Missions are STUPID!!

[unmerged(5161)]

Can anyone tell me the point of the whole missions thing. In every game I play as a little nation, I just take the "Keep X" mission over and over and over and over. By 1792, I have 1200 VPs from missions. It is ridiculous that I should be able to get those VPs. I didnt do anything really. Also, the VPs you get from missions are too few and most of the missions are too hard to even consider. No Spain in Caribbean!!!! YEAH RIGHT. Jesus himself would have a hard time prying those territories from Spain. I have also seen missions offered that were already completed; no Sweden in HRE, No France in British Isles, etc.

Sometimes you get missions that are very hard but achievable after lots of effort, only to get 2 VPs for completing them. Who is going to spend 250g+ on getting a royal marriage with their arch-enemy for 2 VPs?

Is there any point to having missions at all? Turning dynamic missions on is stupid as you will certainly get something like, vassalize Persia when you are playing Spain, which would be impossible to do in 5 years without bankrupting your country. I tried playing with this setting on and I just ended up losing tons of VPs because I couldnt complete 9 out of 10 of the missions.

Please, someone tell me the reason for having these idiotic things in the game!!!

 

[unmerged(931)]

They give weak players a chance to score points. Unless they pick the wrong ones.

 

[unmerged(3627)]

Originally posted by ryoken69
Please, someone tell me the reason for having these idiotic things in the game!!!

It was a brilliant idea that didn't work, and needs an awful lot of work to make it successful. The game engine can't distinguish between an impossible mission, a tough one, an easy one, or one you already achieved.

Incidentally, vassalising Persia as Spain would still be impossible even if you had a million ducats to spare

 

[unmerged(2857)]

You can get tons of VPs when you pick the missions yourself by clicking on the scroll on the left side. But it is silly, I think winning only because of mission points is not winning. So I deactivate them everytime.

 

[unmerged(4944)]

I agree with Heyesey, it's a good idea, but badly implemented.

Missions should vary more (eg different provinces to defend) and be checked to see if they're 'possible'. Some, eg exploration should be worth more, others worth less than they currently are.

i'd say 5 pts minimum for exploring etc, 10 points for defend province/build things type missions and 20+ points for difficult tasks, conquering etc

And maybe 10 year mission duration to save effort

 

[Agelastus]

Even in the current system they're biased anyway-for example, England gets the option for the really easy "no province in the British Isles controlled by......" all the time-that's points in the bank. I play with them on, but calculate my real position by leaving them out (I'm just odd that way!)

 

[BiB]

The general consensus is just to turn them off Unless u like winning with mission points or like trying to get a RM with the pope or vassalise Spain by 1497

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by BiB
The general consensus is just to turn them off Unless u like winning with mission points or like trying to get a RM with the pope or vassalise Spain by 1497

My favourite is "No Austria in the HRE"-when it's set as a major!

 

[unmerged(3627)]

"Vassalise (insert Muslim state here)" is always a good one, when you're a Catholic country. I also thought "keep Rhodes" for the Knights was particularly difficult.

 

[Orm]

Using missions is cheating IMHO, at least when you choose the missions yourself, since the AI players don't.
Had the missions system been better implemented it would have made the game more interesting (not that it isn't now ). Then you would really be able to play the game as an advisor to the king. As it is now, you more or less are the king.

 

[unmerged(4868)]

Missions are not stupid. It's a good idea. It's just poorly implemented. The scripters/programmers need to change the missions to things that are more realistic goals.

For Austria, one of the missions at the start was "No Turkey in the Middle East"

Huh? How the hell is an Austrian player going to prevent the Turks from dominating the Middle East?

Now, if they had changed that to something like "No Turkey in Central Europe", that would make a lot more sense. Or a good one would be "No France inside the Holy Romulan Empire"

 

[BiB]

That's a hard one seeing France when annexing a HRE provinces gets that province kicked out of the HRE

 

[unmerged(5126)]

I'm obviously missing something here. How do you turn off missions?

 

[unmerged(4868)]

Originally posted by Feoh
I'm obviously missing something here. How do you turn off missions?

when you first setup a game.

Dynamic Missions = OFF

 

[unmerged(3627)]

Originally posted by BiB
That's a hard one seeing France when annexing a HRE provinces gets that province kicked out of the HRE

The missions "No XYZ in HRE" don't apply to the red bordered Empire that votes for the Emperor; it means all those provinces that are listed as being in the region "HRE" as opposed to Western Europe, British Isles etc. (The ones Huszics lists in his FAQ.) The two are not synonymous, and - AFAIK - things that are in the HRE region are still in the HRE region when they're not in the HRE any more. (This is why you get the trouble with Polish provinces outside the border that count as HRE.)

I think, anyway. I hope that's intelligible - it was when I thought it

 

[BiB]

That's another flaw in the game

 

[unmerged(5126)]

Suleyman - Cheers! (damn - I should have known that)

 

[unmerged(3627)]

Originally posted by BiB
That's another flaw in the game

Yep, pretty much.

Surely it's possible to replace "HRE" in the regions by "north central Europe" or something similar, to avoid the confusion? Or wouldn't simply Germany do the trick?

 

[BiB]

Then what is Germany ?

 

[unmerged(3627)]

Okay ... having Germany as an area in the region of Germany would look odd but there has to be a better solution than having two different HREs in the game.