End Game comments

from Stardock Forums
I played the last 8 hours of my 30 hour game yesterday and it was boring. I just wanted to send the game results to the metaverse. My military was unstoppable:
Transports had a 6:1 advantage on invasions and my Dreadnought were more powerful than their Overlords. Combat transports had HP 160 and def 62. All sectors in huge galaxy were blue, by 100 to 40,000 points and I had all but 2 resources, with all resource only bases maxed on defense and mining. Just before 8pm I bribed the last 2 AI to be my allies and ended the game. I won a peace victory, even though the AI were warring with each other. Bloodlust and cultural takes too long and I didnt want another tech win. (all AI set to Bright)

You need to keep the excitement. With a player lop-sided military (3x more powerful than all AI combined), make:
1) the Dreadlord event happen, 20+ Overlords appear
2) a rift in space releases 20+ space monsters
3) 50+ pirate Battleships appear
4) or have the AI surrender to you and end the game
446 views 19 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top
This reflects closely an idea I had earlier, about a win situation based on UP council decision.
If you are mightty compared to all the others, it should be a given you will win, and as such you shouldn't be forced to play the last 8-10 hours.

/Flemming
Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top
Ted has a strong point. I have ended the last several games on the last several builds just to get them over with. End game has, for me, become a matter of cleaning up and ending the game. Some excitement at that time would be very welcome to me.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top
Strangely i have just finished a huge game seconds ago and jumped on the forum to catch up and see if the metaverse had picked me up.

I have to agree i have paid zero attention to the last couple of hours (click..click..click) as it was all over ages ago. I was just yearning for the victory screen. In fact i was going for a tech victory and about 10 months from researching 'near omnipotence' but got bored and went for an alliance with the last race to end it all.

This all pains me very much to say as I hate 'major impact' random events as they can destroy (in my view) all the satisfaction. Whats the point of a x3 speed increase if you have spend hours researching speed? whats the point of the UP 'share all tech' vote of you are going for a tech victory?.

I understand teh latest AI build is 'awesome' so all this concern may be irrelevent. That said, something needs to be done to add interest in the late game stage when one player is dominant.

As the last 2 hours are fresh in my mind, I would go for less major impacts, something that gets you working and thinking again to keep your victory on track without destroying all your good work.

Anyone played the excellent Geoff Crammond Grand Prix racing games? The last lap, when you are half a lap ahead, is intense - you can't be caught unless you make a mistake... ;)

s
Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top
don't know myself Ted, I am quite interested in brad's comments about the improved AI. Perhaps we just need to keep an eye on it and dig it out again when we all play beta whatever it is.

but as an example - i am culturally dominant (computer realises i am on a no lose for a culture victory) there is a major coup on a planet by the 'sons of anti steevo' if i don't quash this revolt it could spread..

s
Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top
I agree that sometimes the end-game becomes simply a matter of grinding your way through to the conclusion and I'm not coming up with any blinding insights on how to make the situation better.

But.

I really, really hate the concept of massive game altering "random" events that are designed solely to smack the player because they are too strong. There has to be another way. Better AI design is a part of this better way but it's not the only component.

P.S. The Dreadlords event spawns a crop of Rangers, which are quite ugly enough. There's no need to give the Dreadlords Overlords. :)
Reply #7 from Stardock Forums Top
IF all the sectors were all your color, you should have gotten a cultural victory. :(
Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top
I never get a victory culturally until all of the planets revolt and join my side. Usually all of the sectors turn my color about halfway through the game.

In terms of random events, I think there need to be more early and mid-game events that can radically alter the course of the game. I think that enough of them could make the gameplay radically different.
Reply #9 from Stardock Forums Top
You don't want players to feel like they're at the mercy of random events though.
Reply #10 from Stardock Forums Top
True, there would be nothing worse than doing well and then BOOM, all over because of a bloody event.
Reply #11 from Stardock Forums Top
I had all the sectors blue by Feb2200. I ended the game with a diplomatic win in Jul2200.
Reply #12 from Stardock Forums Top
Concerning the end game, I would suggest that the AI of the other cultures learn
from the dominant one.
The corrallary of influence is that it spreads technologies rapidly, therefore the
culture with the dominant influence would also have more thechnology leakage
to the other culture. The spying could also be more effective in transfering thechnologies.

Or would this just prolong the mid-game?


:notsure:
Reply #13 from Stardock Forums Top
Yeah, you're right, that would drive me nuts. I guess I am trying to find ways to see ways to add depth because if there is any real flaw in galciv it is the fact that there are only three subgames within the main game(colonize/explore, diplomacy, planet improvement).

In most games, including Civilization, there were always 4 games. In Civilization exploiting the terrain was the 4th, but in space games there needed to be a 4th game and so Tactical Combat was used. In Galciv we are missing that critical 4th game....and starbases(and combat) are too much an extension to the colonization/exploration game. question is how do we deepen the other 3 to the depth that the 4th one is not missed?

But I am certain that following the release that the depth will more than make up for this issue.............
Reply #14 from Stardock Forums Top
I spent all night thinking about this post(at work), and I think I am just being too picky.........creativity and ideas are good, but sometimes the magnifying glass method is just a waste of time......
Reply #15 from Stardock Forums Top
Tytan, I don't agree. Galactic resources are exploiting the terrain. Starbases also upgrade nearby areas much the same as a mine or road would in a land based game.

Additionally, other games don't have the ability to affect non-garrisoned units. You can't, for instance, magnify your cultural influence in a particular area in Civilization. You can in GalCiv.
Reply #16 from Stardock Forums Top
Frogboy said: "IF all the sectors were all your color, you should have gotten a cultural victory."

But not until year 2200. Many of us have commented about having almost absolute cultural control of the galaxy by 2190.
Reply #17 from Stardock Forums Top
Your're right, Jack, but it didnt happen by Jun 2200. Perhaps a cultural victory could be based on the UP vote %, starting Jan 2200, a 90%+ earns a cultural victory.
Reply #18 from Stardock Forums Top
In another thread Brad says the required date has been changed to 2190. That should help.
Reply #19 from Stardock Forums Top
That's right, I'm picking at details again. For that matter you can say that the original civ only had three elements but it was in the way they arranged them that made them seem like more.....It's Trying to cause 'secondary belief' on the part of the player.......Its the small touches, not the big ones that make the most difference there.....