Suggestion: Late game crisis

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Even against hard AI, by the time I reach mid-to-end game, I am way too powerful compared to AI regimes

that means that by the time I am starting to get laser rifles & tanks, atomic weapons, robot soldiers, etc, it is already game over because the AI was not able to keep up to speed, therefore I have the following suggestion:

Set a "late crisis" event; some sort of AI or mutant or advanced space invader civilization arriving to the planet and storming it with advanced weapons and a pre-set list of high level buildings and technology

This can be optional, set during "setup options" or "history choices"

[BlueTemplar]

Yeah, this would be really cool !

(It's a common problem in 4X, with their exponential growth... and unlike most of other 4X, ShEmp doesn't even have a mechanic that makes each new zone more expensive to maintain !)

A perhaps easier option would be a "Mega Evil Empire" feature, where the other Regimes get their relation artificially lowered with a regime with a sufficiently high victory score (and artificially raised with each other).

(You could also try playing on the hardest difficulty, but it doesn't really solve the issue : if you manage to survive for long enough, you can then run away with the game !)

[zgrssd]

Maybe it could be a invasion by "THE SHADOW"?

I mean he is literally what the game is named after

[Jorge_Stanbury]

yes, the problem with hardest difficulty is that it will only make the early game more challenging,

[zgrssd]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

yes, the problem with hardest difficulty is that it will only make the early game more challenging,

Haivng a scaling difficulty might help.

It starts with AI bonuses that make the early game a challenge, then ramps up to bonuses that keep the late game interesting.

However I get the feeling a large part of the issues is actually the AI over-recruiting.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

Maybe it could be a invasion by "THE SHADOW"?

I mean he is literally what the game is named after

Yes, I always thought that the "Shadow" thing was, from a developer's perspective, the hardest feature to drop, I mean, in the manual there is paragraph after paragraph explaining it, just to become meaningless once the game starts.

Another alternative that can complement a late game crisis is to have "fallen regimes" (idea borrowed from Stellaris). The idea is that there are some (few) regimes that survived from the galactic republic era, but they just became totally isolationist, so they are technologically advanced, but they won't expand, they won't build armies, they won't bother you as long as you don't declare war.

However, once you reach a certain level of tech or victory score, they will then consider you a risk, and "activate", meaning they will start expanding and eventually declare war on you

[zgrssd]

Yes, I always thought that the "Shadow" thing was, from a developer's perspective, the hardest feature to drop, I mean, in the manual there is paragraph after paragraph explaining it, just to become meaningless once the game starts.

The thing is that the Shadow is fragmented to a incredible degree.
He had planned the Dissolution war to take power via puppets, but totally underestimated the severity of hte conflict.
Seperate fragments of his mind might be following different plans on the way to restore the whole. So he can make one story without conflicting with another.

Another alternative that can complement a late game crisis is to have "fallen regimes" (idea borrowed from Stellaris). The idea is that there are some (few) regimes that survived from the galactic republic era, but they just became totally isolationist, so they are technologically advanced, but they won't expand, they won't build armies, they won't bother you as long as you don't declare war.

However, once you reach a certain level of tech or victory score, they will then consider you a risk, and "activate", meaning they will start expanding and eventually declare war on you

Well, Stellaris stole a lot of things from Distant Worlds 1. Including the Fallen Empires (there called the "Ancient Guardians").
So it is only fair from another Matrix game to steal soemthing back.

The existence of robot Infantry and GR era factories that were never damaged would explain how they could match a empire that literally controls the whole planet.

[BlueTemplar]

Didn't DW1 itself "borrow" the "Ancient Guardians" concept from Master of Orion (2?) ? (Which live on... Orion ! (?))

[zgrssd]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

Didn't DW1 itself "borrow" the "Ancient Guardians" concept from Master of Orion (2?) ? (Which live on... Orion ! (?))

No idea, I never played it.
Something about the way production works just rubs me the wrong way.

[Zanotirn]

In MOO2 Orion was just a juicy planet guarded by a fairly powerful ship. In Stellaris terms, it was a size 25 gaia planet in a system with a leviathan. Although it had a cross between a FE and late game crisis in the form of Antarans - i.e. they only had one planet but sent increasingly difficult attacks against you.

I think it makes sense to add content like this, (though such features tend to be labor-intensive ones that get worked on once devs are satisfied with core gameplay)

[Pratapon51]

Also accounting for the fact that the player themself may also be yet another aspect of the Shadow...

One of the crises I can see working while making sense was the arrival of more crashed starships that happened to carry either human soldiers in stasis or a bevy of AI sentinels hopped up on silicon steroids.

[postfux]

Most 4x games loose their appeal for me once the only decision to take is whom to steamroll first. The only 4x I regularly played till the end is CIV IV (and older). But in CIV IV there is no reason for growth beyond a certain point and there is much to do without waging war. That perhaps wont work for Shadow Empire.

I would love a game mechanic making the regime more instable the bigger it gets. Handling civil war/ brake away zones would make an entertaining late game. Loyality/ factions would be great for that.

How about your mistreated militaristic faction stealing half your army, some of your zones and setting up an evil empire just next door (and founding an alliance with some other regimes)? Or some peacniks throwing you and your mighty army out to starve in some outpost zone?

More depth for diplomacy and some coordination between the AI regimes would als help mid/ late game.

Disclaimer: I am a blind man talking about color as far as Shadow Empire late game is concerned for the reasons stated above.

[BlueTemplar]

Well, the Revolutions mod IMHO doesn't really work that well in Civ4, so I'm dubious about it working in ShEmp... but who knows, after all it already has Faction Happiness and Leader Relation !

How about your mistreated militaristic faction stealing half your army

This part is pretty much already in the game.

[postfux]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

Well, the Revolutions mod IMHO doesn't really work that well in Civ4, so I'm dubious about it working in ShEmp... but who knows, after all it already has Faction Happiness and Leader Relation !

How about your mistreated militaristic faction stealing half your army

This part is pretty much already in the game.

Didnt try the revolutions mod. crusader kings II (not beeing 4x) goes in the right direction, but there are counterstrategies that work too reliable.

Guess I have to play some more ShEmp to form an opinion, but until now I only had very manageable revolutions. A faction founding a new regime is not in the scope of the game as far as I know.

[Pratapon51]

The majority of rebellions will only ever field easily-crushed unsupported militiamen, which makes them trivial to deal with unless you are already in a horrible position. [:D] But I expect said mechanics will be revisited in the future.

[BlueTemplar]

A faction founding a new regime is not in the scope of the game as far as I know.

Yeah, this is specifically about the quoted part.

The majority of rebellions will only ever field easily-crushed unsupported militiamen

Well yes, because you would have to be a fool (or in real dire straits) to have your commander relation drop so much that they would rebel ?
(I did hear of SHQ commanders rebelling with predictably dire consequences...)

[postfux]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

Well yes, because you would have to be a fool (or in real dire straits) to have your commander relation drop so much that they would rebel ?
(I did hear of SHQ commanders rebelling with predictably dire consequences...)

Thats were compexity can kick in for some entertaining late game without scripted baddies.

Once an organisation gets big enough it might not be possible to remove problematic leaders without risking the rebellion you want to avoid. Not a single leader rebelling but a whole faction breaking away, some decision snowballing its way into desaster. Something along the line of a Syndics against Reformists rerun?

Such a mechanic would shift the focus to empire management once the external enemies are no real threat any more and can also produce some new worthy enemies to fight.

[BlueTemplar]

Not a single leader rebelling but a whole faction breaking away, some decision snowballing its way into desaster.

I'm skirting pretty close to that in my game (and with an autocracy faction to boot !) :
fb.asp?m=5020895