Whilst I agree that the missionary design is flawed it would be weird if they had a healing bonus. They are clearly designed as more “agressive” monks, not for healing purposes.
But I wouldn’t have a problem if this could help spanish on more open map types.
2 Likes
It is okay. The missionaries brought more advanced and hygienic medical techniques to many indigenous tribes.
LOL. If any, they brought deseases like the common cold europeans were immunized against.
And Hygiene wasn’t figured out until like end of 19th century…
No missionarys had basically only one purpose: Missionizing.
And in the process of missionizing a lot of medical techniques of the tribes was actually lost.
4 Likes
The Mongol Yuan and Qing Manchus ruled China for centuries. So yes, the Tibetans, who had considerable sway over these two dynasties were influential, irrespective of whatever the regular Han Chinese were up to. You are just being facetious by continuing to quibble.
The lama unit could look something like this, with the regular monk for the Tibetans being a basic shaven headed red robed monk
1 Like
Some useful information on the fortresses and monasteries of the Tibetan region…
Lol. Did you said facetious and quibble?
I know Chinese culture so much, even my first language is Mandarin.
In the Yuan and Qing dynasties, Tibetan Buddhism basically influenced the ruling class who were those Mongols and Manchus only. Even so, Tibetan Buddhism had no particular relevance to the way they rule in China. No matter which nationality the rulers come from, the Han people are still the main body of all dynasties. It has a little influence among the people in China proper, and there are already Chinese Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism in the public. Even Catholicism has had a more profound impact on Chinese history than Tibetan Buddhism.
Mongols and Manchus did believe in Tibetan Buddhism, but it should not be said that in a nutshell that they had a significant impact on the Yuan and Qing dynasties.
1 Like
The two early game civ bonuses they have are a bit too much. The free cav armour is already a super strong knight rush bonus and should be used with a bit of caution, but maybe it is fine, idk, either way consider increasing the stone to 75 and reduce the wood to 100. I dont get why they would have good siege when they were outmatched in siege by all their neighbours except the Gokturks maybe. Seems a bit weird too.
amazing presentation. Great work
You’re sour that the Han were dominated by so-called lesser people during the Yuan and Qing dynasties I sense.
You are the one who were sour. You used the word facetious and quibble. And I just tried to explain the truth about Chinese society during the Yuan and Qing to you. That is all.
Clearly you do not know the Chinese history enough.
The Mongols were lesser ones who only ruled the more Han Chinese for less than a century.
The Manchus had a population of less than 300,000 when they entered China, while the Han population at that time was at least 100 million. At the end of the Qing Dynasty, there were about 1.05 million Manchus, while there were already 400 million Han Chinese. An important reason why the Qing Dynasty could last for more than 200 years is because they were willing to learn the culture of the Han people and release power to Han officials. As time passed by, the influence of the Han people in the court became stronger and stronger, and even surpassed the royal family of Manchu.
It’s like a Protestant country accepting a Catholic monarch who did not force or encourage the people to convert to Catholicism and who did not dictate how he would govern his country and his people because of his Catholic faith. Would you still think Catholicism had a big influence on this Protestant country?
I support Tibetans (or named Tanguts) as a new in-game civ, but I think it’s necessary to address these things so that others don’t misunderstand.
1 Like
On the topic of Tibetans being added. The Chinese government does not have a problem with talking about Tibet in the medieval times, including the relations between the Tang and Tibetans… See these productions by the CGTN, which is the TV propaganda arm of the Chinese government. I see no reason why we should be scared of shadows. If they were so afraid, they would not even talk about Tibet or Tibetan culture/history at all.
2 Likes
Even some documentaries talking about the history of the Dalai Lamas…
I also want to see Tibet in the game, and I have made some suggestions, but each time it ends up being a political issue.
1 Like
this looks so cool i hope devs give us tibetans
I fully do believe you that there is a way to add the Tibetans into this game too without upsetting Chinese censors. Perhaps as you previously suggested, if Chinese historians were primarily consulted then yes it could very well work. I’m sure there is some way to make this a non-political statement, but the unfortunate fact of the matter is that as I’m sure you know, if Microsoft handles it poorly, the game very well may be banned in China like Hearts of Iron IV is. China is a huge market and Microsoft first and foremost wants to make a profit, so the unfortunate reality is that they likely won’t bother because the risks very well could outweigh the rewards. I absolutely fully support them trying though, but it would be a huge investment to create a Tibetan civilisation that does not make any implicit implications towards the modern political status of Tibet.
Could the Tibetans be introduced as Tufans or Tubo? Would that be ok for the CCP??
This will guarantee absolutely never happen given Chinese censorship. Sorry you wasted so much time putting this together.
It’s worth noting that the Han Chinese have extricated almost all undesirable ethnic groups (read non-Han Chinese) from mainland China. Tibet’s freedom is very temporary and soon like dozens of others their people and culture will be lost to the sands of time.
Maybe it’s already been proposed, but couldn’t the Tibetan Mastiff be a unique (secondary) unit instead of a defensive bonus? Then I could suggest you to insert something about these towers (These mysterious towers in southwestern China have stumped scholars for centuries | Goldthread), I heard that they were also used as granaries, so they could be a Tibetan version of the common granaries (of the defensive granaries-tower), however I really want the Tibetan civilization, he could be placed alongside the Swiss and Georgians in a Mountain Civilization DLC ‘Lords of the Mountains’! 
Hence why HoI4 is banned in China but (afaik) EU4 and CK2 are not (granted, Tibet is there only as a formable nation in these games).
1 Like
An excellent exhibition on the Qinghai region of China which was once part of Greater Tibet. The Tuyuhun Kingdom in the area was conquered by the Tibetan Empire but many of its attributes were adapted by the Tibetans. The Tibet-Tuyuhun conflict could feature in a campaign for the Tibetans…
1 Like