Well, when i respectfully disagreed to the dev diary i did exactly this – resprectfully disagree to the content i was shown.
I actually don’t know who bears the responsibility for that said content and it also is not my job to think that over. Neither do i take the content personal, nor do i intend to direct my criticism at a specfic person.
But why am i so critical about the very stuff that was presented?!
My reasoning has always been that the real world war participants have priority in getting focus trees. Poland is one – and like every other playable nation it should be an interesting one. I would have wished for a different country (Italy) but it is natural that an Eastern-Front oriented DLC is the right place to put that revamped Polish focus tree. Offering options to improve the nation and make it stronger than usual is to be expected. There should be ways to change political ideology as well as choosing which side to take part in as well. The focus should offer a good playing experience for players that originate from that country.
However, to me (and this is my very personal impression), this specific focus tree comes across like a collection of all imagineable revisionist fantasies a polish ultranationalist extremist could wish for. Such a person would find any of his personal ideas reflected in some way.
A medieval intermarium,
a united communist state,
not only one but even several monarchist options (even those seem to not be enough and are a matter of hot debate),
colonies granted for free,
a large portion of Eastern Europe suddenly turning into national cores,
a multitude of minor powers and even a major power being subjugated by some focus clicks,
nuclear and industrial assets after being conquered.
All this within the historical setting of 1936 onwards. My personal reception is that this given message just does not sound right.
From a more distanced perspective, it even feels like a reminder of some odd propaganda posters. And getting rid of undesired minorities has been included as well – which is a premiere in this game – and a pretty unwelcome one i assure you!
I don’t think that the polish members of this community belong to such a group of people and i also don’t assume that they actually asked for this. Furthermore i think that they deserved more and different: an immersible and plausible way to increase playability of their country and more justice to the history of their country.
Alternate histories always will be subject of debate – they are by their very nature. As of yet, most of them had been applied in the game with serious repercussions / backlashes for following such a path.
Let’s take Germany changing it’s political ideology from the start of the game onwards as an example:
The alternative options are fantasy. I believe that they only eventually got accepted by the community because of the price a player has to pay for following them: No free territorial expansion, a civil war instead, losses in manpower and equipment, damage to infrastructure and production, future restrictions in access to advisors, commanders and a general delay for the coming build up.
The same applies in case of Japan and several other nations, be it France, USA and so many more.
I don’t like pure fantasy scenarios in a ww2 game but i can accept the overall compromise that was found in most cases. And i also accept that there is a reasonable customer base for more sandbox-style.
But this tree not only straightly blows up the realm of the reasonable in several branches – in most of the more fantasy scenarios it does so for free. „Click youself to the world empire of your personal imagination“ is the message that reaches my mind.
To me, the result shown feels more like a farce and not a serious focus tree in line with the game concept ("quid pro quo") that was presented to us in the past.
Even the historical course grants this country with benefits no other country has been given - and no country actually should receive it at all.
In a historical match the only way around it would be to conquer all majors of the Allies so that this fantasy stuff eventually disappears. I feel player freedom being taken away from everyone – except for the subject nation of this very focus tree.
Poland is special you may say – yes, it is - but not this special i think.
The reasonable idea would have been to give Poland a nuclear theorist. But wait – they certainly get one on top of this… one may even wonder whether this country will actually have to pay pp for activating him. The latter sarcastic notion is of course nonsense but a recipient of the shown content might easily get lead that this might be included as well.
I guess that i don’t have to elabroate any further why i don’t think that is a good idea at all in a ww2-era grand strategy game starting in 1936 with a focus on war.
And now – is it really that surprising that quite a few people feel dissatisfied with what has been shown? And in consequence - in what way are we supposed to discuss these … given ‚facts‘ … in a constructive way?
As i understand it, „constructive“ means „let’s find a way to improve it“. But how can a given matter that feels entirely wrong to so many from the start be improved?
The wrong road leads into the false direction. I see no way to actually change that fact. In such a situation i would have to find an option to turn back instead.
Poland has a very passionate player base and like all other playable nations it deserves to be interesting to play. Still I think that this can be realised by paid development without having to entirely go overboard.
Gathering some more player feedback earlier in the development process would have been helpful i guess.
I actually don’t know who bears the responsibility for that said content and it also is not my job to think that over. Neither do i take the content personal, nor do i intend to direct my criticism at a specfic person.
But why am i so critical about the very stuff that was presented?!
My reasoning has always been that the real world war participants have priority in getting focus trees. Poland is one – and like every other playable nation it should be an interesting one. I would have wished for a different country (Italy) but it is natural that an Eastern-Front oriented DLC is the right place to put that revamped Polish focus tree. Offering options to improve the nation and make it stronger than usual is to be expected. There should be ways to change political ideology as well as choosing which side to take part in as well. The focus should offer a good playing experience for players that originate from that country.
However, to me (and this is my very personal impression), this specific focus tree comes across like a collection of all imagineable revisionist fantasies a polish ultranationalist extremist could wish for. Such a person would find any of his personal ideas reflected in some way.
A medieval intermarium,
a united communist state,
not only one but even several monarchist options (even those seem to not be enough and are a matter of hot debate),
colonies granted for free,
a large portion of Eastern Europe suddenly turning into national cores,
a multitude of minor powers and even a major power being subjugated by some focus clicks,
nuclear and industrial assets after being conquered.
All this within the historical setting of 1936 onwards. My personal reception is that this given message just does not sound right.
From a more distanced perspective, it even feels like a reminder of some odd propaganda posters. And getting rid of undesired minorities has been included as well – which is a premiere in this game – and a pretty unwelcome one i assure you!
I don’t think that the polish members of this community belong to such a group of people and i also don’t assume that they actually asked for this. Furthermore i think that they deserved more and different: an immersible and plausible way to increase playability of their country and more justice to the history of their country.
Alternate histories always will be subject of debate – they are by their very nature. As of yet, most of them had been applied in the game with serious repercussions / backlashes for following such a path.
Let’s take Germany changing it’s political ideology from the start of the game onwards as an example:
The alternative options are fantasy. I believe that they only eventually got accepted by the community because of the price a player has to pay for following them: No free territorial expansion, a civil war instead, losses in manpower and equipment, damage to infrastructure and production, future restrictions in access to advisors, commanders and a general delay for the coming build up.
The same applies in case of Japan and several other nations, be it France, USA and so many more.
I don’t like pure fantasy scenarios in a ww2 game but i can accept the overall compromise that was found in most cases. And i also accept that there is a reasonable customer base for more sandbox-style.
But this tree not only straightly blows up the realm of the reasonable in several branches – in most of the more fantasy scenarios it does so for free. „Click youself to the world empire of your personal imagination“ is the message that reaches my mind.
To me, the result shown feels more like a farce and not a serious focus tree in line with the game concept ("quid pro quo") that was presented to us in the past.
Even the historical course grants this country with benefits no other country has been given - and no country actually should receive it at all.
In a historical match the only way around it would be to conquer all majors of the Allies so that this fantasy stuff eventually disappears. I feel player freedom being taken away from everyone – except for the subject nation of this very focus tree.
Poland is special you may say – yes, it is - but not this special i think.
The reasonable idea would have been to give Poland a nuclear theorist. But wait – they certainly get one on top of this… one may even wonder whether this country will actually have to pay pp for activating him. The latter sarcastic notion is of course nonsense but a recipient of the shown content might easily get lead that this might be included as well.
I guess that i don’t have to elabroate any further why i don’t think that is a good idea at all in a ww2-era grand strategy game starting in 1936 with a focus on war.
And now – is it really that surprising that quite a few people feel dissatisfied with what has been shown? And in consequence - in what way are we supposed to discuss these … given ‚facts‘ … in a constructive way?
As i understand it, „constructive“ means „let’s find a way to improve it“. But how can a given matter that feels entirely wrong to so many from the start be improved?
The wrong road leads into the false direction. I see no way to actually change that fact. In such a situation i would have to find an option to turn back instead.
Poland has a very passionate player base and like all other playable nations it deserves to be interesting to play. Still I think that this can be realised by paid development without having to entirely go overboard.
Gathering some more player feedback earlier in the development process would have been helpful i guess.
- 20
- 7
- 1
- 1