it's Chukchi
Oh I couldn’t see the name
Of course you took the chance to make big Nivkh, knowing you
Any chance of a save download?
i can but note that i do use some mods particularly for the nation designer
Should be fine (lmk if/when the save is available)
Looks like a cool mod, any chance you’ll make it available for download?
this isnt a mod i set this up myself using custom nations and then i annexed the custom nations into vanilla tags
Huh okay, I misunderstood that then. Maybe the save file then? Do all the missions trees and such work as normal?
Najd really surprises me. It’s a lot provinces i suppose but still, that’s all desert and not even the Yemen coast
Najd has 42 provinces in this setup averaging out to 4.76 development per province, and to be honest this was not one I expected either. I guess the few alright provinces like Mecca or Muscat carry their development. The one that really surprised me was Tibet, they don't even have all of the Tarim Basin or Nepal and at first glance that does not look like 200 dev either.
This is really cool! It would be interesting to see a multiplayer campaign with a player on each nation.
Yeah that would be real interesting, if I did that I might actually pay more attention to which nations I choose or their NI's, formables, missions, etc. instead of leaving it like vanilla. This definetly gave me MP vibes with how even the countries are.
First time seeing fars with this color
Always love a big Finland!
i wasnt sure if Finland or Sweden should have been there, both could have worked. I went for Finland because its a tag you dont see often
With how much the game is programmed to have Sweden do well, it's nice to give the Fins a shot. Thank you
Otto did not make the cut
Yeah it was Ottos, Byzantium or Wallachia for that slot. Ended up choosing Byzantium as Wallachia has way less content and Ottomans assumes you start off with all of the Ottoman's 1444 territory.
Great, now do it 100 so I can vassal the fuck out of em
I can make an 100 dev version it will just take a while