Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Endless Legend, fantasyland trying to fix Endless Space's flaws

Lord Azlan

Arcane
Patron
Shitposter
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Messages
1,901
Bought it last Xmas with a bunch of other Endless games. Giving it a good rodgering at the moment.

Like the art style and the way they have incorporated Dust, luxuries and precious metals into the mix.

The one city per region took a bit of getting used to. Also like the various missions that come up.

Seems to be more variety in the different peoples you can lead compared to Civ. My current people can't see food on the map and I head another group can only do war. No peace treaties or diplomacy for these guys.

Agree the game feels a bit odd but maybe that's me adapting from Civ.

Feels more complex than Civ so bit of a learning curve. Tutorial was pants.
 

Zarniwoop

TESTOSTERONIC As Fuck™
Patron
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
18,650
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Bought it last Xmas with a bunch of other Endless games. Giving it a good rodgering at the moment.

Like the art style and the way they have incorporated Dust, luxuries and precious metals into the mix.

The one city per region took a bit of getting used to. Also like the various missions that come up.

Seems to be more variety in the different peoples you can lead compared to Civ. My current people can't see food on the map and I head another group can only do war. No peace treaties or diplomacy for these guys.

Agree the game feels a bit odd but maybe that's me adapting from Civ.

Feels more complex than Civ so bit of a learning curve. Tutorial was pants.
There's also a race that can only build cities in the sea, and one that has mobile cities. (although those are added by expansions/DLC). Really adds a lot more variety than in Civ, where flag colour, 1 (usually insignificant) unit, and 1 slight advantage are the only differences.

Also: winter is coming.
 

Eyestabber

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
4,733
Location
HUEland
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
Heard the last DLC kind of shits up balance can anyone confirm/deny?

As a guy that disabled Tempest to have a more enjoyable game, I can confirm. First of all, there is a somewhat gamebreaking bug that is yet to be fixed:

https://www.games2gether.com/endles...-reports/thread/21453-center-of-influence-bug

As for balance, I can't say with certainty since I'm a noob at this game. I just finished my second playthrough, so I don't have a personal opinion on the issue. What some people are saying is that the ocean facilities are ridiculously overpowered, to the point that they can easily replace overland expansion.

I'm ok with disabling Tempest since I usually find naval stuff to be boring. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Btw, I spent 60h into the game already. Since EL is pretty much Fall From Heaven on steroids, I can already see myself clocking some 500h or so.
 

DramaticPopcorn

Guest
It's as deep as Civ IV...
It's deep and diverse as far as player options go, but as soon as it comes to AI, it's not even on par with Civ V, sadly.

EDIT: Also, Civ 4 had much better use of land, allowing to drop city pretty much anywhere. Civ 4 allowed for more than 6 units in the army. Civ 4 had more tech variety.

EL is more gamey and 'balanced' but not really all that deep.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,506
CIV IV with expansion has decent AI. I remember a very nice invasion where several ships deployed stack of knights and only rushing third longbowmen saved my capital. Quick abrupt decapitation strike.

I also remember how they declared on another continent. Massive nuking followed by quick decisive mass modern tank trust into several cities in one turn. They had foothold on that continent, that's where staged these modern tanks.
 

oscar

Arcane
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
8,036
Location
NZ
Civ IV AI could pull off some pretty impressive doomstack blitz and seize my capital a few games where I neglected armies entirely to focus on tech. Not sure if it was mods or vanilla but seems like a even vaguely threatening combat AI is impossible with 1UPT.
 

Eyestabber

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
4,733
Location
HUEland
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
Civ4 is deeper.

Ok, wall of text time.

It's deep and diverse as far as player options go, but as soon as it comes to AI, it's not even on par with Civ V, sadly.
I remember Civ V AI being mentally challenged and allowing me to take its siege units with infantry every single time. Either you're exaggerating or Firaxis drastically improved the AI in the expansions. I wouldn't know because I uninstalled after realizing CiV had killed the Civilization franchise. :smug:
As for player options, you do realize that, compared to EL, the faction system of Civ is merely just a bunch of reskins and different colors, right?

EDIT: Also, Civ 4 had much better use of land, allowing to drop city pretty much anywhere.

Not "better". Civ 4 adopted a different approach to the "borders question" (culture mechanic) while keeping the old single tile city system + 2 tile exploitation radius. Anyone who ever used Google Earth knows that (single tile + 2 radius) is completely unrealistic. Civ V tried to fix that but only made it worse (just like everything else those retards tried to "fix"). EL brought its own solution to the problem with the region system. You drop a city, you claim all the lands surrounding it. The city grows, you add more districts. Makes sense to me. Of course EL's system comes with its own problems, namely not being able to claim a tile that is right next to your city just because the regional border is there (despite the fact that you also own the adjacent region). They could improve on that by making the region system more flexible, allowing you to incorporate land from one region into another if you meet certain conditions.

Civ 4 allowed for more than 6 units in the army.

Terrible comparison. Civ 4 was the last game that used the old stack of doom/unit vs unit system of civ games. Since there is no army-on-army combat, the size of each army is irrelevant. You could have compared it to Call to Power or GalCiv. CTP had a 9 units per army limit while Galatic Civilizations uses a logistics system. Pick your poison: army size or unit-on-unit combat.

Civ 4 had more tech variety.

Agreed. The tech system in EL feels shallow and I blame the lack of prerequisite techs. Being able to research Titanium/Glassteel weapons 2 w/o researching Titanium/Glassteel 1 is pretty stupid.

EL is more gamey and 'balanced'

Yes. And the fact that EL took the hard way out regarding balance (huge differences between factions) and still managed to succeed proves that the people behind it actually can into math and have the talent necessary to put a game of this scope together. Unlike present day Firaxis.

but not really all that deep.

Some mechanics are deeper, some are shallower. See above. Unless you count AI as "depth", in which case the AI is indeed pretty bad. Probably on par with Civ IV without any expansions, if you can remember that. :smug: Also, in multiplayer the AI is not very relevant and EL has a pretty active MP scene, tho I haven't joined it myself yet.

To wrap it up: I see EL in the same light that I see Cities Skylines. The Civilization Throne is empty, just like the Simcity "throne". EL doesn't quiiiite "replace" Civ's corpse, but it's the best thing we got so far. Same with CS/Simcity. Unless you enjoy Civ V/VI and Simcity (2013), in which case you should kill yourself.

Civ IV AI could pull off some pretty impressive doomstack blitz and seize my capital a few games where I neglected armies entirely to focus on tech. Not sure if it was mods or vanilla but seems like a even vaguely threatening combat AI is impossible with 1UPT.

Pretty sure it was a mod. Civ IV AI is unimpressive, even with all the bling blings attached to it. Here:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/bts-better-bts-ai-download.297810/

Better BTS AI makes the AI actually play to win. There are other AI mods, but they are mostly branches of BBAI. There is also K-Mod:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/k-mod-far-beyond-the-sword.407049/

This one makes BBAI work with BUG. It also brings some balance changes and performance improvements too. This mod influenced several other mods like Realism Invictus. Karadoc is, sadly, long gone but K-Mod was finished when he left.
 
Last edited:

DramaticPopcorn

Guest
As for player options, you do realize that, compared to EL, the faction system of Civ is merely just a bunch of reskins and different colors, right?
Yes? That's why I bought into EL and was a heavy advocate for the game for quite a bit.

EDIT: Also, Civ 4 had much better use of land, allowing to drop city pretty much anywhere.

Not "better". Civ 4 adopted a different approach to the "borders question" (culture mechanic) while keeping the old single tile city system + 2 tile exploitation radius. Anyone who ever used Google Earth knows that (single tile + 2 radius) is completely unrealistic. Civ V tried to fix that but only made it worse (just like everything else those retards tried to "fix"). EL brought its own solution to the problem with the region system. You drop a city, you claim all the lands surrounding it. The city grows, you add more districts. Makes sense to me. Of course EL's system comes with its own problems, namely not being able to claim a tile that is right next to your city just because the regional border is there (despite the fact that you also own the adjacent region). They could improve on that by making the region system more flexible, allowing you to incorporate land from one region into another if you meet certain conditions.
You are trying to rationalize a very gamey mechanic that is supposed to make life for AI easier. Don't do that.
Civ 4 allowed for more than 6 units in the army.

Terrible comparison. Civ 4 was the last game that used the old stack of doom/unit vs unit system of civ games. Since there is no army-on-army combat, the size of each army is irrelevant. You could have compared it to Call to Power or GalCiv. CTP had a 9 units per army limit while Galatic Civilizations uses a logistics system. Pick your poison: army size or unit-on-unit combat.
Doomstacks are bad but so is unit-on-unit in a 4x. Europa Universalis / HoI has a decent system, I guess. But I'm not a fan of everything else in that game. Heard good things about Dominions 4 but haven't looked closer yet.

Also, GalCiv is a terrible borefest and you should feel bad for bringing it up.
EL is more gamey and 'balanced'

Yes. And the fact that EL took the hard way out regarding balance (huge differences between factions) and still managed to succeed proves that the people behind it actually can into math and have the talent necessary to put a game of this scope together. Unlike present day Firaxis.

You are praising the variety and diversity, I did that too. I mean, it was THE selling point of the game for me, but the AI simply cannot use those many options effectively.
Also, in multiplayer the AI is not very relevant and EL has a pretty active MP scene, tho I haven't joined it myself yet.
Man, praising something without ever trying it, you really are the embodiment of the (((hype culture))) and all that stupid shit.
MP in EL is laughable. It doesn't have numbers behind it like EU4 or CIv4/5 have. I had about 7 mp games with randoms and invites from forums and finished none of them. 2 people bitched at me for picking Vaulters, two games were done by about turn 20 when, first one because I built the wonder faster than the other guy and another one because the guy lost his army to something or whatever. All in all, mp with randoms has no leg to stand on and should only played with bros probably. But then again, what good is a 4x that can only be enjoyed in MP?
To wrap it up: I see EL in the same light that I see Cities Skylines. The Civilization Throne is empty, just like the Simcity "throne". EL doesn't quiiiite "replace" Civ's corpse, but it's the best thing we got so far. Same with CS/Simcity. Unless you enjoy Civ V/VI and Simcity (2013), in which case you should kill yourself.

All in all, it's not best, you are praising vapid diversity that is gamified to such an extent it has no identity, go fuck yourself on that dildo spaceship, goddamn excitable moron.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
2,071
Location
Siberia
Initially I was pretty excited about the whole thing, it felt like a solid foundation for a proper 4x game, but the train never really left the station. At least with Paradox's games you get at least a half decent product as soon as most of DLCs are out. EL never really evolved beyond the initial offering, alas.
 
Unwanted
Queued Shitposter
Joined
Oct 22, 2016
Messages
275
EL was pretty fun from day 0. You had at least 20 hours of experimenting with the distinct races. And it was a game instead of a mappainter.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
2,071
Location
Siberia
Well at least painting feels nice sometimes and the randomly generated reactions/stories/encounters are usually pretty fun (though i'm not a big fan of Paradox products in general). EL's combat sucked dick on day 0, yet it was the only thing you could really do in a game, different races and 'world quests' were a nice touch (and the whole interconnected business it had with their other games), but there was no campaign, no real story to tell, just some shallow ass gameplay on a poorly optimized engine.

It's a pretty sad state of affairs for the whole sub-genre though, the last good 4x fantasy game was a fucking CIV4 mod.
 

Eyestabber

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
4,733
Location
HUEland
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
You are trying to rationalize a very gamey mechanic that is supposed to make life for AI easier. Don't do that.

"gamey mechanic". :lol:

:notsureifserious:

And speaking of making life easier for the AI, you mentioned EU and HoI, which are good games, but not really comparable to EL. Apples and oranges. What seems completely lost to you is that these games use a region system with no tiles precisely because of the AI. While EL regions help the AI and add something to the game in the form of districts, while not removing the tiles, EU regions exist for the sole purpose of helping the AI. There is an old forum dev post on paradox forums about it if you doubt me. ;)

Also, GalCiv is a terrible borefest and you should feel bad for bringing it up.

Unlike EU/HoI, GalCiv is actually similar to EL. You should feel bad for spewing so much nonsense. Also, stop trying to cling to KKK.

Europa Universalis / HoI

Shouldn't be compared to EL/Civ/GalCiv. Read above.

but the AI simply cannot use those many options effectively.

So...kinda like every other game of the genre? Newsflash for you: Civ IV AI cheats. Heavily. It makes war by overwhelming you with Doomstacks and trying to brute force its way towards your cities. You usually beat it with terrain/superior comp. The AI has absolutely no idea how these things work. The mods I linked improve on that, but they don't eliminate the cheating. AI is always shit in these games.

praising something without ever trying it

L2read.

All in all, it's not best, you are praising vapid diversity that is gamified to such an extent it has no identity, go fuck yourself on that dildo spaceship, goddamn excitable moron.
You know, if you manage to control your butthurt you COULD argue that the game's "mages" are nothing but AoE archers, that Cavalry is just DPS infantry with extra mobility and so on. But I'm not gonna make your argument for you. :smug:

I clocked thousands of hours on Civ IV, a couple hundred last year. If you know a better "Civ IV successor", I'm all ears. If not, go fuck yourself with your vacuous criticism. The game doesn't hold a candle to your imaginary 4x, we get it. Good for you, buddy. Good for you. :greatjob:

Well at least painting feels nice sometimes and the randomly generated reactions/stories/encounters are usually pretty fun (though i'm not a big fan of Paradox products in general). EL's combat sucked dick on day 0, yet it was the only thing you could really do in a game, different races and 'world quests' were a nice touch (and the whole interconnected business it had with their other games), but there was no campaign, no real story to tell, just some shallow ass gameplay on a poorly optimized engine.

It's a pretty sad state of affairs for the whole sub-genre though, the last good 4x fantasy game was a fucking CIV4 mod.

They added a ton of stuff with DLCs. But selling an incomplete game is bullshit, I'm not gonna argue on that. I got the full bundle on Steam sales for like 50 HB so "how shitty the game was at release" doesn't really factor into my opinion of it.

BTW, MoM Xtended (popular FfH2 Modmod) got a new version last month:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/xtended-download-and-changelog.599130/
 
Last edited:

DramaticPopcorn

Guest
I only brought up EU and HoI in the combat segment, why the fuck do you feel the need to assume it's related to every other point I made? Can you read english, bro?

Unlike EU/HoI, GalCiv is actually similar to EL. You should feel bad for spewing so much nonsense. Also, stop trying to cling to KKK.
So, you admit they both are a borefest? Good to know, boi.

Shouldn't be compared to EL/Civ/GalCiv. Read above.
It wasn't, read again, kthnx.

So...kinda like every other game of the genre?
Pretty much, yes, but Civ AI has less options to work with and makes better use of those.

Also, in multiplayer the AI is not very relevant and EL has a pretty active MP scene, tho I haven't joined it myself yet.
l2write, cuckboi

You know, if you manage to control your butthurt you COULD argue that the game's "mages" are nothing but AoE archers, that Cavalry is just DPS infantry with extra mobility and so on. But I'm not gonna make your argument for you. :smug:
No butthurt here, I was just describing how I was initially similarly hopeful about this game but you went full retard and edgeposted in this thread because people made fair points this game is far from being the savior of the genre. Get fucked, faggot

Gotta give it to you, though, you're pretty good at misreading, misrepresenting and cherry picking just to fit your narrative and come out clean in the arguments.

Keep living in that echo chamber, my dude.
 
Self-Ejected

Irenaeus

Self-Ejected
Patron
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual The Real Fanboy
Joined
Nov 24, 2012
Messages
1,867,980
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Cidade Desespero
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom