The game is starting to feel more like "use the mission tree"

[st360]

Playing as OPM Gotland or an OPM with no missions is not even the same game anymore. Free money, free allies, changing governments for free, personal unions for free, multiple permanent modifiers, unlocking mechanics...

Missions are becoming so important that its less about choosing a nation and playing with unified game rules and more about reading nations mission trees in advance on EU 4 wiki and maneuvering trough them.

Like, I'm all for missions, but I thought it was wildly too much when you could just get claims for free as Russia. Now having a good (new and stuffed) mission tree for a country is more important than anything else.

 

[Arizal]

Playing as OPM Gotland or a OPM with no missions is like not even the same game. Free money, free allies, changing governments for free, personal unions for free, multiple permanent modifiers, unlocking mechanics...

Missions are becoming so important that its less about choosing a nation and playing in a unified game and more about reading nations mission trees in advance on EU 4 wiki and maneuvering trough them.

Like, I'm all for missions, but I thought it was wildly too much when you could just get claims for free as Russia. Now having a good (new and stuffed) mission tree for a country is more important than anything else.

From your post, I would only remove the part where you say “I am for missions”. The rest sounds like reasons to burn them with fire, as they are detrimental to gameplay.

Plus, I hate - and thus I don’t, never have and never will - reading through a code and a linear not even interesting list of objectives in order to have a “right” game experience.

I might learn about the country’s history or, most likely, about the ridiculous fantasy the “content creators” thought the countries history ought to be.

To me, the game should be about starting from different initial positions and making the best out of the problems the game dynamically throws at you.

 

[currylambchop]

More an argument for giving every nation a mission tree than anything else.

 

[Ujin]

Yes, there is a feeling that the game is becoming more and more like a visual novel, like HoI 4
Although the missions of Byzantium or the Ottomans with a bunch of сlaims seem very boring to me
On the other hand, a game without missions can also be interesting, more free-form

 

[Wenla]

But... A silly guestion: is it mandatory to play throug mission tree(s)? Can't you just play without as you like?

 

[CMDR_HERNE]

I keep a copy of 1.24.1 for a reason

 

[Orkonkel]

I really enjoy these mission trees, but (and to me, this is a big but) it feels so weird missions are clickable for rewards and don't autocomplete. It feels so gamey to hold on to mission rewards for decades or centuries when your nation achieved The Thing™ many generations in the past.

Anyway!

Mission Trees are one of Eu4's greatest innovations, and they're what makes me the most excited about the next expansion.

EDIT:
Some of the rewards are really overtunued, especially when stacked with tag-changed mission trees. In my opinions, 'until end of time' modifiers should be stripped when forming new nations horizontally instead of vertically.

 

[st360]

But... A silly guestion: is it mandatory to play throug mission tree(s)? Can't you just play without as you like?

I never really understood the "you don't have to play the game" argument.

When Tibet had a bug to develop provinces to 200 dev by 1450, people could had just chosen not to do it. If Reformed is too weak you can just choose to be Orthodox, or to ignore Reformed being weak.

Yeh, you can ignore a part of the game, I guess.
A part thats the fastest growing one, where 90% of the new development is being redirected to.

 

[Wenla]

I never really understood the "you don't have to play the game" argument. When Tibet had a bug to develop provinces to 200 dev by 1450, people could had just chosen not to do it. If Reformed is too weak you can just choose to be Orthodox, or to ignore Reformed being weak. Yeh, you can ignore a part of the game, I guess. A part thats the fastest growing one, where 90% of the new development is being redirected to.

For me mission trees are more 'tutorial' (= if you don't know what you want/can do, look at there) than mandatory 'game-flow'. If mission tree isn't pointing to the direction I like to go/develop, I ignore it and go with my own.

Have I understood something wrong? This is sincere question.

 

[YellowPress]

I really enjoy these mission trees, but (and to me, this is a big but) it feels so weird missions are clickable for rewards and don't autocomplete. It feels so gamey to hold on to mission rewards for decades or centuries when your nation achieved The Thing™ many generations in the past.

Subjugation cb from English mission tree is one thing I can think of waiting for

Anyway!

Mission Trees are one of Eu4's greatest innovations, and they're what makes me the most excited about the next expansion.

The greatest innovation is a mechanic which rarely if ever interacts with other ones? I quite liked disaster mission trees because then you'd need to do something meaningful to avoid disaster but then all the disaster trees were poorly implemented

EDIT:
Some of the rewards are really overtunued, especially when stacked with tag-changed mission trees. In my opinions, 'until end of time' modifiers should be stripped when forming new nations horizontally instead of vertically.

Just dont powergame or have rules for mp then

 

[YellowPress]

For me mission trees are more 'tutorial' (= if you don't know what you want/can do, look at there) than mandatory 'game-flow'. If mission tree isn't pointing to the direction I like to go/develop, I ignore it and go with my own.

Have I understood something wrong? This is sincere question.

Permaclaims, pu cbs, permanent modifiers, why would you ignore this if its your mission tree and part of the dlc you paid for?

 

[ArtFart]

I love the mission tree system, it gives a country it's uniqueness and it's ability to transform into it's historical path via the player. Although I don't really like the ahistorical side of tree's, some are cool like the Teutons but they should be very rare imo.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

But... A silly guestion: is it mandatory to play throug mission tree(s)? Can't you just play without as you like?

of course. i don't see the problem.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

For me mission trees are more 'tutorial' (= if you don't know what you want/can do, look at there) than mandatory 'game-flow'. If mission tree isn't pointing to the direction I like to go/develop, I ignore it and go with my own.

Have I understood something wrong? This is sincere question.

no. that's the way i see it too.

 

[Stadhouder]

I really enjoy these mission trees, but (and to me, this is a big but) it feels so weird missions are clickable for rewards and don't autocomplete. It feels so gamey to hold on to mission rewards for decades or centuries when your nation achieved The Thing™ many generations in the past.

It kind of is, however, it's also strange to take a mission that for example improves you're war capability for a certain period while you're due to circumstances are kind are forced to stay in peace for a while. "This the golden decade of our army!" "Really? How do we know? All we do is fight some peasants".

 

[Stadhouder]

I love the mission tree system, it gives a country it's uniqueness and it's ability to transform into it's historical path via the player. Although I don't really like the ahistorical side of tree's, some are cool like the Teutons but they should be very rare imo.

Why? Without ahistorical mission trees, only historical winners would get an interesting mission tree, which would decimatre the countries that are intesting to play.

 

[Mindel]

Missions can be fun and all, but I worry that the devs are painting themselves into a corner where they have to eventually get around to making a full mission tree for every significant nation in the world in order to maintain some semblance of balance. If they can pull this off, then it would be fine. But I'm not so sure the resources are there for such a huge job.

Given the overpowered nature of mission trees, there is always going to be a huge power disparity between nations which have a custom mission tree, and ones which don't. A custom tree functions like lucky nation on steroids.

 

[YellowPress]

Why? Without ahistorical mission trees, only historical winners would get an interesting mission tree, which would decimatre the countries that are intesting to play.

How is kilwa interesting to play because it gets free claims on china? Anyone can do that with colonisation and chartering. Many mission trees go beyond what ifs to ahistorical nonsense cough mughals getting claims on malacca cough

 

[vitek69]

I agree, I feel like the mission rewards from the last few DLCs are getting ridiculously OP - with the upcoming DLC taking it to a silly extreme. Really, as Gotland you will get 500 ducats and +5 gold/month just for improving relations with someone? You might as well just enable the console and cheat…

With that being said, I liked the idea of missions in general - as a nudge to progress a certain way, or just to give you a little bit of narrative around your progress. Not as a replacement of cheats though…

 

[Banedon Runestar]

I agree, I feel like the mission rewards from the last few DLCs are getting ridiculously OP - with the upcoming DLC taking it to a silly extreme. Really, as Gotland you will get 500 ducats and +5 gold/month just for improving relations with someone? You might as well just enable the console and cheat…

With that being said, I liked the idea of missions in general - as a nudge to progress a certain way, or just to give you a little bit of narrative around your progress. Not as a replacement of cheats though…

I see where you’re coming from, and generally agree. But as Gotland, you’re a OPM.

If you just want to take Denmark “eventually”, you can snag opportunities around the Baltic for a few centuries and then do it.

If you want to start straight in, you’d need that kind of cash to even have a chance of taking down Denmark, it’s allies, plus Sweden and Norway, before your starting king dies.