Limit Theory Forums

Hmm...I gotta say, I like both kinds when it comes to strategic games. I'm not particularly good at AoE or something like that for example because I screw up the growing in the beginning because I'm just too slow. But if it's a game that ISN'T won withing 2-4 hours, I normally do pretty decently. Because in these games it's your long term strategy that counts, and not if you built a bazillion of resource gatherers or the right buildings in the first minute of the game.

Ooh! Quantum strategy!
What is a unit? It could be a discrete particle or a wave, right? So let's work with it as a wave, 'cause that's unique. "Units" shall be represented as fields of intensity. You can manipulate these fields. Where fields of opposing kinds meet, they interfere in various rule-based ways.
Potentially an interesting premise upon which to base an experimental game.

0111narwhalz wrote:Ooh! Quantum strategy!
What is a unit? It could be a discrete particle or a wave, right? So let's work with it as a wave, 'cause that's unique. "Units" shall be represented as fields of intensity. You can manipulate these fields. Where fields of opposing kinds meet, they interfere in various rule-based ways.
Potentially an interesting premise upon which to base an experimental game.

Wait...what?

JanB1 wrote: Wait...what?

Well, if Flatfingers wants to get rid of units, this seems like a good way. Cornflakes (I think) has already proposed a field method for swarms of missiles, so someone who knows about it thinks it's an option for a game.

Get rid of individual units. The moment you include individual player-movable units as a feature, even if you "chunk" them to a strategic level (e.g., one object represents an army or a fleet), the temptation is nigh irresistible to make the core gameplay loop all about the player moving those individual units around on the map every single turn... and that is how you get the end-game micromanagement grind. In a truly strategic game, the most you would do is provide goal guidance to administrators and general officers: "Admiral, I expect you to secure these three key resource centers within the month," or "Doctor, this agency must produce one breakthrough technology in both of these two sectors by month's end." Note that the key concept here is delegation. (The power of delegation -- of telling an NPC to convert a general goal into individual practical actions -- to support strategic play is why I got so excited when Josh started talking about the delegation of projects to NPCs in LT.)

I like it! I think there may even be a game based on this idea on steam. Let me hunt around for it.

Here we go, it's called Stellar Monarch.

Scytale wrote:Here we go, it's called Stellar Monarch.

Ah, yes. Stellar Monarch.

Baile nam Fonn wrote:

Scytale wrote:Here we go, it's called Stellar Monarch.

Ah, yes. Stellar Monarch.

Oops, sorry didn't see there was already a thread!

Scytale wrote:

Baile nam Fonn wrote:

Scytale wrote:Here we go, it's called Stellar Monarch.

Ah, yes. Stellar Monarch.

Oops, sorry didn't see there was already a thread!

What the actual fuck?

I bought this game
I like it a lot

a lot a lot

Scytale wrote:I bought this game
I like it a lot

a lot a lot

ES2? If thats the case, I'll pick it up tuesday night (payday woo)

Silverware wrote:

Scytale wrote:I bought this game
I like it a lot

a lot a lot

ES2? If thats the case, I'll pick it up tuesday night (payday woo)

Same here!

I am a sucker for slick aesthetics, and ES2 nails that. I love the little cinematics, the soundtrack, it's great.

Things I don't like but don't have any particular reason to:
- In principle every planet is colonizable (I think?)
- Galaxies are in general quite small, even at the "colossal" or "exceptional" settings
- Spheres of influence shouldn't be so neatly circular!!!!
- I found playing with the United Empire was a very... straightlaced experience. I found myself engaged and having some fun, to an extent, but I wasn't managing crises, only creating them for the AI. So I started another game on the biggest possible map on hard difficulty with the Vodyani, which are... different to say the least. My experience now is much more engaging.

Things I don't like with some good reason:
- There seems to be a kind of odd lag related to ship actions. Not sure if this is a bug or an artifact of the simultaneous turns.
- My friend remarked that one thing he didn't like about Endless Space 1 (and this would extend to any game constrained with 'starlanes') is that once the initial colonization phase is over the game gets bogged down in a kind of middle game grind where everyone's pushed up against each other and the only way out is a large-scale war. I feel that this criticism is not entirely fair because Stellaris actually had the same problem at launch, and 2/3 of the time it's not constrained with starlanes. But I do feel that having every planet colonizable contributes to the problem, even if that colonization is spread out over time.
I have not run into this problem with ES2, but that may be because I haven't played for long enough.
I may not be articulating this issue well. I would appreciate the thoughts of others.
- A similar problem to ES1, I found (in my first attempt) that I didn't have to put much thought into how I chose which system improvements to build. This may be because I wasn't put under pressure of getting the most out of my planets on the timescales required in crises, so I wasn't making use of specialization mechanics as much as I could.
- Although I don't feel that there are gaps in the game, as I did with GalCiv3 on launch, I do think there is the potential for more content and mechanics to be added in future. I think that the game right now is deep because of the asymmetry between the various races, not because of the general game mechanics themselves.

Things I do like:
- The asymmetry between races is super cool and I can see it leading to very interesting games
- There seems to be a galaxy-wide economy simulation, and the presence of trading companies (which I don't understand yet). One of the races, the Lumeris, seem to have their playstyle built around this.
- The "playspace", if that is a word, is gorgeous
- The artwork is gorgeous
- The UI is "hella" obscure, to quote the youthful vernacular, but gorgeous, and the popup animations are cool
- The little cinematics are gorgeous, and skippable if they're not your thing
- The soundtrack is gorgeous
- The 3D battles are gorgeous
- The Vodyani are so cool dammit, so cool
- Horatio is gorgeous, obviously

I've been watching it since it first got a Steam page, may pick it up here soon.

*Edit:

I want to buy one but I don't know which, Endless Space 2 or Starpoint Gemini Warlords?

MrPerson wrote:I've been watching it since it first got a Steam page, may pick it up here soon.

*Edit:

I want to buy one but I don't know which, Endless Space 2 or Starpoint Gemini Warlords?

buy ES2, and get Starpoint 2 for free :V (get warlords later)

I've had Starpoint for a while now and tried it once, not really my thing. I believe X3:TC is better at what that game tries to do (for what I like doing). Warlords on the other hand is what I wanted in the combat/expansion side of games like that it seems. Wish there was a happy balance of economy gameplay from X3:TC and combat/expansion from SG:W in some space game.

*edit: eh I broke down and bought the 50$ version of ES2 cuz why not