• 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.

Reception & Thoughts | Patch 1.14.2 [Checksum fbf7]

Greetings all!

Today marks the first dev diary since the release of Trial of Allegiance, so we’ll be looking back over how things went, and community reactions in a little more detail than usual. While I would have loved to have some data on player choices and interactions for today’s diary, our analytics engine is busy chugging away. So, we’ll have to hold off on that until the machine spirit has assessed the incoming preponderance of data.

The Elephant in the Room

It would be hard to talk about Trial of Allegiance without first mentioning that we’re acutely aware of its critical reception from fans.

We’ve had releases with less than satisfactory reviews before, so why talk about them this time? Well, this mostly boils down to the reasons. Usually when something doesn’t do well we’ll create a timeline and buckle down to address the issues that matter. As you’ll see below, things are a little different this time.

Above all, I see no reason not to be transparent about this, and I’m going to use today as an opportunity to talk about what it means to us and how we analyze reactions, so let’s dive into some of the facts:

Everything’s on Fire!

Well, actually no. Trial of Allegiance has thus far been one of our most stable releases in terms of bugs and player-encountered issues. This doesn’t mean there aren’t bugs: stuff always creeps through, but as you may have noticed by now, we’ve had an Open Beta running with a patch scheduled sometime today. The patch notes will be attached to the end of this document. Furthermore, we have another patch scheduled in next week to give us a chance to tackle more complex problems.

Due to the low incidence of bugs in the ToA content, we’re spending a bit more time on general improvements and things folks thought were lacking.

Developer’s Perspective: bugs are defects in the game - errors or unforeseen complexities that render part of the experience to not work as intended. We don’t usually consider design choices or outdated content as bugs unless they cause the first statement to apply, since that evaluation is often subjective.

Circles Within Circles

Our steam review score has taken a fairly heavy beating on Trial of Allegiance. Reviews on DLCs are notoriously hard to draw accurate conclusions from, as very few people tend to leave reviews compared to the overall number of people who bought a DLC. Trial of Allegiance is particularly notable in that regard, as there are fewer reviews overall than we would normally expect. It’s absolutely possible to theorize behind why that is, but that’s all those are: theories.

That said, we read every review. Aaand it’s quite hard, tbh. Being a venerable ancient of the internet, I could wax lyrical on toxicity, vocabulary, and dissociation, but at the end of the day folks leave reviews for a reason. The language they use isn’t as important as the sentiment they’re trying to convey, even if they don’t always know the right way to do it.

What we try and do, therefore, is to try and don our armor of not-taking-things-too-personally, and group negative reviews by common themes or sentiments.

For Trial of Allegiance, we assessed clear ‘meta’ groupings in order of weight*:

  • Unhappiness about recent regional currency price adjustments
  • Unhappiness about the price of the country pack
    • Compared to other HOI4 expansions
    • Other
  • Bought it but wanted something different
    • New mechanics, or
    • A european expansion
  • Unhappy with the quality of the release
    • In relation to specific issues;
    • In relation to mods
    • Unclear/Unintelligible
    • Unclear/Horrendously offensive

*This requires looking at global reviews, not english-language only: something we take quite seriously.

The exact weighting here changes a lot over time, but suffice it to say that the top grouping is significantly larger than any of the others, and the last grouping vice-versa.

But hang on, does this just mean we’re being review bombed by angry interest groups? Well, that would be a nice easy assumption that allows us to feel good about ourselves and go home for supper, but there doesn’t seem to be any coordinated effort here as far as we can tell.

What we can tell here is that folks commonly leave reviews for reasons unrelated to the content we made.

So, these are the findings. So far these have been presented as factual; now we take a more subjective view when it comes to reacting to the findings.

Regional Pricing

This one was a little unexpected, though in hindsight it shouldn’t have been. Looking back over recent reviews on our other expansions, we see the same trend.

In January, Paradox made efforts to normalize pricing across various currency regions according to (as I understand it) a standard used by Valve. On HoI, we saw this as a mostly administrative change, and did not, I think, ask enough questions about the effect it might have on our game-specific player base.
I am not promising any sweeping changes here for decisions that have already been made. What I can say however, is that we will not be treating any such changes as administrative in the future. We will be doing our due diligence.

General Pricing

A little more expected, perhaps, but with some important notes. The vast majority of complaints about the pricing of this release came with comparisons or in relation to other content we’ve released in the past.

While it overlaps a little with the next topic, I feel like we could have been clearer with setting expectations about what a country pack is.

Another observation here is that our fanbase seems to attach more importance to the consistency of expansion prices than we tend to. A lot of the comparisons we’re seeing are equating content made many years ago or at a completely different scale to Trial of Allegiance.

Wanted Something Different

This one is a real games-industry conundrum. Traditionally, if you bring something to market that doesn’t interest everyone, the uninterested ones avoid it. Not so here.

We knew that South America would be a divisive topic amongst the fanbase: some regard it as important, some do not. We calculated that this would make these nations perfect for a country-pack release instead of a full expansion - including mechanics in something that may not interest everyone would put fans in the situation of having to purchase something they did not want.

And, uh, that backfired a bit. Overwhelmingly, reviews in this category are asking where the mechanics are, or why we’re spending time on X instead of Y.

Importantly though, we aren’t gonna change that. We will sometimes have country pack releases, and they will not contain mechanics, though perhaps there’s some middle ground for tech/unit/other additions.

This all comes with a big but: the Juno team who created Trial of Allegiance are not the only ones working on HOI4. Creating content packs is not being done at the expense of other things. We aren’t ready to talk about exactly what’s coming yet, but simply put: we have mechanical expansions in the pipeline that are being built at this very moment. Outside of expansions, we have even more big stuff happening for HoI in the very near future. Watch this space.

Developer’s Perspective: Even if we wanted to, making two mechanical expansions in parallel would be a significant technical challenge. Some games are built to make that easy! HOI is not one of them.

Quality of Release

This is predominantly the stuff that reviews traditionally focus on. Was the delivered content good/bad/neutral? The nature of this is subjective, and these reviews are really where we can act by making changes and fixes. Below you’ll find the patch notes for our first iteration on ToA’s content, with more to come soon.

Overall what we’re seeing from players that stated an active interest in South America is a trending positive reaction. There are some key problems raised to us from highly invested players, which we’ll do our best to address. There are learnings we want to take into future country packs or war effort patches, including but not limited to:

  • Shared branches were one of those things that made sense at the time, but in hindsight we should have avoided.
  • People love map changes more than I thought humanly possible.
  • Power creep is real, and we should have a balance reckoning sooner rather than later
  • We can do more with units, tech, and non-focus content without being explicitly ‘mechanical’ in nature. This was sort of on our radar already, but player feedback confirms that.

As I mentioned above, this has been a very bug-light release, but if an issue is plaguing you then please let us know through the usual channels, and we’ll spend any time left over on making other improvements to ToA’s content.

—-----------

Stuff That Doesn’t Really Help

Reviews that are empty/irrelevant/insulting/contain mysterious dwarven chanting are not going to be useful to us. When I say that we read all reviews, I’m not kidding - but if there’s no actionable text, we can’t do anything with it. Of course, it is your right to maintain a practice of critical ambiguity, I’m just saying it won’t produce results.

Reviews and comments that set up a strawman and try to assign a motive to the decisions we make serves only to create a rift between developers and community. We love this game as much as you do, and while it would be naive of me to assume that every discussion can be equally polite and constructive, I do believe that it is better if we let people represent themselves.

Of course, the vast majority of you understand this.

In Conclusion

From my perspective, team Juno had a cracking debut release, and I’m beyond proud of what they accomplished. The strategic side of things is where we’ve fallen short, and that is my cross to bear.

Finally, the reason I’m saying any of this stuff is to give you folks some context. This is hopefully an insight into the thought process that collectively happens behind the scenes at HoI HQ.

I’ll be around to try and answer any questions!



Below, you’ll find the patch notes for the update coming sometime today:

################################################################
######## Patch 1.14.2 "Bolivar" #########
################################################################

##################################
# Bugfix & Gameplay Additions
##################################
- Presets in the equipment designer should not be blocked because of so-called negative stats
- Blockade runner now requires fighting with at least one >37 knot ship
- Added a decision for fascist Chile after completing the focus "Forge a New Chilean Identity" to change the national flag to the Patria Vieja based one, due to popular demand.
- Added Felipe Molas López as advisor for Paraguay
- Valentino Riroko Tuki's trait has been buffed, and RAP now gains slightly more things when released and chosen to be played as a part of the Araucanian-Chilean civil war.
- Blockade runner is now actually obtainable
- Flourishing economy for Paraguay no longer expires
- Revenge for the Triple Alliance and Rekindle old gripes now gives wargoals against both actors in a civil war if BRA or ARG is in a civil war
- Fixed an issue where two designer companies for Chile wouldn't have icons with AAT disabled.
- Fixed a bug where Bartolome Blanche would go to the revolting side in the Araucanian civil war despite the non-aligned side still meeting all the requirements to keep him.
- Fixed an issue where taking any of the Promote Spanish Immigration decisions as Chile would permanently block the player from taking any further immigration decisions.
- Support the Spanish republicans no longer spams the error folder
- Historical AI behavior setting for Uruguay no longer disallows achievements
- Fixed an issue where Paraguay could take a focus before taking the prerequisite focus
- You no longer require French Somaliland for the Chilean empire achivement
- USA should no longer guarantee Monroe countries in addition to having the Monroe spirit if Trial of Allegiance is on, unless Tension is > 90%
- Replaced some Uruguayan spirit icons with nicer ones
- Italy now joins the war when France proper is being invaded by Axis troops, or on the historical date
- Reshuffled priorities for building slots for URG/PAR to make it less likely that the capital hits the 25 slot limit
- Paraguay river navy gets properly removed upon capitulation
- Fixed Oscar Escudero Otárola having his name backwards
- 'Reach out to Soviets' in the Argentina tree now checks if the Soviet Union is communist.
- Election event will now only fire if Brazil has completed 'Repeal the National Security Laws'
- Made the requirements to get Senor Hilter slightly easier.
- Added the correct Mechanized tech icons for Brazil
- Fixed an issue where Argentina and Chile could not use their modern small aircraft icon for carrier aircraft.
- Added a fix so you can now see that Prestes will become country leader with the 'Align with Moscow' trait.
- Added a check to Argentina's 'Support the Spanish Republicans' focus so it can only be taken if the Spanish Republic exists.
- some more portrait tweaks for minvervino, valentino and dartnell
- Added a check to the Juan Peron focus to make sure he is still recruited. Also added tooltip to event to make it more apparent he will not be available.
- Argentina can now peace out all UK allies when taking the Falklands
- Modified requirements for 'Revise Treaty of Roca-Runciman' in Argentina focus tree. Now accessible to communists after civil war.
- New Edelman portrait added and minor tweaks to previously existing portraits
- Fix for the Cisplatine war achievement not working.
- Fixed snake smoked achievement file names.
- Nerfed some of the recruitable population and supply in Communist Argentina
- Merged two instances of a duplicated Brazilian admiral/advisor
- Added fix to prevent elections from firing if Vargas is still country leader
- Eugenio Gomez portrait updated to show the right person
- Neglected state and Cangaco state modifiers will now be removed when another country owns the state.
- Fixed an issue that was preventing players from inviting countries to the Org of American states faction and made it easier to see how to integrate countries into US of South America.
- Updated some focuses that were not adding cores to new states.
- Added a fix to make sure that Support the Spanish Nationalists isn't available if they win the civil war
- Added chief of army for those without ToA for Argentina
- Made Fascist demagogue advisors available from game start in Argentina
- Brazil and Argentina now have full access to their respective intel agency icons
- Improved tooltip for Align with Moscow focus
- Beneath the shadow of the Triple Alliance and Rekindle old gripes no longer instantly white peace PAR/URG, giving them the option of continuing the war without being teleported back
- Fixed confusing Tooltip for blockade runner
- Peru can no longer go to war with Ecuador if subject
- Chile can no longer create their own faction is subject
- Mexico can no longer invite Peru to their faction if they are at war with Ecuador
- Normandy is now part of Chile's decisions to core France
- Manuel A. Rodriguez no longer has a duplicated localization key and is recruited when ToA is disabled.
- Added fix that prevents players from taking "Demand Compensation From Spain" if Spain does not own Equatorial Guinea
- Fixed an issue with Argentina's starting plane having the wrong icon.
- Fixed a bug where "TAG makes aggressive moves on Uruguay" event fires twice
- URSAL focus now grants cores to Brazil
- Fixed a bug which required reloading the game to show hidden Senor Hilter focuses


##################################
# AI
##################################
- AI now motorizes supply hubs if needed, even if they are controlled by allies or puppets
- The ai should no longer be as willing to send volunteers to the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia for all of eternity.
- Limiting some italy ai strategies for only when in faction with germany

##################################
# Modding
##################################
- Removed the check on negative stats that disabled create_equipment_variant and AI equipment creation


##################################
# Stability & Performance
##################################
- Improve performance in resource computation.
- Various minor optimisations across the game (infrastructure etc)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 94Like
  • 27
  • 23Love
  • 15
  • 9
Reactions:
In my humble opinion, indeed, the DLC and the patch have come out very polished. The overwhelming negative score is due to the content of the DLC itself and the content/price ratio. Don't get depression either, please.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Unhappy with the quality of the release... In relation to mods

Could you say more about how mods factor into planning DLC, if at all. A lot of people say that country packs are pointless because mods can fill in focus trees, or at least, never do justice to the focus tree of a dedicated modder passionate about that country. Others that DLC should stop reinventing the wheel and just adapt the content straight into the release.

Can you share anything to clarify those views among players?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Thanks for the communication.

How does the paradox team pick which major features (MIO’s, International Market, etc) are added?

There's a long list of things we want to do. I've covered some in roadmaps, and others are ideas we've had floating around. Ideas are usually the easy part, but in general we design expansions to fit a theme: with AAT for example, we chose and developed mechanics which supported the fantasy that most players expected from playing one of the Scandinavian minors.

If a major rework or overhaul of a country with a preexisting DLC (Japan, for example) occurred, would it be distributed as an update for those who own the DLC, or would it be a separate purchase? I ask as a rework of Japan would be extensive, and resource intensive, and it seems like a tricky situation.

It really depends on the scope. Minor changes and additions aren't something we'd usually charge for. If a scenario arises where the entire tree is removed, and a new one redeveloped in its place, I expect this would be a separate purchase, yes. The process of development is not free, and while we can sometimes find ways to include smaller changes alongside other, paid content, a full focus tree overhaul is a major resource investment. You're not wrong though, it is a tricky situation, and that is why we haven't done this so far.

I'm waiting for a day when paradox developers will finally understand that without mods their games would die quickly. People wants from you new mechanics because they are interesting and they give new life into game. New country packs will never be interesting like new mechanics because there are already tons of mods which add content to South America or any minor country that have generic NF tree and usually these mods are much better than your content because their creators have better sources, they working on them few years not months. You will always lose with mods in creating new content. But you will never lose with mods in creating new mechanics because modders cant do that ( in most cases ). Players know that, modders know that, but it looks like you dont know that and that's sad.

Mods are there for those who want to use them. If you feel a mod fulfills your needs better than we can, then use the mod instead. For those who feel that isn't the case, we'll continue along this path. I'd correct you on one thing though: we absolutely do recognize how important mods are to our players. We have an open and frank dialogue with many modding teams, and we regularly build features to support both the work we do, and the work they do. It isn't an either/or.
 
  • 11Like
  • 6
  • 3
Reactions:
Is it a local (SWE) team, do you have regional advisers? How does this look like?
I do hope they have a regional team, otherwise, i'm ready to provide my and my fellow Indonesian modders' literature collections for them to read. But one need to be able to read Dutch or Indonesian since our collection is comprised of many single-language books in three languages.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Historic Brazil is very disappointing, I expected much more, both in terms of the focus tree and in events, if compared to the DLC Colossus of the South from Victoria 3 it is very low in terms of quality.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
There's a long list of things we want to do. I've covered some in roadmaps, and others are ideas we've had floating around. Ideas are usually the easy part, but in general we design expansions to fit a theme: with AAT for example, we chose and developed mechanics which supported the fantasy that most players expected from playing one of the Scandinavian minors.
Will we see an updated roadmap soon, or do we have to wait until after the next full-size dlc comes out?
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I loved this DLC, I had a lot of fun invading all my neighbors and creating a great nation with all of South America.

Paraguay is, in my opinion, the most fun to play.

The only thing I didn't like about it was the lack of an option to do cores in South America with communist Brazil and the lack of content with Lampião in power, so I ask you to take a look at it.
The core issue for Brazil is being fixed for a patch :)
 
  • 9
Reactions:
Im really enjoying it, first DLC that I’ve wanted to try a new nation of as it’s away from my usual play through in Europe… my only complaint a long with lack of names… is the lack of pop-ups, you get a lot of flavour from other nations when you complete a focus and get a news article etc.
 
Overall i really liked this content pack, i love the countries in question and it came out pretty well done in my opinion, kudos to the team, you guys did amazing.The way i see is that comunication, or the lack of, may have cause most of the problens with the reception. I don't think it is the devs fault, people will often miss interpretate things even when you explain it multiple times.
TLDR: I loved it, congrats to the team!
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I´ve had fun with the DLC (SP only).

The Mapuche run I´ve done has been the most fun I´ve had recently in HOI4 (growing from a really weak minor to a big power that can challenge the USA and liberating the natives was cool). What I find a pity is that actually liberating the natives before ending your campaign is a downgrade to your nation (specially manpower). But all in all it was good.

Have also played fascist Argentina and it was also fantastic. I was getting crazy looking for the secret path but I see you are already fixing it and making it easier to go down that path which is fantastic IMO.

I have read from other people that getting too few research slots is a bad choice, but given that you get so many national spirits that buff attack I think the nations get somewhat "balanced" around it until you reach endgame and become a beast (playing as said nation feels good!).
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
This was also the first DLC i didnt buy. My reason for it was that it doesnt include any mechanics aswell. AND THAT IS GOOD.
I dont want to spend X amount of money for a country pack with nations i dont care about only to have to spend a vaste majority of that DLC price on those countries.
So i want to say that its correct to keep country packs mechanic free and i wont have to buy and complain about it through negative reviews or even dropping the game after too many of those cases (which would be financialy worse for you then just producing country packs and keeping mechanics out of them)


( i dont know why but i couldnt directly quote like i usally can from a post)

This is more of a half truth though. Yes it doesnt impact the Hoi4 "main" team. But one could argue that those Juno team members could be part of the main team and help it do things faster. They also cost wages so if they were not to deliver a revenue, then that would indanger Hoi4 as a whole.
Iam not of the opinion that the later part is the case. But the former part about them helping the main team to produce mechanical content faster is not unreasonable.

On the regional prices. I think some south american currencies were hit bye those changes if i remeber correctly. So yeah not supprising then.

Not really, the skill competencies required to build content packs are something the Juno team specifically has - creating mechanics requires a different set. Developers are not usually regarded as fungible items. One day I'll do the art for a release and you'll see what I mean ;)

I wanna start off by saying i really liked the DLC, its very refreshing for global conflicts that south america is something to keep an eye on.

I think a really good idea for future DLCs is to make small tweaks to countries that are not nessecerily the focus of the DLC.

A lot of people i know (me included) got very excited the day Yugoslavia got a slight rework on the BFB(Or it might've been BBA im not sure), or how Romania got a couple extra focuses, or when PRC started with 1 extra military factory. Small things like this give a refreshing feeling to "old" countries and make the game more interesting overall. Adding a new one or two decisions or focuses for 3-4 countries per DLC could do a lot more than a full content pack centered only around the tip of a content no-one ever reaches. (For example, the German focus tree could really use some spy bonuses considering Italy gets like 8 spy slots alone.)

I should say that War Effort patches (which added the Romanian and PRC changes you mention) will continue after the ToA post-release cycle is done. I still believe this is the best way to maintain the game moving forwards.

Could you say more about how mods factor into planning DLC, if at all. A lot of people say that country packs are pointless because mods can fill in focus trees, or at least, never do justice to the focus tree of a dedicated modder passionate about that country. Others that DLC should stop reinventing the wheel and just adapt the content straight into the release.

Can you share anything to clarify those views among players?

Players go to mods for some things, and to us for others. Additionally, we know that while many of our players use mods, even more of them don't want to use mods at all; it would make no sense to adjust our strategy on a cross-section of only modded users that happen to play a specific mod that we think might do something similar to what we're considering.
 
  • 8Like
  • 5
Reactions:
Will we see an updated roadmap soon, or do we have to wait until after the next full-size dlc comes out?

This is something I'd like to do again soon. Especially because I know what's coming soon....
 
  • 19Love
  • 5Like
  • 2Haha
  • 2
Reactions:
The most annoying thing are the constant comparisons with mods as in "XYZ modded tree is far better than this worthless piece of junk Paradox sold us". I think this has been already explained somewhere by Arheo, but with as much leeway as modders have in churning out content, oftentimes with many of them working on one nation for a long time, i can't seriously compare it with what Paradox does given that a company has to follow a budget, time-constraints and personal constraints etc.
Ah, yeah. Speaking as someone who has modded for his own nation for almost two years, i do say that i know that this is what separated us country-specific modders from the devs.

I'm not saying this out of love for a stock company like Paradox, however because i know how businesses function and because this behaviour doesn't even change in circles where i work and study and where one would think that customers are more professional like in the transport or car industry. Yes, customers in the logistics sector can sometimes be as oblivious to the reality of how their service is created as players of GSG games Lmao.
Yup, albeit the devs does not have monetary restraint (as Arheo said above, but i do believe that they have one, just a very high limit one), they do have a time constraint. The devs only has one big shot to provide enough content for a country for their countrypack/expansion, and then moving on to another region to add contents for it/reworking an old content. Sincerely, i would be all too happy if they got it right the first time, but if not, i would be all too happy to put my suggestions for fixes before and after release.

Like, putting Soeharto (who is only 15 years old in 1936) and his "New Order" party for Dutch East Indies in the base game is surely off-putting for me, especially making DEI starting as democratic and having Govgen Tjarda leading Soekarno's PNI (Partai Nasional Indonesia). But then again, it only warranted small changes that took a backseat to the more pressing bugs already existing.

Further eluding about the "one big shot" comment above, if the devs wanted to make an Indonesian content, i do hope they would get the major ideological paths right based on the historical evidences present. As example, I would be happy if they got a historically plausible democratic path for Indonesia featuring Dokter Soetomo's Parindra (Partai Indonesia Raya), even if the focus tree does not have a Javanese Revivalists path hell-bent to remake Majapahit led by Radjiman Wedjodiningrat (Rajiman Wediodiningrat). In turn, having the Dutch fascists represented by the NSB East Indies whose foreign relation buildings amounts to only joining the Axis or Italian League are good, as long as they are forever banned to join the Co-Prosperity Sphere.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Why didn't we get Admiral Graf Spee's model since it is on the opening screen and we got one for Blucher who also was on the opening screen despite having Admiral Hipper model already?
Why not give USA-made Aircraft models available for SA nations to USA, since the USA model pool for aircraft is a bit lacking, like P-36 or TBD are available for Bazil but not for the US
 
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Tbh dlc is good but one thing ruining it mostly is USA with Monroe doctrine because its hard to do anything without USA coming into things. It would be better if it would be clearer for knowing boarders but same time I think USA has too much power over South America. So I would wish you nerfed USA on behalf of SA
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Why not give USA-made Aircraft models available for SA nations to USA, since the USA model pool for aircraft is a bit lacking, like P-36 or TBD are available for Bazil but not for the US

Not a bad idea tbh - maybe we will!

Tbh dlc is good but one thing ruining it mostly is USA with Monroe doctrine because its hard to do anything without USA coming into things. It would be better if it would be clearer for knowing boarders but same time I think USA has too much power over South America. So I would wish you nerfed USA on behalf of SA

Interestingly, one of the earlier points of feedback we had was that the old version of the Monroe doctrine felt very unrealistic.
 
  • 10Like
  • 2
Reactions:
If bug is something that stop me from playing your game, then the quality of your chinese localisation for TOA is BUG. For my first time a new PDS content doesn't interest me in any way.

I don't have any negative opinion on Juno, and actually I kinda like this style, but your chinese localisation DOES stop me from opening your game.

BTW, this thread has a very positive effect on public relations. Pay your attention to things more urgent, but just don't forget those less urgent.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I just wanted to say that I really like the policy of having country pack releases be separate from the mechanics focused DLCs. I almost exclusively play the game modded so minor country focus trees are completely irrelevant to me. I'm happy to spend money on something like Man the Guns or No Step Back, but I'm very glad I don't feel forced into buying these country packs.
 
  • 6
  • 4Like
Reactions:
In AAT, we saw that some states in non-Nordic (UK and Albania, too) countries got much needed reworks.

Could we ever expect a War Effort patch that contains a good deal of state reworks for cleaner and more unique borders?
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
In AAT, we saw that some states in non-Nordic (UK and Albania, too) countries got much needed reworks.

Could we ever expect a War Effort patch that contains a good deal of state reworks for cleaner and more unique borders?

Actually this is something we try not to do. Geographical changes have the unfortunate side effect of breaking savegame compatibility, so we try to only do them around major releases that would do that anyway.
 
  • 8Like
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions: