My point was, there is no guarantee that EOOQE will have NBRT ready tomorrow anyway. He could potentially not have it ready before the 14th
Historical Immersion Project - Download/FAQ
- Thread starter Meneth
- Start date
-
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.
My point was, there is no guarantee that EOOQE will have NBRT ready tomorrow anyway. He could potentially not have it ready before the 14th
Not being a HIP member anymore I must say I agree with Arko.If one doesn't update (or rolls back version), saves are not broken
I don't think it really worth it to make players waiting few weeks more when they already waited one year for this marvellous expansion, especially for a patch that be potentialy broken and hotfixed and repatched again during the following weeks (...or not if Paradox leaves in holidays).
Just my own opinion here, not HIP team's, since nothing is decided yet.
If the EE is released at least a week before HL and then people would wait another few weeks for fully compatible version they could still play with unpatched game and switch to 2.4 once compatched EE is ready. That would give them at least 2 weeks of EE games to get used to the expansion.
But as I said, it's just a private opinion of somebody who is not to decide anything anymore.
OTOH, if the EE is released only few weeks after HL, I will be back from vacation and possibly could help SWMH team with potential remarks on my part of EE
- 3
Two cents from somebody who's utilized HIP modules for a while:
Would it make sense to allow the HIP community to play with what you've produced - and, in the process, potentially identify issues that could be complicated by Horse Lords or subsequent further modifications - as opposed to continually tweak it without greater player input? That feedback could be very helpful in expediting the process of weeding out potential issues, and could make issues down the line less complex.
This is just my opinion - one nobody asked for, admittedly - but I think it could actually help a project that I've grown to equate with quality, and general community responsiveness.
Would it make sense to allow the HIP community to play with what you've produced - and, in the process, potentially identify issues that could be complicated by Horse Lords or subsequent further modifications - as opposed to continually tweak it without greater player input? That feedback could be very helpful in expediting the process of weeding out potential issues, and could make issues down the line less complex.
This is just my opinion - one nobody asked for, admittedly - but I think it could actually help a project that I've grown to equate with quality, and general community responsiveness.
- 5
Sigh. I just came back from months of not touching steam games and I see that Valve has done away with the option to disable automatic updates. What a pain in the arse.
This solution will work in the interim as I have a long ongoing campaign, big thanks!
To my understanding, there was *never* an option to disable automatic updates. The only thing Valves says they changed is how the options are worded, but they did the same thing back then as now: update on launch, or stay updated all the time.
Direct statement from Steam Support, Dec 2011:
There are a few possible work-arounds:
1. As I said above, keep a copy of the game somewhere outside of Steam's library. You can run it there without update worries.
2. Go to offline mode before playing. Unfortunately, the next to you buy a DLC and want to download it, it will update the game as well.
3. Apparently, on at least the Windows version of Steam, it's possible to get into a console mode and turn off updates. This is global, affecting all games. I don't know if this ever actually worked, or if it still does.
Last edited:
.png){kind=avatar}
I assume so. That would obviously be recommended. If you want to be sure of savegame-compatibility in the middle of a major patch cycle, sure, go back-up your game folder, but you obviously no longer need to do this if the version you want to maintain is the last minor patch for an older, major CK2 patch. Paradox at least now does us the service of making sure those stay available.
Personally, I try to keep a copy of even every minor patch or even open beta patch version. This makes it much easier to track changes in the vanilla game for an overhaul modder like myself.
Indeed, my drive backup software keeps essentially every version since 1.06b (I missed some betas, and the software lost a few where 2 patches happened in the same week). At one point I was considering publishing a list of changed/added files for every patch, but there didn't seem to be much interest. Similarly, I think it would be useful if every mod listed the files it changes or overrides. Then people could easily see if 2 mods affect the same file(s), they aren't compatible.
Something similar to this is done with the file 'file2mod_map.txt' that the installer generates right inside your compiled HIP folder. In ascending lexicographic order, it lists every single file that was installed by a HIP mod alongside from which module it came. Handy.
It is more overhead than it is worth to enable 'early access' to comprehensive updates like the SWMH expansion. It takes a tremendous amount of effort releasing all these packages together, and it would take even more and make tracking upon feedback that much harder if there were multiple release options. Add in to that the fact that SWMH version changes tend to break savegames, and it's just a mess for the brand that we try to uphold.
However, projects like EMF enable early access through installing the latest beta, which aside from the last 3 weeks or so, is usually updated daily and is nearly as stable as the released product (heavy development is done in separate branches in our code repository before being cleared for beta).
Also, I do generally agree that the SWMH expansion would've been much, MUCH better released in parts, with the SWMH team actively managing compatching and support for their own mod. However, Aasmul (SWMH team leader) was absent due to RL when the Charlemagne compatch had to be done, I took over maintenance and compatching (and fixing) of SWMH out of necessity, and the big glob of unrelated changes in the EE just sort of piled-up as it was separately developed in a decentralized manner by the SWMH folks. So it goes.
Hopefully future SWMH releases will be smaller in scale. Bite-size (or at least meal-size) is good for quality, as it makes the team far more agile and involves users directly in the feedback loop.
I think that all the people who have been waiting for EE don't all need to have imediately a version with which they will be able to run fully-scalled game for several weeks (which is as I see it the only argument for NO release before the HL expansion and patch).
What are the people here basically asking is:
let the users see EE even if it is a week before the HL expansion and patch, so they can just play some test games and look arounf about what has been changed (we all know it was a lot! In fact a 1/3 of the map has changed)
Furthemore, as I read the feedback, many people are more anticipating the EE than any official patch and many, as I believe, would even disable the game update just to be able to play with EE. Why not give them the choice?
Even if they would only be able to play with EE HIP for only about a week, it would still be valuable to both the users and the HIP team, I assume, as the team might get necessary feedback even before the HL patch and some possible remarks could have been sorted out while updating HIP to HL patch/expansion.
So, why not allowing them to do it and have win-win option?
EDIT: I have been working on that update for over a year and I really don't understand why, when it's ready, are the users disabled to play it for no obvious reason - I do understand waiting for NBRT+ at this particular moment, but once it is ready, there is no reason to wait anymore. Ok the users will be informed that a major patch is about to come, so long campaigns are not recommended... so they will just play some first look-around games. Why not?
What are the people here basically asking is:
let the users see EE even if it is a week before the HL expansion and patch, so they can just play some test games and look arounf about what has been changed (we all know it was a lot! In fact a 1/3 of the map has changed)
Furthemore, as I read the feedback, many people are more anticipating the EE than any official patch and many, as I believe, would even disable the game update just to be able to play with EE. Why not give them the choice?
Even if they would only be able to play with EE HIP for only about a week, it would still be valuable to both the users and the HIP team, I assume, as the team might get necessary feedback even before the HL patch and some possible remarks could have been sorted out while updating HIP to HL patch/expansion.
So, why not allowing them to do it and have win-win option?
EDIT: I have been working on that update for over a year and I really don't understand why, when it's ready, are the users disabled to play it for no obvious reason - I do understand waiting for NBRT+ at this particular moment, but once it is ready, there is no reason to wait anymore. Ok the users will be informed that a major patch is about to come, so long campaigns are not recommended... so they will just play some first look-around games. Why not?
- 6
Well another day have passed and NBRT is still not ready. So the discussion about whether it should be rolled out or not is still hypothetical. We're still waiting for EOOQE as we agreed we would
We can wait.
Quick question: are the revamped hre cultures going to be incuded in the EE ?
Quick question: are the revamped hre cultures going to be incuded in the EE ?
Very useful, but what I was thinking was a centralized list where a user could pick 2 or more mods (before installing) to see if they interfere with each other. Also, by comparing vanilla files that have change recently with files a mod affects, it could show if the mod likely needs updated.
If mod compatibility were as simple as whether filenames overlap, that would indeed be great. However, compatibility is a more complex beast in practice.
About 1066 being the most balanced start date: That applies only to the earlier start date in 1066, correct? How much less balanced is the later one (December I believe)?
I believe it's the other way around, with December one being the most balanced.
Not sure why though.