This game has great replay-ability but eventually it seems to boil down to a very similar scenario towards the end.



I think the main issue comes from a tech tree that is basically the same across the board, by late game all the ai / players have acquired a majority of the tech

and are simply ducking it out by micromanaging the mass creation and movement of fleets.



A lot more character could be given, especially in terms of the weapons technology tree to give each race a more distinctive flaire.



options for this could be



A. Very different weapons technology for each race

B. Choosing a path leads to very different tech outcome, different high level choices

C. End Game Weapon Tech / Race



Off the top of my head I'd say this could result in, doomsday weapons, completely different weapons technology for a race or a particular tech path ( tachyon beams!? heh ), fighters, etc.



Right now the only thing that distinguishes me from the next end game fleet is racial ship types, and an occasional hero.

There are no real surprises in the ES endgame. In the early game, exploration is fun, race to control chokepoints is fun, figuring out the order in which to settle and develop systems is fun. Mid-game involves juggling dust, contentment, planet exploitation, technology, and military strength. But eventually everyone has expanded to fill the available systems and ...it gets boring. No more real surprises



I've usually built up my military enough to discourage the other factions (except Cravers, though sometimes even them) from attacking me. Preemptively Marching Through Georgia on my own against the other factions is just tedious...and, frankly, trying to go for the Endless Empire or Pan-Galacity Society is likewise tedious (hitting End Turn 30 to 100+ times). I usually won't attack another faction unless attacked first or unless they're so small that I know I can march through them relatively quickly.



The endgame is where GalCiv2 still has ES beat by a wide margin. The good/neutral/evil alignment actually meant something: many of the random events were tied to it (sometimes with painful consequences if you were trying to pursue a particular alignment), and it impacted tech and diplomacy as well, particularly in the later stages of the game. New factions would break off from old ones, and possibly take some of your systems as well. Existential threats would appear, forcing temporary alliances. Also, GalCiv2, like other 4Xs, also allowed conversion of system via political/cultural influence, which ES does not.



Speaking of which; I still don't understand the exact parameters and path for a diplomatic victory; it is not, as in most 4x games, an alliance victory (form an alliance with all surviving factions), and it's hard to tell what it does entail, so I pretty much write it off.



Most of all, though, the other (AI) factions in ES start out bland and get more bland as the game goes along. Cravers are about the only faction that adds spice to the game, and even then -- as someone said in another thread here -- if you've got Cravers next door, the best thing you can do is wipe them out as soon as possible.



I've played ES for over 250 hours, and I rarely finish a game now. Usually somewhere between turn 80 and turn 130, it becomes obvious what I'm going to have to do to win, and none of it is especially fun or appealing any more.



Particularly because there are no more surprises. ..fritz..

Fritzworth wrote:
I still don't understand the exact parameters and path for a diplomatic victory; it is not, as in most 4x games, an alliance victory (form an alliance with all surviving factions), and it's hard to tell what it does entail, so I pretty much write it off.

Please see the thread about diplomacy victory in the strategy forum. I find this victory type to be an interesting challenge.

davea wrote:
Please see the thread about diplomacy victory in the strategy forum. I find this victory type to be an interesting challenge.

Thanks -- that was very useful: I read it, started a new game, and won with a diplomatic victory. On the other hand, I still had the same endgame problem: the last 40 turns were largely rote. As I've said a few times in other threads here, most 4X games suffer from the same problem: the outcome is often quite obvious and inevitable long before the game actually awards you victory. ..fritz..

I have proposed for the expansion pack some improvements, that could prolong the game and make late game more fun - even after you have won there could be something more to do.



You will find some Ideas for late game here in "Entry 2": /#/endless-space/forum/28-game-design/thread/11347-expansion-pack

When several Factions become like the Endless, what will happen? In my eyes, you could expand the techtree at least so far, that you could choose between several wonders (like Dyson-Spheres, Factionwide-Collective-Mind, Forming whole Star-Systems into weapons -> beeing able to direct sun-emissions against Planets or other Starsystems; Explore the tech for triggering super-novas and direct whole asteroidfields into enemy-locations).

Also the "Terraforming of Gas-Giants and Asteroidfields" as the ultimate discipline could be very interessting. Being able to form new Planets out of Sturdust or relocate whole Planetary Bodies into new Starsystems, not unlike the relocation of Populations is a really good idea for an expansion-pack. Playing God in a Universe.

And for a diplomatic Superiority: It could be fun to contoll the enemy diplomacy as you wish from your godlike state. YOU deside who is allowed to have war and everyone else is praying to you like your faction is God himself. Being able to contoll enemy diplomacy would be very tempting.

And forging new and own wormholes as you please or new gravity lines for Spacetravel? Delicious.

Taking a page from the book of MOO2 (the greatest 4x game in history IMHO) The idea of having multiple techs available at each research step but only being able to choose one or two of them) By late game you all have VERY different technologies available to you making alliances and trade all the more valuable, as a way to go back and get some of those great things you missed.



Their take on choosing a defensive, offensive, habitation or supplementary benefit at each step really added to the end game setup.



This also made their Spy system far more amazing than just sabotage, being able to acquire that invaluable tech that someone else had.



I think this would make the endgame VERY dynamic, almost never having the same outcome twice.

Fritzworth wrote:
There are no real surprises in the ES endgame. In the early game, exploration is fun, race to control chokepoints is fun, figuring out the order in which to settle and develop systems is fun. Mid-game involves juggling dust, contentment, planet exploitation, technology, and military strength. But eventually everyone has expanded to fill the available systems and ...it gets boring. No more real surprises

The fun isn't in the surprise, its in the conflict between 2 forces of known power, like chess.



Personally I have the most fun when the borders are all established and any wars fought are over a single system, diplomacy can create powerful alliance wars where a few players ally to the game's Juggernaut and attempt to stomp out the competitors, and of course when you know someone is getting close to an economy or diplomatic victory, going all in to prevent defeat.

I've usually built up my military enough to discourage the other factions (except Cravers, though sometimes even them) from attacking me. Preemptively Marching Through Georgia on my own against the other factions is just tedious...and, frankly, trying to go for the Endless Empire or Pan-Galacity Society is likewise tedious (hitting End Turn 30 to 100+ times). I usually won't attack another faction unless attacked first or unless they're so small that I know I can march through them relatively quickly.

True, we do need an AI that can beat the crap out of players, but that does mean that we will get complaints when people lose.

The endgame is where GalCiv2 still has ES beat by a wide margin. The good/neutral/evil alignment actually meant something: many of the random events were tied to it (sometimes with painful consequences if you were trying to pursue a particular alignment), and it impacted tech and diplomacy as well, particularly in the later stages of the game. New factions would break off from old ones, and possibly take some of your systems as well. Existential threats would appear, forcing temporary alliances. Also, GalCiv2, like other 4Xs, also allowed conversion of system via political/cultural influence, which ES does not.

The worse thing in the game ever was the event that created an empire out of planets from everyone with everyone's collective technology, there was no fighting it, and it made me sick.



An alignment system is also really stupid, the Drengin are not evil to other Drengin, so why are they judged by people that they couldn't give a crap about. Only the player can judge what is right and wrong. And there is no benefit for being 'good' when your at war, everyone knows that.

Most of all, though, the other (AI) factions in ES start out bland and get more bland as the game goes along. Cravers are about the only faction that adds spice to the game, and even then -- as someone said in another thread here -- if you've got Cravers next door, the best thing you can do is wipe them out as soon as possible.

The Amoeba are fantastic 'peaceful' enemy's, and all UE games are always a hoot. However I will say that most of the other races are kinda let down.

I've played ES for over 250 hours, and I rarely finish a game now. Usually somewhere between turn 80 and turn 130, it becomes obvious what I'm going to have to do to win, and none of it is especially fun or appealing any more.



Particularly because there are no more surprises. ..fritz..

There is no strategy in surprises, that's more a matter of luck, what there needs to be is a way of solidifying borders, greater diplomatic control, and a number of unique ways to fight wars like with stealth, or FTL ISBM's (Inter-system Ballistic Missiles).

erebaros wrote:
This game has great replay-ability but eventually it seems to boil down to a very similar scenario towards the end.



I think the main issue comes from a tech tree that is basically the same across the board, by late game all the ai / players have acquired a majority of the tech

and are simply ducking it out by micromanaging the mass creation and movement of fleets.

Tech trees are inherently boring. They sure look pretty when developers show them off to reviewers and customers but for replay they offer very little. This was one area some of us threw out there months ago. Simply put, there needs to be the chance for gaps in the trees. This could easily be factored in as traits. Then toss in a good espionage system where you can steal techs you don't have and allow for capturing techs when you conquer systems and we could have lots of fun. Now where did I see all that before? Oh yeah, SIXTEEN YEARS AGO IN MOO2.



Go figure.

I had proposed a different tech system a while back, instead of having concrete technologies, you create research projects and invest in particular scientific disciplines at the start of that project then you let it go and will get a blueprint from it that you build your specific item from. It would make the game much more interesting throughout all of its stages, unfortunately the game almost has to be built around that system for it work very well.



MOO2 system would probably end up working out better for this game, as the implementation would be easier, and less of a dramatic shift.

It could be also interesting to make a choise at some position on the tech-tree. E.g . I you chose research A you could not make research B, never. It’s a onetime choise at some position between two researches.

That make the research more unique, also if there are the same factions

Kerberos did a wonderful job with the SotS tech tree. Not only were there techs specific to every race, but also a percentage chance based on race of certain common techs being available or not. You won't know if a tech was available or not until you completed the research of its prerequisite(s). For those techs you didn't have you might be able to salvage during combat. I never messed with the spies because of how difficult they were to work with, so i don't know if you could steal techs or not.