Developer Diary | End of Year 2023

[kimidf]

A DLC that adds an FT for Austria and tweaks Hungary and Czechoslovakia could be fun. However, one problem I forsee is that altering Czechoslovakia and Hungary could be seen as "DLC for DLC", which the devs have stated on many occasions that they will never do for good reason. Of course they could get around this by making Death or Dishonor free...

Developers could use the same procedure they did with Yugoslavia and Romania in BTFB with a small additional improvement on those. I agree with Austria that Belgium, Ireland, Albania and a small tree of their own will surely come for Croatia.

I also believe that perhaps Hongria, Txecolosvaquia and Yugoslavia could receive small additions or reforms to their trees for free through free patches in the so-called war efforts, something that Chinese countries could also join.

 

[kimidf]

I'm starting to think one possibility of what me might get is a Domination-style DLC that updates a bunch of Focus Trees at once. Most of the pre-WTT Focus Trees feel a little limited and outdated at this point.

I am convinced sooner or later a dlc similar to EU IV Domination for HOI IV, especially to thoroughly reform the trees and introduce new mechanics and content for the most important countries in the game

 

[BrotherJonathan]

I am convinced sooner or later a dlc similar to EU IV Domination for HOI IV, especially to thoroughly reform the trees and introduce new mechanics and content for the most important countries in the game

That would probably be the last DLC before the game goes on end-of-lifespan support. The devs have been doing a great job lately, but they seem to be starting to butt up against engine limitations that would be very difficult to work around.

 

[Fatallight]

The devs have been doing a great job lately, but they seem to be starting to butt up against engine limitations that would be very difficult to work around.

Think so? I can't say I've heard a lot of "Well we'd like to but the engine can't support it." What do you think we'd be seeing more of, if not for the engine?

 

[BrotherJonathan]

Think so? I can't say I've heard a lot of "Well we'd like to but the engine can't support it." What do you think we'd be seeing more of, if not for the engine?

Fair point, I can't think of any specific instances of this offhand. I'm just running on the assumption that they might be playing it safe to avoid another potential Leviathan incident.

 

[Teutonic_Knight_2000]

A DLC that adds an FT for Austria and tweaks Hungary and Czechoslovakia could be fun. However, one problem I forsee is that altering Czechoslovakia and Hungary could be seen as "DLC for DLC", which the devs have stated on many occasions that they will never do for good reason. Of course they could get around this by making Death or Dishonor free...

Hungary and Czechoslovakia may receive a minor rework as part of a free update. The monarchist branch for Czechoslovakia could be part of the new DLC - after all, it is about the Austrian Habsburgs and Austria would be one of the main countries on which the DLC would focus.

Developers could use the same procedure they did with Yugoslavia and Romania in BTFB with a small additional improvement on those. I agree with Austria that Belgium, Ireland, Albania and a small tree of their own will surely come for Croatia.

When it comes to "smaller countries", it's a pity that Albania was omitted from the BftB DLC - even if only modestly. Croatia most deserves something unique among the countries that can liberate themselves from Yugoslavia (although it would be nice if each country had something unique) just like Belarus and Ukraine from the USSR. Ireland could have received something as part of the TfV DLC.

As for Belgium, it may receive something as part of the Austria & Germany DLC - the question is whether Japan could also be part of such a large DLC.

 

[kimidf]

Hungary and Czechoslovakia may receive a minor rework as part of a free update. The monarchist branch for Czechoslovakia could be part of the new DLC - after all, it is about the Austrian Habsburgs and Austria would be one of the main countries on which the DLC would focus.

When it comes to "smaller countries", it's a pity that Albania was omitted from the BftB DLC - even if only modestly. Croatia most deserves something unique among the countries that can liberate themselves from Yugoslavia (although it would be nice if each country had something unique) just like Belarus and Ukraine from the USSR. Ireland could have received something as part of the TfV DLC.

As for Belgium, it may receive something as part of the Austria & Germany DLC - the question is whether Japan could also be part of such a large DLC.

I am convinced sooner or later we will have a DLC similar to EUI IV's Domination. Where there will be many important revisions to the major consideration countries, among them will be Germany, Japan, France, etc. that are at the same level of mechanics and depth of the last Soviet and Italian rework

I believe Belgium, Austria, Ireland and other minor European countries will come together with another DLC from neutral European countries

 

[BrotherJonathan]

I am convinced sooner or later we will have a DLC similar to EUI IV's Domination. Where there will be many important revisions to the major consideration countries, among them will be Germany, Japan, France, etc. that are at the same level of mechanics and depth of the last Soviet and Italian rework

I believe Belgium, Austria, Ireland and other minor European countries will come together with another DLC from neutral European countries

I concur. I feel like there's probably going to be a big Domination/Holy Fury style "wrap-up" DLC at some point.
Going off of this, some more wild speculation about this "surprise". Could it be:
1. The base game is going to be made free?
OR
2. They're releasing a DRM-free version?

 

[goodcigar]

Devs have been even more explicit in other threads that there's no foreseeable plan for a Custodians Team.

Do you support using the Joint Focus Tree to revamp China and Japan?

my viewpoint is as follows: Regarding China's focus tree, which can only be unlocked through paid DLC, its actual enjoyment does not justify the cost for players. The content for various warlords is repetitive, resulting in homogeneous gameplay...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

Well that's disappointing news.

 

[herr anfsim]

Overall people strongly preferred the more historical route for Finland and restoring monarchies as Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Iceland bucked the trend. I guess ppl hate being a puppet more than they love the king ;D

Thats an interesting finding, and might indicate that a monarchism path without the monarch and a stated animosity towards monarchism might not be the best approach. Personally, I never was too eager for monarchist paths as I feel the major political ideologies of the time fits better with the setting, but I doubt the majority of people that really wanted monarchism paths are too satisfied with one lacking the actual monarch.

 

[BrotherJonathan]

Thats an interesting finding, and might indicate that a monarchism path without the monarch and a stated animosity towards monarchism might not be the best approach. Personally, I never was too eager for monarchist paths as I feel the major political ideologies of the time fits better with the setting, but I doubt the majority of people that really wanted monarchism paths are too satisfied with one lacking the actual monarch.

Personally, my reading of the situation is that the weird Norway monarchist path is at least partially a result of some of the devs being fed-up with, as they see it, having to cram monarchist paths into nearly every country's FT, even if they really don't make sense, because a small but vocal minority of players will complain if they're not there. Then again, I obviously don't know what the devs think/feel about this, so this is just speculation.

 

[herr anfsim]

Personally, my reading of the situation is that the weird Norway monarchist path is at least partially a result of some of the devs being fed-up with, as they see it, having to cram monarchist paths into nearly every country's FT, even if they really don't make sense, because a small but vocal minority of players will complain if they're not there. Then again, I obviously don't know what the devs think/feel about this, so this is just speculation.

That might be, though judging from the numbers presented by the devs, the group wanting the monarchist paths might actually not be a loud minority, but a majority of the players playing those nations in the DLC. Thus, it might be that a monarchist path without the actual monarch (and influenced by the developers animosity towards monarchy) not only fails to satisfy the majority of the target audience for the monarchist path, but also the target audience of that nations DLC content. Still, I believe there are much more significant shortcomings in the Norwegian content than the treatment of the monarchy path, and to extend your theory, I get the impression that the feeling towards having to create a monarchy path also extended to being stuck creating content for Norway.

Overall people strongly preferred the more historical route for Finland and restoring monarchies as Denmark, Norway and Sweden.

 

[Ossiv]

Personally, my reading of the situation is that the weird Norway monarchist path is at least partially a result of some of the devs being fed-up with, as they see it, having to cram monarchist paths into nearly every country's FT, even if they really don't make sense, because a small but vocal minority of players will complain if they're not there. Then again, I obviously don't know what the devs think/feel about this, so this is just speculation.

Monarchism would rule if this was a WWI game, but it is not. During WWII, monarchs had lost or were loosing powers as rulers in nearly all countries. Authoritarian leaders, both communist and fascist, were on the rise, together with democracies.

 

[BrotherJonathan]

That might be, though judging from the numbers presented by the devs, the group wanting the monarchist paths might actually not be a loud minority, but a majority of the players playing those nations in the DLC. Thus, it might be that a monarchist path without the actual monarch (and influenced by the developers animosity towards monarchy) not only fails to satisfy the majority of the target audience for the monarchist path, but also the target audience of that nations DLC content. Still, I believe there are much more significant shortcomings in the Norwegian content than the treatment of the monarchy path, and to extend your theory, I get the impression that the feeling towards having to create a monarchy path also extended to being stuck creating content for Norway.

This is possible as well. Overall I feel like Norway's is the weakest of the new FTs.

 

[Elettricità]

Monarchies, of course, in the twentieth century were far from at the zenith of their glory, this is a fact. But the weird Russian queen of Poland is in the game, but (as a leader) the actual reigning and popular Norwegian monarch is not. Just a game, huh.

 

[Eudoxe]

Thats an interesting finding, and might indicate that a monarchism path without the monarch and a stated animosity towards monarchism might not be the best approach. Personally, I never was too eager for monarchist paths as I feel the major political ideologies of the time fits better with the setting, but I doubt the majority of people that really wanted monarchism paths are too satisfied with one lacking the actual monarch.

I tend to disagree: I played Norway non aligned path and found it enjoyable. I also found it more credible that the king is not actually in charge.
I tend to play a lot of the non aligned path - and thus monarchist path - not because I like monarchy, but because they tend to be more interesting gameplay wise.
It is actually the opposite: except in a few case (such as Ethiopia) I find the restoration of ruling monarch quit anachronic, but non align and fascists path tend to be more developped. If it was a pure matter of choice regarding ideology flavour, I would mostly play commies and democracy, but in most case they are a bit boring to play, and there is less achievements doable with these paths unfortunately.

So, if I had a message for paradox, it would be: less monarchist non sense, more non align republics/constitutionnal monarchy, and make communist and democracy trees more interesting!

 

[BrotherJonathan]

I tend to disagree: I played Norway non aligned path and found it enjoyable. I also found it more credible that the king is not actually in charge.
I tend to play a lot of the non aligned path - and thus monarchist path - not because I like monarchy, but because they tend to be more interesting gameplay wise.
It is actually the opposite: except in a few case (such as Ethiopia) I find the restoration of ruling monarch quit anachronic, but non align and fascists path tend to be more developped. If it was a pure matter of choice regarding ideology flavour, I would mostly play commies and democracy, but in most case they are a bit boring to play, and there is less achievements doable with these paths unfortunately.

So, if I had a message for paradox, it would be: less monarchist non sense, more non align republics/constitutionnal monarchy, and make communist and democracy trees more interesting!

Actually I tend to find the communist paths fairly interesting because there's always the tension of "do I follow the party line from the USSR or go my own way?" But I do agree that the democratic paths tend to seem a little generic.

 

[CaptainAllen]

When is the next update?