There should be some kind of terrain modifier to battles.



For example, fighting in nebulas reduces missile accuracy. Or a battle around a protostar means shields are less effective because of increased solar radiation or something.



If we're going to improve battles, might as well add another layer of strategy and make it important where these battles are fought. I know Amplitude are very fond of a rock, paper, scissors, lasers approach to the combat. Keeping it simple, keeping it free of clutter. But more strategic depth is what the game needs, and that extends beyond the pure mechanics of fleet combat.



I'd like to see system wide affinities that affect all kinds of gameplay mechanics. You can even go beyond the combat itself. Ship movement might be impaired or reduced by certain star types. Maybe a system with a large or huge asteroid belt does passive damage to ships in orbit, due to bombardment. Or systems without any planets or starts, just a blackhole or a dust cloud. The galaxy map needs more variety in this regard, and I'd like to see more strategic depth to the combat.



You know, if your core worlds have a lot of nebulas or dust clouds, and their effect is to reduce missile efficacy, then you'd load up on kinetic and beam defenses for your defensive fleets. It adds a narrative layer to the game. Think of it like a flavor to each race based upon their locale.

Hey Amplitude and ES Community,



My first post to weigh in on the expansion. /blush. But only because I *LOVE* Endless Space.



Amplitude, you really nailed it. The craft and care you put into this product shows. You've made a truly touchable universe, from the awe-inspiring graphic vistas of space, the minimalistic but highly-functional UX, to the ambient trance-like music... just, wow. I've been waiting for a game like this since Master of Orion II.



Ok. Back on topic:

Battles



FWIW, I really like the real-time battle system. I find it a clever way to keep multiplayer moving, yet still makes your choices matter. After furiously attending to planet production, research, and so on, it's a great break to watch two fleets beat the snot out of each other. So whatever we do, I'd love to keep that feel if possible. If I want to play a tactics game with a hex grid for each battle, there are games that do that. ES, IMHO, is not that game.



But variety would be good. I'd like to see most:



- More tech paths beside Missile / Beam / Kinetics. (You mentioned carriers, etc)



- System anomalies that affect the battle. Solar flares, nebula, magnetic fields, and so on. These could have impacts on certain ship 'builds' but not others. For example, battle in a magnetic field throws kinetic accuracy way off, but beam weapons are unaffected.



- Some variation in maneuvering. This could be simply graphical or have gameplay effects. The combat camera is great, but at the end of the day, ES's combat always displays two fleets on the exact same course as the last battle. I understand why this was done from a project management standpoint, but now that we're talking about paid DLC.... Maybe one or two of them could turn or something, or be orbiting a planet if defending... just to mix it up.



- Now this gets tough: More ship customization. If weapon systems had hardpoints or fire arcs, tactical maneuvering and ship facing be more important. This could still be done in real time. But that involves gutting your current ship build system, which I don't know is a good idea. And again, I don't think we're trying to make Homeworld or Sins here, so I'd have to fight my own temptation to overdesign this.



Static Defenses

- I agree, ES could use a little deterrent from that 1CP pisser of a scout blockading key resource points. I don't think we want to make this a turtling game, however, so I'd suggest space stations not be able to withstand an armada.



More Battle Music?



It wasn't on your list. I love the battle music, and how it's timed with the action on screen. Could we maybe, in the DLC, pay the composer for an extra two to four music tracks? The ambient music randomizes wonderfully, but the same combat music every time.... Nothing the Final Fantasy series hasn't done, but this isn't that game either.





Thanks again, Amplitude! Good luck on your expansion! I'm giving Endless Space to three people this Holiday season, to spread the love...

swedewolf wrote:
I like all the sudgestions(sic) but Carriers and ground fighting(visual) is on top of my list.

So much this.



Also, I really want some expansion to the victory conditions that makes the game last longer. The games seem to go by really fast and before I've really settled into playing it's already over. Maybe just a slower game speed or higher requirements for each victory condition is all.



On top of this, I think I'd really like more depth to the battles. As it stands, the different modules don't hold that much weight. I'd prefer to see new modules or changes to the current modules that allow very well planned fleet composition, such as dedicated fleet repairing ships or perhaps faster ships that could be in the phase ahead of the battle in order to close the distance faster, but with some sort of defense fault for balance. Basically I'd just like to see more tactics involved in the battles. I feel like the battle cards are fighting for me no matter what my fleet comp is.

Definantly will be purchasing the expansion(s). However an option to turn super weapons off is always appreciated.

IMHO a bit early to think that much about an expansion pack. The game is from look and feel more beta than a release version. Multiplayer is even broken right now. Some rules are strange, someone can siege my colony with cold war, but i can't destroy his fleet without declaring war on him ??

Might have been a glitch, but that's what i call beta.. Alot features still feel rudimentary.



Mentioned that, destroying whole star systems is a nogo, even planets, degrading planets a clear yes. Why that ? Because i know humans. If you give them a star system nuke, they will use it over and over until no star system is left...

But bomb planets back to desert, barren or even molten is a better idea. You can terraform it again but you feel the pain if it comes with a loss of inhabitants. You could also be able to disable for a time key ressources, this would open short strategic bombing runs without conquering the system.

Just like a long range bombing attack to take out a refinery...



Right now you got already modules wich adds attack power for system takeovers. So in a way there are already bomber in game.



However, taking over complete systems with all it's production and infrastructure undamaged is highly unrealistic and lead fast to uberness for the winner.

So a certain destruction of the system is wishable. Ressources should not be available for some rounds, some improvements damaged or destroyed. Population reduced.



At last it's a bloody war isn't it ?

Thank you all for the suggestions, we will look into it and keep you informed (after the holidays, probably!).