Open Beta Patch 1.11.10 (Steam Only) - Checksum 09ac

[MatRopert]

Hello everyone!

New month, new open beta patch. The April Hotfix is codenamed "Lavigne" although you won't find any mention in the game because @Arheo wouldn't let me.
You can find it on the Steam branch open_beta. If the branch does not appear, restarting Steam should fix it.
As usual this is meant for the brave souls who want to try out the upcoming fixes & balance changes early.
Remember this branch is a work-in-progress that has yet to go through our full release QA process, so while we try to keep relatively stable you may experience new issues or crashes.

Feel free to leave your feedback in this thread or in the bug report forum as usual, especially if you encounter new issues not present in 1.11.9, or if something marked as fixed in the below changelog still occurs for you.

Spoiler: 1.11.10 (09ac) - BETA PATCH NOTES

##################################
# Bugfix
##################################

- Added a bypass to the Free French "Form the National Committee" Focus to avoid blocking the player if they don't have 90 Legitimacy
- Fixed a problem in British Alternate Strategy Plans when historical focuses are off without a specific strategy plan being selected
- Fixed issue where Estonia and Latvia would not follow the historical focuses
- Added missing leader tooltip in Soviet focus The Glory of the Red Army. Pavel Rybalko will become a general after completing the focus, and now everyone knows it.
- Turkey no longer gets a wargoal on themselves when refusing Balkan Federation demands
- Niche Role will now be correctly set correctly when AI designs ships. This also applies to players using "auto design".
- Japanese puppets should now get the corrects name
- Fixed achievement "Better than Szent Istvan" being impossible to earn due to a an issue with the new character system
- Naval battles will no longer count towards combat duration for career profile

 

[Somentus]

Looks good, happy to see the achievement fixed. Thanks for the bugfixes!

 

[eastcoastceojam]

- Fixed issue where Estonia and Latvia would not follow the historical focuses

Very nice- I was hoping this would get addressed one of these days! Hope this isn't an April Fool's joke!

 

[BarakiSan]

Thank you for fixing the achievement!
One more achievement doesn’t seem to fire for me no matter what I do, the one for having a British and French spy working on the same operation

 

[SRhistory]

very nice. Keep up the good work guys!

 

[TasteDasRainbow]

This is great, but when will there be any update whatsoever, even if just to describe the progress, for tank conversion cost fix? It was buried as one of the issues in the 'known 1.11 issues', with zero update to that issue. Or are you just deciding to go the route of naval bugs and just pretend they don't exist? Considering the AI is still incapable of even using their dockyards, let alone properly building a navy, years after the fact, I'm inclined that this is going to be the case.

Getting pretty annoying, if not outright insulting, how many *critical* bugs like this are being vastly overlooked in favor of arbitrary useless issues like achievements. How many critical gameplay elements are willing to be broken and not fixed simply because the average player can't comprehend these issues exist?

 

[SynthWeaver2]

This is great, but when will there be any update whatsoever, even if just to describe the progress, for tank conversion cost fix? It was buried as one of the issues in the 'known 1.11 issues', with zero update to that issue. Or are you just deciding to go the route of naval bugs and just pretend they don't exist? Considering the AI is still incapable of even using their dockyards, let alone properly building a navy, years after the fact, I'm inclined that this is going to be the case.

Getting pretty annoying, if not outright insulting, how many *critical* bugs like this are being vastly overlooked in favor of arbitrary useless issues like achievements. How many critical gameplay elements are willing to be broken and not fixed simply because the average player can't comprehend these issues exist?

This achievement was an easy fix, they prob only needed to change 1 number. Then again the achievements still does not fire for me using an old save game

 

[SynthWeaver2]

Thank you for fixing the achievement!
One more achievement doesn’t seem to fire for me no matter what I do, the one for having a British and French spy working on the same operation

Does it fire for you? It does not for me...

 

[SRhistory]

This is great, but when will there be any update whatsoever, even if just to describe the progress, for tank conversion cost fix? It was buried as one of the issues in the 'known 1.11 issues', with zero update to that issue. Or are you just deciding to go the route of naval bugs and just pretend they don't exist? Considering the AI is still incapable of even using their dockyards, let alone properly building a navy, years after the fact, I'm inclined that this is going to be the case.

Getting pretty annoying, if not outright insulting, how many *critical* bugs like this are being vastly overlooked in favor of arbitrary useless issues like achievements. How many critical gameplay elements are willing to be broken and not fixed simply because the average player can't comprehend these issues exist?

I do understand your feeling and also the no communication on the bugs reports. I believe in one of the threads I saw one of the dev’s saying they are looking in it but they don’t want to go into a discussion on the bugs. But he promised that they will start with telling if the bug is confirmed or a duplicate. Not sure if they start working like this.

Next to above keep in mind that dev is since this year really working on the bugs. Solving around 9 a month which is really nice/good.

What is a critical bug for you isn’t the same bug for someone else. For example we got a forum member who is complaining about a text bug for a long time already… for him the game is unplayable and so it’s a critical bug… for you well it’s something else. And for me… I am doing achievements and the bugfix for the achievement done was very high on my list!

Will see what they will do and when… for now be happy they solved in a really fast way bugs (before we needed to what until the next dlc for most of the bugs)

 

[Arheo]

This is great, but when will there be any update whatsoever, even if just to describe the progress, for tank conversion cost fix?

It was planned for this patch, but we ran into some unexpected problems with it. It will appear once those have been resolved.

Getting pretty annoying, if not outright insulting, how many *critical* bugs like this are being vastly overlooked in favor of arbitrary useless issues like achievements. How many critical gameplay elements are willing to be broken and not fixed simply because the average player can't comprehend these issues exist?

Look, I get why this rhetoric appears, I really do. This said, the idea that by making rational decisions based on the resources and information available to us, we are somehow insulting or attacking our fans is exceptionally toxic. I know it isn't always intended this way, but this kind of discourse is becoming more and more perpetuated across our community these days, and it needs to be called out.

All it really serves to do is to turn fans against developers, and vice versa.

To be clearer about what the 'resources and information available to us' consists of, consider that fixing a bug in an achievement and fixing tank conversion costs are not tasks of even remotely the same magnitude, nor do they necessarily involve the same disciplines. We don't prioritize one at the cost of the other. As you might also guess from my answer to your very first question, tank conversion costs are a non-trivial issue to solve, and the fix ended up requiring some further attention. That's how software development works, and deciding not to ship this fix is the objectively correct call. You would be even less happy if we'd shipped it and it was still broken in some way.

Furthermore, the issues you think are useless are the ones you don't care about. It is subjective. I know for a fact that some of the items in this month's patch are considered critical by others.

 

[TasteDasRainbow]

I appreciate the response and don't wish to denigrate community-dev relations, though I might have reinforced that rhetoric by repeating it.

The issue I find, however, is that progress, or issues, on such bugs aren't really published without such community outrage.

While I understand and appreciate the magnitude of complexity with the difference in these issues, I also feel that the nature of that magnitude in importance between achievements and considerably important game mechanics should warrant more transparent and regular publishings of the progress or complications of those issues, so that the community doesn't have to continually reach out, or even in my own case display outright disdain to have any discussion on these issues. And while it's absolutely true what some may consider critical is preferential and different from my own, I don't think it's fair to concede that issues with prominent game mechanics are remotely on the same scale of importance as things as minor as achievements, however I don't want to be argumentative in this matter because as you said, subjectivity is key.

Issues like tank conversion, AI naval production, etc. are I would argue critical game mechanics experiencing vast issues, that should have much more priority in terms of tracking and publishing progress on such issues. Without such communication, it becomes easy to get the impression of having little to no progress being made on such issues, which further invokes the fear of them becoming years upon years long bugs that will never be fixed, such as in the case of AI naval production. I think it's fair given the track record of issues like that to have a degree of outrage with these rather critical game mechanics/systems seeing such little coverage, let alone progress. While I don't wish at all to imply that these issues are prioritized more or less than others, I personally find the lack of priority to such features or mechanics concerning.

 

[conquerercornwall]

There is a bug with german tank models ( DLC files missing ), some german army insignia ( some of them corrupted ) leader of mengkukuo has weird skill ( naval bomber ? ) and charles lindbergh has wrong portrait and skill ( I suppose tactical bomber and fighter ) I think these bugs are still didn't fix

 

[flowlanss]

The bug fix is always good. Well done.
Btw, a Japanese theorist Hideo Itokawa's localization line is missing. Could you fix it in this/next patch?

 

[Harin]

I appreciate the response and don't wish to denigrate community-dev relations, though I might have reinforced that rhetoric by repeating it.

The issue I find, however, is that progress, or issues, on such bugs aren't really published without such community outrage.

While I understand and appreciate the magnitude of complexity with the difference in these issues, I also feel that the nature of that magnitude in importance between achievements and considerably important game mechanics should warrant more transparent and regular publishings of the progress or complications of those issues, so that the community doesn't have to continually reach out, or even in my own case display outright disdain to have any discussion on these issues. And while it's absolutely true what some may consider critical is preferential and different from my own, I don't think it's fair to concede that issues with prominent game mechanics are remotely on the same scale of importance as things as minor as achievements, however I don't want to be argumentative in this matter because as you said, subjectivity is key.

Issues like tank conversion, AI naval production, etc. are I would argue critical game mechanics experiencing vast issues, that should have much more priority in terms of tracking and publishing progress on such issues. Without such communication, it becomes easy to get the impression of having little to no progress being made on such issues, which further invokes the fear of them becoming years upon years long bugs that will never be fixed, such as in the case of AI naval production. I think it's fair given the track record of issues like that to have a degree of outrage with these rather critical game mechanics/systems seeing such little coverage, let alone progress. While I don't wish at all to imply that these issues are prioritized more or less than others, I personally find the lack of priority to such features or mechanics concerning.

It is hard to argue with some/most of the points you make. Like Arheo said, most of us get why people sometimes post a little louder than they would normally do. Some of my past posts drop a list of things that I felt needed attention long ago.

In the past I blamed the higher up decision makers for not giving the development team the resources they needed to fix issues faster. Podcat stepped up and said not to blame them, that he made the decisions. I get that, but in a fantasy world where Podcat, now Arheo, had the authority to pull anyone and everyone from inside Paradox to help out on HOI4 and hire any new people they felt could be helpful, I have no doubt that every bug and feature and wish of the developers could be completed. Since we live in the real world, resources are limited and decisions have to be made. That is why it is hard for me to accept that some larger blame rests on Podcat or Arheo. Forgive me, but I still believe people in higher positions do not give the HOI4 team what they need to break out of this cycle that has been ongoing for years.

Unfortunately, since HOI4 is so successful, those decision makers probably feel they are making good choices. It is those guys and gals I would like to loudly post concerns about resources to, not the development team. I know on this forum, many people who are "nice" to the developers get labeled as fans and should be ignored. It would not surprise me if these fans are just aware that the those higher up decision makers are not watching this forum, so choose not to raise their voice at those who are unfortunate enough to be on the front lines.

Heaven help me though, some days I see the potential the game has and the cycle it is caught in and I truly want to YELL on these forums. If you ever see me do it, please help me eat those words, because I do not want the development team to read them, and worse, read between them, and steal any of their energy.

 

[TasteDasRainbow]

Yeah I couldn't agree more with that sentiment. I'm hard pressed to blame the devs or community outreach for issues that exist in game, but moreso publishers who are concerned much more with profit margins, shareholders, etc. as the beginning and end of their decisions. And while I'd still give publishers the benefit of the doubt in that regard, that possibly they seek to make the best possible product first and seek profit therein second, it still largely feels as though they are rather detached from the product(s) they are publishing, and have to concern themselves much more with deadlines, market outreach, advertising, etc., and that such pressures leak downhill toward the devs of any given title, where issues with the actual product themselves by and large don't reach upwards at them unless there is such vast community outrage to actually affect their priorities.

Widely in that regard I don't like to fan my frustrations with such issues toward the devs or relevant community outreach, but at the same time, lacking mechanisms to reach out to such individuals and see legitimate course of action derived from such mechanisms, it becomes difficult to see meaningful avenues of expressing those issues to any real world effect. Which becomes especially concerning and disconcerting when there are rather massive issues with core game functionality that we see unattended for years on end, especially for a product that so many of us enjoy rather significantly compared to any relevant titles on the market.

 

[Ethereld]

Forgive me, but I still believe people in higher positions do not give the HOI4 team what they need to break out of this cycle that has been ongoing for years.

They do not give any project what is truly needed to solve most critical issues, but that is to be expected.

In the end of the day Paradox is a company that exist to make profit. If they have to choose between having 60 people working only on HOI4 and 30 people working on on HOI4 and 30 on a new project that will give more money, they will be clearly go for the later.

IMO for me that is why it is so important to have some kind of custodian group as in Stellaris. Because at the end of the day the main team beyond solving issues is also expected to make new content and in that regard no matter what they do people will be disappointed on one side or the other.

 

[Corpse Fool]

should warrant more transparent and regular publishings of the progress or complications of those issues, so that the community doesn't have to continually reach out, or even in my own case display outright disdain to have any discussion on these issues.

This is what my monthly 'round table'/community discussion threads were supposed to be about. Getting a list of things the community wants to hear the most about, and hoping the devs would actually comment on it to avoid having the community just seething because try as they might, they are getting absolutely no help. A couple people expressed their support for the idea and I'm at least somewhat ashamed that I've just let that effort die.

 

[XselenS]

Hello everyone!

New month, new open beta patch. The April Hotfix is codenamed "Lavigne" although you won't find any mention in the game because @Arheo wouldn't let me.
You can find it on the Steam branch open_beta. If the branch does not appear, restarting Steam should fix it.
As usual this is meant for the brave souls who want to try out the upcoming fixes & balance changes early.
Remember this branch is a work-in-progress that has yet to go through our full release QA process, so while we try to keep relatively stable you may experience new issues or crashes.

Feel free to leave your feedback in this thread or in the bug report forum as usual, especially if you encounter new issues not present in 1.11.9, or if something marked as fixed in the below changelog still occurs for you.

Spoiler: 1.11.10 (09ac) - BETA PATCH NOTES

##################################
# Bugfix
##################################

- Added a bypass to the Free French "Form the National Committee" Focus to avoid blocking the player if they don't have 90 Legitimacy
- Fixed a problem in British Alternate Strategy Plans when historical focuses are off without a specific strategy plan being selected
- Fixed issue where Estonia and Latvia would not follow the historical focuses
- Added missing leader tooltip in Soviet focus The Glory of the Red Army. Pavel Rybalko will become a general after completing the focus, and now everyone knows it.
- Turkey no longer gets a wargoal on themselves when refusing Balkan Federation demands
- Niche Role will now be correctly set correctly when AI designs ships. This also applies to players using "auto design".
- Japanese puppets should now get the corrects name
- Fixed achievement "Better than Szent Istvan" being impossible to earn due to a an issue with the new character system
- Naval battles will no longer count towards combat duration for career profile

Thanks for the update for the baltics!

 

[FLUX2226]

- Added a bypass to the Free French "Form the National Committee" Focus to avoid blocking the player if they don't have 90 Legitimacy

That change specifically gets a thumbs up, small improvements to older focus trees are always a big plus in my book

 

[vermicious knid]

That is why it is hard for me to accept that some larger blame rests on Podcat or Arheo. Forgive me, but I still believe people in higher positions do not give the HOI4 team what they need to break out of this cycle that has been ongoing for years.

Speaking as a former corporate drone, if the problem is coming from above there is no way in Hell that Podcat, Arheo, or any other developer would be allowed to say so.