Chinese stability survey

[iOnlySignIn]

Side note on Chokonu: It's absolutely useless now, since:

(1) First you cannot possibly afford to tech Machinery early with all the rushing to Calendar/Compass/Paper.

(2) Then it's no longer a unique tech, and the lack of your UP advantage makes it too expensive, and you need to rush Gunpowder.

(3) Then you have Cannons, muskets, and soon Cuirassiers. The only reason you need Chokonus then is to cheaply fulfill your 100 unit limit goal. But that means forgoing Rifling and getting pounded by marauding Samurai. Naval supremacy means nothing since AI Japan is now very good at surprise attacks with mass landings.

I suggest buffing the Chokonu with a +50% vs. Mounted bonus (instead of Collateral, which the Babylonian UU already has), and/or make it require Mathematics + Metal Casting instead of Machinery. As it is now there's zero reason to build one, since it sucks against Samurai and all the other enemies China faces are Mounted (Elephants and Keshiks).

 

[iOnlySignIn]

China today is among the innovative nations

I'm as big a fan of China as any (you misread my earlier post; I meant 21st century China is stable so Leoreth should consider expanding its Stability map in Xinjiang and Manchuria. ), but me and all my Chinese friends would disagree with this sentiment about their current innovation abilities. China's strength today is in its industry and labor force instead of its innovators (the best of which they still loose to the U.S.).

But I agree on "Too much overlap with Mayan UP" argument. Still, Representation-Taixue China is almost as OP as Representation-Research Institute Russia, or Representation-Assembly Plant Germany, and comes about 300~400 years earlier. Which makes me wonder why China isn't adopting Representation in IRL. XD

Hell, early Representation is OP for any nation in DoC or RFC or Civ IV in general. China is following the rule instead of making an exception. I rest my case.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Well, in many fields, they are still behind many Western nations. The jump from say, the early 1980s era to even the early 2000s was tremendous though and while I recognize that it's still playing catch-up, the gap is getting closed at a steady rate.
I agree with the statement that innovators that are being raised in China going to the U.S. though.

Like these for example (I don't know whether you would count Taiwanese researchers in the same category or not), but there a quite a number of Chinese & Taiwanese researchers and graduates that come over here to the US to advance developments:

New Method for Predicting Fires:
http://goldsea.com/Text/index.php?id=12071
LCD panels that Generate Electricity:
http://goldsea.com/Text/index.php?id=12014
Grid-Battery Breakthrough:
http://goldsea.com/Text/index.php?id=12121

On gameplay though.

Hmmm, typically, I go after the Fascism & Communism route, so I can start invading other nations (typically the ones with good land and easy access) while hitting stability somewhat in expansion, makes up for it with economy gain. Also, most of my tech, post Fascism is gained from Espionage; which seems to be a more commerce-efficient model in RFC over straight research. Representation would have more merit for me if it didn't mean I wouldn't have a harder time seizing foreign assets and if Espionage wasn't infinitely more efficient for teching than actual research. The only techs I tend to go for in the late game myself, are the ones that give you something if you're the first to research it (Physics, Communism, Fascism, Fusion, etc.)

I'll also only usually build 4-5 cities on the mainland and invade Corea & Japan on spawn, so I don't have to deal with them later (a force of Cho-Ko-Nus against Corea and a mixed force of Knights+Cho-Ko-Nus against Japan). As long as you can prevent Japan from getting their initial Settlers out, you won't have to deal with a bunch of Samurai messing up the day. I understand though, that on Emperor, there isn't as much of a stability luxury for that in the same timeframe.

I admit, my general strategy is a bit different from yours,
and I do play on the lower levels.

EDIT: About Cho-Ko-Nus, historically, they were useful against massed infantry, so I think it is fine where it is. They still have some use in rushing down Corea and some limited use in rushing Japan so I don't think a +50% vs. mounted is necessary. You'd also pretty much never build Pikemen or Levys if they did get that bonus too.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

About Cho-Ko-Nus, historically, they were useful against massed infantry, so I think it is fine where it is.

Historically Chokonus are used by the Chinese to fight against each other, and that naturally involved massive infantry (best represented by the Levy unit in game). To counter the nomadic invaders across the Gobi desert the Chinese developed powerful cavalry of their own (胡服騎&#23556. And of course, Gunpowder weapons, which were used to stall the Mongols for centuries.

Korea could be wiped out with anything. On spawn or 1000 years later. They should be choked to death by Chinese culture since you built your Cathedrals right next to them. But on Emperor I cannot prepare enough siege weapons and ships to wipe out Japan on spawn without killing my Stability entirely or loosing one of the Four Great Invention races. And because I could not wipe out Japan, I need Korea alive as a buffer state in between. As long as Korea is alive I can maintain peace with Japan and get trade, just as how I keep Khmer/Thai alive so I can get trade from Indonesia. That's the historical grand strategy of China and I feel an appropriate strategy in game (at least on Emperor).

Like I said, in the current SVN upgrade China's major enemies are India, Khmer/Thai, and Mongols, all featuring Mounted units that Chokonus are hopeless against. Korea is so weak that they could be wiped out with anything.

Rushing Japan *should not* be a valid strategy because it's absurd from a historical point of view. Japan's weak starting units is the only reason such an exploit is possible (for HI China). I suggest Japan starts with 2 Samurai and 2 Crossbowmen instead of Swordsmen and Archers (although not Feudalism! Not Feudalism!).

Re: Espionage China, doesn't that invalidate China's current UP completely? I have a penchent for leading in tech and beelining my research. The current Chinese UP just made that habit worse. XD

Edit: Re: your earlier mention of how the game is balanced differently on different speeds, I think it's true, and also depends on the style of the player. I'm such a tech/trade whore that whenever I play as an early starting civ, the late starting civs are screwed over because the world becomes more advanced than they'd expect. Except when I play as England and deliberately instigate wars in Continental Europe.

 

[Qiu]

For crossbow, the Chinese utilized it in mass no late than BC 500. One of the main force that Qin used to unify China was formidable crossbow troops. There are also huge crossbow armies founded in the terracotta-army. So I wonder the place of crossbow in tech tree of vanilla CIV4 some kind originated from a western-centered thought. Maybe Chinese UU could be linked with an earlier tech in the game.

According to historical achieves, the early main method used by the Han army to defeat Xiongnu horse-archers were crossbow phalanx. They could shoot farther and more accurate. However, crossbows are good in statics but poor in logistics comparing to horse-mounted armies. Xiongnu cavalry could easier cut off their supply line. Finally well trained cavalry settled all. So I am not sure whether crossbow could be a rival to horse-back warriors. It depends on how to translate IRL strategy in this game IMO.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

For crossbow, the Chinese utilized it in mass no late than BC 500. One of the main force that Qin used to unify China was formidable crossbow troops. There are also huge crossbow armies founded in the terracotta-army. So I wonder the place of crossbow in tech tree of vanilla CIV4 some kind originated from a western-centered thought. Maybe Chinese UU could be linked with an earlier tech in the game.

According to historical achieves, the early main method used by the Han army to defeat Xiongnu horse-archers were crossbow phalanx. They could shoot farther and more accurate. However, crossbows are good in statics but poor in logistics compared to horse-mounted armies. Xiongnu cavalries could easier cut off their supply line. Finally well trained cavalry troops settled all. So I am not sure whether crossbow could be a rival to horse-back warriors. It depends on how to translate IRL strategy in this game IMO.

Exactly. Crossbows were effective weapons for the Chinese to fight *against each other*, like I said. But RFC or DoC contains no element of Chinese unification/civil wars, so it's out of place.

The great generals of China's war against Xiongnu, such as Wei Qing and Huo Qubing, were all great cavalry commanders skilled with deep penetrating attacks.

Edit: According to Wikipedia, Wujing Zongyao (written in the Song dynasty) mentions that mass crossbow fire is the most effective defense against cavalry charges.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Re: Espionage China, doesn't that invalidate China's current UP completely? I have a penchent for leading in tech and beelining my research. The current Chinese UP just made that habit worse. XD

Edit: Re: your earlier mention of how the game is balanced differently on different speeds, I think it's true, and also depends on the style of the player. I'm such a tech/trade whore that whenever I play as an early starting civ, the late starting civs are screwed over because the world becomes more advanced than they'd expect. Except when I play as England and deliberately instigate wars in Continental Europe.

About Espionage, I usually stop teching on my own after I get the Industrial/Modern essentials for a Police State+State Property bum rush. Spending 4500 commerce points in Espionage sounds a lot more attractive than spending 9000 commerce points in Science at that point, no? In the early game, I tech almost everything myself since espionage is not well developed. In the late game, you would end up utilizing your espionage points anyway because you would be building Jails+Security Bureaus+Intelligence Agencies in every city for the stability.

EDIT: Also, I don't see rushing Japan as being bad. The AI is not able to do so in any capacity but that should be an option available for the player.

To me, it would be the same as rushing Portugal on spawn as Spain or rushing the Dutch as France/Germany.
I mean, don't we already rush Mongols on spawn as China?

 

[iOnlySignIn]

You have a good point Re: Espionage. It's just that when I tech to Fascism the game is usually over. I do a lot of espionage as Russia (Kremlin ftw). Otherwise it's tech/trade mongering (as China, Japan, England, Netherlands, Portugal, Phoenicia, Greece) with intermittent short, profitable wars for resources.

"There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare." - Sun Tzu

To me, it would be the same as rushing Portugal on spawn as Spain or rushing the Dutch as France/Germany.

Those happened historically, more than once even.

I mean, don't we already rush Mongols on spawn as China?

Mongolia is hard to balance. It is either too weak (current DoC build) or too strong (current RFCS build). Ideally Mongolia should be as terrible for HI China as spawning Spain/France is for HI Rome. That is another reason why I suggested spawning strong Independents (which will flip to Mongols) in northern China earlier. As it is now, Mongolia sucks no matter how China plays (warmonger like you or tech whore like me). That simply should not be the case.

Alright. Off to more tech/trade mongering as my favorite civ, England.

 

[Qiu]

Exactly. Crossbows were effective weapons for the Chinese to fight *against each other*, like I said. But RFC or DoC contains no element of Chinese unification/civil wars, so it's out of place.

The great generals of China's war against Xiongnu, such as Wei Qing and Huo Qubing, were all great cavalry commanders skilled with deep penetrating attacks.

Edit: According to Wikipedia, Wujing Zongyao (written in the Song dynasty) mentions that mass crossbow fire is the most effective defense against cavalry charges.

actually I found a record that in Talas crossbow were used to defend against cavelry charge
http://books.google.com/books?id=ze...CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=talas crossbow&f=false
also http://2011neweststyletopqualitychristianlouboutinukshop.blog.com.mt/2011/08/30/battle-of-talas/
http://wn.com/Battle_of_Talas_River_YouTube__China_Vs_Islamic_Caliphate

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

You have a good point Re: Espionage. It's just that when I tech to Fascism the game is usually over. I do a lot of espionage as Russia (Kremlin ftw). Otherwise it's tech/trade mongering (as China, Japan, England, Netherlands, Portugal, Phoenicia, Greece) with intermittent short, profitable wars for resources.

Fascism isn't game over if you're going Space/Dom/Conquest.

But I agree with you on Mongolia.

It's either too easy or too hard. Currently, if you look at the OMG threads, Mongolia is way too strong right now though.

 

[civ_king]

I played a China game and a Japan game on the latest SVN update yesterday. 3000 BC, Epic, Emperor, I stopped both games after I've won the Liberalism race.

Mongolia is super weak in both games.

In my Japan game I appeased China and kept peace and open borders, giving us both massive trade. China traded Philosophy to me for Guilds, for example. China lost Printing Press race to me though. By the time the Mongols spawn, China has a strong army of Cannons and Cuirassiers (Military Tradition monopoly tech). By 1452 (when I stopped the game) China had taken the Mongol capital.

In my China game I did my usual GLH - naval path. I teched slightly slower than the AI China in my Japan game, getting Gunpowder a few turns before and Military Tradition a few turns after the Mongol spawn. The Mongols spawned with a dozen Keshiks but never declared war on me. Then news came of a string of their victories in the Middle East and in Russia. Then my spy discovered that they have like 6 units total in the 3 measly cities in their homeland (Dunhuang was taken by the Koreans, then razed by barbs, then Korea declared on me and was killed). I promptly wiped out the Mongol homeland with my Cuirassiers (no Cannons needed) and they collapsed.

In both games India was really strong, leading the scoreboard all the way until the Mughals, and almost constantly at (phony) war with China.

TL;DR conclusions:

(1) Mongols need to flip more (barb or Indie) cities in their homeland. Or spawn with many, many more Keshiks. Or both.

(2) India needs to be nerfed and not declare on China all the time for no reason.

I'll play an English/Dutch game next and see how East Asia turns out without me taking sides.

As India China always freaking declares war on me. I think that the AI India needs to be taught to play for the UHVs, by playing for the UHVs India is severely gimped, I have noticed that India tends to snowball due to all the calendar resources, it just starts picking up momentum and needs to get beaten by the Mughals, I think the conquerors need to be much stronger. When not gimped by gunning for the UHVs India/Mughals can be made rather broken by the player

 

[iOnlySignIn]

My England game is almost done (Epic, Emperor, now in the 1750s). General impression is that the Chinese and Indian UPs combined makes Asia as a whole OP.

Tidbits most relevant to this thread:

(1) AI China wiped out AI Mongolia 1 turn after spawn. With about 10 Cannons and a massive army of 30~40... dun dun dun dun... Horse Archers.

(2) AI China has tech monopoly all game including Democracy (circa 1680) and Nationalism (circa 1730) despite me tech mongering as England. I got Liberalism first and has monopoly on Rifling, Steel, Steam Power. Mughals eek nearly (by less than 10 turns) beat me to Physics. But I got my James Clerk Maxwell in the end.

(3) Europe as a whole lags in trade/tech compared to Asia. The Romans survived and traded Scientific Method (Galileo) to me for Liberalism (Locke), but other than that I cannot trade tech in Europe because they have no tech. Granted that I screwed over Continental Europe with my diplomacy as usual: I bribed France to declare on Portugal, then Spain declared on France, then I founded Protestantism and switched to Free Religion and Russia declared on Spain. Western Europe was ruined and Russia emerged as the undisputed hegemon (just as I intended, as they have no navy) with Spain, Viking as beaten Vassals. Then Germany declared on Russia and collapsed.

(4) By comparison, Asians are too advanced in tech. Dutch 'conquerers' evaporated to the Indonesian military around 1740. The Indonesias had tech parity (Muskets and Cannons) and advantage (Frigates) over the Dutch 'conquerers'.

Around 1720 China discovered Nationalism, and the Mughals demanded my Indian colony in the first congress. It passed and the Ottomans and Mughals declared on me (I was well prepared, relatively speaking). I never had so much fun fighting India as England. The Mughals had 5 Frigates, plus 2 or 3 more that arrived later. This is the first time I have ever put Ships of the Line to use in a Civ IV game (i.e. use them to kill Frigates). Thank Leoreth for that! On land, I know Siege Elephants are nasty so I engaged the Mughal army in the field with my Redcoats. Fortunately the Mughal army is consisted largely of Muskets (just what my Redcoats love) and they were quickly annihilated. Again, thank Leoreth for the first chance to put Redcoat's power to use!

But I was unable to take any major inland Mughal cities. I took Mumbai and Dhaka by bombing off their defense with my Royal Navy [TM] but I didn't (and couldn't) prepare enough Redcoats to both hold those two cities and advance deep into the Indo-Gangetic Plain.

All in all, thank you Leoreth for making the Mughals such an awesome enemy to fight. Dunno if their massive fleet of Frigates is realistic or not, but they certainly are great fun to go up against as England.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

That's a nice analysis of Emperor level gameplay.

For whatever reason though, on Viceroy & Monarch, India & China suck horribly; India gets screwed over by colonists+Mughals and China gets overrun by Mongols or some other faction. It appears that there's some sort of hidden X factor on Emperor (and perhaps Epic?) that makes them tick really well. I don't know if you'd like to weigh in on that. (I'm thinking it has to do with an early start and difficulty level AI bonuses snowballing over time)

Do you think that on Emperor, rushing France as England during the first 10-15 turns is feasible (To set yourself up as a regional hegemon)?
And vice versa for that matter?

 

[iOnlySignIn]

That's a nice analysis of Emperor level gameplay.

Do you think that on Emperor, rushing France as England during the first 10-15 turns is feasible (To set yourself up as a regional hegemon)?

Impossible. On Emperor barbs (Swordsmen and Axemen) in Western Europe spawns in eights and tens to facilitate Roman collapse. Most of them spawn in France and flip to France on the French spawn. This is why when I play Spain my first order of business is to set up defense along the Pyrenees, as France can and will declare and send those converted barb Axes and Swords swarming at you.

Rushing England as France - I've never done it (I like rushing Germany better (more historical), and getting Rome, since I'll build Notre Dame and SoL), but I imagine it's only a matter of building enough ships to carry all your troops over before the English spawn. If you're not going for UHV you can found your capital on the coast (there are much better locations than Paris tbh) and that will be very easy. If you found Paris though it will be harder since default French coastal cities have poor food/production, especially if Paris is there to choke them.

Re: different balance, I think both Emperor and Epic contributes.

Epic/Marathon tends to favor earlier starting civs as a rule (I always have a really hard time as the Dutch), because

(1) AI likes to settle GPs instead of bulbing. The slower the game, the more advantageous settling GPs (long term benefit) is over bulbing (slower game makes bulbing with a single GP near impossible).

When I conquered the Mughal capital (right before American spawn) there were 6 settled GPs in there (along with a batch of wonders including Taj Mahal).

(2) Slower games means more actual wars (as opposed to phony wars) since all units travel a set number of tiles per turn regardless of game speed. Earlier civs always have early war advantage (e.g. AI China killing AI Mongolia).

Emperor tends to favor Specialist Economy. This is inherited from vanilla BtS. In BtS Specialist Economy is da bomb (unless you're Financial) on Emperor, and necessary above. In RFC Specialist Economy is even more important because there are Plagues, and your population recovers much faster than your Cottages after Plagues.

China, India are both in food-rich regions, with current UPs/UBs that greatly encourage a Specialist Economy geared towards Representation (IMO). Indonesia is equally food rich, and now with fantastic trading partners in the form of India and China (large, overseas, foreign cities). Neither of these two powers will declare on Indonesia because there's Khmer/Thai buffering in between.

So China and India becomes incredibly powerful, which makes Indonesia powerful. That's my guess on what's happened, based on what I've seen. Perhaps I need to play an India game just to make sure. I will eventually because their new UP is really powerful and really suits my style.

----------------------------------------------------------

Re: Indian UP, I think it needs to be nerfed, by either assigning less food for each specialist, or by capping the effect at a certain number of specialists. Just compare it to the Italian UP (Renaissance) you'll see how much more potent it is.

In general a UP should be comparable to a vanilla BtS trait (Mali = Financial, Japan = Charismatic, Greece = Philosophical, RFC India = Spiritual) or the beneficial aspects of a Civic Option (Persia = Occupation, Phoenicia = Free Market, Italy = Mercantilism), or a Wonder (Italy = Mercantilism = SoL, Phoenicia = Free Market = GLH, Arab UP is somewhat like the Eiffel Tower).

India's current UP is *way* more powerful than a free specialist in every city, which is what you pay for by running Mercantilism, or what you get by building SoL (one of the most expensive and best wonders in game). That is just not fair.

Historically, India ran a Caste System Specialist Economy because it was food rich, it did not become food rich because it ran Cast System Specialist Economy. The two are related and the idea of the current UP is awesome, but it needs to be nerfed to reflect a relation of historical cause and effect. IMO.

Also, Tomorrow's Dawn, when I passed by Panda Express today I thought of naming my Chinese strategy (GLH => Pacificist Trade/Tech mongering) as "Panda Strategy", and your Chinese strategy (Nationalism + Communism + Espionage/War mongering) as "Dragon Strategy". Both are historically valid strategies for China and both are great in their own right:

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Haha, that would be a lot more accurate if it weren't a Western Dragon in that comic but I think the overall message gets across fine. "Dragon Strategy" just builds off of and draws from the precedent set by Conquest/Domination winners like blizzrd & AnotherPacifist. (Off-topic, but I wish I had paid more attention during secondary Chinese school, because I can read every character except for the one meaning "mascot" )

I really must try out Epic speed sometime, myself.

Perhaps when 1.8 is wrapped up, we should write strategy articles for our respective strategies as well.

The old vanilla RFC guides are largely not as applicable to the current incarnation of DoC.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

^ The dragon mixup is so common that I've learned to ignore it.

Epic/Marathon are really great for warring. They also allow you to conclude wars in historically accurate timeframes (e.g. Roman conquest of Egypt will not take centuries). On Marathon teching is a bit too slow though, especially in Ancient times. In general I feel Epic is the best speed.

I cannot access the vanilla RFC guides (on Rhye's wiki) any more. Site problems. I'd love to write some guides, but the first one I write should be for England. It's by far the civ that suits my style best and I've discovered some nice tricks. For China I think my Panda strategy needs a major overhaul because:

(1) No Textile Industry, and Trading Company not spreading to China means late game Free Market is of doubtful value (even with many coastal cities). However China does not have so many river tiles without resources so as to make State Property a must (like with Russia). Its late game economic strategy is a real tossup (as it is IRL).

(2) No longer able to found a capital on the coast, the GLH rush becomes harder. I'm now investigating the possibilities for a Pyramids rush (possibly followed by Oracle => Mathematics). Could work out or not, but I routinely see AI Babylon get Pyramids, so why not China? If I delay Civil Service - Paper as much as I can it will really be worth it.

(3) New, uber belligerent India will declare instead of trade techs with me. Perhaps I should steal its religious techs (with a Great Spy) instead of trading for them. To do that while maintaining tech lead to leverage Chinese UP would be very interesting challenge.

 

[AOS9001]

Looks like I play Panda every time then. /obligatory still alive post

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

I cannot access the vanilla RFC guides (on Rhye's wiki) any more. Site problems. I'd love to write some guides, but the first one I write should be for England. It's by far the civ that suits my style best and I've discovered some nice tricks. For China I think my Panda strategy needs a major overhaul because:

(1) No Textile Industry, and Trading Company not spreading to China means late game Free Market is of doubtful value (even with many coastal cities). However China does not have so many river tiles without resources so as to make State Property a must (like with Russia). Its late game economic strategy is a real tossup (as it is IRL).

I think we could just write strategy guides in the DoC forum and someone would compile them in a sticky. I'd be interested in your England strategy.

About 1) Semi-seriously, we could have a modern organization for China where you loan money to other nations and then collect a profit in interest. Debt-buying or as some people like to joke around here (America), China is our "sugar daddy". But then again, that already exists in the form of subsidies trading, which I haven't seen very many people use in DoC yet.

 

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

People have mentioned that China's problems include:
- collapsing too early
- unreasonably small stability map
- poorly placed cities
- Cho-ko-nu is useless against nearby cavalry and naval civs
- UP is boring

Here's an idea that might solve most of the above, and be historical too:

Unique Power: The Mandate of Heaven
When China collapses, it quickly recovers.

The respawn mechanism should check every turn (at least on Normal, maybe less on Marathon) and if China is dead and there is at least one independent city in it's Core Area, then it gets a respawn.

Advantages:
- mirrors China's historic dynastic cycle
- Cho-ku-nus can do their thing fighting against independent cities, not Keshiks etc.
- only the industrial respawn will have Tibet and Xinjiang in its stability map (of course, an industrial-era war with India is throughly historical)
- less likely to rush Japan and Mongolia, but has experienced units to defend itself
- we get to meet the Tang, the Qing, etc!

Disadvantages:
- maybe it's a lot of work for Leoreth
- UP doesn't help human players - allowing a human to remain Chinese through the respawn would probably require serious messing with the DLL

But if we're going to distinguish between Brits and Americans, Seljuks and Ottomans, Indians and Mughals, then why insist on only one China?

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

- UP is boring

This is in regards to the old, old UP, Power of the Myriads, which wasn't that great and encouraged gifting metals + Warrior spam.

- less likely to rush Japan and Mongolia, but has experienced units to defend itself

AI China has never, ever rushed AI Japan, to the best of my memory. There are only maybe 4-5 pictures of China controlling a Japanese city or two in the vanilla OMG thread (usually through Congress or collapsed Japan) and you're more likely to find them controlling Jerusalem than Kyouto.

Disadvantages:
- maybe it's a lot of work for Leoreth
- UP doesn't help human players - allowing a human to remain Chinese through the respawn would probably require serious messing with the DLL

This is my single biggest issue.

The Mandate of Heaven is a very significant thing in Chinese history so it feels inappropriate to leave it out. Perhaps it should be an institution (abstract of course, but represented by a building) that gives a minor stability bonus; make the Mandate only applicable to East Asian civs (no Khmer or Thai here) and have it expire upon a tech like Democracy or Communism.

But if we're going to distinguish between Brits and Americans, Seljuks and Ottomans, Indians and Mughals, then why insist on only one China?

Because China is largely contiguous (some people may disagree with that) and we already have Yuan modeled when Mongols conquer China. Jurchens/Manchus should be represented with Independents, imo.