HOI4 - Development Diary - October 12th 2016

[SteelVolt]

With the information I have currently (knowing full well things may change over time) about this DLC I am willing to give up potentially more damage rather than paying for something that does "more or less the same thing"
Why would I pay for this feature when I have been replicating it with just a couple of mouse clicks since HOI1?
Most of us have been successfully pulling off encirclements and blitzes from day one of playing. I'm trying to figure out why I would pay for something that every general has used (or tried to use) since the very first war?
PDS did not invent encirclements or the blitz. It is not patented by PDS. I'm not sure why this is not part of the base game to begin with to be honest.

I'm one of PDS's loudest fan boys but I'm having a real difficult time cheering for this

Sorry for lack of clarity: the end result would look more or less the same in that the same provinces would be conquered, given enough superiority. But since the manual orders, unless you micro the whole process, would not include stuff like support attacks or waiting until a reasonable amount of org before attacking, the difference in cost can be significant.

 

[podcat]

In the Garrison order configuration, it would be handy if you could not only set what you want the garrison to care about, but also prioritize the things it does care about.

I.E.Quell the rebels first. Then if you have units left over guard the airfields. Then if you still have units put them to harbors.

Also the AI could prioritize using cavalry units for rebel duty, and more fighty units for other duties. And between other duties would put "heavier" units to tasks with higher priority. In regards to my example above, that would mean putting the heaviest units to guard airfields, and whatever is left to guard the harbors.

This has been free feedback.

Thanks we did consider it, but often there is a clear priority order you want and changing it on the fly makes it difficult for player to anticipate what the result will be. You can also prioritize perfectly by using separate groups where you give just the amount of divisions you want

 

[podcat]

Perhaps if one has both coastlines and ports selected, it should prioritise defending coasts adjacent (or just generally closer) to ports?

not a bad idea

but what I don't understand is why one of these features is paid for and the other is free - both are incremental improvements to existing features. I know @podcat disagrees with this, but my argument is simple - the battle planner already exists and the new Blitz function is an addition to this.

There are a lot of things to consider. Some reasons garrison is free:
- We want to be nice and have a chunk of free stuff in an expansion just because even though it costs us money and time to develop
- particularly the resistance part worked very badly, so in some ways it is a bug fix
- the resistance system is one of those things in the game I am not 100% happy with which might translate to being changed in the future, and then I dont want people to pay for something I might change drastically in the future.

This was something meant to be in from the start

No it wasnt. Wishing something to be in the game doesnt somehow make it so.

And alas I still remain the student........... apologizes master

apology accepted my disciple

 

[BjornB]

Angst for angst sake is not all that helpful. I usually speed right on by posts like this to get to the posts that matter. I think I would read these more if they offered constructive advice or thoughts.

It is correct that I'm removing off-topic non-constructive repetitions for this very reason.

Stay on topic and be constructive, or be deleted. There are a lot of criticism left in here that are put forth in a constructive and civil manner, without resorting to personal insults and flame bating.


Some pointers:
- Discussions on content and value of other games expansions does not belong here.
- Posting over and over, basically just saying "this/you suck" without providing any form or food for thought, will be deleted.
- Calling other people names etc, is not allowed.

 

[podcat]

Personally, I'm worried about the trend this sets for future DLC. The adjustments to get the Pacific Theater working well in the following DLC/patch... am I going to need to buy a DLC to get the island-hopping working?

Of course not, thats just silly

 

[BjornB]

From now on I will start moderating and writing

Paid and free feature...?
1. This is what I got the most expensive pre-order for...? Or do I have to pay extra for Blitzkreig...
2. Is Fw 200 also going to be a paid feature?
3. April 1st is many months away...

This is one of many features currently planned to be in the first expansion, one that is included in the Field Marshal edition.

 

[podcat]

I'm not 100% certain but I believe it is handled like for the SP game—the features are actually there but only unlocked if you have the DLC. Gameplay DLC have most or all of their code integrated into the main game and the AI has always been able to use new features, only the players without the DLC are restricted.

Cosmetic expansions might use the host's expansions, I'm really not sure.

You dont get cosmetic content, but you do get code features in MP if host has them

 

[podcat]

But without fixing battleplanner in the first place they are adding a very simple button to it. And it is even a paid one!
This is unacceptable. Paradox needs money to keep development for sure. But Blitz button? "just move there, dont do anything fancy that attack order does" This dosent seem to be a big trouble. Nobody spent days to code this, hopefully.

Its a kind of feature that does take days to code for sure. Just because its controlled by a single button doesnt mean there isnt a lot going on behind the scenes.

 

[BjornB]

I understand the concerns people are having. We already know a majority in here is strongly against the Blitz button to be part of the paid content.

Please use the "I agree" button instead of making the exact same post someone else already did to keep this thread possible to follow. Thank you!

 

[BjornB]

Posts made with the sole purpose of agitation will be deleted.

Making your concern known is fine. Trying to start a flame war is not.

 

[podcat]

Wow this heated up fast. I'll have some discussions about it tomorrow and see if its possible to switch things around. I do mostly blame how I presented things and I should have anticipated the hostile environment to these particular things. As a feature its nothing different than what we normally put as part of DLC, but I understand how it might appear otherwise to someone just reading this.

Do note that its important to understand that we need to actually charge money for DLC as much as people would like everything to be free, its what fuels bug fixing and continued development. We arent like a lot of other companies who release 1-3 patches then make sequels instead so we need to find a good balance between paid/free stuff, and sometimes stuff is in a grey zone. Sometimes big stuff need to be free (like tech changes in EU's Rights of Man) to give a base to build on, and because you cant just replace an existing system and then not have it accessible for all so it needs to be free.

 

[podcat]

One thing is not having enough time to solve it because laziness or not enough resources, but other is leave it intentionally broken to charge for it, or tie it to a DLC.

and the battle planner is not a simple QoL, like it was in vic2, It actually gives a % attack bonus for the divisions. It is a huge deal, to have behind a paywall something that actually improves the performances of the army.

That first behaviour will not change. its required for a lot of cases to work out. If all you had was something like blitz the system would break down all the time for general use and require a lot of babysitting. Also insinuating lazyness is just down right rude.

as for bonuses, well as you must know you get those as long as you manually play with stuff attached to a plan, so I have no idea what your argument is here

 

[podcat]

If it's split between a DLC and core gameplay that basically means we can't expect it to continue development

If there was any risk of that then I wouldnt have added blitz to it.

 

[podcat]

I have no problem with that. And honestly many people will buy the first DLC anyway (or already have). So what the point of adding Blitz to the DLC ? Increase sells figure ? You are most likely getting the opposite by including such basic feature in a DLC. I feel cheated as a customer. Please reconsider.

in this case, adding value to people who actually pay and for people who already did through the field marshal edition

 

[podcat]

They did the best release in the Paradox history and people loved team for It. I loved It too. This reaction from fans was so evident, even other Paradox teams ( CK2, EU4 ) were inspired by this and tried put more effort into their work.

I'm sorry, but I am not sure if this is sarcasm or not HOI4 release was probably one of the best and most stable in PDS history, but this forum has been overwhelmingly negative to a large degree since release (and was also very negative the week before release when a lot of other gaming communities were very positive as they watched streamers etc play). Its something I think partly is legacy of HOI3 release, partly our fault for managing communication less than optimal, and partly because well, HOI players are HOI players. We will need to work together to overcome this stuff, because its not fun for us or you with such a climate on the forum. payed or not aside people have spent 99% of their energy in this thread on being negative, posting ultimatums and critic. Now, to clarify there is nothing wrong with speaking your mind and giving constructive critic, and has sent a clear message, *but* the fact that there is no talk about the actual features is sadly not so surprising and pretty depressing. Its pretty clear the current community climate only really accepts negative opinions which is driving away a lot of people who are having a good time.

also since this is moving fast, I have recognized the feedback here. check my post last page

 

[podcat]

@podcat since you seem to be reading this, can you respond my PM about a huge bug I encountered in this game?

Yeah thanks, already logged it earlier tonight after talking with Bjorn.

So your thinking equates to the following: people are complaining about your DLC announcement because customers of your HOI franchise are naturally just negative whiny people?

Thats not what I said. I said this forum is seemingly in a big negative place and its not good for anyone and we should try and get it out of there. I also care a lot, otherwise I would not be talking to fans on the forum at midnight.

 

[podcat]

I think people are mostly negative because we feel like we aren't being heard.

To turn this constructive, do you have any ideas for how we could improve this? We already spend a lot of time on forums (the people who dare), and you have to remember that is time we arent working on say coding a new feature or something else so we need to spend it wisely where it matters the most.

 

[podcat]

1. Add an option to battle plans to fix their maximum width.

2. Add some ways to organize and distribute air forces more easily.

3. Add some UI feedback features to give players more of an idea as to what is happening with the war, and why it's happening. For instance, how many planes are being lost in an air region.

4. The AI really, really, really, really needs work in a bad way. Entire fronts are abandoned by the AI and single player is zero challenge at all, even with maxed sliders on your enemies.

There's four things you can work on right now which will dramatically improve the quality of the game. Please do not charge us for these things.

We were talking about how people should feel like we listen to them. I'm not sure that must translate to "work on this stuff we want".
If you check out what we did in the patch it was the most talked about issues. The diary today also highlights two things improving areas people have been complaining about a lot. So if people still say that we arent listening there is something else missing, and its not work more on stuff we want, because thats what we do basically.

 

[podcat]

Vets remember the glitchy HOI3 supply system, where a sudden bug in the port could kill the whole campaign.

Veterans remember how HOI3 AI was just standing there. They do see the potential and seeing with patches.

Thanks, lets look at your comments which more reflect my memories on how developing hoi3 was and compare it to how people actually talk about it.
Check the previous dev diary. It had a lot of disagrees and arguments for how both AI and supply system were perfect in HOI3. By a big majority (there were a few people who argued otherwise of course).

But this, is not about a design choice! Please don't do this. Please don't create this paywall.

I'll see what can be done.

 

[podcat]

Can I ask a question? Will the MP-dlc policy be the same as in EU4, where only the host needs to have bought all the dlc for everyone to enjoy them? I'd hate for a chaos of 20 different versions of this game.

yes. without it it would be really messy