User Research Survey!

[Chakerathe]

Generals!

Command has issued another survey from Research & Development in order to understand our battlefield a bit better, looking into what similar games you interact with, your different playstyles and preferences, and overall your experiences across the community.

Whether you're a seasoned veteran, a casual roleplayer or someone just getting started, your feedback will help us design features and experiences that better reflect the way you play.

To Participate in the Survey, you can click HERE or on the image below, alternatively you can scan the QR code.

 

[MobiusXIV]

I took the survey, but after filling out the final question (a prompt allowing me to provide my own feedback), I received an error requiring me to try again. Then I didn't receive any sort of confirmation that it worked.

Nevertheless, I really appreciate Paradox trying to gather feedback from the player base. I wanted to include my feedback statement here again in case it didn't go through:

"I mainly want the game to feel like it's on the same page with itself. New mechanics are released which would blatantly be beneficial outside of the nations for which the DLC focused (such as shared focuses or focus trees not really being used for the Commonwealth or factions as a whole, or expansive complex focuses, struggles, and national spirits like that of Italy which could easily apply to nations like Japan or France). I am frustrated by how much the excellent new content for some nations clearly reveals how out-of-date other mechanics or nations are."

 

[pheonicia]

A number of focus trees are too bloated, and something a little slimmer and more polished would be better.

Also, ui bugs are awful.

And lastly, this is a minor gripe but I'm annoyed that it wasn't clear that buying Gotterdammerung separate from the season pass wouldn't give a discount until after graveyard of empires released.

 

[FLUX2226]

Participating in a research survey is quite the challenge if you only have 4 research slots at your disposal, but I'll do my best

 

[General Tao]

"Do you use in-game automation (battle plans, convoys, etc.)"

Can someone clarify how convoys are in-game automation? What's the alternative that they mean, is it having transports e.g. EU? Bit of an odd question since you can't not use the automated system, there's no alternative possible.

Man, if you could set up your own convoy routes and have more control over how men and material are moved around the map rather than just blocking sea tiles and hoping convoys would be rerouted away from your enemies shores....

 

[Gigliovaljr]

I hope there's more focus on historical paths for focus trees. Ahistorical is good, but I feel like historical paths have been neglected a bit, especially in GoE.

 

[brantodb01]

Ugh, it's one of these marketing data ones.
Being brutally honest;
I come to the particular game forum because i care about that particular game.
Filling in a survey to help the devs make their game is good.
However I don't want to fill in a survey to help a suit predict sales numbers on the next stellaris: galaxy command/star trek: infinite

 

[LastButterfly]

The own feedback prompt allowed me to sneak in a remark that I don't usually do - multiplayer is a VAST concept, and it's not very meaningful to ask a player "do you play multiplayer" I think.

In recent years, I played probably more multiplayer than singleplayer... but basically exclusively 2~3 players cooperative games. Not "many players deathmatches" which is what I assume people think about when they say multiplayer. And I think it's worth making the distinction - small coop games, or even just 2 players against one another, feel like they're a bit the "forgotten" way to play - but not completely, there are still some mechanics that incenticize such things (think belgian/congo shared tree), just, a few.

Still sad it's impossible to play a 1 on 1 spanish civil war.

 

[Killer-Cosmo]

Ahistorical is good, but I feel like historical paths have been neglected a bit, especially in GoE.

GoE is a terrible example for "pure" historical.

Of the four nations added, one does literally nothing (despite being the inspiration for the name of the DLC) and two are steamrolled with minimal effort.
Poor India's left to pick up the historical slack

 

[Idle America]

"Do you use in-game automation (battle plans, convoys, etc.)"

Can someone clarify how convoys are in-game automation? What's the alternative that they mean, is it having transports e.g. EU? Bit of an odd question since you can't not use the automated system, there's no alternative possible.

Man, if you could set up your own convoy routes and have more control over how men and material are moved around the map rather than just blocking sea tiles and hoping convoys would be rerouted away from your enemies shores....

Maybe they mean using battle plans to automatically ship troops, instead of selecting units and right-clicking the port you want them to sail to?

 

[KubiG37]

That part where it asked "How many hours have you spent playing HoI IV?"

And I had to select 2999+ hurt a little.

 

[Slippyfopp]

Welp, I don't actually expect much to change, but I filled out the survey nonetheless.
I tilted my head when it asked me if the diplomacy mechanic was difficult to use, and I was like, "What diplomacy mechanic?"

 

[Waaaghaaa]

如果架空国策线有更多可触发事件就好了，那样更有代入感，另外希望不同国家焦点树差异化些，现在的共产主义大同小异。
It would be great if there were more triggerable events in the alternate national policy lines. That would make it more immersive. Also, I hope the focus trees of different countries could be more differentiated. Currently, the communist ones are quite similar.

 

[Slippyfopp]

如果架空国策线有更多可触发事件就好了，那样更有代入感，另外希望不同国家焦点树差异化些，现在的共产主义大同小异。
It would be great if there were more triggerable events in the alternate national policy lines. That would make it more immersive. Also, I hope the focus trees of different countries could be more differentiated. Currently, the communist ones are quite similar.

Yeah, pretty much every communist focus tree boils down to "join Stalin" or "oppose Stalin".

What frustrates me is how the United States does not have a communist path where you oppose Stalin, which you think would be the most logical path, considering they opposed the Soviet Union for 45 years IRL. I wish there was a path for that, one that can be divided into sub-paths of "just conquer Stalin" and "rescue Trotsky/Bukharin and conquer Stalin with his help". One extension I'd love to see is the ability to flip the other nations in the Americas communist, much like Mexico's focus tree.

 

[Farquarsen]

Your survey did not ask any hard questions like: How to improve the game? What is the worst DLC in the game? Has any DLC or country pack broken the game or made it unplayable?

 

[Neolaris]

I hope the survey asks if we want more content for countries that haven't received it, like the rest of North and South America, the Caribbean, or the Arabian Peninsula, or reworking old content for Asia, or what most people want today: unique content for Luxembourg.

 

[Hidler201]

The questionnaire should include more severe criticism.

 

[51states]

I took the survey and have a few suggestions for SP (nearly 3k hours):
1. Japan, the USA and SEA need a face-lift to make the Pacific war a thing, because right now the Pacific War really isn't a thing. Guadalcanal never happens. Both Foci trees are ancient.
2. Food is something you should consider including along with division limits for performance. No one is fielding these many divisions and feeding them.
3. If the AI can't handle island hopping make pre deploying and staying I'm islands more expensive for the player in terms of supply.
4. Since equipment tags became a thing the US starting fleet of cruisers and aircraft carriers have the wrong tags, the Wichita isn't a light cruiser but has the shield tag so it doesn't reinforce fleets with heavy cruisers (the turret tag). Same thing with the Lexington which should have a CV tag but doesn't(has a turret tag instead of plane). Doing this every game gets old.
5.The attack on Mers al Kabir never happens if you play as the US, so the Churchill sequence of decisions ends with emergency arms deliveries. This is due to the UK having so many decisions but not enough PP to actually take them. Same thing with invading North Africa.
6. The USSR never follows through on Potsdam, because there is no Potsdam and Yalta doesn't do what it should.
7. Research bloat has hit the USA, you never field everything you could because you lack slots to do so.
8. You don't actually do anything with spies in the US till you're the spymaster so you don't do operation Bolivar.
9. Having Iran join the Axis because the USSR and the UK can't topple them in SP is stupid.
10. Having the DR, El Salvador and Venezuelq join the the Sphere or the Axis when the allies are winning is hilarious.

Edit:

11. Having the USSR lose Stalingrad because it's garrisoning the Kharabosk coast is silly.

Edit 2:

12. Lend lease is broken especially to China.

 

[Tartemagne]

One of my dude was a guest at the PDX MIXER in March, and he was told there will be a DLC related to China.
Since Japan is the last major country that has not been reworked, so I guess, this DLC is probably about Japan, China and Southeast Asia.

A friendly advice, talk more with players from these regions. Communication is the only way to solve cultural differences. What happened in February was a tragedy, I believe there were ways to avoid it, but things eventually got out of control.

I've been talking to our community ambassador a lot lately, and to be honest, he's a great guy. I believe he did a lot to help resolve problems between the community and the hoi4 devs. I also believe what he said, "good decisions take time", I hope you can really make the good decision.

Before those unfortunate things that happened, HOI4 was one of my favorite games. Even so, I don't think the problems between the hoi devs and the player community are unsolvable.
So... seriously, good luck PDS Gold.

 

[Irishman845]

"Do you use in-game automation (battle plans, convoys, etc.)"

Can someone clarify how convoys are in-game automation? What's the alternative that they mean, is it having transports e.g. EU? Bit of an odd question since you can't not use the automated system, there's no alternative possible.

Man, if you could set up your own convoy routes and have more control over how men and material are moved around the map rather than just blocking sea tiles and hoping convoys would be rerouted away from your enemies shores....

Pretty sure they mean do you use the battle plan function and just let the plan do the work with little to no micro. Similar to attaching air wings to armies and leaving them alone.