Still not a very good reason to whine like there was no tomorrow. Some people cry like they're not going to receive the patch in the first place.
Most problems with video games aren't worth whining like there is no tomorrow.
Steam BETA Patch v1.101 now live - checksum [JERN]
- Thread starter Doomdark
- 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.
- Status
Most problems with video games aren't worth whining like there is no tomorrow.
CK2 beta policy has generally been no public betas, regardless of whether you are on Steam or GG. So it's not like GG players *lost* something.
I don't remember any of the devs saying the small arsenal will never be fixed.
Although I wish some dev would clearly point out if they intend to fix this or just completely neglect it, so I don't get my hopes up every patch.
I gotta say... I'm a tad bit disappointed at Paradox for failing to address this issue after almost 5 months.
It's evident that they're putting in decent effort and listening to people though, as seen in this patch.
I'm crossing my fingers that it'll be addressed in the next official patch.
He wasn't being serious; he was mocking the absurdity of a bug unfixed for so long.
You guys evidently didn't complain loud enough in the Bug Report forum to catch and KEEP the devs' attention. When there are so many bugs that needed to be whack, it's easy to lose track of a few... even long-standing ones.
There are at least five threads complaining about this issue; one posted six days ago to remind the devs again.
Not to mention ForzaA, one of the devs, directly replied in one of the threads
"Thanks for your report.
yes, it is a bug. It's also been reported in the bug forum already. But I'd rather have a report twice than never.
*closed; any additional info can be added to the bug report in the bug report forum. http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...enal-in-venice".
I wouldn't be here crossing my fingers if I thought the devs weren't even aware of this.
One issue and one question:
Sons to whom I've granted temple titles (it still warns me they'll be removed from succession) remain heirs to my titles. This did not happen before the patch. Working as intended? Nothing in the patch notes says anything about this, but I'll understand if it's another move by the devs to make it hard to circumvent gavelkind obnoxiousness; in that case though, they need to remove the warning that the son will be disinherited. (Edit: Made a thread about this in bug report forum as well. Mostly just posting here for the following question)
And is it possible to destroy a gavelkind title when your primary title is not gavelkind? For instance, if I create Francia, and change the succession to elective, can I destroy my other kingdom titles that are still gavelkind, or must I change the succession of each of those titles before destroying them? (I hate having kingdoms under my empires, especially if I'm Byzantine/Muslim, though the ability to revoke vassals will make it a little more tolerable)
Sons to whom I've granted temple titles (it still warns me they'll be removed from succession) remain heirs to my titles. This did not happen before the patch. Working as intended? Nothing in the patch notes says anything about this, but I'll understand if it's another move by the devs to make it hard to circumvent gavelkind obnoxiousness; in that case though, they need to remove the warning that the son will be disinherited. (Edit: Made a thread about this in bug report forum as well. Mostly just posting here for the following question)
And is it possible to destroy a gavelkind title when your primary title is not gavelkind? For instance, if I create Francia, and change the succession to elective, can I destroy my other kingdom titles that are still gavelkind, or must I change the succession of each of those titles before destroying them? (I hate having kingdoms under my empires, especially if I'm Byzantine/Muslim, though the ability to revoke vassals will make it a little more tolerable)
Last edited:
It is pretty difficult not to feel like a second class customer when being excluded from a public beta. This does not make me anxious to buy future PI titles or DLC.
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...cksum-JERN&p=15595571&viewfull=1#post15595571
for the avoidance of doubt, the last phrase covers you.
Its covered by the patch note that heathen priests can now inherit titles. The incorrect warning is however a bug.
Last edited:
Unless someone has a zero sum view, they gained something, ergo I lost (out on) something.
Besides we all here, Steam or GG, like this game a lot, so at least Steam users should understand that GG users would have loved being able to also have access to this beta.
Join Date: May 2013
^ says it all
I once was a second class Direct2Drive customer of... EU Rome. PD/D2D released a broken final(?) patch build for that (they included an old .exe) and PD didn't exactly care. For anybody who didn't "illegally" acquire functioning game files, ... yeah, tough luck. Game no worky. D2D then fixed it after just 8 months.Still not a very good reason to whine like there was no tomorrow. Some people cry like they're not going to receive the patch in the first place.
Of course the issue of separate release channels is indeed mitigated by moving all future games to Steam-only, and with Paradox now having split up into PDS (to make rather good games), PDI (to publish murky games with hundreds of DLCs and hundreds of bugs) and a spun off GamersGate (to sell mostly niche products to not all too many customers) a special GG version of their games makes less and less sense for them.
IMO they should really just give Steam keys to all who bought any titles from EU2 to CK2 on Steam and be done with it :3
In any case, seeing how close the release of the patch is, this doesn't seem like that much of an issue. Assuming GG and Steam will offer the patch on the same day, of course.
Last edited:
My recent discovery of CK2 has nothing to do with the fact that those acting like spoiled, entitled children should be thankful the developer offers any post launch support.
I find you sad. Sad that you judge the merit of my comment based on "join date" to this clearly enlightened and mature community. Enjoy your obvious elite status as a nearly 10 year member, while contributing over 72 pieces of pertinent information. Quite the feat.
As Paradox' own games have always enjoyed 'post-launch support' (and of course also usually needed it, as games of this scope will always have bugs/errors/mistakes/inaccuracies), it's very much expected that there shall be patches. The games are bought in the expectation that they will be patched and modded. Purchase decisions are heavily influenced by this.
And if you weren't "May 2013", you'd know that. Simple as that.
This actually popped up in 1.10, but in a Republic I created, none of the Patricians would marry. They would generally just sit there and age until they died and their house died with them, and the replacement house would be the same thus repeating the cycle. I figured it was just a freak anamoly and ditched the save but if other people are seeing it than there may be more to it.
Also, when I tried to arrange marriages in this broken republic, it had no 'Yes, no, maybe' banner and the propose button was greyed out (but mousing over it had all the requirements green).
I know that the company provides post launch support not because I joined this forum this year, but because I'm an intelligent human being capable of observing the changing landscape that is virtual entertainment. It doesn't take a genius to know that today, a great many companies provide post launch support, but a great many companies provide NO post launch support. Moreso, Paradox is providing you post launch support, they just aren't letting you beta test their own patch before it is made official. You aren't entitled to test their product any more than they are required to let you test it. They are however making the official patch available to you at their earliest convenience and for that you still complain. As someone who has a superior join date, perhaps you should know that Paradox has not historically provided open testing to its customers, and that any form of open testing is as much a gift to the consumer as it is a resource to the company. Perhaps you should re-evaluate your belief in the correlation of a person's join date and that persons knowledge of said company and product since you yourself certainly do not display a decades worth of related information.
a) I don't own the game on GamersGate, so I'm not affected by this
b) Paradox have a long long long long long long long history of providing "open testing" to customers, which once they put in place game registration as 'DRM' (I think around the release of some HoI 2 stuff? before that they had no product keys whatsoever) was limited to those who had registered their games, but previously was just publicly accessible downloads on this very forum system, and later thus turned into downloads "open" to anybody who had actually bought the game via the respective game's tech support subforum
I would personally argue that testing open to all customers who bought a particular product is exactly "open testing".
I wasn't aware that CK2 actually had difficulty settings. I had thought that the bar with the pacifier to the skull and crossbones was a measure of how difficult the game 'thought' it would be to play as that character, not something that actually granted bonuses to the AI, or things like that. Would anyone be willing to explain?
From the main menu go to options screen, select gameplay tab, and you'll find the global difficulty settings. They can't be changed once you load up a dynasty, only from the main menu. The tooltips explain what the different options do.
It's very unintuitive if you come from previous Paradox games (where you choose difficulty when creating the game in both SP and MP), and also for new players (who are used to similar systems from other games).
So I post this question with little hope it will get answered but:
Did you consider making defensive attrition apply to all other faiths? The way I (and some others we discussed it with) see it, it should make it very unlikely for Finnish, Pommeranian, or Baltic pagans to disappear from conquest by other pagans, while not making it impossible. I don't really see cons of that solution other than perhaps a lot of work with code. Is it a lot of work with code, did you not think of it at all, or why wouldn't you go that way?
Or make it moddable - please.
Another question about Subjugaton:
Would it be ridiculous idea to make Kings and above immune to it?
- Status