Update from the Developers

[Kosaki MacTavish]

I wonder if your team/studio has a workplace rule that punish people for playing HOI4. Because it looks like there simply no on in the team spent time playing the actual game, like, ever. If you have this kind of rule, please delete it. As a modder I understand the toll on making the game, but until you play a freshly started game, you never get the perspective of what kind of shit you wrote in the codes. I learnt it the hard way.

They have their own gametesters on closed BETA sessions.

 

[Askorti]

I don't know how valuable this will be as feedback, but my opinion is thus:
If you're going to do country packs, you can go either of two ways:
a) do minor and niche nations, while also including at least some universal gameplay features and mechanics. (that might be inspired by the countries the dlc is dedicated to, but also apply for other nations)
b) do major or otherwise "popular" nations without said mechanics.

But making a DLC that is both very niche, *and* doesn't offer anything transformative for the rest of the game, I think, is simply a bad idea.

 

[Felraksis]

Greetings all,

At the risk of stating the obvious, the release of Graveyard of Empires has not gone the way we wanted. Today, I want to post a mini-retrospective that explains some of what happened leading up to the release, and how we plan on acting on the results of that and on subsequent feedback and reception moving forwards.

One of the most important parts of the pre-release process we perform in Studio Gold is the Go/No-Go meeting. This is where each discipline; QA, Tech, Design, Marketing, Business et al, present their perspective on the state of the game and expectations on the likely reception thereof. We do this so we’re all on the same page, and so we can jointly arrive at a consensus on whether to launch or not. In GoE’s case, while we identified some areas of uncertainty mostly relating to dev diary feedback, we agreed that there was nothing out of the ordinary here, and that a release at this stage was acceptable. I don’t want to diminish my role here or throw anyone under the bus: as Game Director I can overrule in either direction, and I did not - I did not see what I should have seen.

Collectively, and personally, we were quite clearly wrong. As an organization we were unaware of the issues present in this release, and this represents a serious need for some inward thinking on how we arrived at this decision, and how we reorganize ourselves to prevent it occurring again. I have few answers for you right now as we’re focusing on the short-term goals for putting Graveyard of Empires right, but we have no intention of sweeping this under the rug.

From a long term perspective, this is now the second release of a Country pack which has performed worse than expected. Review score is actually a surprisingly difficult metric to evaluate. It is better to think of it as a snapshot that, on balance, gives us an idea of how much of the community considers everything surrounding a release to be a net positive or negative. This can include price, quality, scope, overall opinion of a company, and many other things. What we tend to do is aggregate the key sentiments of negative and positive reviews and work out, on balance, where the main points for and against are. The two main negatives on Trial of Allegiance were, in first place the regional price adjustments in two specific markets, followed by scope. It’s a bit early to say for Graveyard of Empires, but first impressions are content direction & quality (as we’ve acknowledged), followed by scope.

Both regional pricing and content quality are things that I would hope are relevant only to the individual releases here. They’re localized. Scope, on the other hand, represents a clearer area where we need to offer more on a fundamental level. Scope in this context, is the nature of what we’re offering: focus trees, mechanics, 3d models; the whole package. Content-only releases are popular with some HoI fans, but on balance are not enough to resonate with the majority of the community. Once again, I don’t have an answer yet here, but we’re aware of it, and will be evaluating how to make these releases more exciting to more people.

And finally, in the short term, I want to address our plans for Graveyard of Empires. Beginning this week, we have a series of patches and updates planned for GoE as well as for the base game in order to both fix and improve content that you found lacking. I sincerely appreciate all those who have reached out with constructive suggestions. We have all hands on this endeavour right now.

Timeline:

• 12th March - Patch (Operation HEAD)
• 20th March - Patch (Operation KNEE)
• Late March - War Effort (Operation SHOULDER)
• April - Updates & Changes to GoE content

/Arheo

View attachment 1263791​

I think we can all agree that mistakes happen. I can only speak for myself but I think other people will agree: I am not mad because of a "bad" DLC.
Sure it's annoying to have a DLC not turn out great content wise and have performance issues, *but* in my opinion mistakes like theese can be forgiven. ToA wasn't great we can all agree, but looking back it could have been way worse. And you as a company go your way and fix it. That's how it should be. As longs as it is not "abandoned" this is fine. And I mean Götterdämmerung was fire in my opinion, so dampers like this sure hurt, but they aren't world ending.
I hope for your team and for the community that you can solve theese issues in a solid manner and that the future will bring us good DLCs again.
Even if a release needs to be delayed, that just shows that thought has been put into the community reaction and that a full release was deemed better than an unfinished product.

We will stay here even after hiccups like this as long as we stay a community.
Thank you Paradox

 

[Diamond2323]

I am glad to see that the disastrous release of GoE has been recognised, at the very least, but I am deeply concerned at how such a thing could even be possible. Within the first playthrough of any of the branches of the 4 GoE focus trees there are incredibly blatant issues in all areas: gameplay, localisation, QoL, etc. many of which should have been detected in the very earliest stages of creating this DLC (such as unbelievable structural issues in the RAJ Communist tree), and almost all of which should have been filtered in QA.

Doing an internal revision is all well and good, but the fact that not even the most blatant of issues were filtered by the Go/No Go meeting by any of the teams clearly shows that either the content teams are lying about the state of their work in order to avoid internal backlash, or the developers fundamentally don't care about the quality of the product and they truly do consider the product they put out to be passable, which is a truly terrifying idea.

Players should not be expected to pay $20 for a product like this. Studio Gold needs a fundamental change in the way things are structured: content packs are well and good, but they need two things to be acceptable in my eyes: firstly, a high level of quality which we have not had by any content pack yet, and secondly, a lower price. If we are only going to get focus trees and country-specific mechanics for 3 or 4 countries, we cannot rightfully be expected to pay half the price of the basegame for that!

In general I am very disappointed with the previous 4 or so DLCs released in HOI4 and their accompanying updates. Gotterdammerung was the pick of the bunch, but even that was not excellent, with the special research system adding needless bloat which has become a serious issue in the game, with more and more disconnected mechanics being added while fundamental problems remain with baseline systems, such as the economy and the barebones diplomacy system. I hope this serves as a serious wake up call to Studio Gold and to the entirety of PDS that this cannot continue happening, but I expected that after Trial of Allegiance and we were served an even worse piece of content after that, so I have little expectations.

 

[Vaipts]

Will one of the patches include this very popular concept by fans, the Omani Empire for OMA and IMO?

 

[Robspierre138138]

Is there going to be any changes to how you package together DLC in the future?

I am pretty upset that I can’t get a refund for GoE because I bought the expansion pack last year before the DLC.

 

[Dumbledood]

In terms of game direction, could we please get an updated version of this roadmap. the last time the community has been given an actual plan of where their game is going is seemingly 3 years ago.

Roadmap

As mentioned above, the 2020 roadmap for HoI4 included many things which have now either been completed or rendered unnecessary. This leaves several from podcat’s list which I believe are still important for the future of the game:

• Improvements to frontline stability (progress in NSB, more to come)
• Long term goals and strategies to guide ai (progress in NSB)
• Improving peace conferences
• Update core national focus trees with alt-history paths and more options (Italy)
• Wunderwaffen projects
• More differences between sub-ideologies and government forms
• More National Focus trees
• Make defensive warfare more fun
• Adding mechanics to limit the size of your standing army, particularly post-war etc
• Have doctrines more strongly affect division designing
• Strategic and tactical AI improvements

In addition to these items, I will of course add some of my own personal intentions:

Great Power Diplomacy
This is one area that I feel doesn’t need much explanation. More diplomatic tools are a clear area for expansion, and a careful look at how this module can be developed without interfering with the overarching global war, is likely to happen.

Economic Decision Making
The economic system is very abstracted in HoI, and I do not foresee ever making it a major part of the game loop. This said, there are elements of an industrial economy that I feel could do with being part of decision making in HoI.

Immersive/Roleplay Elements
Optional tools for making your mark on a game, and/or development of further building blocks to enhance attachment to a HoI campaign. Bring the simulation to life.

And of course, many more that I feel do not need as much of an explanation:

• Battleplanner improvements
• Advisors/internal politics improvements
• Ideological distinctions
• Multiplayer & social layer improvements & support

/Arheo

And in terms of like locations, I seriously dont see the issue with announcing which countries are going to be in the next expansions now instead of like 2 months before release. It feels from AAT the releases have had shockingly bad flaws for every country narrative and missing key things for a variety of countries.

 

[uncle sia]

Can you please also rework the entire iran tree from the ground? Ofc what i ask is impossible but the way things stand its better to just use mods for content there than this.

 

[Arheo]

I wonder if your team/studio has a workplace rule that punish people for playing HOI4. Because it looks like there simply no on in the team spent time playing the actual game, like, ever. If you have this kind of rule, please delete it. As a modder I understand the toll on making the game, but until you play a freshly started game, you never get the perspective of what kind of shit you wrote in the codes. I learnt it the hard way.

We do not. We have a lot of game fans on the team who play the game both during scheduled work sessions, and on their own time.

In terms of game direction, could we please get an updated version of this roadmap. the last time the community has been given an actual plan of where their game is going is seemingly 3 years ago.

I'll see what we can do after this situation is resolved.

And in terms of like locations, I seriously dont see the issue with announcing which countries are going to be in the next expansions now instead of like 2 months before release. It feels from AAT the releases have had shockingly bad flaws for every country narrative and missing key things for a variety of countries.

I don't think we'll ever be able to do that quite this early, but I am hoping to begin the dev diary cycle quite a lot earlier than we did for either Götterdämmerung or Graveyard of Empires in future.

 

[DEVERSUS]

Bring back the cut shared military tree!

 

[quaZa_1992]

What about the bug, that for ai their nukes disappear into thin air? or the game crash for ballistic submarines? will this be addressed in those patches?

 

[mecanojavi99]

Everyone has a different interpretation of what constitutes "major", so I will say this: the latter patch in this cycle will contain changes of a larger nature than we would normally expect in a post-release cycle. It is intended to focus more on additions and changes to the existing content than bug fixes (which will be the domain of the preceding patches).

I understand that specifics would be more useful, but in short we're still working it out. And taking on board as much feedback as we can.

Just so everyone understands exactly what to expect in the last patch, hipothetically, when you say additions and changes are we talking stuff like a comunist path for Iraq, expanding the already existing branches and extra generals, for example?

 

[OsnofSenun]

I am aware this might fall on the creative liberties you took and want as a team but Ill leave some thoughts here.

When working with minor countries there should always be a way to avoid civil war a good example is Portugal (I think everyone enjoys it) and the only civil war thats forced is heavily counterbalanced by virtually handing you all of Iberia and its industry (cored).

When playing small countries you are already severely weakened having scripted civil wars I believe has the effect of pushing newer players away and disentivizing choosing certain paths (because they are inherently worse).

Additionally this is a problem with hoi4 focus trees in general but 70 day focuses should really be less frequent especially in small countries. I dont think we need content until 1945/49 I dont think you should be afraid of having content packed into a smaller timeframe then just siting watching 70 days pass for 2 factories.


Another problem with this dlc was resources most of these countries lack them and dont have the industry to buy them either giving them more industry or resources would help them greatly.


Ps: Entirely a pet peeve of mine the Stalinist USSR should be allowed to core eastern poland (Ukraine and Belarus) and the baltic states when you take into consideration the cores in the other paths.

PPS: the peace deals should allow you (once more)to hand territory to puppets you establish in the ongoing peacedeal.

 

[Nnorm]

Corporate jargon aside, this is 4th "we are sorry, we acknowledge mistakes, we will improve" annoucement i see from Paradox. There have been tons of bugs reported for years that have gone unaddressed, it would be nice to finally do something about that, and this kind of posts has zero credibility.

 

[Daimyo Vader]

I think it's great you guys are willing to take responsibility regarding the GoE's poor release. I think the idea of a country pack is great, but what we get in its value also matters to us. Yes I am aware the intent of a country pack is to not add any major mechanics so not complaining about that. No doubt you are aware there's games out there like Cyberpunk and Total War: Pharaoh that had very bad releases but later work made them so much better and I see GoE and certain parts of Hoi4 as being in that situation. In the future, if you guys need to delay the release of an Expansion or Country Pack just make sure its good for release, we understand. Regardless of how this DLC did turn out, you fellas did not deserve the death threats in relation to the Raj content, especially over the Tibet coring.

I don't know how much you guys plan to change in the GoE content. But here's my simplified view on it since others have given very in-depth responses:
If Chile got a large focus tree, I think Afghanistan and Iraq should have as well.

Afghanistan: Country needs a lot more to do especially in regards to allowing it the ability to be strong and flavorful.
- Tree seems to depend too much on Germany staying Fascist or Soviets staying Communist.
- Civil Wars in a very mountainous country with poor industry can hurt much harder than intended.
- I'm surprised Afghanistan didn't qualify for the Silk Road Empire idea.
- I don't think Afghanistan should be stuck with choosing between Fascist Cores in India or Communist Cores in Central Asia. Their country is in a weird situation ethnically so a lot of possiblities.

Iraq: Country needs a lot more to do though what is in the content now is headed in the right direction.
- Needs a Communism tree and a better Fascist tree, also needs a lot more to do than just forming Arabia or restoring Kurdistan.
- Historical path is the right idea, but more should be done with it.

Iran: Nothing much to say, but Iran seems like it would qualify for more "demanding areas" focuses rather than just war declarations (Ex. Iran demands Iraq submit/allow annexation!)
- Their communist tree does feel bland and could use as much immersion as the Fascist and Non-Aligned paths do. You'd think there'd be Iranian Fascists who'd want to also restore Persian Empire as a second option (Greater Iran is also good for Fascists)
- Idk why Persia and Greater Iran can't integrate most of if not all of Afghanistan and Pakistan?

British Raj: I think the ideas of the paths are good but need some tweaking.
- Implement a path where India wants to stay part of Britain and improve its own position like the other Commonwealth countries do.
- Allow India more opportunities to ceasefire the British like at the start of the Mughal tree.
- Split the Silk Road part of Mughal tree off so players are not locked out of attacking Iran should they not have Sinkiang.
- (Not sure about this one) If possible, allow India an event depending on the path to release Burma like the Aden event since the split didn't happen until 1937.

Other Notes:
- No doubt you're all aware of the "That's Sikh" achievement being impossible to get right now
- While Britain guaranteeing Iraq makes some sense, it also doesn’t. Especially for game play it hinders Iran's and Turkey's expansion. Maybe a Monroe Doctrine-like system for them could work? Tis fine if ya keep it or remove it or create more focuses that remove it.
- A lot of 70 day focuses vs 35 day focuses in the India tree (partially in the Iran tree) makes efforts to industrialize before conquest very difficult like in Trial of Allegiance
- I'm not sure how to feel about the mandates being semi-autonomous now and existing outside of DLC. Syria can't even join Vichy France anymore like historically, they were critical for Axis supply during the Anglo-Iraq War.
- Lastly, I have no idea if this was in the original plan so if not I will desist, but I am surprised you guys didn't take the opportunity to make trees for Bhutan and Nepal in this DLC. The priority is fixing the currently made GoE trees so up to you.

I wish you guys luck and look forward to what is being planned for the upcoming patches!

 

[Ksiezzycc]

I ran into issue when staging a coup in India, both as fascist and communist. When i staged a coup side I supported don't have entracted any economy/trade/mobilization laws resulting in them having 0 manpower and I cannot trade with them. Glad that Netherlands was fixed thou.

 

[Nor William]

I hope we will get DD like AAT again that we can see from the begining of concept design.

 

[Rachidelson]

GoE is a priority now, but please revisit Trial of Allegiance sometime. I could actually provide suggestions on small changes to the brazilian focus tree with sources.

 

[Geredis]

Any thoughts on: A) The power-creep discussion that's been coming up? Or B) The general opinion surrounding the theming and/or nature of the alt-history pathways? I'd love for some actual insight into how/why you're making some of these alt-history decisions because so many of them feel like they're flying right in the face of even nominal historical possibility.

 

[PDX_Gorion]

Other Notes:
- No doubt you're all aware of the "That's Sikh" achievement being impossible to get right now

That one should be fixed with the wednesday patch!