Hey everyone, Thank you all for taking the time to ask your questions in the AMA last week! The team has been really eager to respond to as many as possible and will be looking to elaborate further during the [url=https://discord.gg/D2Jxxszj?event=1133881046438526986]dev podcast[/url] with RazBora and The Fresh Baked Goods, which will premiere over on [url=https://www.twitch.tv/raz_bora]Twitch[/url], and on [url=https://www.youtube.com/@TheFreshBakedGoods]YouTube[/url] at 6pm BST on Saturday, 5th of August. [img]https://clan.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/images//34012997/6dbfb55af244fb75e023ef208714d1f05b5f32d4.png[/img] [h2]Patch 14.2 PTE Session[/h2] Thank you to those of you who have taken part and submitted feedback during the recent PTE session. We want to make sure these sessions, as well as the process of taking part and submitting feedback, continue to be improved upon, including the duration and timings of the PTEs, as well as increasing the visibility of these sessions. [h3]Player Locomotion Speeds[/h3] Despite the fact there was no new content to try out, two hundred of you still took the time to submit your feedback, and we were able to evaluate your responses on the changes to player locomotion. Players were asked whether they felt the acceleration, sprint, and run speeds were either ‘too fast’, ‘just right’, or ‘too slow’ - for both the PTE session with the removal of the recent locomotion changes, and the live build where players still have faster player locomotion. In the PTE session, around ¾ of all players who responded indicated they felt the acceleration and run speeds were ‘just right’ - compared to a roughly fifty percent split between ‘just right’ and ‘too fast’ in the live build. For the sprint speed in the PTE, over half of the participants felt that the speed was ‘just right’, and when asking about the live build, almost ¾ felt it was too fast. While the total number of responses is not wholly representative of the Hell Let Loose community, the opportunity to provide feedback is something we can take into consideration when working with you to determine the implementation of new changes. We can see that there continues to be a close divide in opinion, however, the data we have from this session, alongside community discussion, helps to informs us that the removal of the increased player locomotion during the PTE session was felt to be ‘just right’ by the majority. [h3]Speed Values[/h3] The speed values for the PTE session have been a topic of conversation, and prompted us to investigate some theories suggesting the PTE speed tested was actually closer to the pre-U8 player speeds, rather than the speed before U14. As the new studio taking on Hell Let Loose, we aren’t aware of the values that were used prior to Update 8. The base values that we returned to - with the removal of the increase - were that of the values we had, prior to the Update 14 release. However, it is possible that because of a discrepancy that we believe was present between U8 to U14 - where German forces had a faster acceleration speed - the balancing of the Allied vs Axis speeds that also occurred with U14, may now be more visible with the reduced running and sprinting speeds. The values changed for the PTE were that of the values pre-U14, and there has certainly been no deception involved! We will continue to investigate this to understand whether there is somehow another value within the code that we're unaware of that controls the speed which has now been impacted - which is what this PTE was to help us discover. We’ll keep you updated on whether we find anything! [h3]Dive to Prone[/h3] We also saw that over half of you felt that dive to prone had made a positive impact, and would be keen to see it tested further and improved upon before returning to the live game, in a way that was less arcadey, and more punishing, encouraging players to use it strategically, rather than as a means of continuous evasion. If this is something we continue to see requested by the majority, it would be possible for us to revisit the feature and polish it to prevent any potential exploitation, before PTEing it for re-consideration in a future update. [h3]Why remove the U14 player locomotion changes altogether?[/h3] During the initial stages of internal testing, any lower speed increments tested turned out to be rather nominal. What we hadn't planned for, was that the game was already relatively well-balanced regarding tanks and infantry. Tweaking player speed caused complications with this. At the moment, tanks do in fact move unrealistically slow - but it is balanced against the existing infantry movement. We explored increasing vehicle speeds, but physics instability caused the tanks to fly more often than not! Improvements to vehicles, as well as locomotion, could continue to be considered, but we must first revisit some elements of the code from the ground up - before then involving the community in any future changes. [h3]Grenade Bug[/h3] Based on the feedback so far, the grenade bug was not once reported during the PTE session. We believe the changes to the PTE build process would have allowed the grenade bug to reproduce, so we are hopeful we may [i]finally[/i] have a successful fix and are eager to get this released into Patch 14.2 to confirm! We know a conga line was mentioned if we nailed this one, is that still on the cards? [h2]Patch 14.2 Release Date[/h2] With no reported impact from the removal of the recent player locomotion changes, we will be looking to now release Patch 14.2 on the 7th of August. [h2]Patch 14.3 Progress[/h2] We are making progress with bug fixing for Patch 14.3, and have already prepared fixes for some of the community-raised bugs we plan to address, including, but not limited to: [list] [*] Doubled-up explosion VFX [*] Ultrawide screen support [*] [Xbox] Missing audio on firing/reloading SFX [/list] [h2]Loadout Bug Hypothesis[/h2] While not a fix, our investigations into the loadout bug have produced a new working hypothesis. We know that when a player deploys, there are several checks that are carried out, including verifying if the player has met the correct level requirements for unlocking the loadout they have selected. If they fail the validation, the default loadout is used instead. In rare circumstances, it would appear that the validation fails even if the player has met the correct unlock criteria, which suggests that there is an issue with the validation checks. This may be caused by incorrect cached stats that are used, or failing to get stat data from Steam or something else entirely. We are looking to now add error reporting in this area of the code that will help track down where the fault lies so we can work on determining a potential fix, if this theory is confirmed. [h2]AMA Answers[/h2] Thank you for giving us the time to address as many of your questions as we could. While the format allowed community members across different time zones to take part, we want to explore how we can introduce live sessions to discuss new content in the future! While word count restricts us from adding all the answers in this dev brief, you can find the rest of the answers from the open session here on the[url=https://www.reddit.com/r/HellLetLoose/comments/153r6sg/studio_ama/] Hell Let Loose Subreddit[/url], or by visiting the Discord and reading the #ama-july-2023 channel. [b]Who has answered your questions?[/b] [list] [*] Kieran, Studio Technical Director [*] Adam, Senior Brand Manager [*] Craig, Producer [*] Matt, Studio Creative Director [*] Alisha, AKA WombatMedic, Community Manager [/list] [h3]Update 14 & The Trailer[/h3] [b]What was the thought process around why Team17 wanted to purchase the Hell Let Loose IP in the first place?[/b] This is a great question, and although I wasn't part of the high-level discussions between Black Matter and Team17, I can comment from my perspective. Team17 had partnered with and worked very closely with BM for the life of the title in Early Access and had not only seen how great the community had become with the title but also saw the potential to keep on bringing new content and growing this community. One of the joys of Team17 is how varied our portfolio is from our owned IP's to our 3rd Party published titles and so we can keep creative in our approach to titles and avoid the "Cookie Cutter" style of games. The end goal for us with the title is to deliver the best possible experience in HLL and to deliver content that our community want to play. We don't want to game to ever be watered down or be more like those titles, the main focus is to keep the core gameplay experience the same HLL everyone knows and loves but improve on its issues and bring new exciting content from the WWII theatre of war. [b]What was the thought process behind the very infamous German OP trailer?[/b] The story behind the trailer going live isn't as exciting as some would have you believe (summer intern? we wish!). This trailer was outsourced to a new partner agency, with a too-short deadline. And to be honest, the checks that should have been carried out on the quality of the assets and historical accuracy did not happen. This mistake has been learned from and acted upon - with our internal trailer team, which had worked on the majority of our previous trailers, being brought back onto the project. That trailer is not a representation of HLL or the dedication and care that the team apply to everything they do with regard to the title, and we will never put out an asset of that quality ever again. - Adam [b]What will the British rework look like?[/b] Honestly? Thorough. We know they need more accurate uniforms, vehicles and weapons. So much so, that, sadly, we can't give a solid timeline for this amount of work just yet. We're committed to making it happen, however! We'll share our progress through regular developer briefings and PTE any significant changes to firearms. - Adam. [b]What was the intention behind the sprint speed change?[/b] Two things - 1. We wanted to understand how all the player locomotion mechanics worked and we have implemented a bunch of improvements to them - such as improved step height consistency. 2. We are also keen to try things that could make the experience better, and we had seen community comments that the game locomotion feels slow. What we will do moving forward is keep these sorts of experimental changes to PTEs first before rolling them out to the community, ensuring your feedback is what determines whether a feature is implemented or not. - Matt [b]Why were the British forces historically inaccurate?[/b] The British forces were originally delivered in the same way previous forces had been brought to the game. We are exceptionally keen as a studio to move more towards historical accuracy and have plans to improve the British forces to make them not only more accurate but fun to play. Alongside your feedback and future PTE sessions, we want to see more of a focus on historical accuracy come into place. - Matt [b]Why was it not policy to issue bug-fixing next-day patches?[/b] It isn't a policy of ours to do this, or even our intent, what needs to be done with anything like this is first evaluate the bug, reproduce it, have the team access what needs to be done to fix it, submit a fix, have our QA team test the fix works, and then sign-off a build ready to go out to the public. This can all take time depending on the severity of the issue, and our ability to reproduce it and submit a successful fix. What can happen with bugs like this though, is that it becomes what we call a work item, where we need to have a member of the team create additional animations to fix the issue which can take some time depending on the level of complexity, in an ideal scenario, I want to be able to have fixes out to the players as soon as possible, but we need to be confident as a team that we've fixed the issue and not introduced any more issues in the process. - Craig [b]How do you feel about the recent negativity?[/b] I won't lie it's tough, especially for a team that, like myself, has worked on the game since Early Access - including team members from Design, QA, Production, and Marketing. We all worked very closely with Black Matter and try to stay true to the core direction of HLL. We take ownership of the fact that our recent direction drifted from this and are actioning a lot of changes that put the community back into perspective, including tackling many community-raised bugs, holding more sessions like this, as well as listening to feedback and providing more opportunities for feedback by introducing PTEs before releases that will help to inform development. We know words mean nothing right now, and it's our actions that will regain trust. It's going to be a journey, and we hope you'll come along with us! - Adam [b]How did the purchase agreement with Black Matter affect the changes to the core mechanics in updates 13.5 & 14?[/b] As we didn't have knowledge of any detail of the agreement or go looking for them, any such clause did not have an effect on the game's development or core mechanics. [b]Will the recent shift in development focus delay the planned December update?[/b] It will sadly change what was planned in the old roadmap. But we will be releasing a new one soon. - Adam [b]Why are we where we are today?[/b] As a returning member of the team that has been off-project for the past 12 months, I think I have an interesting perspective on this. The desire to give our fans new content with what has become somewhat of an overly ambitious roadmap, sadly meant that focus shifted from the core gameplay experience, with plans so far ahead that we tripped on our own feet. But lesson learnt, and with a new focus and mantra, we will always aim to stay true to the core experience for our players. - Adam [b]Does the massive public outcry towards the increased sprint speed change in U14 give the team any confidence to make changes on a larger scale going forward?[/b] Confidence aside, I think it's important to note that, while we don't want to shy away from making changes to Hell Let Loose, we need to first make sure that there is large appeal within the wider community in regard to any changes we explore implementing, as well as having the ability to make changes without running into certain programming limitations. That includes ensuring our development continues to focus on being transparent and bringing players into the process of implementing new features, modes, forces, and more, at a much earlier stage. [b]What can we expect from the in-game store?[/b] The in-game store, or rather, our DLC hub, will be arriving with Patch 14.3, along with the Basic Training and Practice Range environments, originally planned for Update 15. At launch, you'll only be able to use the store to get hold of DLC cosmetics that already exist on your platform's storefront. Eventually, we will add new and upcoming cosmetic DLC to the store. The store will only offer cosmetics, and captured weapons is not something we're currently looking into, because it could upset the game balance, and end up becoming something that is more pay-to-win - which we absolutely do not want to do. - Adam [b]How did you go from Dev Brief #160 saying Team17 is just as passionate about the game and understands the differences between Hell Let Loose and other titles, to introducing the recent changes that are now being removed?[/b] This was a mistake born out of good intentions. We tried to add too much content and took our focus away from the core gameplay experience. We have made necessary changes within the studio to make sure this doesn't happen again. - Adam [b]Why did you stop using PTEs?[/b] We took too long to evaluate a way forward with PTEs that would support us in working with you, and this is something we have now corrected. Our release schedule has had adjustments made to it that will ensure your feedback will be taken on board throughout the development process, holding PTE sessions before each release. - WombatMedic [h3]Bug Fixing & Optimization[/h3] [b]Will there ever be a proper optimization update? [/b] We will be bringing optimisations to every update that we release. There are multiple areas that require attention on both the server and client. Right now we are working on optimising the art assets on the worst performing levels. In addition we are looking into ways to reduce the increased stuttering that has started happening in the game. This however is just the start and we are committed to continuing to look into ways that we can make the game run better. - Kieran [b]Will we ever see improvements to vaulting and not getting stuck on random assets?[/b] In short, yes. Part of what we want to achieve is a more fluid and balanced movement experience for all players, I know my design team have already put some work into this, and when we do make these improvements, I want to make sure that you as players get time to try it out and share your feedback, which will shape how we proceed as a team. - Craig [b]Is there ongoing work to fix bipod mounting?[/b] We have created specific tooling to help fix these issues! We are now able to more easily visualise the various collision shapes and level mark-up in a much simpler way - which makes identifying and fixing these issues a lot easier. The reason for issues mounting your weapon or not having the freedom of movement you would expect once mounted is due to the game being very (overly?) cautious about not allowing geometry to intersect with the game camera, which would look ugly, but also could potentially be used for exploits. The issue in most cases is poor collision geometry causing collision checks to fail. We have created new tools to more easily fix these issues when we find them or are made aware of them. Please let us know about specific locations and we will get them fixed! - Kieran [b]When will we get a higher server tickrate?[/b] We are working on optimisations with every update (both client and server). Right now this is targeting getting a constant tickrate, but once we achieve that, we absolutely want to keep pushing so that we will be able to increase the server tickrate. - Kieran [b]When will the LOD be fixed for distant objects?[/b] Our tech-art team are working on fixing the worst offenders. However, the core issue is down to how LODs are implemented in the game, which makes it very hard to fully fix. We are, however, very much looking into options on how we can make any improvements in this area. - Kieran [b]Is there any chance of an engine upgrade?[/b] I wanted to address this because we will always be assessing how we can deliver the best version of Hell Let Loose - and while there are some things we are considering, we must first address the issues at hand, including optimization and bug fixing, so that the existing experience can be improved, before further exploring engine upgrades, including UE5. - WombatMedic [b]Why did the 14.1 patch cause stuttering and other performance issues?[/b] There was a server issue that did not show up during internal testing which caused servers to not show up for Steam players when we pushed 14.1 live. We found that the issue did not happen if we switched to using a development build of the server. This ensured that players could continue playing the game, however at the expense of reduced server performance. We then worked with community server owners to test and roll out a fix to the issue. This fix was rolled out without having to re-patch the game. We have since changed our testing strategy to ensure that this particular situation cannot happen again. - Kieran [b]Do you plan to provide more QoL features, and also fix the bugs that were introduced before the studio began work on the game?[/b] Absolutely! In fact, we believe we may have (finally!) fixed the grenade bug! We're extending the initial PTE based on your feedback, so that it will run over the weekend, but so far, we haven't seen any reports of the grenade bug on our new PTE build. Also, we are testing a fix for the doubled-up explosion VFX. These are just two examples. We know the game needs some sizable QoL improvements, and there are a lot of designs in place for these that Matt has shared throughout some of these answers. We are considering any and all issues in the game and will continue working to improve the game experience. - Kieran [b]Are we likely to see improvements with VOIP?[/b] We have already pushed out a number of fixes for VOIP issues that do fix failures in some situations, however, it is clear that we are far from done with this. We will continue to investigate and fix instances where VOIP can fail. This is an area where it is tough to get information about the issue as we rarely see issues in our development environment. We hope to get much further with this during our PTE sessions with you. - Kieran [h3]Game Design & Meta[/h3] [b]Do you have plans to add accurate uniforms for different maps?[/b] We want to offer specific uniforms for maps, including more accurate British and German uniforms for North Africa maps. We also want to make weapons, vehicles and armour specific to certain maps and are already working on a new set of British Armour for North Africa - which we'll be able to share more about in a future dev brief. - Matt [b]What are the future plans for artillery in the game?[/b] We understand this is a big topic amongst players, and are looking at different solutions for artillery, including self-propelled artillery, smaller artillery pieces, and mortars. We have a variety of prototypes we want to explore implementing, and then eventually run PTEs to gather feedback as part of the development process. - Matt [b]Will you be adding the ability to use the bipod on the bren gun?[/b] We are looking at potential solutions for the Bren light machine gun to include a bipod. However, there are a lot of things we must first take into consideration. One of the options could be to give the Bren a functioning bipod and move it to the machine gunner role. We are conscious that giving the Bren a bipod as it exists now, could have a large impact on the existing meta, and game experience. A 6 person squad could end up with two LMG-type weapons which could be too MG-heavy. We need to continue prototyping this and look for your feedback through future PTEs. - Matt [b]When will I able to manage my squad without dying first?[/b] This can be really frustrating and is a design change we are keen to make. Once we're in the position to, we will run a PTE for feedback on a potential solution. - Matt [b]Will you add a fire selector for some weapons?[/b] While it is not currently being looked at, as that functionality does not exist in HLL, I think it's a good idea and would definitely help make the game more historically accurate. Few things we'd need to figure out (especially on console controllers) but yes, this is something we should prototype out and PTE. - Matt [b]Will there be destructible environments in the future?[/b] We are indeed looking at including environment destruction for the game, however, there are quite a few factors to consider, including the level of destruction caused by not only the weapons in the game currently, but also future vehicles and weapons we want to include, plus the technical performance impact. These are all things we must continue to evaluate and explore. - Matt [b]Can we expect wider trenches for new maps?[/b] This is something we have actually already prototyped out - with wider trenches in the development of Brecourt Battery - and it works quite well. For our refresh of SMDM, we'll look to implement this change as well - which you'll be able to test for yourself in a PTE session. - Matt [b]Are there any plans to reorganize the resource nodes meta?[/b] It is something we will need to continue to consider, however, we definitely like the idea of Nodes generating different levels of resources based on their location. - Matt [b]Will Hell Let Loose ever receive freelook?[/b] A lot of these are features we want to bring to the game and have been working on in the background but will take time to design and develop. We already have a design for freelook which we will prototype in the future. - Matt [b]Are there any plans to address the Medic’s viability on the battlefield?[/b] This is something we have been looking into in the background - and yes, we even have designs for Medics to be able to drag wounded players, as well as reevaluate incentives such as bonus XP when revived by a Medic. - Matt [b]Will anything be done to encourage more players to better utilise Garrisons and OPs?[/b] As a player myself, I understand the frustration when squads do not create Garrisons or Outposts. One key mechanic of HLL is that squads have the tools they need - Officers should be building Garrisons with supplies from the Support role, the supply truck, or from the supply drop. One element we can work on though, is how to better communicate these mechanics to players, especially new players, bringing clarity to the importance of placing Garrisons and Outposts. - Matt [b]Can we expect the studio to lean towards realism?[/b] While recent feedback around the sway of British firearms has suggested leaning too heavily on realism wouldn't be appreciated by some in the wider community, this could be something we eventually look at to strike a balance between. However, this would require a complete re-design of a major component of the game. - Matt [b]Is it possible to fix the Garrison/OP overlay order in the redeploy menu?[/b] This is something we'd like to introduce, and we already have a design for the Garrison/Outpost ordering which we are keen to prototype out and test in a future PTE. - Matt [b]Do you plan to expand the server queue?[/b] We know there are many in the community who support organized gameplay in Hell Let Loose, and we're looking at the best way to support players being able to join games with large parties, which is especially an issue on console. If we allow players to search with 20 friends for an active game, we need to put you into a server that has 20 slots available, ideally on the same side. This is where it becomes difficult. What I, and the rest of the team, don't want to happen, is seeing players getting placed into an empty server just because you're trying to find a game that can support a large number of players. We will continue exploring alternatives for queuing and when we've made progress, will be sure to get in touch! - Craig [b]Will you introduce a minimum level requirement for key roles?[/b] This is very much something we have already looked at and have designed, including for the Commander role, and plan to go into more detail with a future dev brief - I'd be keen to get feedback on this soon. - Matt [b]Is it possible to have means to cross the water on maps that have a singular bridge?[/b] This is something we're looking into - the inclusion of boats and watercraft. - Matt [b]Will anything be done to prevent players from creating squads and then leaving them so they don’t have to play as Officers?[/b] This can certainly be frustrating. We need to think of an elegant design solution for this, as well as help educate players on how to confidently use the Officer role. - Matt [b]Will you ever release map-making / mod tools for the game?[/b] Hell Let Loose as a game offers players the ability to relive some of the most memorable battles of World War II. While we know there's a healthy appetite for modding tools and the ability to create and submit maps, it is not something that is currently on the game's roadmap. As it exists now, Hell Let Loose is limited by its initial setup and code. In our last dev brief, we touched on the fact that we must first look to address player feedback while preserving the core aspects of Hell Let Loose, so for now, community modding tools remain off the table, however, I'd be really keen to see where we can involve the community in the future when it comes to potential maps! - WombatMedic [h3]Maps, Forces, & Uniforms[/h3] [b]Can we expect more Soviet maps?[/b] We want to bring many iconic fronts and battles to Hell Let Loose, including building upon the existing forces. So, yes - we are looking at delivering more Eastern Front maps. - Matt [b]Will you consider adding the Pacific Front?[/b] We do want to explore introducing the Pacific Front, and will need to look into how we could deliver this. Right now, we don't currently have any timelines, while we continue to make sure we improve the existing game and forces already available. - Craig [b]Will you create more urban-based maps like Carentan?[/b] Yes, we have plans for more urban-based maps. This is something we are very keen on as I know many players, like myself, enjoy urban combat. - Matt [b]Will you ever introduce some of the famous cosmetics people have been asking for, including SS camo smocks, pea dot 44 uniforms and British Paratrooper battledress?[/b] Yes. There are plans to include all those uniforms in the game at some point. [h3]Tanks & Vehicles[/h3] [b]Is there anything that can be done about tanks bouncing around like they are made of paper when hitting small and insignificant obstacles?[/b] While the handling of vehicles could be improved, we need to consider this with caution as it would likely change the balance of the game. One reason for vehicles bouncing around or getting stuck when they shouldn't however is because of collision issues with the environment. We have created new tools to help us fix these issues. Therefore if you have specific locations where this happens, please let us know and we will take a look. - Kieran [b]Will we ever see any changes to the existing armour system?[/b] There are many changes we would like to make to armor in order to better simulate the performance and attributes of armor in WWII. As many of the community will acknowledge, there is very little symmetrical armor in relation to their traversal speed, reliability, turret rotation, reloading speeds, armor strength and deflections, suspension, plus gun range and penetration in WWII. This level of more historical accuracy combined with gameplay is a delicate balance, but one we are keen to address in a series of prototypes that we will want to PTE. Plus, yes, we are very keen to include US Tank Destroyers and more armour like the StuG. - Matt [b]Are there any plans to add a “turn out” ability for armour?[/b] Yes, we know this is highly requested amongst the community, and I can talk about this more in the upcoming podcast. As well as evaluating the wider design of armour, we will be looking at prototyping at both being out of hatch or buttoned up, with the hatch closed. - Matt [b]Are there plans to add correct tanks for maps?[/b] Yes - we want armour to be historically accurate (including markings, camo etc) for all maps. We don't have a timeline we can share for this work right now, but it is something we want to eventually introduce. - Matt Catch up on the rest of our answers from this session by visiting the Subreddit or Discord. Join us next time as we take a closer look at the Practice Range. See you all on the frontline!