Zenicetus wrote:
No, it may only apply to outposts, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with proximity to the enemy. Unless we're talking about two different distance-from-empire penalties?



I have a new game started with a homeworld and three outposts. Two are at least 3 jumps from the enemy's zone of influence, and one is on the back side of my empire, behind my homeworld. All the outposts are showing that "distance from empire" tax penalty, even though the one at the rear is just one jump away from the homeworld. So it must just be a penalty for not being a full colony and under the home empire's influence yet? It would work better to constrain rapid expansion if it was a true distance penalty from the capital, as in the Total War games.

So instead of like a pesent revolt, would it be more like the system trying to become independent?

I also think the races are not different enough which seems weird when you look at the description: the differences should be _HUGE_

.. but then it hit me... Rapid Expansion is too powerful and there aren't enough things to discourage you from doing it.. so everybody plays REX which ofc makes everygame feel similar to the last one...let me explain with examples:

-> in the civ series you pay for every city you build and you pay more the further it is away from your capital (not to mention that your cities wont grow while building a settler) furthermore barbarians just wipe your cities if you leave them unprotected -> you wasted a lot of time to build a settler for no bonus.

-> in MoO II traveling distances are _severely_ limited at the start so only fast teching species can claim a good chunk of the galaxy without sacrificing everything else at start

... there are many more examples but i think my point is clear

in ES there is hardly anything that discourages you from expanding as quickly as you want.. to the best places available no matter how far away... so every race plays REX --> there is no real differentiation in playstyle.



If pirates would destroy system colonies or had a halfway decent way to claim them from the start it would discourage races with a weak military start from booming.. also upkeep payment for colonies (distance and number) would make people think if expanding is profitable right now...

and all those other little things that make people think if they should really take this system too or if it would be better to stick to the ones they already have for a little longer.

StK;33916- wrote:
> in the civ series you pay for every city you build and you pay more the further it is away from your capital

On this one point, note that there is a penalty to Dust production for systems that are located more "distant from Empire," which I think means your starting homeworld? Although it could be distance from established colony borders and only apply to outposts.... I haven't checked it lately. It's listed on the mouseover window when you hover over the Dust production for each system in the main empire stats screen.



So there is at least one form of that game mechanic in place. It could be tweaked to slow expansion, but that also depends on how easy it is to earn vs. spend Dust.

I didn't say there aren't any... I said there should be more.

Look at the 30 turn challenges (yey I'm a link) the amount of expansion going on in these is astonishing, but it is the only way to play if you want to stay on top.

If you want compare it to the first 30 turns of other 4X games I don't think you will see anything like it.

I realize this thread has evolved but I wanted to point out this suggestion I made for Race Specific Battle Actions as a way to further differentiate the races in a player active way: /#/endless-space/forum/29-archives/thread/13461-suggestion-racial-battle-actions

StK wrote:
I didn't say there aren't any... I said there should be more.

Look at the 30 turn challenges (yey I'm a link) the amount of expansion going on in these is astonishing, but it is the only way to play if you want to stay on top.

If you want compare it to the first 30 turns of other 4X games I don't think you will see anything like it.

I'm not so sure about that. There is a colony rush in GalCiv2 if you want to survive at the harder difficulty levels, at least on the medium to smaller maps (and note that the "30 Turn Challenge is on a small map). In Civ V, you have to grab enough territory in the early game to have a shot at the important resources like marble, horses, iron, etc. once you unlock them. In Total War games prior to the last one (Shogun 2) you had a strong incentive to quickly expand through neighboring neutral/rebel territory before coming up against the borders of the major factions.



It's partly a question of player style -- some people want to turtle, others like to steamroll the map. I'm somewhere in the middle, but most 4X games I've played have been designed so I have to consolidate my starting position fairly aggressively. Then I can kick back a little, negotiate treaties, trade, and think about the next phase.



It's that last part that's missing from the game right now, since diplomacy is still pretty weak. That encourages aggressive expansion because it's all you can do. However, I think it's always going to be important to expand quickly on a small map like the 30 turn challenge. That's just how small maps work.

Yes, another vote for that the factions should "feel" different as a gameplay experience.



In another thread I played around with an idea of actual craving for the cravers. As in they could for example have a turn-based craving counter, which could tick down, and they would have to settle a new planet by then or something bad happens. (I'm not sure how locust points work)



The Horatio's should be able to somehow clone themselves in order to fill the galaxy with Horatio. The hero cloning mechanic is nice, but it could be expanded somehow to other areas of the game as well. What about lesser Horatio-vassals?



What if the Sower player couldn't tell the other factions apart from each other?



Without going into more specific stuff, there are surely relatively easily implemented ways to affect the experience of playing a certain alien race without it breaking the core game.

@Zenicetus: In >this post< I show the differences of ES to other 4X games when it comes to expansion. You will note that ES makes expansion easier then every other 4X game I know.

And yes it is a design decision but I think REX shouldn't be the only valid strategy especially not for every faction.



Also as for Civ V i disagree with you (I was never a huge fan of GalCiv or the total war series so i simply don't know about them).

In Civ V there are civilizations for different playstyles.. India doesn't have to play REX .. and it shouldn't its benefits lie elsewhere (it can however play ICS (infinite city sprawl) but that is profoundly different to REX and a decision of the player because he can also just go for a few huge cities)

Japan for example doesn't play REX either.. they are insanely effective when using a warrior rush.

and so on and so forth...

And that's exactly my point.. different races (or nations in the case of Civ V) different playstyles... but in ES REX is so strong there is just no alternative.

Zenicetus wrote:
On this one point, note that there is a penalty to Dust production for systems that are located more "distant from Empire," which I think means your starting homeworld?

It's not. It's for your OUTPOST being 1 jump away from an enemy colony, or for the OUTPOST from being under the region of influence from an enemy colony (both can happen at the same time). It's a 25% penalty, after tax rate.

Draco18s wrote:
It's not. It's for your OUTPOST being 1 jump away from an enemy colony, or for the OUTPOST from being under the region of influence from an enemy colony (both can happen at the same time). It's a 25% penalty, after tax rate.

No, it may only apply to outposts, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with proximity to the enemy. Unless we're talking about two different distance-from-empire penalties?



I have a new game started with a homeworld and three outposts. Two are at least 3 jumps from the enemy's zone of influence, and one is on the back side of my empire, behind my homeworld. All the outposts are showing that "distance from empire" tax penalty, even though the one at the rear is just one jump away from the homeworld. So it must just be a penalty for not being a full colony and under the home empire's influence yet? It would work better to constrain rapid expansion if it was a true distance penalty from the capital, as in the Total War games.

stevenmc409 wrote:
My suggestion for race specific active abilities



Sophon:Collapse string/wormhole: self-explanatory

Pro:the puny Sophon can hide for the early-mid game

Con:it hampers the Sophons growth/exploration



Hissho: Ramming speed: (I'm think a card in battle) destroys ships in the Hissho fleet and converts their HP+Tonnage*X (X is a value that can be adjusted for balance purposes)

Pro: Allows the Hissho to do tremendous damage if they are lousing a battle or build cheap suicide fleets.

Con: They are lousing an entire fleet!



UE: Prosperity: trigger say 50 turns of increased FIDS followed by 50 turns of decreased FIDS

Pro: Like any capitalist society you make a lot of money, food ect. right now...

Con:but like all capitalist societies you base it on things like speculation, overvalued investments and currency exchanges witch ultimately lead to depressions.



Craver: Cannibalism: Sac Pop for sudden FIDS increases

Pro:When there is nothing else to eat then eat your people

Con: you're a monster and you lose population



Horatio:actually the current cloning ability works great I'm thinking expand it so you can buy population points.

Pro: Fast growth yay!!!!

Con: It costs how much???? (seriously your cloning million if not billions in less then a year that is going to cost a lot.)



Based on descriptions



Ameoba: Force cease fire

Pro: Suddenly ceases a war for X turns.

Con: Long cool down so be nice.



Sowers: Terraforming: Turn a world immediately to a certain planet type for a lot of Dust possibly growing each time this abilty is used

Pro: Lots of good planets

Con:Cost a lot and if you do it to a lot of planets you become a target (If you have 6 Terran worlds you are going to be a target)



That's what I'm thinking to make the races unique and it is easy to balance once implemented.

This seems to be really nice. Even if it think that one special makes them not different enough.

The also need Techs for their special and like 2 or three of this for each faction.

Igncom1 wrote:
So instead of like a pesent revolt, would it be more like the system trying to become independent?

I don't know if that would work for all empires though. It doesn't make sense for the Ameobas or the Sowers to have independent colonies. UE and Hissho for sure, Cravers and Sophons maybe.

Becuse of the hive mind thing?



Surly if heros can be indipendant, others can too.

Igncom1 wrote:
So instead of like a pesent revolt, would it be more like the system trying to become independent?

Something like that, yes. Not necessarily going for full independence, but a reduction in efficiency (tax income) or increase in general unrest, due to being further from the heart of the empire, with less news about what's happening, slower transmission of goods and services, etc. Also cultural changes that can happen when a distant colony is closer to another faction's empire than it is to their own capital. All of which would mean that an outpost or even a developed colony on the borderlands wouldn't be as efficient as one closer to the heart of empire.

MiburosWolf wrote:
I don't know if that would work for all empires though. It doesn't make sense for the Ameobas or the Sowers to have independent colonies. UE and Hissho for sure, Cravers and Sophons maybe.

Yes, it's something one would expect to be different for every alien race. It could be argued different ways, though. The Amoebas and Sowers might have a deeper malus with distance, because they like being closely linked. On the other hand, if they can evolve methods to stay linked in a group mind across interstellar distances ('ansible" FTL communication or whatever), then maybe they're more immune to any effect of being separated from the core of the empire. And speaking of ansibles, that's the kind of tech that could be researched to reduce the effect.

Zenicetus wrote:
Something like that, yes. Not necessarily going for full independence, but a reduction in efficiency (tax income) or increase in general unrest, due to being further from the heart of the empire, with less news about what's happening, slower transmission of goods and services, etc. Also cultural changes that can happen when a distant colony is closer to another faction's empire than it is to their own capital. All of which would mean that an outpost or even a developed colony on the borderlands wouldn't be as efficient as one closer to the heart of empire.

Why not full independence? if they can, why wouldn't they?

I do hope they add more variety to the races, or at least allow us to when we can create our own race!



I want to make a race that excels at defence and technology but has a very low attack power and invasion power. So say 50% bonus to defence and attack if the ships are in a home system but -50% attack and defence if in an unowned system or invading.

When it comes to the expansion, they could add a refueling requirement like Pax Imperia Eminent Domain.



In that game, you start off with star drives (which let you travel through wormholes, which link each system together) that have a fuel value of 2 points. Every time the ship passes through a wormhole, one point is used up. It doesn't let you use up all your fuel if your desination is a system that does not let you refuel (i.e. a system you own, or a system owned by another empire who you have refueling rights with). Therefore, at the early game, you have to colonise planets in adjacent systems in order to spread out futher.



The beauty of this system is there are technologies that increase fuel capacity to a maximum of 8. Not only that, but there are different star drives for different ship sizes, but I think ES would be better without that.



Another thing I think that would make each species play differently would be a different affinity to a different type of ship.



For instance, Imperials prefer a balanced fleet. They get a bonus with multiple ship classes. Cravers prefer numbers, so get a bonus with more smaller ships. Sophon are pacifists so they get a bonus for using defensive ship classes. Hissho are aggressive, so they get a bonus for using offensive ship classes. Horatio prefer everything to be the same, so they should get a bonus for a fleet made up of all the same ship type. One of the remaining 3 races (depends on what the 8th race does) will prefer larger ships - if the 8rd race isn't suitable, then Sowers would be instead. Without that race determined, it would be hard to consider what the other bonus would be. And as for the Amoeba, I really can't think of anything right now.

Photon_Ventdesdunes wrote:
It's already the locust ability of Cravers.

Just some thoghts the difrence is that you can control when you activate this abilty and it eventually goes away (unlike Locust Points).

Virus wrote:
This seems to be really nice. Even if it think that one special makes them not different enough.

The also need Techs for their special and like 2 or three of this for each faction.

This is just some Ideas of abilities I agree more can be done to differentiate the races but based upon the Horatio Clone ability I think they are going to put in abilities like these for each faction

One good way to make races play differently is to give them really powerful abilities with a downside, As a pretty good example Civ 5's India, they have half unhappiness from population (this is an insane advantage) but they gain double unhappiness from the amount of cities, this makes spreading like cancer impossible while making VERY BIG CITIES possible, sadly India is basically the only faction that plays really differently in Civ 5.



also u must always think about balance, boosting the current % is pretty much a no no, because that would cause some maybe unwanted effects, like doubling the effects would lead to sophons with about 100% tech increase so they would win any game that would go long enough(soooo muuuuch teeeechh..) on the other hand boosting hisho's abilities anymore would make them unstoppable when they rush at you early game.(i think they might be slightly op at the moment too when playing small galaxies.)

This of course is also exemplified by SotS with the locomotion differences. Playing as the Hivers, Zuuhl or Mogiri is a completely different experience from playing as the others who were a bit too much alike(Tarkas and Humans use the exact same locomotion and the Liir just put a slight twist on that. MoO, GalCic, and Lost Empire are good examples of titles with varied races with there own niches as well.

I agree it should be bigger differences, but maybe only take the ones we already have and amplify them.

I agree with the OP. However, I don't think amplifying a percent bonus makes it more interesting. For example, Hissho have +40% damage and -20% science, while Sophons have +40% science. These differences have a real effect; but I don't *play* these any differently. The OP is suggesting *rules* differences for the different races. This could be done with race-specific techs. There are race-specific techs already, so we know it can be done. But the race-specific techs also make practically no difference. A wider detection radius for Sophons; a building which adds experience to Hissho ships in the unlikely case they sit still. IMHO these are not interesting enough.



I have had pretty good success with TC mods (Civ IV Dune Wars, for example) where each faction has a very different play style. This highly encourages players to replay as each different faction, which means they spend more hours playing. I don't really see much reason to replay the current ES to get a slightly different science rate or higher damage.

davea wrote:
I have had pretty good success with TC mods (Civ IV Dune Wars, for example) where each faction has a very different play style.

Civ vanilla still does this very well, relative to ES, since the bonuses you get are highly varied and the units you receive decide at which point in "history" you are at your best. So you could give the Cravers a unique hull early in the tech tree while Hisho has access to a tech mid-way up the tree that gives him an invasion bonus, and so on. Wonders would also work nicely since they help shape a given nation's role from match to match.

Good point, even vanilla civ makes the races more different than ES alpha.

DLC content right here!



i think...

I was disappointed too, when I first saw that the aliens in ES had mostly superficial differences that don't translate to major differences in strategy.



The visual design and backstory of the alien races is great, but the lack of gameplay difference may harm replayability. Games like this are all about replayability. The tech tree differences are why I played GalCiv2/TA for so long after they finally added big racial tech differences, and why I can never seem to stick with a Civ game past the first few months, since every faction moves through the same basic tech tree. Racial traits aren't enough, if everyone has the same tech tree.



Even if one assumes that star travel and combat techs will be the same (which is the shortcut GalCiv2/TA took), it's the economic development differences that can shake up a game, and give you a reason to play one faction over another.



I don't think it can be improved in ES unless the devs are willing to make some major restructuring of the tech tree for each race. Maybe in a later expansion? GalCiv2 didn't do it right away, so maybe it's good to get the basic underlying mechanics solid, before any major restructuring.

Well, I think part of this is that everything's still in alpha. There are Race-Specific tech, but not to many of them, and that's probably a good thing, what with basic facets of the game not working yet. It's still alpha: if it's like this in Beta, then it's more likely a flaw in the game.

Tavar wrote:
Well, I think part of this is that everything's still in alpha. There are Race-Specific tech, but not to many of them, and that's probably a good thing, what with basic facets of the game not working yet. It's still alpha: if it's like this in Beta, then it's more likely a flaw in the game.

It's forgivable because the development is early but I too would be concern if it's in late stages. Personally I don't mind, but i'm not a seasoned strategy gamer.

Let me begin by saying, that I love this game and have 60+ hours into it already.



I have played quite a few games and several of the races, and I am invariably left with the feeling that they are all pretty much the same. For the most part, the bonuses and penalties can be replicated or overcome with the acquisition of resources or through research. Perhaps only the Craver's special ability truly sets it apart. And even then, it is merely an economic effect.



In order for the differences to be felt and for strategy and tactics to evolve from those effects, I believe that the differences need to be pronounced.



Many of you will remember the excellent VGA Planets (1992) by Tim Wisseman. As a classic 4x game it shares a lot with Endless, however, to my mind, it boasts racial abilities that fundamentally altered the way almost every race was played. I'll discuss a couple.



The Feds (think Star Trek) had great economies, special ship bonuses, and quick refits

The Birds (Romulans): cloaking, ability to slip into systems and evade mines and detection

The Pirates (my favouries): a couple ships with double the speed of any other, the ability to drain fuel and cargo from enemy ships, as well as capture them, and at least one cloaking ship.

The Rebels (ahem): build fighters in space, devastating ground attack and a hyperspacing ship that could jump vast distances and deliver cargo (mines? etc.)



The abilities of each race are not just different in magnitude but also in character. A few races had super ships while some others (Pirates) had as their largest, cruisers. Some had economic advantages that couldn't be matched. Another had web mines which not only damaged the enemy vessel, but stopped it in space and drained it of fuel. Once the fuel is gone, the ship is easily captured. Imagine the possibilities if the Pirates with their 2x speed, cloaking ship were to trade with the Crystals for and their web mines. Devastating! Take a look at the Wiki for info on this game: http://vgaplanets.org/index.php/Main_Page.



Anyway, the point is that % change modifiers for each race are nice and provide subtle differences, but I think what is needed are dramatic differences if we really want each race to stand out.



The beautiful thing about ES is that it has the framework to do what I've described.

Cravers: The industry giant, till they fall.



Sophons: The science guys, with poor melee.



Hissho: Space samurai, bad school grades.



Horatio: Clone armys, cloned from a bad engineer.



United Empire: For fun and profit, as long as the heros get a cut.

Good summary of the racial backstories. The question is how to turn these into more interesting advantages and disadvantages, compared to what we have now. For example, what would be a more interesting set of race-specific techs for Sophons? Expanding on telepathy, allowing them to take over planets with less unhappiness? Maybe Hissho could have some unique ship weapons, or an intermediate hull size, or ship modules that increase dodge.

Sophons seem like the sort of race that would be able to produce the sorts of technologys that most races would only find in science fiction.



Lighning guns and other types of crazy (Laws of physics braking) type stuff would be cool.

I think the idea is not to make a race 'better' at something that everyone can do. For example, if they have more powerful weapons then the counter is just to have more ships or better defences. However, if the ability is unique, then all sorts of choices arise.



I referenced VGA Planets because I'm not a game designer and it would be pointless for me to try to come up with a whole range of stuff. I'd be happy to contribute one thing (or maybe simply happy to have spurned the conversation).



What if one race's ability was to capture enemy ships and with it points towards that vessel's tech?

- I would think twice about leaving my ships as prey to these guys and be damned sure that a battle with them was an all or nothing proposition



What if a race could draw it's own strings? I guess this is obviated by warp tech, but in my opinion the jury is still out on warp tech in this game.



Sabotage?



The ability to stall a fleet. Delaying an enemy fleet's movement for a turn could open incredible opportunities for penetrating defences particularly in a universe without warp tech.



Anyway, you guys get the idea.

The fly in the ointment for all these ideas is that it's going to be a multiplayer game, as well as single-player. Those two different (and overlapping) player groups have different priorities.



Multiplayer games can be fun when the factions are highly differentiated, but they have to be balanced so no faction is intrinsically hard or easy to win with.



By contrast, a singleplayer game can be fun if some factions are easy, and others are harder to play, due to their faction traits and tech trees. That was the case with GalCiv2. As a strictly singleplayer game, some factions in GalCiv2 were hard to get started and win with. Nobody cared, because it wasn't multiplayer. You waited until you had a good feel for the game with easier factions, before tackling the tougher ones. That won't work for multiplayer balance, and it might explain why there isn't more differentiation between races in the current ES design.



As someone who has too many schedule conflicts to do much MP (especially strategy games, which can be very time-consuming), I hope the devs aren't going overboard in trying to make all factions equally easy to play, for the sake of multiplayer.

hobbes wrote:
I think the idea is not to make a race 'better' at something that everyone can do. For example, if they have more powerful weapons then the counter is just to have more ships or better defences. However, if the ability is unique, then all sorts of choices arise.



I referenced VGA Planets because I'm not a game designer and it would be pointless for me to try to come up with a whole range of stuff. I'd be happy to contribute one thing (or maybe simply happy to have spurned the conversation).



What if one race's ability was to capture enemy ships and with it points towards that vessel's tech?

- I would think twice about leaving my ships as prey to these guys and be damned sure that a battle with them was an all or nothing proposition



What if a race could draw it's own strings? I guess this is obviated by warp tech, but in my opinion the jury is still out on warp tech in this game.



Sabotage?



The ability to stall a fleet. Delaying an enemy fleet's movement for a turn could open incredible opportunities for penetrating defences particularly in a universe without warp tech.



Anyway, you guys get the idea.

This is a great idea. Unique racial abilities are really the way to go. They should cost time and precious resources to use, and should be situatonal and slightly dangerous. This way the race you choose can really inform your playstyle. So, for example, the Hissho could have this ridiculously massive suicide weapon with a huge production cost that can only be made once every 10 turns and must survive to the melee phase of combat where it immediately destroys both fleets. The Cravers could initiate a population boom in a system that has a lot of excess food, where that system would grow at an insane rate for the next several turns but it could not produce anything else. The boom could only be exercised once every 20 turns or so.



These are all stream of consciousness, and these exact ideas might not work, but this is the sort of thing that could really change stuff up.

My suggestion for race specific active abilities



Sophon:Collapse string/wormhole: self-explanatory

Pro:the puny Sophon can hide for the early-mid game

Con:it hampers the Sophons growth/exploration



Hissho: Ramming speed: (I'm think a card in battle) destroys ships in the Hissho fleet and converts their HP+Tonnage*X (X is a value that can be adjusted for balance purposes)

Pro: Allows the Hissho to do tremendous damage if they are lousing a battle or build cheap suicide fleets.

Con: They are lousing an entire fleet!



UE: Prosperity: trigger say 50 turns of increased FIDS followed by 50 turns of decreased FIDS

Pro: Like any capitalist society you make a lot of money, food ect. right now...

Con:but like all capitalist societies you base it on things like speculation, overvalued investments and currency exchanges witch ultimately lead to depressions.



Craver: Cannibalism: Sac Pop for sudden FIDS increases

Pro:When there is nothing else to eat then eat your people

Con: you're a monster and you lose population



Horatio:actually the current cloning ability works great I'm thinking expand it so you can buy population points.

Pro: Fast growth yay!!!!

Con: It costs how much???? (seriously your cloning million if not billions in less then a year that is going to cost a lot.)



Based on descriptions



Ameoba: Force cease fire

Pro: Suddenly ceases a war for X turns.

Con: Long cool down so be nice.



Sowers: Terraforming: Turn a world immediately to a certain planet type for a lot of Dust possibly growing each time this abilty is used

Pro: Lots of good planets

Con:Cost a lot and if you do it to a lot of planets you become a target (If you have 6 Terran worlds you are going to be a target)



That's what I'm thinking to make the races unique and it is easy to balance once implemented.

stevenmc409 wrote:


UE: Prosperity: trigger say 50 turns of increased FIDS followed by 50 turns of decreased FIDS

Pro: Like any capitalist society you make a lot of money, food ect. right now...

Con:but like all capitalist societies you base it on things like speculation, overvalued investments and currency exchanges witch ultimately lead to depressions.

It's already the locust ability of Cravers.