1.8.7?

[Muramasa]

So just had a patch, what changes does it bring?

 

[NATOaster]

It just added the new ship cosmetic pack available if you buy the expansion pack.

Dev confirmed that there will be no 1.8.7 and all focus is on 1.9 for now, releasing on 17/6/2025.

Pretty frustrated given that 1.8 still has nonfunctional features such as the lacklustre Indian content and movements still being broken. Doesn't fill me with a great deal of confidence going forwards because I feel like I paid for a product that was left broken. Going to have to mull over EP2.

 

[Adrized]

Yeah that’s disappointing. I was hoping for at least one more hotfix.

 

[lilcritt]

I can’t believe they left India like it is and expect us to buy another expansion pack largely hinging on similar flavour content. Let alone everything else. Very disappointing.

Paradox botched 2 India dlcs. I’m surprised it’s not that community that’s rioting lol

 

[Jimboy93]

I can’t believe they left India like it is and expect us to buy another expansion pack largely hinging on similar flavour content. Let alone everything else. Very disappointing.

Paradox botched 2 India dlcs. I’m surprised it’s not that community that’s rioting lol

Whats wrong with India?

 

[47pik]

Somebody explain to me why the minor version number being 8 or 9 matters to you as the consumer.

I guess it breaks saves, but is that really the end of the world?

 

[za3tarani]

Pretty frustrated given that 1.8 still has nonfunctional features such as the lacklustre Indian content and movements still being broken. Doesn't fill me with a great deal of confidence going forwards because I feel like I paid for a product that was left broken. Going to have to mull over EP2.

can you enlighten us other what the issues are with current vic3 version? (i am currently not playing vic3, thats why im asking)

 

[NATOaster]

can you enlighten us other what the issues are with current vic3 version? (i am currently not playing vic3, thats why im asking)

Main issues to me are:

Movements (a core feature added with 1.8) currently don't work properly. A decent number of movements such as Socialist, Communist, Abolitionist movements basically never spawn; some, such as the Peasant Movement never despawn; and some such as the Reactionary and Communist movements have either strangely tuned or outright incorrect pop attraction (the Communist movement attracts the literal opposite pops to what it says in game due to coding errors), this is hard to fix with a mod because it's difficult to see what the dev intention is.

Another issue with the 1.8 content is that India's narrative content (which I'm one of the few people who actually likes it, the EIC is really fun but marred in the issues I'm mentioning) is incredibly unrewarding. A lot of it feels like you're completing a JE so that a negative thing doesn't happen, rather than doing them for a reward.

Then the issue that compounds these two is that some bugs have been exacerbated (the changes to how revolutions work have made random states become incorporated, this affects AI weighting in trade states as well as infamy when conquering), and additionally - the AI can't use the content! The AI will consistently fail India's 2 core JEs in the Sepoy Mutiny and Home Rule because the AI is functionally inactive in a game and does not change laws. AI British India is incredibly passive and will never expand the Raj more than once, and oftentimes never expands it at all - it will even drop it's interest in Persia (where it maintains claims) to look at other strategic regions. The AI also cannot handle movements, it does not understand that it should not be passing a law that puts radicalism above 100% and yet does this incredibly often for unimpactful laws, >50% of my games I see a Prussian Radical Revolt because they were adamant about passing Secret Police for some reason.

Somebody explain to me why the minor version number being 8 or 9 matters to you as the consumer.

I don't know what youre asking here, we're asking for a patch before a future content update because the last content update we were sold doesn't work. It personally feels kind of bad for me that I buy something that doesn't work properly and have to wait 7 and a half months for it to maybe be fixed.

 

[KopiG]

I am also super disappointed that there will be no 1.8.7. They really downplayed the bugs we have in 1.8.6. Now we have to wait till 1.9 till the middle of June which is unacceptable in my opinion. So my posts:

The problem isnt new information about 1.9, the problem is the crazy bugs which exist in the game and makes it borderline unplayable (stopped playing) and refusing to address them in a patch.
Just to mention a few:

1. Privatization is broken when a resource is maxed out.
2. Coop Ownership has been broken since 1.8 due to nationally owned levels
3. Various wrong defines making the game do many wrong decisions.

Regarding the PC freezes: I did downgrade and it broke my Windows installation. I had various UI scaling issues and I wasnt able to install any updates after that. So I dont think this should be preferred solution. I had to completely reinstall my Windows 11. Did this a few days ago. We would need a patch to fix this issue as it is a critical bug.

I very much love to hear this but I do feel a little bit disappointed at the same time that we probably have to wait months for these fixes as it seems that you guys wont be releasing a new patch but will release only 1.9 which will contain these fixes. I mean these arent minor bugs but major issues which have been in the game since 1.8 came out and were never fixed. So now we have to wait for 1.9 for another major version? This is a bit weird.

Which they completely downplayed:

I agree, some of those are major, but certainly not all of them.
That put aside, it's always a question where you draw the line for where you want to spend the limited time you have available.
Any update we put out costs us a fair amount of overhead time spent on it, for example to verify fixes, backend setup, creating a changelog, posting updates, ensuring release goes well etc. etc.
So all time we spend on releasing a hotfix will take away from the next release in some shape.
Here we also have a decent amount of issues related to trade which is undergoing substantial enough changes that a lot of this will need to be revisited anyway. So we'd put out a hotfix for something that is going to be irrelevant a few months down the road.
Hope this makes it a bit more understandable.

While I did react to this post as being helpful explaining the "why's" I completely disagree with this. Middle of June? Really?

 

[za3tarani]

Main issues to me are:

Movements (a core feature added with 1.8) currently don't work properly. A decent number of movements such as Socialist, Communist, Abolitionist movements basically never spawn; some, such as the Peasant Movement never despawn; and some such as the Reactionary and Communist movements have either strangely tuned or outright incorrect pop attraction (the Communist movement attracts the literal opposite pops to what it says in game due to coding errors), this is hard to fix with a mod because it's difficult to see what the dev intention is.

Another issue with the 1.8 content is that India's narrative content (which I'm one of the few people who actually likes it, the EIC is really fun but marred in the issues I'm mentioning) is incredibly unrewarding. A lot of it feels like you're completing a JE so that a negative thing doesn't happen, rather than doing them for a reward.

Then the issue that compounds these two is that some bugs have been exacerbated (the changes to how revolutions work have made random states become incorporated, this affects AI weighting in trade states as well as infamy when conquering), and additionally - the AI can't use the content! The AI will consistently fail India's 2 core JEs in the Sepoy Mutiny and Home Rule because the AI is functionally inactive in a game and does not change laws. AI British India is incredibly passive and will never expand the Raj more than once, and oftentimes never expands it at all - it will even drop it's interest in Persia (where it maintains claims) to look at other strategic regions. The AI also cannot handle movements, it does not understand that it should not be passing a law that puts radicalism above 100% and yet does this incredibly often for unimpactful laws, >50% of my games I see a Prussian Radical Revolt because they were adamant about passing Secret Police for some reason.

right, thanks... i guess back imperator for me then

btw, ai not being able to play the game, this has been the case since vic3 released.

 

[lilcritt]

Whats wrong with India?

It’s not fun or rewarding, instead obtusely punishing and frustrating. It’s lacklustre in its scope and content (JEs, decisions) and the AI cannot handle it leading to a worse experience than just not having it in the game.

 

[47pik]

I don't know what youre asking here, we're asking for a patch before a future content update because the last content update we were sold doesn't work. It personally feels kind of bad for me that I buy something that doesn't work properly and have to wait 7 and a half months for it to maybe be fixed.

As long as the issues are fixed, what does it matter what the minor version on the patch is?

What is the meaningful difference to you of having a 1.8.8 patch vs a 1.9.0? Either way, it’s a new patch that solves the bug.

The only difference I see is that 1.9.0 breaks saves, but I can’t say I really care about that.

 

[khedas]

Thank you for your reply. I have held off on buying Vic3 so far because of the game's problems and now that the base game is 70% off on Steam I wondered if it was finally worth getting it with whatever DLC I deemed necessary.

The issues you pointed out show that this game still has a myriad of problems and, worse of all, that the AI cannot handle the new features (a problem I suspect will plague the Market rework).

I will return to waiting for a proper version of Vic3, but I won't lie that I am starting to despair that this game will never be in a functional state...

 

[KopiG]

It’s not fun or rewarding, instead obtusely punishing and frustrating. It’s lacklustre in its scope and content (JEs, decisions) and the AI cannot handle it leading to a worse experience than just not having it in the game.

I have to agree. I tried East India Company once but the bordergore even if its realistic is insane. I cant handle that. Also keeping track of the "annexation princely state button" is also madness. I really dislike it.

 

[NATOaster]

As long as the issues are fixed, what does it matter what the minor version on the patch is?

What is the meaningful difference to you of having a 1.8.8 patch vs a 1.9.0? Either way, it’s a new patch that solves the bug.

The only difference I see is that 1.9.0 breaks saves, but I can’t say I really care about that.

Because the conversation isn't about what patch the changes should come on, it's about the prioritisation of new content while the previous installment of content doesn't work

 

[47pik]

Because the conversation isn't about what patch the changes should come on, it's about the prioritisation of new content while the previous installment of content doesn't work

Dog, the topic itself contains nothing but a patch version, and all conversation is about the patch versions.

The idea that all work on new feature should stop for bugfixes is ludicrous - that's simply not how software of any variety works. I make software for a living - believe me, nobody at any company is stopping business-critical feature work just because there are bugs in the previous release - they get handled in parallel. And depending on the nature of the feature work, or the bugs, it is sometimes impractical to release bugfixes separate from the new features because of changes to the overall codebase.

My point here is, what is the core issue? Because fixating on patch versions is silly. The idea that all bugs present in 1.8.x need to be fixed before the 1.9 minor revision is completely absurd. If the issue is the time between patches, then say that - 7 months is a long time to wait, but ya'll be acting like you'd be mad if 1.9 dropped tomorrow because it isn't 1.8.8.

Fixating on version numbers as a consumer makes no sense, and you are setting yourself up for disappointment if you hold unrealistic views of software development. If a hypothetical 1.8.8 were released, all that would mean is that the developers spent extra time and effort trying to backport fixes from the 1.9 branch that were already implemented, which may even introduce new bugs.

Again, if you have actual tangible complaints, make them, but the version number is irrelevant here.

 

[lilcritt]

No one cares for the actual version number like that. It’s what they represent and how there’s been no meaningful update to 1.8 that fixed large issues to that version/DLC for this long.

No addressing of the issues either.

 

[47pik]

No one cares for the actual version number like that. It’s what they represent and how there’s been no meaningful update to 1.8 that fixed large issues to that version/DLC for this long.

No addressing of the issues either.

This is what I’m trying to say though - the linear numbers are an illusion! They don’t represent anything about the internal process! They only represent release order and semantic information about compatibility. If the issue is that it’ll be 7 months without a patch, then say that’s the issue, because the number does not represent what you think it does.

No matter what, bug fixes and feature work will be done in parallel. That’s the industry. Hit that red X button on my posts all you want - it doesn’t change this basic FACT of software development. Nobody cares if you like it, that’s what we do. Work on the next release has already started on other branches before the current release even comes out most of the time.

If you got your hypothetical 1.8.8 release it wouldn’t mean they worked out the bugs before developing new features. It would mean that they pushed bug fixes to the 1.8.x branch.

In the immediate aftermath of 1.8 this was probably fairly easy to do, but as features diverge there is more and more overhead in continuing to maintain fixes across versions. Presumably PDX reached the critical mass at which point it wasn’t worth it to keep supporting 1.8 a while back, which is why there haven’t been more patches.

This is not abnormal. It happens all the time in software - I’m doing it right now at my job. It’s simply not worth it for me to do double the work to support my last release - the fixes are gonna come on the next version.

Releases are linear, development is not.

 

[Prescott_London]

I have been hoping for a new bug fix for a couple of months now.