Mi primera impresion,malisima,el juego no rula ahora que le he instalado el nuevo dlc....No llega ni a cargar el launcher....he borrado,reinstalado,verificado cache etc...y nada ¿alguna solucion?
-
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.
Mucha gente esta teniendo los mismos problemas que tu,solo habra que esperar a un hotfix, cosa que esperaba yo hoy
Yo he vuelto a la beta anterior para una MP y al volver a poner el juego con el parche actual ya ni me sale el lanzador...
Intentad esto:
Please do a full clean re-install:
- move any valued save games elsewhere
- "delete local content" in Steam-EU4
- manually delete all files and folders left under Steam/EU4 AND Documents/Paradox/EU4
- re-install game in Steam, run a Steam Verify when done.
- start the game with no mods active and test
Teneis que borrar por steam y todo archivo del EU4, tanto dentro de la carpeta de steam como el de los mods.
A mi me salió el lanzador para colgarse...y nada. Esto tiene toda la pinta de fallo gordo del parche.
Intentad esto:
Please do a full clean re-install:
- move any valued save games elsewhere
- "delete local content" in Steam-EU4
- manually delete all files and folders left under Steam/EU4 AND Documents/Paradox/EU4
- re-install game in Steam, run a Steam Verify when done.
- start the game with no mods active and test
Teneis que borrar por steam y todo archivo del EU4, tanto dentro de la carpeta de steam como el de los mods.
A mi me salió el lanzador para colgarse...y nada. Esto tiene toda la pinta de fallo gordo del parche.
Last edited:
Pues a mi me va de perlas, incluso más rápido que antes. Eso sí, necesita de 2-3 parches para arreglar cosejas.
Hay que borrar todos los mods subscritos en steam y todos los de mis documentos de forma manual.
A ver si es posible que no se cargen los mods...
A ver si es posible que no se cargen los mods...
Exactmente eso me pasaba a mi y asi lo arreglé. No basta con desuscribirte porque yo por ejemplo me desuscribí del mod de traducción pero me seguia petando. al final borré la carpeta mods de mis documentos y asi ya puedo cargaqr el juego.
A mi me va como kina y no he borrado nada, pero miedo me da de volver a la 1.11 si no me permite jugar de nuevo a la actual
El problema me vino a mi porque pasé a la versión 1.11.4 para jugar a una MP. Ahora va bien.
A mi lo que me pasa es que hace tiempo que no me descarga los mods,aparece como descargando y tal pero luego no hay nada en la carpeta :/
por ahora no hay mods validos que yo conozca hasta que no se ponga que soportan la 1.12
acabo de ver que estan petando el apartado de bugs 
Edit : "bug" solucionado , que impaciente soy jaja
Edit : "bug" solucionado , que impaciente soy jaja
Last edited:
Pero creo que no he podido poner ninguno en lo que va de año(No deberia descargarlo de todas maneras?),al final he tenido que jugarlo en ingles por no usar la aberrante traduccion que lleva el juego.
Hay algunos mod que basta que les editas la cabecera para que sean compatibles. Yo lo he hecho con el de betteriu2 y coló.
El de la traducción creo que peta porque ya para empezar el número de provincias no coincide
Code:
supported_version="1.12.0.0"El de la traducción creo que peta porque ya para empezar el número de provincias no coincide
Nose, he echado dos partidas de prueba con Castilla para ver como me da el aire.
La primera conclusion es que hay que poner el focus en el diplomatico hasta dejar la Mancha en 10 de desarollo, con este movimiento nadas en la abundancia en dinero al principio. Creo que el efecto de bola de nieve se acentua, porque en 1460 y solo habiendo conquistado Granada y con una Guyena de 3 provincias ya tenia unos 20 de oro de ingresos.
Eso si, la IA es pasiva-agresiva. Dos guerras me declaro Aragon en las dos partidas para salir vapuleada, y en el resto de europa una partida guerras casi constantes entre borgoña-austria-francia-inglaterra, la otra partida ni una sola, porque estaban aliados entre si y no hacian mas que mirarse y enseñarse los dientes
Lo de los fuertes, todavia no tengo una opinion. Creo que lo han hecho para que la IA tenga mas posibilidades contra los humanos, el resto propaganda
La primera conclusion es que hay que poner el focus en el diplomatico hasta dejar la Mancha en 10 de desarollo, con este movimiento nadas en la abundancia en dinero al principio. Creo que el efecto de bola de nieve se acentua, porque en 1460 y solo habiendo conquistado Granada y con una Guyena de 3 provincias ya tenia unos 20 de oro de ingresos.
Eso si, la IA es pasiva-agresiva. Dos guerras me declaro Aragon en las dos partidas para salir vapuleada, y en el resto de europa una partida guerras casi constantes entre borgoña-austria-francia-inglaterra, la otra partida ni una sola, porque estaban aliados entre si y no hacian mas que mirarse y enseñarse los dientes
Lo de los fuertes, todavia no tengo una opinion. Creo que lo han hecho para que la IA tenga mas posibilidades contra los humanos, el resto propaganda
Se dice en el foro guiri que la IA es incapaz de gestionar bien la AE y no contabiliza bien las fuerzas aliadas cuando declara guerras y por eso se ven situaciones bien extrañas en Europa.
Los fuertes funcionan fantásticamente, al menos en early. Yo como Francia con una mega Austria (Países Bajos con un pasillo desde Luxemburgo hasta el franco-condado conectado a Sundgau y de ahí a Tirol) como aliada intentamos 4 veces tumbar a Castilla+Aragón+Nápoles+Portugal y no hubo forma por los fuertes. Sin cañones a nuestro alcance y sin superioridad marítima para desembarcar tropas por detrás ganábamos las batallas del frente pero los 3 fuertes de los Pirineos eran asedios largos y costosos que no acababan llevando a nada... una vez Castilla y Aragón se retiran, reorganizaban pillaban mercs y a presionar again. Intercambios de 1 provincia, war reparations y un par de white peaces. En el parche anterior mis 38k y los 44k de Austria hubieran entrado en Castilla para desayunar y estarían cenando en Sevilla con 99% warscore.
Otro run con Milán en Italia pasó lo mismo, pero a la inversa. Unos Estados Papales (Romagna con un fuerte es brutal) con Nápoles como aliados intentaron entrarme pero no pudieron gracias a una cadena de 3 fuertes en medio de Italia.
Tengo que probar a llegar a 1600 o cargar un bookmark y ver si la artillería y un general con algo de siege se comen a los fuertes o no, pero el asunto es que unos fuertes bien puestos permiten realizar un frente decente y si pierdes un ejército no se acaba el mundo, pues el enemigo no puede desbordar la línea y hacer carpet-siege. A Borgoña, si no le hacen una triple guerra para matarle al rey xD, le he visto hacer fuertes en varias posiciones flamencas y resistir embestida tras embestida francesa. Es divertido y refrescante cuanto menos. Es cierto eso sí que el sistema de fuertes tiene un gran problema y son las provincias sin defensas, he visto a Inglaterra comerse a Escocia entera de una sola guerra por tomar el fuerte de la frontera y en menos de 3 meses tener todo el país ocupado, como tiene el warscore lanza la propuesta de paz y la IA cede sin esperar refuerzos de sus aliados ni nada. Otro ejemplo así... ver a Génova comerse a Crimea en una guerra defensiva gracias los fuertes que construyó (el primer intento de echar al genovés quedó en white peace al entrar el austriaco y el otomano).
Los fuertes funcionan fantásticamente, al menos en early. Yo como Francia con una mega Austria (Países Bajos con un pasillo desde Luxemburgo hasta el franco-condado conectado a Sundgau y de ahí a Tirol) como aliada intentamos 4 veces tumbar a Castilla+Aragón+Nápoles+Portugal y no hubo forma por los fuertes. Sin cañones a nuestro alcance y sin superioridad marítima para desembarcar tropas por detrás ganábamos las batallas del frente pero los 3 fuertes de los Pirineos eran asedios largos y costosos que no acababan llevando a nada... una vez Castilla y Aragón se retiran, reorganizaban pillaban mercs y a presionar again. Intercambios de 1 provincia, war reparations y un par de white peaces. En el parche anterior mis 38k y los 44k de Austria hubieran entrado en Castilla para desayunar y estarían cenando en Sevilla con 99% warscore.
Otro run con Milán en Italia pasó lo mismo, pero a la inversa. Unos Estados Papales (Romagna con un fuerte es brutal) con Nápoles como aliados intentaron entrarme pero no pudieron gracias a una cadena de 3 fuertes en medio de Italia.
Tengo que probar a llegar a 1600 o cargar un bookmark y ver si la artillería y un general con algo de siege se comen a los fuertes o no, pero el asunto es que unos fuertes bien puestos permiten realizar un frente decente y si pierdes un ejército no se acaba el mundo, pues el enemigo no puede desbordar la línea y hacer carpet-siege. A Borgoña, si no le hacen una triple guerra para matarle al rey xD, le he visto hacer fuertes en varias posiciones flamencas y resistir embestida tras embestida francesa. Es divertido y refrescante cuanto menos. Es cierto eso sí que el sistema de fuertes tiene un gran problema y son las provincias sin defensas, he visto a Inglaterra comerse a Escocia entera de una sola guerra por tomar el fuerte de la frontera y en menos de 3 meses tener todo el país ocupado, como tiene el warscore lanza la propuesta de paz y la IA cede sin esperar refuerzos de sus aliados ni nada. Otro ejemplo así... ver a Génova comerse a Crimea en una guerra defensiva gracias los fuertes que construyó (el primer intento de echar al genovés quedó en white peace al entrar el austriaco y el otomano).
Hotfix camuflado en el "DD"
Hello everyone! Common Sense and 1.12 have been released, and our expansion sales continue to shatter previous records! With the expansion and patch now out, we're going to shift into a different gear with our dev diaries for a while, talking about other things than upcoming features. Some ideas we've had is to discuss our design process, how we handle feedback from fans, and reflections on different parts of the game and where we want to see them go in the future.
Today, however, we're busy working on a hotfix for 1.12, so I thought I'd tell you about that, and also a bit about why there will always be bugs on release of a new expansion.
Let's deal with the hotfix first. From what we've seen, 1.12 has been a smooth launch for the majority of users, with a low bug count in new features, but there were some serious technical issues on certain hardware setups.
The hotfix is expected to be released today or tomorrow, and at present contains fixes for the following issues:
Hotfix 1.12.1 (AS OF WRITING OF THIS POST, THIS IS NOT YET OUT)
- Fixed a bug where the AI would declare suicidal wars due to incorrectly calculating defensive call acceptance
- Fixed a bug where the AI would continously march back and forth between two provinces in a fort's ZoC
- Fixed exploit where you could give away ally's provinces even if not occupied in coalition war.
- Fixed a bug where rebels would spawn at very low morale when there were hostile units in their spawn province.
- Fixed an issue with steam workshop removing supported_version from .mod files
- Fixed an issue where .mod files would be printed with garbled data, resulting in CTD on launch
- Fixed an exploit where you could give away the provinces of your war allies even if they were not occupied (you should only be able to give away your own unoccupied provinces)
- Unit movement lock can no longer be bypassed by issuing another move order.
- Fixed artillery models for several different unit packs to have the correct infantry model accompanying it.
- Lowered cost of diplomatic annexation from 10 to 8 dip points per development (since there's more ways to decrease adm cost)
- Autonomy from diploannexation is now 60 (down from 75)
- Fixes issues using the MacBook trackpad when interacting with the map on OSX.
- Fixed a CTD in AI province conquest weight calculation
- Fixed a CTD related to rebels in uncolonized provinces
- Game no longer crashes when forcing nations with subjects to revoke claims.
- Save games saved in 1.12 no longer cause CTDs in 1.11 (only applies to saves made after this hotfix is applied)
- The '+' key should now increase game speed correctly on US/UK keyboards.
- Fixed issue where foreign Separatists defecting to your country caused your country to act as if it was just released.
Note that we are only considering important fixes and tweaks for hotfixes, so if you have a bug you think should be hotfixed, take a moment and ask yourself whether or not it can wait until the larger bugfixing patch that we'll be releasing later in June.
Why do patches always have bugs?
This is a question we get a lot, along with 'Do you even test your games?', and 'Do you even play your own games?'. The answer is, yes, we play our own games, and yes, we test our games. Loosely calculated, about 2400 man-hours of QA has gone into Common Sense, and before a launch every feature is tested thoroughly. Over the course of the development of 1.12 and Common Sense, approximately 1200 bugs have been fixed by the team.
So why, then, do bugs still get into the release? There are two sides to this, and the first one is math.
As of Tuesday night, we had around 20000 concurrent players. If we assume that those 20000 people each play 2 hours that night, that is 40000 hours of play. In order to have equivalent QA test hours to only 2 hours of play on a release night, we would need a team of 30 full-time QA. Scenarios that only happen once every 10000 games will realistically never happen for our QA, and when you factor in that those 20000 players have 20000 different hardware setups... you can begin to see why things like the game not launching on a single core computer (we do not have a single core computer in QA because they haven't been making them for over half a decade) or the engine upgrade breaking mac trackpads (we did not have a mac trackpad in QA, we now do and will use to test future versions) happen.
That's one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is priority.
It's always our ambition to release new expansions without bugs in the new features, and for this reason we consider newly introduced bugs higher priority than older ones. We haven't always done a great job of this in the past, but 1.12/Common Sense had a much lower bug count in new features than previous expansions. There were however, a couple immediately apparent issues, particularly the fact that movement locking did not work at all. You might reasonably ask yourself how such a thing slipped through QA. The answer: It didn't.
The movement locking bug was introduced in the very last build we made for release, as a result of fixing another bug where ZoCs would create weird movement paths. It was only found after the build was done and smoke tested (smoke testing is basically a thorough 'does the game actually run' test that we do on anything we release to the public). Given that we had no other serious known issues at the time, I made the call that the issue was not serious enough to warrant spending another half a day making a new build and testing that build. QA found the issue, I chose not to fix it because the time spent making a new build could be better spent working on our back log of older bugs, and I figured that we'd have to make a hotfix anyway due to the risk for technical issues appearing with the engine upgrade.
The simple fact of it is that we are probably never going to have a launch that doesn't introduce at least one or two serious technical issues, because we do not, and cannot test the game on the thousands and thousands of different hardware configurations that will be playing the game the moment we set the patch live. The measure of a successful launch, in my book, is not that there are no bugs, but rather that there are no serious bugs which could reasonably have been caught by our internal testing.
Do I expect this explanation to change much? Not really, because I think people like easy explanations, and 'Paradox does not even test their expansions' is a much easier explanation than 'In a complex piece of software you will always have some bugs no matter how much QA you do', 'Fixing bugs can introduce new bugs' and 'Not all bugs are worth grinding development to a halt in order to fix'.
Nonetheless, for those who wish to know, there it is
Hello everyone! Common Sense and 1.12 have been released, and our expansion sales continue to shatter previous records! With the expansion and patch now out, we're going to shift into a different gear with our dev diaries for a while, talking about other things than upcoming features. Some ideas we've had is to discuss our design process, how we handle feedback from fans, and reflections on different parts of the game and where we want to see them go in the future.
Today, however, we're busy working on a hotfix for 1.12, so I thought I'd tell you about that, and also a bit about why there will always be bugs on release of a new expansion.
Let's deal with the hotfix first. From what we've seen, 1.12 has been a smooth launch for the majority of users, with a low bug count in new features, but there were some serious technical issues on certain hardware setups.
The hotfix is expected to be released today or tomorrow, and at present contains fixes for the following issues:
Hotfix 1.12.1 (AS OF WRITING OF THIS POST, THIS IS NOT YET OUT)
- Fixed a bug where the AI would declare suicidal wars due to incorrectly calculating defensive call acceptance
- Fixed a bug where the AI would continously march back and forth between two provinces in a fort's ZoC
- Fixed exploit where you could give away ally's provinces even if not occupied in coalition war.
- Fixed a bug where rebels would spawn at very low morale when there were hostile units in their spawn province.
- Fixed an issue with steam workshop removing supported_version from .mod files
- Fixed an issue where .mod files would be printed with garbled data, resulting in CTD on launch
- Fixed an exploit where you could give away the provinces of your war allies even if they were not occupied (you should only be able to give away your own unoccupied provinces)
- Unit movement lock can no longer be bypassed by issuing another move order.
- Fixed artillery models for several different unit packs to have the correct infantry model accompanying it.
- Lowered cost of diplomatic annexation from 10 to 8 dip points per development (since there's more ways to decrease adm cost)
- Autonomy from diploannexation is now 60 (down from 75)
- Fixes issues using the MacBook trackpad when interacting with the map on OSX.
- Fixed a CTD in AI province conquest weight calculation
- Fixed a CTD related to rebels in uncolonized provinces
- Game no longer crashes when forcing nations with subjects to revoke claims.
- Save games saved in 1.12 no longer cause CTDs in 1.11 (only applies to saves made after this hotfix is applied)
- The '+' key should now increase game speed correctly on US/UK keyboards.
- Fixed issue where foreign Separatists defecting to your country caused your country to act as if it was just released.
Note that we are only considering important fixes and tweaks for hotfixes, so if you have a bug you think should be hotfixed, take a moment and ask yourself whether or not it can wait until the larger bugfixing patch that we'll be releasing later in June.
Why do patches always have bugs?
This is a question we get a lot, along with 'Do you even test your games?', and 'Do you even play your own games?'. The answer is, yes, we play our own games, and yes, we test our games. Loosely calculated, about 2400 man-hours of QA has gone into Common Sense, and before a launch every feature is tested thoroughly. Over the course of the development of 1.12 and Common Sense, approximately 1200 bugs have been fixed by the team.
So why, then, do bugs still get into the release? There are two sides to this, and the first one is math.
As of Tuesday night, we had around 20000 concurrent players. If we assume that those 20000 people each play 2 hours that night, that is 40000 hours of play. In order to have equivalent QA test hours to only 2 hours of play on a release night, we would need a team of 30 full-time QA. Scenarios that only happen once every 10000 games will realistically never happen for our QA, and when you factor in that those 20000 players have 20000 different hardware setups... you can begin to see why things like the game not launching on a single core computer (we do not have a single core computer in QA because they haven't been making them for over half a decade) or the engine upgrade breaking mac trackpads (we did not have a mac trackpad in QA, we now do and will use to test future versions) happen.
That's one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is priority.
It's always our ambition to release new expansions without bugs in the new features, and for this reason we consider newly introduced bugs higher priority than older ones. We haven't always done a great job of this in the past, but 1.12/Common Sense had a much lower bug count in new features than previous expansions. There were however, a couple immediately apparent issues, particularly the fact that movement locking did not work at all. You might reasonably ask yourself how such a thing slipped through QA. The answer: It didn't.
The movement locking bug was introduced in the very last build we made for release, as a result of fixing another bug where ZoCs would create weird movement paths. It was only found after the build was done and smoke tested (smoke testing is basically a thorough 'does the game actually run' test that we do on anything we release to the public). Given that we had no other serious known issues at the time, I made the call that the issue was not serious enough to warrant spending another half a day making a new build and testing that build. QA found the issue, I chose not to fix it because the time spent making a new build could be better spent working on our back log of older bugs, and I figured that we'd have to make a hotfix anyway due to the risk for technical issues appearing with the engine upgrade.
The simple fact of it is that we are probably never going to have a launch that doesn't introduce at least one or two serious technical issues, because we do not, and cannot test the game on the thousands and thousands of different hardware configurations that will be playing the game the moment we set the patch live. The measure of a successful launch, in my book, is not that there are no bugs, but rather that there are no serious bugs which could reasonably have been caught by our internal testing.
Do I expect this explanation to change much? Not really, because I think people like easy explanations, and 'Paradox does not even test their expansions' is a much easier explanation than 'In a complex piece of software you will always have some bugs no matter how much QA you do', 'Fixing bugs can introduce new bugs' and 'Not all bugs are worth grinding development to a halt in order to fix'.
Nonetheless, for those who wish to know, there it is
Tienen razón con el tiempo de testeo, la verdad. Lo del lanzador si que no tiene explicación.