• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Reception & Thoughts | Patch 1.14.2 [Checksum fbf7]

Greetings all!

Today marks the first dev diary since the release of Trial of Allegiance, so we’ll be looking back over how things went, and community reactions in a little more detail than usual. While I would have loved to have some data on player choices and interactions for today’s diary, our analytics engine is busy chugging away. So, we’ll have to hold off on that until the machine spirit has assessed the incoming preponderance of data.

The Elephant in the Room

It would be hard to talk about Trial of Allegiance without first mentioning that we’re acutely aware of its critical reception from fans.

We’ve had releases with less than satisfactory reviews before, so why talk about them this time? Well, this mostly boils down to the reasons. Usually when something doesn’t do well we’ll create a timeline and buckle down to address the issues that matter. As you’ll see below, things are a little different this time.

Above all, I see no reason not to be transparent about this, and I’m going to use today as an opportunity to talk about what it means to us and how we analyze reactions, so let’s dive into some of the facts:

Everything’s on Fire!

Well, actually no. Trial of Allegiance has thus far been one of our most stable releases in terms of bugs and player-encountered issues. This doesn’t mean there aren’t bugs: stuff always creeps through, but as you may have noticed by now, we’ve had an Open Beta running with a patch scheduled sometime today. The patch notes will be attached to the end of this document. Furthermore, we have another patch scheduled in next week to give us a chance to tackle more complex problems.

Due to the low incidence of bugs in the ToA content, we’re spending a bit more time on general improvements and things folks thought were lacking.

Developer’s Perspective: bugs are defects in the game - errors or unforeseen complexities that render part of the experience to not work as intended. We don’t usually consider design choices or outdated content as bugs unless they cause the first statement to apply, since that evaluation is often subjective.

Circles Within Circles

Our steam review score has taken a fairly heavy beating on Trial of Allegiance. Reviews on DLCs are notoriously hard to draw accurate conclusions from, as very few people tend to leave reviews compared to the overall number of people who bought a DLC. Trial of Allegiance is particularly notable in that regard, as there are fewer reviews overall than we would normally expect. It’s absolutely possible to theorize behind why that is, but that’s all those are: theories.

That said, we read every review. Aaand it’s quite hard, tbh. Being a venerable ancient of the internet, I could wax lyrical on toxicity, vocabulary, and dissociation, but at the end of the day folks leave reviews for a reason. The language they use isn’t as important as the sentiment they’re trying to convey, even if they don’t always know the right way to do it.

What we try and do, therefore, is to try and don our armor of not-taking-things-too-personally, and group negative reviews by common themes or sentiments.

For Trial of Allegiance, we assessed clear ‘meta’ groupings in order of weight*:

  • Unhappiness about recent regional currency price adjustments
  • Unhappiness about the price of the country pack
    • Compared to other HOI4 expansions
    • Other
  • Bought it but wanted something different
    • New mechanics, or
    • A european expansion
  • Unhappy with the quality of the release
    • In relation to specific issues;
    • In relation to mods
    • Unclear/Unintelligible
    • Unclear/Horrendously offensive

*This requires looking at global reviews, not english-language only: something we take quite seriously.

The exact weighting here changes a lot over time, but suffice it to say that the top grouping is significantly larger than any of the others, and the last grouping vice-versa.

But hang on, does this just mean we’re being review bombed by angry interest groups? Well, that would be a nice easy assumption that allows us to feel good about ourselves and go home for supper, but there doesn’t seem to be any coordinated effort here as far as we can tell.

What we can tell here is that folks commonly leave reviews for reasons unrelated to the content we made.

So, these are the findings. So far these have been presented as factual; now we take a more subjective view when it comes to reacting to the findings.

Regional Pricing

This one was a little unexpected, though in hindsight it shouldn’t have been. Looking back over recent reviews on our other expansions, we see the same trend.

In January, Paradox made efforts to normalize pricing across various currency regions according to (as I understand it) a standard used by Valve. On HoI, we saw this as a mostly administrative change, and did not, I think, ask enough questions about the effect it might have on our game-specific player base.
I am not promising any sweeping changes here for decisions that have already been made. What I can say however, is that we will not be treating any such changes as administrative in the future. We will be doing our due diligence.

General Pricing

A little more expected, perhaps, but with some important notes. The vast majority of complaints about the pricing of this release came with comparisons or in relation to other content we’ve released in the past.

While it overlaps a little with the next topic, I feel like we could have been clearer with setting expectations about what a country pack is.

Another observation here is that our fanbase seems to attach more importance to the consistency of expansion prices than we tend to. A lot of the comparisons we’re seeing are equating content made many years ago or at a completely different scale to Trial of Allegiance.

Wanted Something Different

This one is a real games-industry conundrum. Traditionally, if you bring something to market that doesn’t interest everyone, the uninterested ones avoid it. Not so here.

We knew that South America would be a divisive topic amongst the fanbase: some regard it as important, some do not. We calculated that this would make these nations perfect for a country-pack release instead of a full expansion - including mechanics in something that may not interest everyone would put fans in the situation of having to purchase something they did not want.

And, uh, that backfired a bit. Overwhelmingly, reviews in this category are asking where the mechanics are, or why we’re spending time on X instead of Y.

Importantly though, we aren’t gonna change that. We will sometimes have country pack releases, and they will not contain mechanics, though perhaps there’s some middle ground for tech/unit/other additions.

This all comes with a big but: the Juno team who created Trial of Allegiance are not the only ones working on HOI4. Creating content packs is not being done at the expense of other things. We aren’t ready to talk about exactly what’s coming yet, but simply put: we have mechanical expansions in the pipeline that are being built at this very moment. Outside of expansions, we have even more big stuff happening for HoI in the very near future. Watch this space.

Developer’s Perspective: Even if we wanted to, making two mechanical expansions in parallel would be a significant technical challenge. Some games are built to make that easy! HOI is not one of them.

Quality of Release

This is predominantly the stuff that reviews traditionally focus on. Was the delivered content good/bad/neutral? The nature of this is subjective, and these reviews are really where we can act by making changes and fixes. Below you’ll find the patch notes for our first iteration on ToA’s content, with more to come soon.

Overall what we’re seeing from players that stated an active interest in South America is a trending positive reaction. There are some key problems raised to us from highly invested players, which we’ll do our best to address. There are learnings we want to take into future country packs or war effort patches, including but not limited to:

  • Shared branches were one of those things that made sense at the time, but in hindsight we should have avoided.
  • People love map changes more than I thought humanly possible.
  • Power creep is real, and we should have a balance reckoning sooner rather than later
  • We can do more with units, tech, and non-focus content without being explicitly ‘mechanical’ in nature. This was sort of on our radar already, but player feedback confirms that.

As I mentioned above, this has been a very bug-light release, but if an issue is plaguing you then please let us know through the usual channels, and we’ll spend any time left over on making other improvements to ToA’s content.

—-----------

Stuff That Doesn’t Really Help

Reviews that are empty/irrelevant/insulting/contain mysterious dwarven chanting are not going to be useful to us. When I say that we read all reviews, I’m not kidding - but if there’s no actionable text, we can’t do anything with it. Of course, it is your right to maintain a practice of critical ambiguity, I’m just saying it won’t produce results.

Reviews and comments that set up a strawman and try to assign a motive to the decisions we make serves only to create a rift between developers and community. We love this game as much as you do, and while it would be naive of me to assume that every discussion can be equally polite and constructive, I do believe that it is better if we let people represent themselves.

Of course, the vast majority of you understand this.

In Conclusion

From my perspective, team Juno had a cracking debut release, and I’m beyond proud of what they accomplished. The strategic side of things is where we’ve fallen short, and that is my cross to bear.

Finally, the reason I’m saying any of this stuff is to give you folks some context. This is hopefully an insight into the thought process that collectively happens behind the scenes at HoI HQ.

I’ll be around to try and answer any questions!



Below, you’ll find the patch notes for the update coming sometime today:

################################################################
######## Patch 1.14.2 "Bolivar" #########
################################################################

##################################
# Bugfix & Gameplay Additions
##################################
- Presets in the equipment designer should not be blocked because of so-called negative stats
- Blockade runner now requires fighting with at least one >37 knot ship
- Added a decision for fascist Chile after completing the focus "Forge a New Chilean Identity" to change the national flag to the Patria Vieja based one, due to popular demand.
- Added Felipe Molas López as advisor for Paraguay
- Valentino Riroko Tuki's trait has been buffed, and RAP now gains slightly more things when released and chosen to be played as a part of the Araucanian-Chilean civil war.
- Blockade runner is now actually obtainable
- Flourishing economy for Paraguay no longer expires
- Revenge for the Triple Alliance and Rekindle old gripes now gives wargoals against both actors in a civil war if BRA or ARG is in a civil war
- Fixed an issue where two designer companies for Chile wouldn't have icons with AAT disabled.
- Fixed a bug where Bartolome Blanche would go to the revolting side in the Araucanian civil war despite the non-aligned side still meeting all the requirements to keep him.
- Fixed an issue where taking any of the Promote Spanish Immigration decisions as Chile would permanently block the player from taking any further immigration decisions.
- Support the Spanish republicans no longer spams the error folder
- Historical AI behavior setting for Uruguay no longer disallows achievements
- Fixed an issue where Paraguay could take a focus before taking the prerequisite focus
- You no longer require French Somaliland for the Chilean empire achivement
- USA should no longer guarantee Monroe countries in addition to having the Monroe spirit if Trial of Allegiance is on, unless Tension is > 90%
- Replaced some Uruguayan spirit icons with nicer ones
- Italy now joins the war when France proper is being invaded by Axis troops, or on the historical date
- Reshuffled priorities for building slots for URG/PAR to make it less likely that the capital hits the 25 slot limit
- Paraguay river navy gets properly removed upon capitulation
- Fixed Oscar Escudero Otárola having his name backwards
- 'Reach out to Soviets' in the Argentina tree now checks if the Soviet Union is communist.
- Election event will now only fire if Brazil has completed 'Repeal the National Security Laws'
- Made the requirements to get Senor Hilter slightly easier.
- Added the correct Mechanized tech icons for Brazil
- Fixed an issue where Argentina and Chile could not use their modern small aircraft icon for carrier aircraft.
- Added a fix so you can now see that Prestes will become country leader with the 'Align with Moscow' trait.
- Added a check to Argentina's 'Support the Spanish Republicans' focus so it can only be taken if the Spanish Republic exists.
- some more portrait tweaks for minvervino, valentino and dartnell
- Added a check to the Juan Peron focus to make sure he is still recruited. Also added tooltip to event to make it more apparent he will not be available.
- Argentina can now peace out all UK allies when taking the Falklands
- Modified requirements for 'Revise Treaty of Roca-Runciman' in Argentina focus tree. Now accessible to communists after civil war.
- New Edelman portrait added and minor tweaks to previously existing portraits
- Fix for the Cisplatine war achievement not working.
- Fixed snake smoked achievement file names.
- Nerfed some of the recruitable population and supply in Communist Argentina
- Merged two instances of a duplicated Brazilian admiral/advisor
- Added fix to prevent elections from firing if Vargas is still country leader
- Eugenio Gomez portrait updated to show the right person
- Neglected state and Cangaco state modifiers will now be removed when another country owns the state.
- Fixed an issue that was preventing players from inviting countries to the Org of American states faction and made it easier to see how to integrate countries into US of South America.
- Updated some focuses that were not adding cores to new states.
- Added a fix to make sure that Support the Spanish Nationalists isn't available if they win the civil war
- Added chief of army for those without ToA for Argentina
- Made Fascist demagogue advisors available from game start in Argentina
- Brazil and Argentina now have full access to their respective intel agency icons
- Improved tooltip for Align with Moscow focus
- Beneath the shadow of the Triple Alliance and Rekindle old gripes no longer instantly white peace PAR/URG, giving them the option of continuing the war without being teleported back
- Fixed confusing Tooltip for blockade runner
- Peru can no longer go to war with Ecuador if subject
- Chile can no longer create their own faction is subject
- Mexico can no longer invite Peru to their faction if they are at war with Ecuador
- Normandy is now part of Chile's decisions to core France
- Manuel A. Rodriguez no longer has a duplicated localization key and is recruited when ToA is disabled.
- Added fix that prevents players from taking "Demand Compensation From Spain" if Spain does not own Equatorial Guinea
- Fixed an issue with Argentina's starting plane having the wrong icon.
- Fixed a bug where "TAG makes aggressive moves on Uruguay" event fires twice
- URSAL focus now grants cores to Brazil
- Fixed a bug which required reloading the game to show hidden Senor Hilter focuses


##################################
# AI
##################################
- AI now motorizes supply hubs if needed, even if they are controlled by allies or puppets
- The ai should no longer be as willing to send volunteers to the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia for all of eternity.
- Limiting some italy ai strategies for only when in faction with germany

##################################
# Modding
##################################
- Removed the check on negative stats that disabled create_equipment_variant and AI equipment creation


##################################
# Stability & Performance
##################################
- Improve performance in resource computation.
- Various minor optimisations across the game (infrastructure etc)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 99Like
  • 27
  • 23Love
  • 15
  • 9
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Another minor complaint is that the newly added spies have different scale compare to the default ones, which looks odd putting together. Why not make it consistent?
 
Yes, but:


Let's not start the great research slot war once again :D
*lowers pitchfork Ah, well! I hate this softlock so much.....

Just make sure that you would get things right for Southeast Asia.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
General Pricing

A little more expected, perhaps, but with some important notes. The vast majority of complaints about the pricing of this release came with comparisons or in relation to other content we’ve released in the past.

While it overlaps a little with the next topic, I feel like we could have been clearer with setting expectations about what a country pack is.

Another observation here is that our fanbase seems to attach more importance to the consistency of expansion prices than we tend to. A lot of the comparisons we’re seeing are equating content made many years ago or at a completely different scale to Trial of Allegiance.
I do wonder if some players making such reviews are taking inflation into account. Perhaps they are only considering it in one direction: their own disposable income is shrinking and they don't want a reminder that inflation can hit other sides of the world too. The book "Scarcity" by Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir presents research on how people obsess over a resource (money, time, calories, friends, etc) when they're aware of a scarcity. Meaning some people will be very closely tracking exactly how much mileage they get out of every dollar, euro or other currency.

Wanted Something Different


This one is a real games-industry conundrum. Traditionally, if you bring something to market that doesn’t interest everyone, the uninterested ones avoid it. Not so here.
My theory is that players don't like being reminded that they belong to a diverse community. Some feel left out that they don't get anything fun while others do. Then there's some who think everyone plays with mods. And those who think it's fair to compare the fruits of unpaid labour of love with that of salaried, scheduled labour.
Overwhelmingly, reviews in this category are asking where the mechanics are, or why we’re spending time on X instead of Y.

Importantly though, we aren’t gonna change that. We will sometimes have country pack releases, and they will not contain mechanics, though perhaps there’s some middle ground for tech/unit/other additions.
One cannot tell if a review author has ever read dev diaries or has experienced past DLC launches. There will always be someone who joined the player community late and is experiencing their first ever DLC release. Getting the message across to even the fringe of the community is a challenge. A written game review makes no distinction whether the author is a newcomer or an entrenched veteran.
 
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Not really, the skill competencies required to build content packs are something the Juno team specifically has - creating mechanics requires a different set. Developers are not usually regarded as fungible items. One day I'll do the art for a release and you'll see what I mean ;)
Yes i agree. You dont need an artist doing programmer stuff and vice verca. But the argument, as far as i understood it, was always that those jobs could be used for more positions in the main team helping those DLC get done faster. That obviously doesnt always work, since more cooks dont make the soup cook faster afterall.
But it is still the general simplified view that people have on this and one that should maybe comunicated more so that less people hold this idea and therefore complain less when its unjustified.

Victoria 3 also had a DLC release that was entirely Art/flavour content after release when they were in their big fixing release phase. People complained how they could do something like that while the game was in the state it was. They obvously didnt understand that artist are not capable of fixing programmer stuff and need something to do, cause who here really would love to fire people for 2 months because the teams next update doesnt need an that many artists?
 
I would like to know what percentage of players like to play minor countries vs the traditional major countries. I believe there are many players like me who don't find it very appealing to play minor countries other than our own personal home country.

I can tell you pretty exactly. Over the last 4 months (not including March) the number of unmodded games played as major nations has fluctuated between 49.5% and 53.1%. So yes, there are many players who like playing major nations. But clearly the balance is close to even.


I expect most are looking for improvements or change in the main major ww2 countries and games mechanics.
While I see the value of regional DLCs, I believe interest will always be limited without also including changes that improve overall game mechanics while playing the major countries.

The issue with your statement about majors vs minors is that you assume your lived experience is generally true for others - it's a common if broad group of human behaviors called egocentric bias (which makes it sound a little unpleasant, but I didn't name it, and I don't mean it in such a way!). It also doesn't prevent that opinion from being right, as I expect it may be in your comment here about what others are looking for. But I don't think that means we should only ever do what is demonstrably right for the largest group. Business and design can also be about providing something for everyone, and in some cases even whole expansions might be more targeted towards a group that doesn't include you.

In terms of games mechanics, I would like to see improvements in analytics in terms of providing players more insights as to battles results so we can make adjustments.
Why are my fleets or division losing battles? Not enough AA? Piecing? It would be great to have a better way to get insights. I would like to be able to view view past battle results, analytics and insights.

I would actually love that too. Especially for naval combat where you really need that information before your highly expensive ships are sunk due to mistakes you made 5 years ago.
 
  • 13Like
  • 5
  • 4
Reactions:
I would like to say that I greatly enjoyed the DLC and I specially enjoy playing small nations like Paraguay and Uruguay to teach the big kids how it's done, which brings me to my main complain about the DLC.

I understand that Paraguay and Uruguay were meant as small scope focus trees and I don't have a problem with that, but I find that they lack a "flavour".

Things like having only 4 generals between the 2, no admirals for Uruguay, almost no unique looking Focus icons or Spirit icons (specially egregious when you see things like the shared army branches that give you Ethiopia's Army and Air Focus icons instead of the bespoke ones for those nations like with BRA, CHL and ARG), lack of historical Intelligence agencies (something even Iceland got), lack of voices and lack of 3D sprites for the infantry (an issue shared with Iceland)

This may look like small things when separate, but if you look at them as a whole it really starts to sour an experience that otherwise would have been almost perfect.

An example of extra flavour that made me incredibly happy was when you added Portuguese voices in a patch for Portugal, you didn't have to, but at least for me it greatly enhanced the experience.

I don't know if you'll have time to go back and add some of the things I mentioned for Paraguay and Uruguay (and Iceland as well plx), but if its possible please be more mindful about this short of things in the future.

Sorry for the long post and I cannot way for your next content drop (Tannu Tuva focus tree when)
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Hi
Before the release of ToA I wasn’t exited about it. Preordered it out of habit (loyal HOI 4 player with all DLC’s). When it was released and I started playing it I was positively surprised. This has made the South-America playable and I’ve only played the ToA content since the release.
Well done team!
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
1. Rapa Nui should probably be considered part of the Polynesian Empire and everything related to that since it's now its own state

2. The "De-Imperialize" setup for the Americas starts with some things broken. Guiana and Canada just use their normal names and flags no matter what. Similar happens if you give them territory or change their ideology in a standard Mapuche game.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Hi
Before the release of ToA I wasn’t exited about it. Preordered it out of habit (loyal HOI 4 player with all DLC’s). When it was released and I started playing it I was positively surprised. This has made the South-America playable and I’ve only played the ToA content since the release.
Well done team!
Speaking of preorders. Was disappointed by the preorder song this time. But I suppose nothing will beat Bella Ciao
 
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I do wonder if some players making such reviews are taking inflation into account. Perhaps they are only considering it in one direction: their own disposable income is shrinking and they don't want a reminder that inflation can hit other sides of the world too. The book "Scarcity" by Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir presents research on how people obsess over a resource (money, time, calories, friends, etc) when they're aware of a scarcity. Meaning some people will be very closely tracking exactly how much mileage they get out of every dollar, euro or other currency.

This is a lengthy and interesting topic which I won't pretend to be a mega-expert on, but some context specific to this industry is that the price of games more or less stagnated for 15 or so years until quite recently. There's a bunch of contributing reasons to that, that include everything from communications advances making it easier to have a wide reach, or the massive shift from physical to digital media making it easier to maintain a competitive price by not adjusting game prices for inflation.

And then all of a sudden the industry started to realize that it had overstretched that practice to the point where not only had the expectation become that games always cost $30-40, but costs had increased to the point where that was no longer a viable business model. So within the sphere of the games industry, there have been a relatively rapid series of cost increases, especially for AAA(A) games. And naturally, the time the industry realizes that is when it becomes squeezed, which is, funnily enough, when everyone else is squeezed. It isn't a wonderful situation for anyone, and I'm not offering justification for anything here, but those are the facts.


My theory is that players don't like being reminded that they belong to a diverse community. Some feel left out that they don't get anything fun while others do. Then there's some who think everyone plays with mods. And those who think it's fair to compare the fruits of unpaid labour of love with that of salaried, scheduled labour.

See above replies re: egocentric bias. It's common and understandable, but that doesn't make it true.

I would like to say that I greatly enjoyed the DLC and I specially enjoy playing small nations like Paraguay and Uruguay to teach the big kids how it's done, which brings me to my main complain about the DLC.

I understand that Paraguay and Uruguay were meant as small scope focus trees and I don't have a problem with that, but I find that they lack a "flavour".

Things like having only 4 generals between the 2, no admirals for Uruguay, almost no unique looking Focus icons or Spirit icons (specially egregious when you see things like the shared army branches that give you Ethiopia's Army and Air Focus icons instead of the bespoke ones for those nations like with BRA, CHL and ARG), lack of historical Intelligence agencies (something even Iceland got), lack of voices and lack of 3D sprites for the infantry (an issue shared with Iceland)

This may look like small things when separate, but if you look at them as a whole it really starts to sour an experience that otherwise would have been almost perfect.

This is good, actionable feedback. Thankyou.

An example of extra flavour that made me incredibly happy was when you added Portuguese voices in a patch for Portugal, you didn't have to, but at least for me it greatly enhanced the experience.

I don't know if you'll have time to go back and add some of the things I mentioned for Paraguay and Uruguay (and Iceland as well plx), but if its possible please be more mindful about this short of things in the future.

For everything, probably not, but I'll see what we can do.

Sorry for the long post and I cannot way for your next content drop (Tannu Tuva focus tree when)

I don't know, but before Belgium.
 
  • 6Like
  • 6
  • 4
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I don't mind the DLC. But I will be honest I would much rather have a Germany and Japan focus rework.
 
I quite like this DLC, one of my favorite things is the sheer amounts of choices for different leaders, and I hope that can be carried over to a future USA update, where all sorts of fascinating and wacky candidates can become President. I love content for varied parts of the world, and I'd love in-depth regional content for places like South Asia (even the releasables like Pakistan and Bangladesh) or Central America or something. I'm of the opinion that every place in the world has interesting history and deserves attention. I really don't think I'll ever be upset with any place you guys decide to focus on, but updates to majors should be a priority for big expansions since they have such global impact.

One of the things that has really bothered me (and maybe only me, I've barely seen it mentioned anywhere else) is the reused art assets for Paraguay and Uruguay. I don't mind reused assets per se, the generic focus icons and spirits don't bother me, but the icons made for specific countries (Uruguay has a spirit that has a picture of China on it, and a national focus with a Russian imperial eagle on it, another and one with Finnish flags) are just a pet peeve because they are so out of place. I'd rather just see reuse of the generic ones.

Also, regarding the pricing stuff, I remember seeing in the dev diaries that the Uruguay/Paraguay dev mentioned that those trees were a personal project that got brought into the DLC. Have you guys considered little DLCs for single minor countries? Like, Liberia gets a tree and some content for $4, and people who want content for Liberia and only Liberia get it, and people who don't care won't miss out on a whole pack or expansion or something. So maybe if a certain dev is going through a phase on interest in say, Liberia, they can do something like what was done with the Paraguay and Uruguay trees. Just a thought.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I don't think I could leave a review because I got the DLC temporarily through the subscription, but I gave Communist Brazil a go and it was great fun, even though I know almost nothing about South America in this era. Well done to team Juno. Also, I only experienced a couple of bugs with the TOA content, which by PDX standards is pretty good for launch week.

IMHO there are numerous long-standing bugs (I have two tabs open with unfinished bug reports right now) but that's a different team.
 
I'm waiting for a day when paradox developers will finally understand that without mods their games would die quickly. People wants from you new mechanics because they are interesting and they give new life into game. New country packs will never be interesting like new mechanics because there are already tons of mods which add content to South America or any minor country that have generic NF tree and usually these mods are much better than your content because their creators have better sources, they working on them few years not months. You will always lose with mods in creating new content. But you will never lose with mods in creating new mechanics because modders cant do that ( in most cases ). Players know that, modders know that, but it looks like you dont know that and that's sad.
New trees are my favorite part of any DLC. They're the primary reason I buy the DLC's. I love having extra flavor and options for every nation possible.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
I haven't had a lot of time to play the DLC but what I did play I liked. I like that the country pwcks bring historical flavor to the countries and add alt history ways to play them.

I understand that a lot of players want updated trees for Nations that are outdated or neglected but that's no reason to bash this DLC.

I look forward to future updates to SEA and Japan, Germany and the USA but in the meantime I'm going to try the new trees for fun
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Who is Domingus Bras and why doesn't he have his own portrait?
Has Fanny Edelman's portrait been altered?
Please add your portrait of the ANL council, otherwise it uses the portrait of Sweden from the previous DLC.
And please add the generals and field marshals of Norway.
Add the opportunity to bring Washington Luis Pereira to Brazil.
And will there be a separate mechanic for nationalizing provinces based on claims in the future?
 

Attachments

  • dcJc3f9kz3Y.jpg
    dcJc3f9kz3Y.jpg
    32,4 KB · Views: 0
  • BRA_alt_history_screenshot_H.png
    BRA_alt_history_screenshot_H.png
    68,3 KB · Views: 0
  • cY32uYjpCUk.jpg
    cY32uYjpCUk.jpg
    30,1 KB · Views: 0
Last edited: