Hello, Amplitude forums,



I started playing Endless Space around Christmas, got enthralled by its elegance, already clocked 80 hours, and of course by this point I've got some thoughts brewing. So I decided I'd share them, and this seemed like the right place.







IMPERIAL ETHOS



I've discovered, that no matter my intentions (peaceful/aggressive, industrialist/financier, expansionist/isolationist, etc), my development curve (and research pattern) remained almost the same.

• I'd want to go at least half-way in each direction at the very least for the "essentials" (rare/luxury resources from sciences, 2 tiers of weaponry and artifacts from warfare, colonization and expansion disapproval from exploration, diplomatic options and approval improvements from diplomacy) and some odd faction specials.
• At this point, which takes quite awhile to reach (some ~80-100 turns), I'm all set for a "take-off", a "singularity" of sorts - an explosion in scientific output followed by massive explosion in FIDS production. Is this the time to specialize? Not really, because progress becomes so rapid, that any "specialization" is of no consequence. See below.
• Some 20-30 turns later the snowball is an avalanche just waiting out its time to reach the desired victory of choice.

Furthermore, the ethos, character of my empire, is only in my head. The gameplay remains virtually the same either I pretend to be a trader, a scientist or a warmonger. The faction-specific bonuses only slightly adjust the overarching pattern.



Building a Utopia, suspected culprits



I believe that one of the major reasons behind this lack of ethos is that the basic element in any empire largely lacks it. Any system will be a jack of all trades, and can be the master of all depending on population size. I feel like pointing my finger at system improvements.

• They are net positive FIDS-wise virtually all the time, sometimes massively so.
• There's no limit on the number of improvements, so it's almost a no-brainer to just spam most of them.

Thus there's no specialization and they don't require that much strategic thought to manage.



What if the number of available system improvement slots was limited either by prohibitive maintenance price or a number of slots derived from something like population or planets? Limited slots with system improvements that amplify certain output by % rather than on per-population basis would effectively facilitate system specialization.



Another reason already singled out above is that the plausible point of specialization comes so late at the game, that it becomes inconsequential. Rapid snowballing occurs almost regardless of the chosen direction (just a matter of preference for the victory of choice).



Finally, there's this thing about ship design and choice of mods (in particular weapons) being not really a choice, but I've read some threads already covering it.







CHARACTER THROUGH GAMEPLAY



This flow of consciousness is probably hardly relevant for ES-1, consists of incoherent ramblings, things pulled off top of my head, often invokes comparisons with obsolete and long gone states of Terra, and is harmful for your boredom meters. But here goes anyways.



So we have these several possible game styles. I imagine there's really only one way to make them feel diverse - through diverse gameplay mechanisms. I'll try to cover them one by one.



Trading - merchant adventurers



As much as I appreciate ES trade routes (the idea is as elegant - sleek, simple and effective - as most of the rest of the game), let's be honest - I'll have to role-play a trading empire really hard. Just sitting on fat flat trade income is gratifying when it's big, but it also quickly becomes a boring non-engaging turn-skipping.



Now, mad as I am, I'm always willing to suggest production of consumer goods from raw rare materials as a basis of exchange. But that's a completely different game and we want to keep ES elegant. What would be the first things that spring to your mind when you think about a trading empire? In my case it's trading outposts and trading fleets. (And trade routes. As actual trade lanes. Which, again, unnecessary complexity. So off to the trash bin you go!) So let's start with these.



"Trading" profits weren't necessarily earned through possession of some goods others want. Maritime empires could just as well earn their buck by freighting. And merchant fleets tend to need some small ports all over their area of operation. So what if small/tiny planets, some barren or arid rocks, or even big asteroids nobody wants to develop because it would cost more than it's worth, were instead sold or rented out to some merchant faction operating in the galaxy?



Naturally though, there have to be incentives to hand over a planet to those greedy foreigners. Just thinking aloud:

• What if there were costs associated with maintaining freight operations, and a specialized faction could perform them way more efficiently/cheaply.
• There definitely can be some per system "freight overhead" as a system's resources are shared in ES. Say, you don't freight well enough - the system output never equals 100% the sum of each planet's output?
• Alternatively, a dedicated trading outpost could effectively pool resources of several systems within its area. Food production shared between several bleak systems? Or designate one of several systems as the production center and see the industry score united there?
• Or freighting in general can be designed as inter-regional and intra-regional - between constellations and within a constellation. With inter-regional exchange linked and facilitated by trading outposts.

Plenty of possible opportunities. Countless better than the ones above. But either way it would give traders something engaging to do - cherry-picking strategic locations, populating them with fleets, guarding them with (gunboat) diplomacy, competing with other merchants and reaping the rewards.



Food and population in ES, expansion and trading



One thing that bugs me about food in ES is that I find all the mid/late +food system improvements rarely worth it until I get food-to-industry bioreactor tech. Accessing techs should feel rewarding, and in the case of food it's underwhelming to say the least. So I conclude the food to population capacity ratio isn't strict enough. Personally I see nothing wrong with underpopulated systems. And to make the techs worth it, one should really work hard to settle 30+ systems.



On a more conceptual level I consider it interesting that in ES all the food system improvements are located in the trading branch. Now, it's true that in fact most of modern mercantile regimes were also pioneers in intensive food production, and yet it still wasn't enough. What really was singling them out was actually high density of population (large cities, large cities everywhere). So if it were up to me, I'd move food improvements into expansion, and population increasing techs along with +all FIDS chromatic ones to trade branch. Maybe we could finally do something with all those trade outposts, like buying food from Pilgrims? They seem like nice farmers!



Finally and additionally, population can be automatically "attracted" (new slots acquired, and/or even inner migration) to planets in systems with high DS output in some fashion to further add to the "tall development".



More bonuses to traders!



...boni? No, that makes me sound like a smug bonehead. Perks! More perks to traders!



Anywho, and still personally I'd like to see a way for traders to feel that they are not only freighting, but also trade rares and luxuries. Doesn't have to be something too complex. For example, what if dedicated traders had special buildings/improvements consuming production to double a certain rare resource to resell? (Effectively making "consumer goods" out of "raw materials".) Or converting one resource to another? As usual, something off top of my head.



Alternatively same said production could be used to produce-sell arms (ships or ship modules). Again, looking at all those advanced manufacturers developing in the hearts of mercantile marine empires, later morphing into financial hubs.



Speaking of finances. The big problem is what to do with all the money. Sure, fleets for gunboat diplomacy. Loans... would be so cool. But it's a different game. And I don't think I've ever seen loans done right. Let's not do loans! Hopefully, with all the potential engagement in outpost racket, and opportunities to purchase research and terraforming, all that dust will find some use.



Big Bad Blob



Another thing that bugs me is that more systems (except for the first phase of the game) invariably means more FIDS. By mid-game enough expansion disapproval is researched, system approval improvements are cheap and plentiful. This is one more reason why I have to try hard to role-play a medium-sized peaceful nation - there's little reason not to expand and colonize. Particularly as automatons. Gaia, I love those adorable clockwork hug-toons... But back to expansion.



A lot of new players seem to be upset when they see their "approval" in red. I suggest re-branding it as a neutral "administrative capacity". If I was given unrestricted game design reign, I'd go as far creating "administrative centers" for certain areas/constellations to reduce administrative strain at the cost of lost FIDS and focused production, or "delegating authority" in a hierarchical rulership arrangement... maybe that's why my career as a game designer hasn't been a success. .png" alt="smiley: " title="" /> Or maybe it's because I've never tried. Either way, ES design is about elegance! And I imagine that if the number of system improvement slots was limited, the need to build administrative structures would effectively punish an expansionist player with FIDS output as is.



Alternatively, how to prevent snowballing of fleets? Well, maybe if constellations or systems had to be policed for administration / freight security / approval, bigger empires wouldn't have been able to send their deathball after that nuisance of a faction sitting on valuable rare resources?



An ordinary terraformer and the hardships of savant



What about a scientific faction then? How is one to make due as a scientist in the cold dark depths of space?



As much as I like the idea of trading technologies, it's so final in its current implementation. And doesn't seem all that beneficial to the scientists. What if instead techs were leased out for dust per turn? While the arrangement is active, the recipient can build things as if he possesses the tech. Additionally - why not lease out research capacity? A certain number of science units for, again, dust per turn? And if trading outposts are okay, why not scientific outposts? Establish your academy in a constellation with a wonder or a cool anomaly - get cool bonuses and synergy! And scientist sure seem to like their barren and arctic planets already.



It would also solve the existing lack of relationship between cash and science - no way to invest. Only indirectly (by juggling with ind->x conversions). Once my cash income starts exploding, I have very few options to spend it.



Same applies to our good friends explorers. To make their techs non-essential to research for the others, and to make our pals Pilgrims even more useful to the rest of the galaxy other than its breadbasket, their services might be bought to establish a colony in hard environment. Or terraform this rock or that.



Which, by the way, should really be something to aspire to. Again, in its current implementation I rarely have reasons to terraform. I think I had to do it for approval reasons only once in 80 hours. And not because approval was ghastly, but because I like my benevolent majesty and lordship to be accepted ecstatically! However, if the number of system improvement slots was limited... and we had reasons to specialize systems...



Hissho beaks in our pies



Finally, what about a military power breeding traders and scientists to gulp their systems for their juicy system improvements? Well, administrative capacity aside, something like a penalty to facility's production output if you don't have researched technology to back it up might be implemented. So all those shiny buildings are of little use to you. Along with a cool diplomatic option similar of "vassalage". "Accept protection". "Acknowledge superiority". "Install puppet". "You're free to do what you want as long as you do what we say". That kind of diplomatic relations. Which under most circumstances should be more beneficial to the oppressor than outright integration. And it gives an opportunity to subdued faction to rebel later. Maybe supported by another cunning faction!



I'd even suggest something called "culture" and a chance of rebellion for defeated and completely eradicated factions. But no one ever likes rebels. Or pirates. So to the trash bin with all of them.



Still speaking of diplomacy, cold war and ordinary war might still be somewhat more engaging. What if border systems could be pillaged for loot? Would that make expansive empires fortify their borders and waste even more administrative capacity on that? Or alternatively pin a patrolling fleet in the area? Additionally, how about a certain fleet designated as a pirate fleet in a constellation, preying on local freighters?







And this wall of text doesn't even touch espionage and sabotage. Well. I think I'm done talking about this game in space that is not ES at all. But it mentions some concepts used in ES. So maybe there is place for it here after all. Thank you for your attention and consideration.

You certainly have some imaginative ideas, and some of them are fine ideas for a game--but probably not this game. You described the allure of this game for me in your first sentence: elegance. It plays fast and it plays fun.



I am wondering if you have looked at the game Distant Planets. I don't own it myself, but I literally spent hours looking into the game trying to decide if I would enjoy it. I concluded it was likely to be overwhelming for me. However, with the increased depth you are looking for, it just might exactly the game you are looking for.

coyote303 wrote:
I am wondering if you have looked at the game Distant Planets. I don't own it myself, but I literally spent hours looking into the game trying to decide if I would enjoy it. I concluded it was likely to be overwhelming for me.

Ah, Distant Worlds. Interesting. Games that aren't on Steam tend to escape my radar. ><



Looks like micromanager's haven. But I'm not really fond of micromanagement for micromanagement's sake. This is why I truly appreciate all the elegant decisions by Amplitude. Interacting with the whole star system from a single screen without the need to manage separately different types of ships to do different tasks for me in that system? That's smart and great! But I'd really love to see some more gameplay diversity based on this design philosophy. And maybe a little bit extra complexity. I'm a strong believer that complex doesn't have to mean complicated. Obscure. Arcane. Maybe in a sequel?

It would be nice to have some of the ideas in the Endless space...industry and trading galore..

I think one of things that will improve your games is to limit the quality of planets. Lower quality systems (few rare resources, few highly desirable planet types, lots of difficult planet types, a wide spread of anomalies) make the game much more interesting, especially as you expand in the early stages. When there are only a handful of Terran/Ocean/Gaia planets in a whole galaxy, controlling them becomes much more valuable. When one empire has a single source of a vital strategic resource, the whole war may centre on a single system. This kind of play is much more interesting and leads to a significantly more challenging, rewarding experience.



Otherwise great suggestions. I especially like your idea for trade, but might I take it a bit further? You could give over whole systems to a neutral (or semi-neutral) trader faction (of which there would need to be several, probably several per player), which would then generate huge amounts of resources for you as a sort of "business tax", with occasional bursts of resources gained through diplomacy. However why not instead add outpost slots to systems/planets? You can't use outpost slots directly, but other civs and various neutral factions might ask to develop one or more slot, giving you various one-off and continuous rewards. However outposts would need certain conditions to be fruitful, such as peace (or war, depending), high FIDS income (of one or more types), diplomatic or military protection, etc.

coyote303 wrote:
You certainly have some imaginative ideas, and some of them are fine ideas for a game--but probably not this game. You described the allure of this game for me in your first sentence: elegance. It plays fast and it plays fun.



I am wondering if you have looked at the game Distant Planets. I don't own it myself, but I literally spent hours looking into the game trying to decide if I would enjoy it. I concluded it was likely to be overwhelming for me. However, with the increased depth you are looking for, it just might exactly the game you are looking for.

I do believe that you're right in some respects, but saying that that isn't for this game isn't true, I think. Endless Space itself is such a great concept, and I think that it needs to be built upon. Endless Space itself is good, yes, but it's primitive. It's appeals and mechanics need to be brought to life, so to speak. As it is, it's a great premise, but there are it's quirks, like he said, it's underwhelming when you start winning, and it's generally not very expanded upon. I feel that if it expanded on it's mechanics (i.e. Diplomacy and Research) than it would be a vastly superior strategy game to many others. It needs to require more thought in its play, thusly feeling more rewarding. I'm talking from the prospective of a person that comes from playing strategy games made by Paradox, like Victoria and Hearts of Iron.

Endless Space is a game with great concept, which I liked at first sight.BUT it is also a game of unfunfilled potential. In the end it turned out to be a casuall strategy lacking depth and immersion. Endless Space certainly has great ideas, sadly they weren't fully developed.



I am worried, because I see the same flaws in Endless Legend Depth, immersion and intuitive gameplay make a strategy game great !!