Despite this obstacle, the sheer power of the Ottoman state makes them a force to be reckoned. With expansion options on all sides and an army that cannot be challenged in quality until the mid-16th century, the world is your oyster!
At first it allows you to declare a subjugation war on any nation in Indonesia. After finishing that conquest, it also allows such wars against all nations in the Chinese culture group. Finally, you can use it against any nation on the map, regardless of their size.
Mutapa's gold mines should allow you to go over force limit and quickly declare a war of conquest against Kilwa despite the technology disadvantage. Focus on military mana to not fall further behind Ethiopia.
The Qing conquest theory proposes that the actions and policies of the Manchu-led Qing dynasty held China back, and led to the Great Divergence in which China lost its early modern economic and industrial lead over the West. The theory seeks to explain why Europe could experience an industrial revolution, but China did not. Theory supporters, some of whom may be motivated by anti-Qing sentiment, claim that advances in science and technology and economic development in the Song and Ming dynasties moved China toward a modern age, however, the restrictions placed on commerce and industry and the persecution of non-orthodox thought after the transition from Ming to Qing in the 17th century caused China to gradually stagnate and fall behind the West.
Different dates are offered for the beginning or end of ascendency and whether it was in economic, technological, or political terms. Some see the Qing as the time when China fell behind, either because of stagnation or because Europe or the West pulled ahead. The economic historian Angus Maddison calculates that in the tenth century China was the "world's leading economy in terms of per capita income," and that "between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries economic leadership passed from China to Western Europe." Carl Dahlman and Jean-Eric Aubert of the World Bank argue, based on Maddison's data, that China was the world's largest and most advanced economy for the most of the past two millennia and among the wealthiest and most advanced economies until the 18th century. Maddison believes that China's lead did not happen until the fall of the Roman Empire and that China lost its lead because Europe pulled ahead, not because of domestic conditions.  In a review of the field in 2006, the Harvard economic historian David Landes began by stating that "as late as the end of the first millenium of our era, the civilizations of Asia were well ahead of Europe in wealth and knowledge," but five hundred years, that is, in the early years of the Ming dynasty, later "the tables had turned."
The Mongol conquest inflicted a large population loss and devastated the economy but the succeeding Ming dynasty brought a recovery in per capita incomes and economic output, surpassing Song dynasty heights. Late Ming laissez-faire policies such as nonintervention in markets and low taxes further stimulated commercialisation, as market agriculture replaced subsistence farming. Wage labour became increasingly common, as large-scale private industry developed, displacing indentured labor and often buying out government workshops. Historian Robert Allen estimates that family incomes and labor productivity of the Ming-era Yangtze Delta Region, the richest province of China, was far higher than contemporary Europe and exceeded the later Qing dynasty.
Some contend that economic and social developments during the late Ming paralleled the development of Europe in the 18th and the 19th centuries and that China would have entered a modern age had there been no Manchu conquest and no Qing dynasty. The Ming regime was ideologically rigid but cities and new wealth allowed room for intellectual fervor and liberalization. New thinkers like Wang Yangming and Li Zhi challenged orthodox Confucianism and argued that the words of Confucius and Mencius were fallible and that wisdom was universal. They also questioned government power over the economy and personal rights. Scholars of the Donglin school protested increases in government taxation during the Wanli Emperor, and restrictions on freedom of speech, advocating a program similar to classical liberalism. Ming dynasty scholars also investigated western science, such as Archimedes.
Supporters of the theory hold that the policies of the Qing dynasty slowed China's economic and scientific advancement and allowed Western nations to surpass China. Specific Qing policies cited include suppression of creative thought, literary persecution, discouragement of foreign trade, repressive domestic policies, rigid neo-Confucian emphasis on ideology rather than practical knowledge, disrespect for business and commerce, destructive fiscal and tax policy, as well as the devastation of the initial conquest itself.
The Ming-Qing transition was one of the most devastating wars in Chinese history, and it set back Chinese progress decades. Examples of the devastation include the Yangzhou massacre in which some 800,000 people, including women and children, were massacred by the Manchus. Whole provinces, such as Sichuan and Jiangnan, were thoroughly devastated and depopulated by the Manchu conquest, which killed an estimated 25 million people. Some scholars estimate that the Chinese economy did not the regain the level reached in the late Ming dynasty until 1750, nearly a century after the foundation of the Qing dynasty. According to economic historian Robert Allen, family incomes in the Yangtze delta, China's richest province, was actually below Ming levels in 1820 but equal to that of contemporary Britain.
I have been attempting to unite the world under one tag in EU4 with moderate success, doing a few test runs recreating the Roman Empire as an orthodox Ottomans and getting the Mare Nostrum achievement. But as much as the world trembles before the awesome culture and religion shifting powers of the Great Green Blob, they don't exactly have the optimal set of national ideas to undertake global dominion.
Aside from making a custom nation, which country in the game would have the best possible shot in terms of total development and national ideas at creating a worldwide government, be it formable or otherwise?
I don't understand, why you would say the Ottomans are not a good choice for world conquest. Ever since the game was released, they've been the #1 choice.While going for catholic makes it easiest an orthodox or even sunni Ottoman is still very much capable of world conquest.
At this point, you are absolutely unstoppable. Your vassal swarm can crush everything. you can be at constant 100% OE, but all the while also feed your vassals. Once you are able to form client states, do so at the border of HRE territory and feed the whole world into vassals. Once you have the whole world under the control of your vassals, click the last reform to become the HRE.
I agree with Polygnome that Mughals are the strongest nation in the game. But if played correctly they are the easiest world conquest since it only requires you to understand proper management of wars. You don't need to PU anyone or understand the HRE. You will win like Genghis Khan, massacre every army you face. So here goes, keep in mind I don't have every DLC but I do have the main ones along with the Dharma DLC. So this strategy would probably change a bit with all the DLC's I've developed this from conquering too fast in my Mughal world conquest runs and having to slow down to make sure the corruption mechanic doesn't break my economy in the early years.
So Ideas: First - Administrative Ideas, (For Core cost reduction) Second - Espionage Ideas, for Aggressive expansion reduction and more importantly -0.10 Corruption + another -0.10 Corruption from Policies. So two ideas in and you start saving massive amounts on corruption costs which means you can overextend much quicker. Third - Plutocratic Ideas: , +1 merchant, 10% army morale, unrest reduction, Institution spread, manpower Recovery and a massive 43% increase in manpower from policies. Ideally you take this before you switch to the Mughals that way you convert to a plutocratic government, take the idea then form the Mughals and get the standard overpowered Mughal government bonuses. At this point there isn't a conquering speed that can possibly get you manpower to drop, it will always be maxed no matter how tight you layer your conquests. Fourth - Exploration so you can take Australia and the East Indies. More Merchants means more money! Fifth - Humanist ideas which you take now so that you can have tons of rebels right when you want to max your absolution. Usually times nicely with a boost in number of states so you can squash rebels and reduce autonomy like a boss as soon as possible. After you have all the Humanist ideas you no longer have to waste time sending your armies across the entire map to deal with rebels. And I mean no rebels ever even after a 100 years of 95% overextension! After this it is all military ideas, I take Defensive ideas first because this gives you another -0.20 corruption in policies and then Offensive for late game siege speed. By this time your army morale will be about 8 to 9 which will be higher than every European nation, your core cost reduction is insane most provinces will cost you about 2 admin to core, your manpower is insane, your money is insane, you have no rebels and most of the world is already yours because you haven't cared about corruption at all for most of the game. The only trick is to try and surround Europe by 1700 so you have a good 100 years to take out only europe.
After all this time, I'm back with a new unlikely candidate since 1.32.One of my main issues with world conquest is the endgame blobs.Nations that cumulate 1000% war score, and therefore require to war against again and again.As stated in my prévious solution, PU are a good way to work against it.Well there was a new better and more efficent option : 2b1af7f3a8