Can we no longer play "forever" in man the guns?

[Feeblezak]

I don't care about achievements since they require you to play on Ironman, but I really don't like the game just arbitrarily ending in 1948 either. Yes there's little reason to play past that point but maybe I want to ruin the world a little more before I end the campaign.

This seems like an incredibly strange change to make after all these years, since I don't remember a popular request being for HoI4 to have an official end date.

 

[Hojsimpson]

Some Controversial changes are added stealthily

 

[bottle228]

does this phenomenon only appear in ironman or for all games

 

[Keldros]

I don't get the change. As other have said you can cheese your way around this by surrounding capitals and leaving countries uncapitulated. Really the annoying thing is I just lost my weekend playthrough because I didn't know about it before hand. Thanks for buying our DLC, here's your surprise?

 

[stygN]

One of the big problems with just keeping a war going is the PP cost for occupation. When I did the stupidly hard achievement to take back all of china (which includes the treaty ports) as Nationalist China. Even WITH ending the mayor wars against the Comintern and Axis, I still nearly maxed out the PP on occupation alone against the Allies.

Well, I guess you just have to start the new war before you end the old.. Not that bad I guess.. But still, it's annoying that you can bypass this change by cheesing the system and getting a bit extra pain (as, for instance with China, you might actually want a year or two of peace to beef up your army, get tech, produce tanks.. But I guess you just have to defend for a few years before you can do anything...), so the change is just plain stupid.

And yes, it is somewhat logical that the game should end at some point, but it's bloody well not necessary. But hey, I guess the paradox devs just want to see the world burn : / (Oh, and thanks for the DLC by the way, it's great fun, apart from this..)

 

[pheonicia]

So I decided to play as the US in man the guns, go fascist and try to get 4 achievements. "To arms in Dixie", "Arsenal of Democracy", "Team America" and "Georgia on my mind". I only got 1 ("To arms in Dixie") since the game decided it was time to end...

Everything else aside, how exactly were you planning to get arsenal of democracy after to arms in Dixie? I didn't think you could stay democratic on that path.

 

[klinkvon13]

Honestly if the forced endgame happens only in iron man mode then imho this is working as designed.

Think about it. If you had unlimited time to accomplish something really special then it really is not much of an achievement.

Having said that if the endgame is forced in non iron man mode then that really goes against the "this game is highly moddable" theme

Would that be complicated to deactivate achievements the player decided to continue after the endgame/score?
No it would not.
So, no, it is not a necessary or sensible change.

(edit: and the smart guy that respectfully disagree 4sec after my post, if you are so respectful about disagreeing, maybe you should raise your voice to explain what you actually disagree with. The fact it is not complicated to deactivate achievements after endgame/score dialog? or are you claiming it is a necessary change?)

 

[SchwarzKatze]

Some Controversial changes are added stealthily

Last time it was the 8x planning decay, which also wasn't in the patch log.

 

[GeorgieBest]

Last time it was the 8x planning decay, which also wasn't in the patch log.

I thought that change was in patch logs? I remember reading about it before experiencing it in game.

 

[currylambchop]

Would that be complicated to deactivate achievements the player decided to continue after the endgame/score?
No it would not.
So, no, it is not a necessary or sensible change.

(edit: and the smart guy that respectfully disagree 4sec after my post, if you are so respectful about disagreeing, maybe you should raise your voice to explain what you actually disagree with. The fact it is not complicated to deactivate achievements after endgame/score dialog? or are you claiming it is a necessary change?)

The reason I disagreed is I simply don’t see why you’d be playing ironman if it were not for achievements. It’s also simple enough to change something from Ironman mode with savegame editing.

Also, knowing Paradox spaghetti code if they added something like this it would probably end up causing like 100 bugs.

 

[klinkvon13]

The reason I disagreed is I simply don’t see why you’d be playing ironman if it were not for achievements. It’s also simple enough to change something from Ironman mode with savegame editing.

Also, knowing Paradox spaghetti code if they added something like this it would probably end up causing like 100 bugs.

Ok, that's what I thought: believe it or not, when posting, I wrote a line stating that I do like playing ironman not to be tempted to savescum (I think that why it was invented in first place, not for easily foolable and not so meaningful achievements), so that makes the question of the achievement secondary.
Then I removed the line because I felt it was unnecessary to mention. But it actually is then

About the bug angle, that is a frightening thought. But, really, that should not to be too hard. That would be more complicated if it was about allowing something that was never possible.

 

[edwardx]

They should have put this in the change log and not done it by stealth. This way it just looks bad on them.

 

[bottle228]

So is this still the case for non-ironman games?
I really liked to get to the point where I can have everything researched as I am bad at choosing what to research and build.
It will be harder for me to enjoy the game with my own slow playstyle in vanilla I guess.
And having a no end date limit mod on makes it a hassle if anyone wants to play late game with me too.
And it opens the flood gates of "can we also add this mod too?"

 

[currylambchop]

So is this still the case for non-ironman games?
I really liked to get to the point where I can have everything researched as I am bad at choosing what to research and build.
It will be harder for me to enjoy the game with my own slow playstyle in vanilla I guess.
And having a no end date limit mod on makes it a hassle if anyone wants to play late game with me too.
And it opens the flood gates of "can we also add this mod too?"

Yeah, that’s really important for me IMO. If they blocked it for non-Ironman games it’s most probably a bug.

Also pinging @podcat since no one has done it yet.

 

[SeekTruthFromFx]

Many posts here assume that PDX stealthily hid away from the patchlist. Perhaps it would be more charitable, and realistic, to assume that it's a bug?

 

[currylambchop]

OHH What if this is a teaser for a COLD WAR EXPANSION?

 

[orochi2k]

OK.... let's call this a bug then....
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...laying-after-score-screen-1-6-0-9513.1157446/

 

[Reman]

I thought that change was in patch logs? I remember reading about it before experiencing it in game.

Nope, it wasn't in the patch notes. We only heard a dev confirm it as intended from a response to a bug report.

Many posts here assume that PDX stealthily hid away from the patchlist. Perhaps it would be more charitable, and realistic, to assume that it's a bug?

It's highly unlikely that this is a bug. Paradox has a long history of stealthily introducing nonsense changes like this. The 8x planning decay and EU4's arbitrary capital movement restrictions are two recent examples.

 

[Tormodius]

I'm not sure its anything new. What has changed recently then?
When the game was released it was not like this however. You could play forever being at peace with everyone.
But last time I completed a late game war (coupla months back I think), i got only until the early 50's game ended when i won the big war and had no more enemies.

 

[CharlieFox]

Really, Paradox? Was this really necessary?

I wouldn’t have gotten One Empire or New World Order without going past the end date (justifying against all the minors takes a long time).