Suggestion - Victory Conditions

[GHerr]

im sure someone has said this but i want to second it. i would suggest hiding the victory conditions progress behind intelligence missions. its already kind of so with not adding civs until discovered. just feels a little cheaty sometimes when i go and check how i compare. i have stopped trying to resist this temptation.

[AKicebear]

I agree - we should know our own situation well, but rank and position of others should depend on how much *recent* intelligence you have on their empire.

[zgrssd]

Then how do you get that kind of information if you aren't willing to use espionage operations? Like, if you are on good terms?

I could see it as a setting - that also offers the other extreme: Show every ones progress, even if not yet contacted. Maybe hide the specific name, just give us "unnamed Human Empire".

[AKicebear]

Shadow Empire does it very well - you start with essentially no Intel of the inner workings of the other empires. A combination of espionage missions, border scouting, diplomacy and trade can all gradually increase your awareness of the other, with little bits of information becoming more visible and reliable as a result.

The simple version in DW2 could be espionage, diplomacy, and trade. Successful espionage missions increase your awareness of the overall scope of the enemy. As could long term diplomacy (ambassadors posted, treaties in place). As could private sector trade. Some methods could be faster/slower, more/less reliable - tradeoffs are what make different play styles interesting to experience.

[frankycl]

im sure someone has said this but i want to second it. i would suggest hiding the victory conditions progress behind intelligence missions. its already kind of so with not adding civs until discovered. just feels a little cheaty sometimes when i go and check how i compare. i have stopped trying to resist this temptation.

No, please don't ! - I don't second this at all.
This is the most important feature when it comes to testing/judging how well you or the AI-factions are doing and what can be the reasons if this is not the case, imho, and I really use it/need it often
It doesn't feel "cheaty" either, imho, because it's the same info the AI uses, too - in fact it would be rather dumb if you Don't use it - and let only the AI be "cheaty", imho. - Why don't you just IMAGINE that this IS the general intelligence info you/your empire has available ? - And if you really don't need it/feel bad about it, just simply don't use it ! - No one forces you to even look at it.

However, it's something different when you'd mean the info/knowledge your empire - as a faction - has at its disposal; - and would be able or limited in some things/reactions, etc. accordingly. THIS I would second, too, but not that you as the game-master ABOVE your empire should be limited (or better: limit yourself, since it's not a general game-function), only because you're not doing enough intelligence-missions

But if you (or the majority of the community - and therefore maybe also the DEVs) really think you'd need something like this then please at least let it be done OPTIONAL !

[frankycl]

I could see it as a setting - that also offers the other extreme: Show every ones progress, even if not yet contacted. Maybe hide the specific name, just give us "unnamed Human Empire".

Yes, that would be the other extreme (and might be useful for some testing-scenarios, too) - but it would also need to be OPTIONAL - then I could agree fully with it.