Missions are improved, but still leave you with a set of three impossible ones often

[TheDarkMaster]

Sounds like there is still some work to be done with the missions. Any particular stand outs that have bad rewards or just seem to come up at really inappropriate times?

For the missions I brought up, here are some changes I'd make to them:
-Annex small country; can't come up if you have a truce with that country.
-Protect against rival/threat; you must be within a certain percentage of that country's army size first, and that army size can't be more then 5 regiments over your forcelimit.
-Achieve religious unity; this mission has all sorts of problems when you factor in the religious unity policies that you can just flip on when you want to complete the mission not to mention extreme conversion times. I kinda think that this one should just be scrubbed, I can't really see a way that the computer will be able to figure out when this mission is appropriate for the player.

 

[DicRoNero]

-Achieve religious unity; this mission has all sorts of problems when you factor in the religious unity policies that you can just flip on when you want to complete the mission not to mention extreme conversion times. I kinda think that this one should just be scrubbed, I can't really see a way that the computer will be able to figure out when this mission is appropriate for the player.

With current reward - probably. But it's not that the mission itself is bad, but rather the reward being totally ****.

 

[m1c]

the prestige ones are horrible sometimes like 'recover abysmal prestige (get to 0) if you're at -100 after converting or 'build prestige' when there's no other way to get it aside from events

 

[TheDarkMaster]

the prestige ones are horrible sometimes like 'recover abysmal prestige (get to 0) if you're at -100 after converting or 'build prestige' when there's no other way to get it aside from events

Prestige can be gained from winning battles and wars, as well as discovering new lands. However, you tend to either be constantly sitting at the max or not really be in a position where you can actually boost prestige in a short time to complete the mission. You're right that they don't really work that well functionally within the game, it can't accurately predict what position you're in.

 

[Elfryc]

I think this quote may be commented and used regarding the missions topic:

The first place is the main mission list, an often hard to achieve goal given to you by “the nation”. It will often take 10 – 50 years to achieve, and picking those off one by-one is a great way to go through your first games.

EU4 Official Strategy Guide, p. 4​

​

 

[TheDarkMaster]

I think this quote may be commented and used regarding the missions topic:

​

​

The main problem with that is that while you've got that 50 year mission in your log, you aren't getting any other missions. If I were to say, take a mission to achieve religious unity. It will take me 50 years to complete it, assuming no major stability drops and I do not expand my nation at all, my reward for doing so is +1 true faith tolerance for 10 years. During that time, I could instead complete the rival of my rival mission at least 5 times, I'd earn 125 diplo points and 25 prestige. Which do you think is the reward that's worth going for?

Also, the mission to get 100% true faith tolerance fires just as easily if you're at 95% unity as if you're at 50% unity.

 

[Falc]

To the OP: you might want to pick the Protect against the Mamelukes mission. If they ever get into a war and lose enough regiments it'll also count.

 

[Trin Tragula]

Missions will continue to be worked on and improved for the upcoming patch and some have already been given stricter triggers (all rewards should also be for 10 years).
The fact that there are fewer available in general however is mainly because a lot of no-brainers where simply removed or remade to be finished only once per campaign to guide new players. Examples of missions that will never reappear once finnished are increase relations with x, get a royal marriage with x or get an alliance with x. The pruning of the mission lists means that there are fewer missions around in situations where you'd previously have missions to construct buildings, etc. On the flipside the rewards for the ones that remain should be more useful (and if they're not the will be improved).

Half of new rewards are actually worse than previous one. For example those missions to create and army/navy, or have a bigger army than xxx, all of them rewards you with lower recruiting cost and lower upkeep or recruiting time

Lower recruiting cost = lower maintenance for all the soldiers you just recruited or ships built. The recruiting speed is just an extra bonus if you would like to build more units (as for instance both the basic construct army and navy missions only require you to build to 75% of your forcelimit, though the missions that put you against a rival can require more and will have more careful triggers in the future).

One thing I really hate is when generic missions stop you from picking national missions. As England I'd much rather take "Vassalise Scotland" than "Improve Relations with Papal States".

These two missions can in fact never block each-other as they are off different categories (as long as possible the game will always give you one of each category). Also once you perform "improve relations with x" it will no longer re-trigger for the rest of your campaign now so if you find it cluttering your list you can easily get rid of it now
On a more general note: In general generic missions should never bock national ones, if they do so that's a bug (the tag-specific missions can however block eachother).

During that time, I could instead complete the rival of my rival mission at least 5 times, I'd earn 125 diplo points and 25 prestige. Which do you think is the reward that's worth going for?.

At maximum 5 times actually, as there is a 10 year timer on the mission. But point taken

 

[DicRoNero]

The fact that there are fewer available in general however is mainly because a lot of no-brainers where simply removed or remade to be finished only once per campaign to guide new players.

What was wrong with conquer X for 25 ADM points? Or claim X? As it is now, barely any mission generate MPs, and the modifiers we got instead are all the same and often overlap - you get the same modifier for allying X and integrating Y, for isntance.

Was that an intention to restrict Monarch Points generation to just basic monthly gains?

 

[bestbrian]

"Turn X into a City". Used to give +1 base tax, now it give -15% development cost for 10 years. Why would I sink monarch points into a just colonized island? Why not just give the +1 base tax?

 

[Alerias]

I liked the missions that rewarded a small amount of Power. TBH I already modded the changes a fair bit for my own use - but I admit overall this is more streamlined than before.

Also thank you for removing 'befriend a rival'. It ought to have had it's own achievement

 

[Me_]

Have you considered giving more missions an effect while they're active? Conquest/vassalization/union missions give you claims/CBs that let you perform them more easily. Perhaps some other missions could have extra effects while active. I'm thinking specifically about the religious unity mission now, which could give you a small bonus to missionary strength while active, but other missions could have some extra effects as well (e.g. the mission that requires you to build an army/fleet bigger than that of your rival could reduce the recruitment time while active).

 

[Basileios Makedon]

When as Byzantium you are conquering Greece and appears the mission "Restore the Pentarchy"...

 

[Seelensturm]

Didn't play 1.12 yet, so did they finally gave AI the option to profit from generic missions as well? Still feels like the time when AI e.g. couldn't change autonomy.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/ai-and-generic-missions.859601/

 

[niallmcfc]

"Turn X into a City". Used to give +1 base tax, now it give -15% development cost for 10 years. Why would I sink monarch points into a just colonized island? Why not just give the +1 base tax?

Because then your CN will improve it for you (in most cases)

 

[Imgran]

"Turn X into a City". Used to give +1 base tax, now it give -15% development cost for 10 years. Why would I sink monarch points into a just colonized island? Why not just give the +1 base tax?

Better yet, why not give abou 25-30 ADM points to subsidize development of the new island

 

[Imgran]

Because then your CN will improve it for you (in most cases)

Yes the CN will really improve St. Helena excellently.

More to colonize than just the New World friend.

 

[tobias.mb]

Maybe on top of a reward for completion, missions could make reaching the completion condition easier.
We already get claims / cbs from all those annex, conquer, remove from map... missions
For example while you have a convert province or reach religous unity mission you get 1% missionary strength.
Or while you have the recover manpower mission you get 10% manpower recovery rate.

 

[niallmcfc]

Yes the CN will really improve St. Helena excellently.

More to colonize than just the New World friend.

"(in most cases)"

 

[Ex Mudder]

Does cancelling a once only mission keep it from showing up again? or do you actually have to complete it?
Agree with the development cost colony mission, would prefer +1 production though, as most colonies export trade goods not base tax.