Give generic missions more freedom

  • 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.

Glanyr

Second Lieutenant
22 Badges
May 6, 2019
107
201
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Stellaris: Necroids
So in my playthrough as a british tribe i enjoyed the missions in times of peace to have something i can work on. However most of them force you to build stuff you wouldn't really want there.

What i would ask is to make the missions more versatile, so you can choose what to build. Like, maybe instead of forcing me to build 1 market and 2 libraries, tell me to build 3 economic buildings, which i can choose by myself.

Because often i just see myself building the stuff and destroy it afterwards (since in assimilated provinces loyalty isn't an issue i would never build a court there).

What do you think?
 
  • 11
  • 3Like
Reactions:
It's not only the buildings, it's the cities themselves. The program will ask me to build a city in a "rubbish" territory with no positive modifiers, and I'm like, no, I'd much rather build it here in the territory adjacent to your suggestion with the farmland and coastal port.

It should ask we build a city in a specified province, not territory.
 
  • 8
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Yes the city part of missions tend to be pretty terrible, a city is 50 political influence which is like a year Worth of influence and that don't even consider the gold cost. Sure you get 3 graneries in the worst case which can help pop growth, but it is probably not Worth it compared to other options, but I have not done the math and it is complicated.

Right now there is probably just 3 strategic reasons to build a city:
  • For its economic benefit, the megacity
  • For fort stacking
  • For graneries to speed up pop growth
A fourth reason could be to change trade good. Being forced to build the cities in specific location and being forced to build specific buildings that in many cases don't make any strategic sense is a major issue with those missions.

They did say they would do some building and pop rebalances so it may affect those missions but if for the better or worse I don't know.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
It's not only the buildings, it's the cities themselves. The program will ask me to build a city in a "rubbish" territory with no positive modifiers, and I'm like, no, I'd much rather build it here in the territory adjacent to your suggestion with the farmland and coastal port.

It should ask we build a city in a specified province, not territory.


This. This is what really annoys me. I might be in the process of building up a city, attracting loads of pop and all to a good location, and then the game tells me to build a city next to that one or very close in the same province or something like that and it really annoys me.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Theoretically, the mission should be able to identify the best location in a province for a city to be and ask you to build it there. But if the system can't do it, then surely they should just leave it more open-ended.

What I'm waiting for are more variety to the dynamic - ie not content pack - missions. Right now there are several varieties of missions for Carthage, Greece, etc. But of the generic, dynamic missions, I think there are still just two types - conquer a region and build some infrastructure. What about defense missions? What about politics missions? What about trade missions?

So yeah, give more choices for the type and more open-ended within the mission.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
I said this when missions came out but they really should be more broad. Why do I have to invade everything inside of a predefined region to finnish a mission? What if my greatest ally holds one empty holding there? Why do I have to build up this spot or that city specifically?

Just make it so if I'm conquering along and building along some of my missions should be completed.

They should be goals and directions not a laundry list!
 
What I want is that the generic mission are given the same quality as the missions Rome and others get, right now they are nothing but do this, press a button and get a boring reward, many which are pretty useless. I often forgott about the missions since they are hardly noticable except the claim missions.

Adding more missions or mission types is not what is needed, what is needed is a major rework.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: