• 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.

EU4 - Development Diary - 19th of March 2019

Good morning everyone. Today I’ll be shifting the focus from maps to missions. I’ll be offering a retrospective on the history of the mission system, some insight into our design philosophy, and speculating about future mission trees.

oldmissions.png

A rather boring selection of missions in patch 1.24

Here we see a relic of the past, the old mission system as seen prior to the 1.25 patch. Practically identical to the mission system of EU3, it was long due for a change. Chief among the reasons for transitioning into a new system was the desire for missions to be impactful and immersive rather than forgettable and generic. While the old system still has a few ardent defenders, we consider the redesign of missions to be a great success both in terms of improving the game and in terms of community reception.

The mission redesign was rolled out in patch 1.25, alongside the release of the Rule Britannia immersion pack. This first round of mission updates was highly experimental. Much of the work involved translating as many of the ‘unique’ old missions as possible into the new system, taking the opportunity to improve many of them and find interesting ways of linking them together to create some semblance of narrative. Examples of this process include the current French, Burgundian, Ottoman, and Swedish trees.

currentmissions.png

Burgundy had very few missions prior to 1.25. After translating the old missions into the new system the result didn't feel adequate, so we added a few original missions.

Notably, most of these adapted trees contain only simple ‘Conquer [place]’ style missions. These kinds of missions certainly have a place, but we quickly recognized that we could do so much more with this new system. Cue the impressive English/British mission tree:
britishmissions.png

The British mission tree remains one of the largest and most content-heavy trees in the game

The British mission tree is extensive and covers nearly everything you might want to do while playing as England and Great Britain. We simply don’t have the time or resources to make something of this scale for every nation, but it was certainly fitting for Rule Britannia, and opened our eyes to the possibilities both in terms of extent and design.

Mission tree design evolved further over the course of the ‘Mughals’ (Dharma), ‘Poland’, and ‘Spain’ (Golden Century) updates. While we had plenty of unique mission trees in Dharma, we also create a ‘generic Indian’ tree for those nations without them, as well as for players without the Dharma DLC. We found generic missions both inherently more difficult and more time-consuming to design, and less fun to play through than even shorter mission trees that were unique to a country. In the future we’ll be less likely to take this approach, instead adding smaller but more immersive missions for minor nations. Navarra, for instance, received a small but interesting mission tree in the 1.28 ‘Spain’ patch that contained high risk/high reward options for the plucky OPM as well as a colonial branch allows them to bypass the usual restrictions and move their capital to the New World.

So how do we design a mission tree? First we need to establish design goals by asking ourselves some key questions - how large will the tree be? Will it be free or part of a DLC? Will the theme be conquest, colonization, trade, etc? How far to we want to incorporate existing content such as events? I’m currently in the process of drafting a new mission tree for the nation of Burgundy. As an example, some design goals for Burgundy include: a) concerned with elevating rank to kingdom and eventually empire, potentially incorporating a tag switch to Lotharingia, b) interacting with and potentially joining and leading the HRE, and c) clashing with France, possibly through interaction with a restored French vassal swarm (inspired by the League of Public Weal). When we have a clear idea of what we want to achieve, we hit the books and start researching. Research can include not only looking through books, maps, and academic articles, but also reading through community suggestions and seeking inspiration from mods. When we feel like we have a solid set of ideas for missions, we create a first draft. Personally I like to do this with good old pen and paper, but others sometimes use fancy computer software.

burgundy.png

A very messy, confusing, and unimplementable early draft of a new Burgundian mission tree. Yes, I know my handwriting is awful.

Drafts usually have to go through many iterations as we discover that our original plans don’t even fit into the interface, or we need to rethink positioning because we had a great idea for a mission that needs to be squeezed in further up the chain. It’s at this stage that we start to get an idea of how each mission will work mechanically. After all this, it’s finally time for implementation into the game using our scripting language. This can be a time-consuming process - we need to make sure that we always have fallbacks in place in case the player does something unexpected like converting to Shinto as Gujarat, we need to make sure that highlighting functions correctly and is intuitive, and of course we need to iron out as many potential bugs as possible before QA get their hands on it.

What can you expect from the mission trees in the Q4 European update? It should come as no surprise at this point that Burgundy is on the cards. We’re planning to bring a mix of large and small, paid and free missions to nations across our focus areas (Germany, France, Italy, and the Balkans). Some other strong contenders for larger mission trees include France, Austria, and the Papal State. There’s a great deal of space, both historical and fantastical, to create content for these nations, and they’re consistently popular among players. Serbia, Provence, and Saxony are good candidates for mid-sized mission trees, while Ulm and Hesse may receive minor additions.

As always, we’re eager to hear your thoughts on which nations are most deserving of a brand new mission tree, and we welcome your ideas for what kinds of missions these trees could contain. Next week I’ll be taking a break from writing dev diaries. Instead I’ll hand you over to Jake, who’ll be discussing our future ambitions for more mechanical aspects of the game
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
I agree with Britnavfan that Permanent Claims are too abundant and too OP. Only a few core areas that were captured in RL should have those, and all the others should have standard claims! The only nations that should have significant Permanent Claims are underdogs; the Great Powers are OP already and they just keep getting stronger.
 
Ulm only gets a minor mission tree? Come on Paradox, you know the community would love a large Ulm mission tree, even if it is mostly fantastical. I'd certainly be more than willing to pay for one. Also a proper papal mission tree is something that would be a very valuable addition. The pope needs to be able to throw his weight around.
 
I already said it in a previous DD thread : no spamming about the hour at which a DD thread is posted, each and every week.

DD thread is posted when it's ready.
 
you guys need to give a mission to nations that can form yuan and maybe even Qing (technically dont need eoc i know) to offset the mandate loss from bordering whatever blob is in india and Russia so we dont need to use dumb strategy like literally giving a line of single provinces along your border to a vessel to prevent mass rebellion across your stable nation by just forming Yaun since its literally a requirement for the nation maybe its a bad idea to take mandate loss from just bordering russia but im just venting since i just played a game were it ruined my game in multiplayer
 
I know it's quite late however i think Sweden/Denmark/Norway should get a mission tree. Sweden should at least have an option to get Gustav Wasa/ Gustavus Adolphus as king or at least get the Wasa dynasty a lot easier then currently. Norway should get a mission tree with colonial focus and/or conquest of British isles focus. Denmark should maybe have a focus with Erik of Pomerania and his Gutnish pirate base at Gotland maybe even an option to play as a Gotland pirate republic. Denmark might even deserve a special modifier for the Kalmar union and Sweden should get a special unit the "Karoliner" in the age of reformation and absolutism.
 
What can you expect from the mission trees in the Q4 European update? It should come as no surprise at this point that Burgundy is on the cards. We’re planning to bring a mix of large and small, paid and free missions to nations across our focus areas (Germany, France, Italy, and the Balkans). Some other strong contenders for larger mission trees include France, Austria, and the Papal State. There’s a great deal of space, both historical and fantastical, to create content for these nations, and they’re consistently popular among players. Serbia, Provence, and Saxony are good candidates for mid-sized mission trees, while Ulm and Hesse may receive minor additions.

As always, we’re eager to hear your thoughts on which nations are most deserving of a brand new mission tree, and we welcome your ideas for what kinds of missions these trees could contain. Next week I’ll be taking a break from writing dev diaries. Instead I’ll hand you over to Jake, who’ll be discussing our future ambitions for more mechanical aspects of the game

Dear EU team if you still have in plan to add missions to Balkan countries please add missions for Croatia too (Serbia is already in plan I think). Croatian missions can be focused on repeal of Ottoman invasion and establish a dominance in region + in Hungary and Venice
 
We need an Austria/HRE update with new units for Eastern European Nations. They still all have the ugly units from the release of the game. Also I beg you fix regnal names for Poland and England. Also making it easier to keep a Jagellions until the 1600s.
It always struck me odd that the elective monarchy mechanic begins with the PU of Lithuania rather than with the formation of the Commonwealth. In practice, the monarchy was effectively hereditary (though formally elective) until the Jagiellons died out, which was with the formation of the Commonwealth. So if you want the dynasty to stick around longer, that's probably the way to do it, but it makes Poland/Lithuania a bit more stronger (less prestige drain on supporting candidate) for the 80 or so years between 1444 and whenever the player forms the Commonwealth. Then again, they'd be subject to regency or PU for that time. Maybe a mod to improve own candidate support if your ruler is Jagiellon that doesn't apply otherwise.
 
In my opinion, the mission system is good and I don't think that the British mission tree is overpowered. It reflects the ambitions of the British at the time and if the 100 years war had gone in their favour they definitely could've destroyed France.
Either way, I think that there could be better mission trees for nations like France, Prussia, Austria, Denmark and Ming/Japan (Japan is kinda disappointing). However, I don't want to be paying £10 for some missions and a couple of features. When I got Dharma in a sale I found that the features were nice extras and the Indian mission trees were pretty good but I was surprised to see Jaunpur (who is quite powerful) didn't have a mission tree. Felt like I would have payed to much for it if it were not on sale.
Rework the DLC policy before you do anything else is what I want to say, I guess.
 
and all the others should have standard claims!
Normal claims time out way too fast. If it's regular claims then you'll have to wait with actually clicking the previous mission until you're ready.
Now, something between regular and permanent claims could work, i.e. a type where you get significantly longer than 25 years, but it isn't permanent.
But 25 years is way way too short for these missions as the previous mission which grants the claims often can be finished way before you're ready to take all the claims.
Plus, lets not forget that it might not even be possible to take all the claims in a single war and then you might start running into the claim timeout, even if you started your conquests almost immediately after getting the claims.
 
I'm really late to the party, but I hope it's oaky to share some thoguhts. ^^;

I don't suppose it is possible to have both the old mission system and the new mission trees? I like the mission trees, but the older system (which I have only seen second-hand) seemed to offer more flexibility.

The British mission tree is extensive and covers nearly everything you might want to do while playing as England and Great Britain.
Well, not really. It doesn't really help you if you want to restore Canute's North Sea empire, for instance. And that's more the kind of thing *I* would like to do, over colonial expansion. And that's with a mission tree that is indeed quite impressive.

I would tentatively support the idea of making the mission trees more like HoI's focus trees, but if some paths are exclusive than they also need to be bigger. So I don't know if it's practicable.

I’m currently in the process of drafting a new mission tree for the nation of Burgundy. As an example, some design goals for Burgundy include: a) concerned with elevating rank to kingdom and eventually empire, potentially incorporating a tag switch to Lotharingia, b) interacting with and potentially joining and leading the HRE, and c) clashing with France, possibly through interaction with a restored French vassal swarm (inspired by the League of Public Weal).
I'm cautiously excited about expansions to Burgundy, since Burgundy is probably my favourite country to play as. Personally, I don't see them reforming Lotharingia; that would be more of a thing for Lorraine and the Upper Rhenish countries. To my mind, Burgundians would more likely associate themselves with the ancient kingdom of the Burgundii. But then I'm somewhat averse to tag switching. Lotharingia makes somewhat more sense to me than the Netherlands.

Provence and Savoy could also potentially be interested in reformign the Arelat kingdom/Middle Francia. Having an AU path of Savoy being more interested in France, the Rhineland and the HRE is at aleast as appealing to me as the historical path of reuniting Italy.

Also, I'd bet this is already being considered, but I think most or all italian states should have a path to reform italy leading to reforming Rome. Kind of on that note, thoguh, it would be nice if Catholic nations in general didn't have such a painful choice when conquering italy (i.e. the Papal State).