Mission effect only useful prior to completion?

[Simoleum]

Now this is a hard one to grasp, but bear with me. Isn't some of the mission effects (upon completion) something that is useful when trying to complete the mission. Example: Build an army/navy for our nation! Effect when completed: Shortened recruitment time. Now this isn't useful when you are finished building an army? Same goes for fleet. Wouldn't it be more apt with an effect like "-10 maintance" and/or "+10% morale" (fresh recruits, or something). These are just examples.

Is it just me who hasn't got something here, or is those two (possibly more, can't think of more ATM), useful only when trying to complete said mission.

 

[zeredek]

I never take the missions for this reason, they're just so pointless

 

[Chat]

I still end up taking them sometimes, on the reasoning that the other two are terrible as well, and I can get up to 75% FL within a year and then get lower cost for the last 25% (does anyone really care about -10% recruitment time?), but most of the time I end up forgetting/not caring enough and end up building the last ~30% or so in one hit, completely missing out on what little it gives you. The rewards or how the mission works could definitely do with being looked at. Front load the rewards of the mission and have it locked in for the next year for example.

 

[Will Steel]

Yes indeed. Mission system is weird in general. Almost all missions give you bonuses which would've been more useful to complete the said mission, and thus become completely pointless after completing it.

This is why I always take missions depending on my strategies. If I am going to mass-convert a lot of my provinces, I take a mission to convert one province and use the reward conversion bonus on the rest. Or when I need to expand very fast, I take a mission about conquering something so that I get faster core creation.

Either that or I don't take missions at all. Missions are there for temporary small boosts if you need them I think. They are not there to guide you or anything even if their bonus is mostly pointless after completing those missions. Missions do guide the AI on the historical path sometimes. For example it allows Ottomans to conquer Levant, or Mughals to expand on other Indian kingdoms, etc.

 

[Noel84]

they do give -maintenance. They give -recruitment COST, which = lower maintenance. Th only problem is that it's not clear at all that -recruitment cost = -maintenance

 

[Trin Tragula]

Recruit time is not really the main reward, reduced unit cost is as that lowers maintenance for all troops you have built.
The time reduction is simply if you wish to build more as the missions don't require you to go all the way to your force limit most of the time (and for that matter as it lasts 10 years it may be that you're going to want to build more troops in that period, these will then both come at reduced time and reduced cost).

 

[Chat]

they do give -maintenance. They give -recruitment COST, which = lower maintenance. Th only problem is that it's not clear at all that -recruitment cost = -maintenance

Recruit time is not really the main reward, reduced unit cost is as that lowers maintenance for all troops you have built.

That's a good point, and something I keep forgetting personally.

 

[BarskiPatzow]

Recruit time is not really the main reward, reduced unit cost is as that lowers maintenance for all troops you have built.
The time reduction is simply if you wish to build more as the missions don't require you to go all the way to your force limit most of the time (and for that matter as it lasts 10 years it may be that you're going to want to build more troops in that period, these will then both come at reduced time and reduced cost).

What about the loans mission? Gives reduction to interest per annum when you repay all loans... Pointless.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Some are weak/close to useless, some are at least reasonable, some are solid. The diprep ones, ones that give a little money back, ones for stability or prestige all have their place. it definitely got nerfed with the 1.12 patch though.

 

[Gaussia]

Does recruitment cost affect maintainence of all units, or only of untis that was acctually built when the modifier was active?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Does recruitment cost affect maintainence of all units, or only of untis that was acctually built when the modifier was active?

All units, best I can tell, though the mission reward is temporary of course.

 

[diceyy]

Prove legitimacy giving legitimacy would be another example. By the time you complete the mission you're already well out of the woods.

 

[Buladelu]

The mission system as a whole is somewhat half-backed. I understand it's great for giving meta-goals to AI but it doesn't feel integrated into other systems enough. Maybe with added estates each mission will affect this or that estate and will look more like fulfilling wishes of your people and getting far-reaching consequences from it.

 

[Thrake]

The revamp made it much better. Prior to it, I would ignore missions almost completely (besides the OPed one like build a fort lvl 1 and get free extra manpower). Now I take it a bit more into consideration, like rebuild an army will make me rush to the goal rather than slowly rebuild. -10% cost is a really powerful reward; that's one year free of maintenance over the 10 years and I typically build more anyway, so I do benefit a bit from cheaper recruitment too.

The only one I never pick is recover legitimacy; its too slow to build up so going for other missions just gives more rewards.

 

[OldmansHQ]

The only missions I never pass are Rival of Rival which gives 25 bird mana after getting relations to 100 and Colonize X which gives +5% settles increase and +25 colonial growth. The first is the only one reminiscent of the old, useful missions, it's always very rewarding. While the second one gives a global boost to something you're currently doing. And perhaps the mission that gives diplo rep. The rest of the missions and their rewards seem very illogical, and honestly not that great, and it's something has already been mentioned.

 

[CrabHelmet]

People say the old, useful missions - most of the new missions are better than the old ones, as the typical reward used to be 5 prestige, a.k.a. totally useless. Most of the current missions have at least marginal returns under the right circumstances. In general, I agree there's still a *lot* of room for improvement.

 

[Sunspawn]

People say the old, useful missions - most of the new missions are better than the old ones, as the typical reward used to be 5 prestige, a.k.a. totally useless. Most of the current missions have at least marginal returns under the right circumstances. In general, I agree there's still a *lot* of room for improvement.

They mean the AT, manpower and mana missions.

 

[Simoleum]

Recruit time is not really the main reward, reduced unit cost is as that lowers maintenance for all troops you have built.
The time reduction is simply if you wish to build more as the missions don't require you to go all the way to your force limit most of the time (and for that matter as it lasts 10 years it may be that you're going to want to build more troops in that period, these will then both come at reduced time and reduced cost).

Thanks for the information, but I still feel it is something that needs to be looked at, at least to clarify.. There must be many players thinking the same, and not knowing what you explained now.

Prove legitimacy giving legitimacy would be another example. By the time you complete the mission you're already well out of the woods.

Yeah, there are several it turns out. Hopefully they fix some of them! At least we got an answer from a dev

 

[SolSys]

Now this is a hard one to grasp, but bear with me. Isn't some of the mission effects (upon completion) something that is useful when trying to complete the mission. Example: Build an army/navy for our nation! Effect when completed: Shortened recruitment time. Now this isn't useful when you are finished building an army? Same goes for fleet. Wouldn't it be more apt with an effect like "-10 maintance" and/or "+10% morale" (fresh recruits, or something). These are just examples.

Is it just me who hasn't got something here, or is those two (possibly more, can't think of more ATM), useful only when trying to complete said mission.

You do realize you get lower recruitment cost which in turn lowers your maintenance cost, right?
I'll admit the connection isn't explained well [at all], but still... you should research better before complaining in order for people to take the complaint seriously.

EDIT: NVM, been answered already.

 

[SolSys]

They are not there to guide you or anything even if their bonus is mostly pointless after completing those missions. Missions do guide the AI on the historical path sometimes.

Actually that is the main reason they were added originally** - back in EU3.
People were getting to mid-game, did not know what else to do and tended to quit since they reached their initial goals and couldn't think of any. The missions were added as a way to guide newcomers and mid-game players.


**The more-historical AI thing was just an extra.