Part of the slowdown is the beta patch, which should be greatly reduced in the official patch.
-
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.
Yes, it sounds like the official patch is going to make a reasonable difference. Lets see how that goes.
It could be done quite easily, by inserting a bit of code into each mission and then having a decision which would allow you to turn them off. Is it really that bad? Are you referring to vanilla mission or new Epigoni missions?
Hi Hardradi,
well getting a mission to declare war on a Roman tributary playing as a 2 prov Rhodos is kinda idiotic. And losing 2 stab for not complying is not exactly uplifting.
Or establishing a trade route with a friendly power with no free trade slots is agonizing when you think abt. the 100 gold you`ll never get.
I do not know if these are vanilla or Epigoni missions but quite regardless missions should be doable without being suicidal(does not necessarily mean easy). If not possible to make them thus, better not make any at all.
Regards, Oldtimer
well getting a mission to declare war on a Roman tributary playing as a 2 prov Rhodos is kinda idiotic. And losing 2 stab for not complying is not exactly uplifting.
Or establishing a trade route with a friendly power with no free trade slots is agonizing when you think abt. the 100 gold you`ll never get.
I do not know if these are vanilla or Epigoni missions but quite regardless missions should be doable without being suicidal(does not necessarily mean easy). If not possible to make them thus, better not make any at all.
Regards, Oldtimer
I've been playing vanilla and I get impossible missions like this too. Establish trade with a one-province neighbor who has only one trade slot and is already trading with someone else. There's really no way to complete it.
Still, in real life sometimes you are confronted with impossible situations. At least you know you're going to get a stab hit, so you can prepare for it in advance.
Still, in real life sometimes you are confronted with impossible situations. At least you know you're going to get a stab hit, so you can prepare for it in advance.
I'm sure revamping missions must already be somewhere on Hardradi's long to-do list. 
I've been playing Rome yet again recently and finally read the Roman missions file (vanilla, Epigoni hasn't changed that one yet). I really dislike the way Paradox handled the Punic and Macedonian Wars. There's just the one Punic War mission, usually completed in the first war so there will be no mission-based conflict between those two afterwards. Whereas the file is set up such that once Rome has beaten Carthage once, their mission will be to invade Macedonia from then until Macedonia ceases to exist, interrupted only by "Capture RANDOM_PROVINCE" missions during a Macedonian War after Rome captures the capital province. Very boring and frustrating sometimes! I remember a previous Rome game where I didn't feel like messing around in Greece so I just suffered through the permanent Border Incident modifier and periodic stability hits for failing to complete the mission.
Another issue that will need attention at some point involves the missions that trigger based on owning provinces in certain regions. There's a Roman one about the Mithridatic Wars, where the trigger has something to do with who owns provinces in Asia. Since Hardradi has carved up that region, the list of province IDs should be expanded appropriately at some point. I'm sure there are similar examples elsewhere in the world.
I've been playing Rome yet again recently and finally read the Roman missions file (vanilla, Epigoni hasn't changed that one yet). I really dislike the way Paradox handled the Punic and Macedonian Wars. There's just the one Punic War mission, usually completed in the first war so there will be no mission-based conflict between those two afterwards. Whereas the file is set up such that once Rome has beaten Carthage once, their mission will be to invade Macedonia from then until Macedonia ceases to exist, interrupted only by "Capture RANDOM_PROVINCE" missions during a Macedonian War after Rome captures the capital province. Very boring and frustrating sometimes! I remember a previous Rome game where I didn't feel like messing around in Greece so I just suffered through the permanent Border Incident modifier and periodic stability hits for failing to complete the mission.Another issue that will need attention at some point involves the missions that trigger based on owning provinces in certain regions. There's a Roman one about the Mithridatic Wars, where the trigger has something to do with who owns provinces in Asia. Since Hardradi has carved up that region, the list of province IDs should be expanded appropriately at some point. I'm sure there are similar examples elsewhere in the world.
Hi,
in RL you do not get impossible/meaningless missions this often though...
Regards, Oldtimer
I'm sure revamping missions must already be somewhere on Hardradi's long to-do list.
Another issue that will need attention at some point involves the missions that trigger based on owning provinces in certain regions. There's a Roman one about the Mithridatic Wars, where the trigger has something to do with who owns provinces in Asia. Since Hardradi has carved up that region, the list of province IDs should be expanded appropriately at some point. I'm sure there are similar examples elsewhere in the world.
THIS!!!
Absolutely agree...
And do not forget Massilia, Rhodos and others who need historically plausible
long-time aims. And sometimes better resources to fulfill them.
Like where has Rhodos powerful navy gone? Size of territory does not always correspond to a nations true strength.
Regards, Oldtimer
On the other hand, in EVR you get missions that are super easy too. More often than in RL.
The main point though is that these are generally missions from vanilla, not Epigoni.
On the other hand, in EVR you get missions that are super easy too. More often than in RL.
The main point though is that these are generally missions from vanilla, not Epigoni.
Hi,
they DO NOT compensate for impossible missions with unbalanced penalties like: gain 2 senators for establishing a trade route OR lose 5 for failing.
This is crippling for a republic where keeping the populists at bay is all-important.
In SF where the game can develop in totally unrealistic and ahistorical direction there is a function where you can set the the game to work in a more historical way AFAIK.
Here also it would be better to send the missions out the window and set the
AI to follow more historically plausible long term goals instead.
Regards, Oldtimer
From the AI perspective, do we even know if it actively tries to meet mission goals?
If it doesnt, then its pointless to build a huge mission chain as it will never even bother to attempt them.
If it does, then they have even more potential, you could effectively use them to make the AI more intelligent. As a simple example, there is a triggered modifier called "Naval Supremecy in the East", where if you own Alexandria, Phoeonica and Crete you get an extra 10% naval morale. You could build an event where if the AI owned two out of the three territories, it would get a mission to capture the final one.
From the player perspective, perhaps the impossible mission penalties need to be toned down a bit and the benefits increased. As far as I know there are no ways to effect trade, so that mission is bogus and perhaps should be removed.
If it doesnt, then its pointless to build a huge mission chain as it will never even bother to attempt them.
If it does, then they have even more potential, you could effectively use them to make the AI more intelligent. As a simple example, there is a triggered modifier called "Naval Supremecy in the East", where if you own Alexandria, Phoeonica and Crete you get an extra 10% naval morale. You could build an event where if the AI owned two out of the three territories, it would get a mission to capture the final one.
From the player perspective, perhaps the impossible mission penalties need to be toned down a bit and the benefits increased. As far as I know there are no ways to effect trade, so that mission is bogus and perhaps should be removed.
Hi Hardradi,
in the Magna Mundi mod for EU III missions for the AI were deleted AFAIU because the AI could not "handle" them properly, whatever that means.
Setting long-term goals I think may be done by breaking them down into sub-goals as already suggested. So "destroy someone" could be composed of smaller steps like "if this" do "that" and so on. You know what I mean.
Regards, Oldtimer
in the Magna Mundi mod for EU III missions for the AI were deleted AFAIU because the AI could not "handle" them properly, whatever that means.
Setting long-term goals I think may be done by breaking them down into sub-goals as already suggested. So "destroy someone" could be composed of smaller steps like "if this" do "that" and so on. You know what I mean.
Regards, Oldtimer
In my experience it does seem that the ai does try to complete missions, but only to a limited extent. In my mod Rome have a mission to deal with Illyrian pirates and I often see them go to war with Illyria while having that mission (while generally ignoring them otherwise unless the Illyrians are extremely weak). Likewise the Seleucids have two small missions to either conquer Judea or Caria & Lycia. When they win the initial war they tend to take the provinces they have a mission to take in the peace (and when at peace they like going to war with the Ptolemies when they have one of those missions). However it is only if it seems easy enough. As an example Egypt rarely feels strong enough to attack the Seleucids even with missions that would require it.
I doubt that the actual rewards (and penalties if failing the mission) have any real impact on wether or not the ai tries to complete a mission. I think only the perceived probability of success matters, but I might be wrong.
For what it's worth the EU3 AI places a very high priority on it's missions (as long as it can understand them). If you start a grand campaign with Ireland you'll soon notice that peace with England is virtually impossible as they get a mission to annex you repeatedly.
Same thing with Morroco and Castille, the Turks and Byzantium, etc.
I agree that I doubt the rewards are factored in that decision however.
One nice way to use missions is to have them trigger events upon completion, that way you can actually set off a whole process through the completion of a mission...
Same thing with Morroco and Castille, the Turks and Byzantium, etc.
I agree that I doubt the rewards are factored in that decision however.
One nice way to use missions is to have them trigger events upon completion, that way you can actually set off a whole process through the completion of a mission...
Thanks for the feedback. So it sounds like the more complex the mission the less likely the AI will handle it. Luckily, I broke down the new Carthage missions into bite sized pieces, that flow from one to the other, conquest wise.
Thanks for the feedback Lofman,it definately sounds like it is recognising them. Also the AI isnt suicidal, which is a good thing.
I guess we could test a mission by ramping up the rewards and see if they do it. Then we would know for sure.
Thanks for the feedback Trin. Likewise you are suggesting to keep them simple and it appears we need to test whether event rewards have any bearing.
Yes, I like that idea of triggering an event off a mission. That could be handy for trying to simulate historical events, like the 2nd Punic War. I cant see any scope for triggerring missions from events though.