• 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 We don’t usually consider design choices or outdated content as bugs unless they cause the first statement to apply, since that evaluation is often subjective.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:
I am always surprised by the price discussions (except for regional pricings ofc). 15 EUR divided by the hours of gameplay I will add since the next DLC = by the time of the next expancion rolls out less then an cent per hour of gameplay. I'm already down to less then an EUR / hour I played since release. Compared to other games money for hour of gameplay, you're devilishly cheap and I will never not apprechiate it.

To the content of the DLC, I was one of the 'why should we need this? germany rework now!' crowd and I'm positivly surprised. It added dept to a part I knewer knew needed some, so far I've only played Brazil (had to get the Bad Ending Achievement) and Argentinia and I'm very pleased.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I said it in my review on Steam, but I can repeat it here too: My main gripe is with the price for the content. And I do not think it's unfair to compare this DLC with other DLC in terms of pricing for content. You say it's unfair to compare the price of a country pack today to the price of content from years ago. Okay. Let's compare it to recent DLC then. Your latest expansion, Arms Against Tyranny costs 20€. In fact, every single big expansion costs 20€.

You can't possibly tell me that you consider the scope and amount of content of Trials of Allegiance to be just shy of a full expansion. No way, no how. 10€, like all the other country packs (with the exception of Together for Victory) would have been a much more reasonable price to ask. (And I can actually understand Together for Victory costing 15€, since it added more than the other two country packs after it).

Frankly, I do not see how it is in any way unreasonable to compare the scope and price of releases with one another and expect consistency in terms of pricing and content.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I’m glad dlc like this are being made and I enjoyed this one well enough. It certainly doesn’t deserve the horrible reviews it’s been getting by people who it isn’t really for like those who will never want to play in SA or who think you should only use mods for trees (though those aren’t the only nevative reviews by any means). I do think it’s a missed step to used shared military trees and that (in part due to it) theres a very sizeable power creep issue here thats gonna make it hard to safely slot (for example) Brazil naturally into a mp game as things stand.

I’m really hoping the next few dlc focus on countries that played a major role in war world 2 and its build up though. Yeah, if you scan my play history you won’t see any time spent on Siam, East Indies, Iran, etc but that’s because they have no tree rather than a lack of interest. I’d be thrilled if Belgium, Austria, Siam, DEI, Mongolia (USSR really needs a historical friend to hand out with in mp), etc get added within the next few releases. Redoing or significantly overhauling Norway would also be highly appreciated too, but I get why that’s probably a low priority for you given what doing that would mean.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
It really depends on the scope. Minor changes and additions aren't something we'd usually charge for. If a scenario arises where the entire tree is removed, and a new one redeveloped in its place, I expect this would be a separate purchase, yes. The process of development is not free, and while we can sometimes find ways to include smaller changes alongside other, paid content, a full focus tree overhaul is a major resource investment. You're not wrong though, it is a tricky situation, and that is why we haven't done this so far.
So if I understand correctly, given a product purchased with dlc content, in this case a country and the focus tree. This is outdated...etc, so it will be reworked, will you replace the old one completely with a new one, so even the person who previously bought the dlc that contained the converted content will have to pay? Is this some kind of bad joke?

The first time you have to pay again for the revision of old dlc content, there would be much harsher reactions from the players (protests, drastic reduction of the player pool.....etc). But I think the development team is also aware of this and are you prepared for this?
I don't think it will be very pleasant.;)


I know a development requires a lot of resources
No one likes to work for free (this is a quote from you).

However, there is some problem with this:
- This content has already been paid for once....
- It was recommended to set up a separate team that would directly deal only with the conversion of old content and fixing errors, while the rest of the development team could develop the new content that would generate income. But of course nothing came of it.
- The Custodian team of the Stellaris game, which specifically deals with converting old content, works for free according to them...


As for the new dlc, I haven't bought it,. But I have an opinion, if it costs so much compared to the previous country pack, shouldn't something have been included as compensation? For example, converting a lot of old content.....
Since what was included is not very much and as I read the forum I had to realize that it was not sufficiently thought out (Monroe doctrine) and contained quite a few errors.

But at least the error correction was done quickly this time, which I must say is positive. Communication has also improved a lot compared to before. But this excessive profit orientation could still be improved, because according to the signs, a lot of players don't like it. Just as an example, I would like to mention that there are game publishers who don't even charge 5 euros for an add-on of the same size as the ToA dlc. Well, they almost really work for free!:oops:
 
  • 10
Reactions:
I am simply just not interested in a SA DLC, I have no intention of buying it or have ever wanted to play any SA country in HOI4.

Look forward to see what's on the horizon with HOI4 though.
 
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
So if I understand correctly, given a product purchased with dlc content, in this case a country and the focus tree. This is outdated...etc, so it will be reworked, will you replace the old one completely with a new one, so even the person who previously bought the dlc that contained the converted content will have to pay? Is this some kind of bad joke?

The first time you have to pay again for the revision of old dlc content, there would be much harsher reactions from the players (protests, drastic reduction of the player pool.....etc). But I think the development team is also aware of this and are you prepared for this?
I don't think it will be very pleasant.;)


I know a development requires a lot of resources
No one likes to work for free (this is a quote from you).

However, there is some problem with this:
- This content has already been paid for once....
- It was recommended to set up a separate team that would directly deal only with the conversion of old content and fixing errors, while the rest of the development team could develop the new content that would generate income. But of course nothing came of it.
- The Custodian team of the Stellaris game, which specifically deals with converting old content, works for free according to them...


As for the new dlc, I haven't bought it,. But I have an opinion, if it costs so much compared to the previous country pack, shouldn't something have been included as compensation? For example, converting a lot of old content.....
Since what was included is not very much and as I read the forum I had to realize that it was not sufficiently thought out (Monroe doctrine) and contained quite a few errors.

But at least the error correction was done quickly this time, which I must say is positive. Communication has also improved a lot compared to before. But this excessive profit orientation could still be improved, because according to the signs, a lot of players don't like it. Just as an example, I would like to mention that there are game publishers who don't even charge 5 euros for an add-on of the same size as the ToA dlc. Well, they almost really work for free!:oops:
The tone of your message is quite frankly incredibly rude and unpleasant. Couched in language insulting the developers and making assumptions of them while comparing them to other companies and other teams.

Arheo perfectly explained that development of anything has a cost that needs to be met from somewhere nor does the Custodian team on Stellaris rework large dlc content on the scale of HOI4 focus trees.

You're entitled to your opinion and views but you should consider in future how you choose to phrase and voice them.
 
  • 10
Reactions:
Can you elaborate what makes focus treed and events for you "low quality"? And what Vic3 in particular does better?
- Vargas was the leader of the country, not the military, the non-aligned party should be called "Estado Novo" not "Army".
- "Decree Number 37" puts an end to all partisan political activity in the country, but in the game we have a separate focus that bans parties (Prohibit Political Parties), and this decree has the same purpose, these 2 focuses should be unified, Dutra only overthrew Vargas after the Second World War, but in the game it was possible to do so in 1939.
- There should have been events after the parties were banned, like the integralist coup attempt, Olga Benario being sent to Germany in 1936, Plínio Salgado (Leader of the Integralistas) being arrested in 1939, Potengi Conference where FDR and Vargas meet There's even a photo of that meeting.
- And basically what victoria 3 does best is everything, the narrative, the historical events, the territory in victoria 3 are all correct while in hoi4 some states in the northeast are unified, other states never existed for example Ponta Porã and some others were only exist a long time later (Tocantins).
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
So if I understand correctly, given a product purchased with dlc content, in this case a country and the focus tree. This is outdated...etc, so it will be reworked, will you replace the old one completely with a new one, so even the person who previously bought the dlc that contained the converted content will have to pay? Is this some kind of bad joke?

The first time you have to pay again for the revision of old dlc content, there would be much harsher reactions from the players (protests, drastic reduction of the player pool.....etc). But I think the development team is also aware of this and are you prepared for this?
I don't think it will be very pleasant.;)


I know a development requires a lot of resources
No one likes to work for free (this is a quote from you).

However, there is some problem with this:
- This content has already been paid for once....
- It was recommended to set up a separate team that would directly deal only with the conversion of old content and fixing errors, while the rest of the development team could develop the new content that would generate income. But of course nothing came of it.
- The Custodian team of the Stellaris game, which specifically deals with converting old content, works for free according to them...


As for the new dlc, I haven't bought it,. But I have an opinion, if it costs so much compared to the previous country pack, shouldn't something have been included as compensation? For example, converting a lot of old content.....
Since what was included is not very much and as I read the forum I had to realize that it was not sufficiently thought out (Monroe doctrine) and contained quite a few errors.

But at least the error correction was done quickly this time, which I must say is positive. Communication has also improved a lot compared to before. But this excessive profit orientation could still be improved, because according to the signs, a lot of players don't like it. Just as an example, I would like to mention that there are game publishers who don't even charge 5 euros for an add-on of the same size as the ToA dlc. Well, they almost really work for free!:oops:
Firstly Arheo is pretty clearly speaking terms of hypothetical and also clarifies that this difficulty is exactly why they haven't done this kind of overhaul so far; precisely because they can't find a way to sell it that doesn't rob some previous DLC of their value.

Secondly: As for something included in the new DLC as compensation, the previous country pack had three trees and was $10. This one has five trees and is $15 (even if you want to argue two of those are smaller, they are still larger than Greece's tree from BftB). It could be argued it should still be less but there is markedly more content here than in the other two country packs.

Also, very weird tone that sounds like you're a mobster trying to get a protection racket going lol
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I love the work you put into the game and the expansion of content. This release did exactly what I expected, made South America interesting in the base game. I'm happy to support continued development of a game I truly enjoy.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Dear Hoi IV team!
First of all, I want to thank you for your hard work and the time and effort you put into the game.
I personally do not understand all the complaints that were made, which is why I would like to put some of these points into perspective:

1. Regarding the fact that people expected something else of the DLC: There were plenty of Dev Diaries, even videos released before the release, which anybody could watch and make up their mind as to if the DLC is interesting or not. There is no point complaining about expecting something else of the DLC after buying it, because in that case it's entirely the buyers fault.
2. Price: In my opinion, the price is absolutely okay! I myself am a mod developer and I know how time intensive it is to create a focus tree, with everything that comes with it (art, text, planning, etc.) Therefore, the few bucks that go on the DLC are nothing and is well deserved for the amount of work put into it. And again: if you don't like it, simply don't buy it. On my side I can only say that the focus trees have given me lots of hours of fun and exploring the paths has been a pleasure, just like in the previous DLCs.
3. I don't get why people don't understand what the difference between a focus tree pack and a major expansion is. Other titles have exactly the same system and it seems to be working.


I just wanted you to know that there are plenty of people supporting you and the game and we are always happy for new content. Thank you and keep up the good work!
 
  • 9
Reactions:
Arheo, I thank you for your transparency regarding this release, and sharing the development team’s thought processes on some of the controversies surrounding this release. I should start off by admitting that I did not end up purchasing the DLC, primarily because I don’t have much interest in South America in the context of HOI4. Therefore, I cannot comment on the mechanical quality of the DLC itself. While I understand peoples’ complaints about the pricing, I for one purchase any HOI4 DLC regardless of price if I find the subject matter to be interesting. This was the first focus tree DLC I skipped out on. Personally, I think the flow of WWII in HOI4 works decently enough, and the last thing I want to have to do is play “whack-a-mole” against Brazil or any other South American country that joins the enemy faction at the last second, magically becomes a major, and delays my peace deal by 1-3 years of game time. When the time comes to develop the Middle East, Asia, or rework some of the European countries, you can rest assured that I’ll preorder.

One thing that strikes me in your writeup is your revelation of the community’s apparent distaste for shared focus tree branches. To me, this makes sense as a time-saving measure, provided there’s still enough flavor to keep it immersive. To my memory, no one complained when the Baltic countries got shared industrial focuses (except maybe on grounds of them being overpowered given the historical size/relevance of those nations). Likewise, I never saw many complaints regarding the shared foreign policy trees for the Chinese warlords – the issues with those has always been more about having to micromanage your relations with majors and potentially getting locked out of further progression. If the "cost" of having two or three regional minors getting unique focus trees is a shared industrial focus tree, I'll gladly accept that if it means an extra country or two getting content.

Since the team seems to be reading the comments here, which I appreciate, I’ll list some of the complaints I have with the current state of HOI4. To me, these are all much more important than whatever issues people may have with TOA:

  • Glitches/wonky things happening out of nowhere that ruin Ironman achievement runs. In a recent game, I puppeted a sliver of France after the Axis capitulated, only to watch in real time as Free France magically absorbed my puppet with zero say from me. Critically, this gave me a land border with the Allies, which I was actively trying to avoid.
  • Old/outdated focus trees. India and South Africa are easily the biggest offenders in my opinion.
  • Inaccurate borders - these ruin my sense of immersion lolol. Vichy France is an example of this.
  • Lingering issues with the peace conference system – particularly how majors often end up exiled on faraway islands and how you have no control over what happens to impassable states in the Sahara or elsewhere.
  • How the MIO system is basically busywork with a predetermined meta with no reason to differ from the same options every game. Compare this to something like Policies or Religion in Civ V/VI, where some of your options might be a little more niche than others, but all of them are potentially more useful than others depending on the map/civilization/victory condition.
  • The naval system being inaccessibly convoluted, even as someone who has played the game since 2017.
  • EDIT: The espionage system also requires far too much micromanagement. I've always thought it was very odd that you control individual spies, and having to break them out of prison every six months is incredibly tedious and not fun at all.

I hope your team isn’t discouraged, I still have a lot of fun with HOI4, as do many of us! People tend to get negative and defensive about things they’re passionate about.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I love the idea of country packs. This one still have potential if certain things will be fixed. Chile is perfect probably the best focus tree yet. Argentina is fun, Uruguay need a communist path and Paraguay could benefit if PCP could become ruling party (Both countries need a few more generals and admirals). I had already elaborated on Brazil and after playing it my opinion still stands. (Thank you for Chile and Argentina <3)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
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.
In that case, I don't believe they'll be any better. There is simply no value in putting down money for content that modders have been doing much better for years.

It would be different if Paradox-made content was a sign of unmatchable quality, or had a sense of consistency with other base-game content. However, from what I've read of this release, many trees are not up to the standard of mod focuses (copy/pasted miliary tree?), and the gap in content quality from launch to today is staggering, making vanilla a mishmash of old and new content with little consistency.
 
  • 5
  • 3
Reactions:
In the long term (1944+), Brazil and Argentina are overpower. So it is inevitable that it will receive a nerf in the near future.

In the short term, his debuff makes sense. If the underdeveloped country suddenly decided to fully militarize in 1936, it would take a few years to generate results. Industry and research are not created overnight, even under an authoritarian government.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I appreciate your transparency. It takes courage to face the community and make yourself vulnerable in this fashion. So I will attempt to reciprocate the same respect while offering my own criticism. Which I will add into a negative review, on steam, while also reiterating your respectable and courageous diary. I waited to review on steam for this reason; I expected the developers to address this in some fashion.

The conclusion of the negative reviews, as you have stated, are overwhelmingly related to it's price tag. I remain unconvinced that the regional pricing policy is an effective argument to justify the cost of this DLC. It is a country pack, not an expansion, as you have stated yourself. In previous diaries (see BFTB) you made it very clear what a country pack is and what it is not. Yet you did not learn from BFTB. TOA remained priced exceptionally high, comparable to an expansion. The community made it very apparent that it was displeased with the pricing then. This time it is been actioned effectively with reviews.

What went wrong? The country pack was priced too high. The BFTB debacle was pushed aside by the applicable departments. The result is overwhelmingly negative feedback that roots to pricing for the majority of reviews. This is further compounded by locking preorder bonus tracks behind a paywall. Many of us preorder knowing we will be disappointed with a particular DLC solely because if we do not, we will never have the chance to have that track in our vanilla paylist. We are aware and prepared to leave a negative review upon launch. We are simply dedicated players that refuse to be locked out of content, even if it means overpriced DLC that we know we will not be satisfied with. Negative reviews are inevitable due to that business practice and will continue. Though, Paradox's bottom line benefits from this practice at the expense of consumer satisfaction. It results in a conflict of desired outcome between departments. Profit, or accolade?

If preorder bonuses were not permanently locked behind the preorder paywall, the reviews would trend more positively than what you are experiencing. I would not have preordered the DLC. I would have waited for a sale and then enjoyed the country pack for a reasonable price. I would have then left a positive review while also stating to others "wait for a sale". The players who wanted this content would have paid full price, while also leaving a positive review.

Conclusion. Change your preorder practices and that will help mitigate the price tag issue if you refuse to change the price tag. Or, change the price to reflect the content we receive. A country pack, not an expansion. Both result in more positive results, the choice is yours. One results in a lower profit margin, one is higher and consumer satisfaction will correlate accordingly though remain more positive then what you are experiencing now.

Final notes: As a consumer, fan and dedicated player for well over a decade. I value this country pack at $5.99 USD. Modders have made richer "country packs" and this has also been stated in reviews. Though I must stress my respect for you and the other developers for addressing this as an issue. I only hope that I have helped shed light on what went wrong, why it went wrong and what can be done to mitigate this in the future.
 
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think it's also fair to say that our fans have been asking for South America far more than I've seen anyone ask for Dutch East Indies or Egypt, ie.
Ah yeah, fair enough. Us Southeast Asians at that time failed to convince why our region is historically more important than Middle East or South America.

I myself only discovered the interesting side of my nation's Interwar-WW2 history in early 2022 when reading George McTurnan Kahin's "Nationalism and Revolution in Indonesia", which prompts me to create East Indies Reworked in the first place. I did not know much about it beforehand because our government's educational curriculum skipped the 1928-1941 part of our history even in highschool, which i would name it "The Silent Era".
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
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.

This quote right here is the main issue, and shows a couple limiting beliefs that need to be questioned by the dev team:

- That each region should exist in isolation from the rest and each country isolated from the rest. World Wars should be global, not restricted to Europe because armchair historians think it was. Just because Latin America is not a regio they want to play as does not mean it should be useless to them. These reworked countries SHOULD be useful to the player regardless if they are playing that country. Mexico has a focus for a latin American alliance and that relies on strong allies. A German player for example should WANT these expansion because it opens up more gameplay and strategies.

- That Latin America didnt have a chance to be interesting when it could have been a whole expansion that fixed terrain, added faction roles and diplomacy between members, or fixed the economy. This expansion was the OPPORTUNITY to make people care and change their minds and have them think about new ways to do things in the next playthrough.

- Country packs have a bad history of needing to be fixed in later expansions, so why not just dump country packs and do full expansions? You will need to come back to these trees anyway.

No one boycotted MTG because it had Mexico in it or because no one wanted America content. Players loved the reworks and new mechanics. Players dont care about specific trees the way you think they do, they care about how they FEEL playing the game and MTG delivered even if you never played an MTG nation.

By limiting DLC to "buy this if you want X country" you are limiting yourself, your sales, and creating problems that need to be fixed later.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
Transparent and direct, with limited corporate doublespeak. Accepts responsibility, while also parsing through toxicity with professionalism. A well-written post—I particularly enjoy the formatting.

While I am sure there are some potential improvements to the release, I think you communicated very clearly what you were delivering—hence why I myself have chosen not to purchase at this time.

I don’t know how much better you all could have explained things, or how much more you could have delivered, as I fear that the sense of entitlement that gaming is rife with currently may overwhelm anything you all put out.
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions: