Endgame Content

Id like to see the introduction of another Major Species with shipset and research tree, however access to this new faction is different to the previous ones. Seed ~50 planets all over the galaxy, with population of that faction (cant be moved like current minor species), on those planets all of the buildings of the new Major species can be constructed (like harpy scanner e.g.), their research buildings give special research points that can be used to research stuff in the their tech tree, (so basicly 2x tech trees in endgame). And their ships can only be constructed with shipyards on those planets, but its possible to merge their ships with other fleets of the players main faction. All buildings of the new species have bombardment protection and their species cannot be killed through bombardment.

Iam thinking like Jovian ships in EVE… stuff most players simply cannot get but its cool to know its out there.

Why all this?
So there is some extra content in Endgame to keep veterans happy after maxing out or almost maxing out the normal research tree and have some special planets that are actually worth fighting for. And having cool ships only a limited number of other players can get is always something nice.

1 Like
  1. RNG content that gives significant advantage - no. Outscape is marketed as a 4x game, not a loot box game. What’s described goes beyond “limited tactical consideration” to “exclusive strategic options”; the game shouldn’t be about who happened to spawn closest to one of 50 planets.

  2. Limiting access under alternate implementation - no. If good things are locked to veteran only, it becomes more grind-to-win. Gameplay becomes less about strategy and tactics and more about who’s played the longest.

  3. Additional variations of existing mechanics don’t change the fundamental issue. Veterans are always going to hit the max out point on tech and what there is to see at some point, then another expansion is necessary. It’s a never-ending quest for “more”.

Your preferences are perfectly legitimate, and you did well to post them. But they are rather a significant change to the game’s stated direction, and would require an ongoing investment by developers to maintain.

2 Likes

Never said that, thats your imagination. Iam a huge advocate of different stuff rather than stronger stuff.

Yes, so its actually worth to go to war.

Everyone can take such a planet, you dont need to be a veteran to do so. Its just something to make the Endgame interesting for people who have seen everything else.

Your proposal was the new sub-faction offer an entire tech tree of options, unique buildings, unique ships, and bombardment immunity. If nothing else, those offer new strategic and tactical options; additional viable options are of themselves an advantage.

You’re saying players wouldn’t get an advantage from the 50 planets; it doesn’t affect game balance. Yet it’s “worth to go to war” for them. So do I understand correctly that you’re saying players will go to war when they stand to gain no game advantage whatsoever thereby? But if that’s the case then they wouldn’t need the 50 planets to go to war anyways.

Whichever way you’re going, player motivation to go to war is a player issue that needs to be addressed with player solutions. Whatever mechanics will not change things in the slightest.

If you have control of one of those planets and nobody in the area cares enough to fight you for control, then there will be no war unless you start it. And if you were going to start a war to protect potential gains, you would have started a war even without one of the 50 planets. If you were the sort to start a war to gain what other players have, you would have started a war; if one of the 50 planets is nearby that gives a focal point, but you would still have gone to war.

The 50 planets just don’t make a real difference in player motivations.

To be clear - even if the 50 planets offer a real strategic/tactical advantage, even if that’s a game balance issue and a problem, that still won’t necessarily mean players will care enough to go to war over them. Players often value their real-life pursuits over time spent in-game, and whatever in-game incentives just aren’t going to motivate them.

I thought you might switch up the proposed implementation as you were specifically addressing veterans with the proposed feature.

All right, so it’s more of a location-based exclusivity than veteran exclusivity. It’s still putting in work on an ongoing basis that most of the server doesn’t get access to firsthand, that can be argued to give whoever holds it an unfair advantage.

If you want to make the game like “Path of Exile” say so, but remember - even if balance issues are addressed, PoE’s monetization model might not work for Outscape. ARPGs have a larger playerbase than 4x.

(If you don’t know what Path of Exile is, you might want to look into it and its monetization model. If you want to push for monetization without pay to win, and seasonal content updates, those are things PoE does. Looking at PoE might give you ideas for suggestions.)

1 Like

Bump because the game needs stuff like this to bring back all of the old testers like me who got frustrated and left but are still waiting.

Don’t make them wait too long…

PS - I have not left again yet :stuck_out_tongue:

id just recycle the snithereal faction to this new minor/major species. all the assets are there.

Actually there is something from other games like EVE and X that outscape could take from. Both of these games involve empire building, but you the player are ultimately one character piloting one ship. I wonder if Outscape could be adapted to incorporate this by having you control one fleet directly, but all others are AI based.

Another game is Starsector where this kind of thing is implemented, though in a pretty simple way. One part of that game is the concept of communication relays, meaning you cannot directly manage assets that are too far away, instead each system has relays with report on activities, but it takes a while for that information to reach you.

An advantage to this would be that you the player can develop your character as well as your empire. This will mitigate some of the negative feelings towards having parts of your empire destroyed.


With Alliances, this kind of thing would allow for players to effectively govern a single empire if they chose to.

Game has balancing issues in regards to bombing and new players vs old players, exacerbated by the latest patch, and the UI/QoL needs a lot of improvement to reduce the massive micro needed to explore, create and move fleets. Now is not the time to give you “veterans” more toys to play with at the expense of everyone else.

2 Likes

please stay on topic and dont spam every other thread with your disliking of the changes.

fun fact iam not a veteran and most veterans quit as the game doesnt offer much endgame, while the amount of people leaving because they were totaly destroyed is very small.

1 Like

I am staying on topic by highlighting that there are far more important things in this game to address then to give you new toys to play with because you are bored. Maybe you should stop multi and use that to get an advantage over other people and play the game it is meant to, instead of whining that you don’t have a new server and no new toys to play with.

This is probably why you were pushing so hard for this price hike as you have enough resources, through max-mining and multi-accounts, to deal with it but it does give you an advantage over people who don’t do such things.

And your proof for this ‘fact’ is what? Sounds like you are confusing your opinion with fact.

Regardless, a handful of veterans is not what is going to decide the future success of this, or any, game. It is how good it is at attracting new people and retain them and most gamers these days are casuals and not multi-account max-miners.

It is far more important to fix the issue with excessive micro and the very weak offline protection this game has to offer as well as the balance between newbies/casuals and multi-account Max-Miners such as yourself.

Sure endgame content is important too but not when people like you can tear down in hours what other people have built up in days and weeks.

Player entity is an initial step toward hauling a wider community into this game.

thats not what this is thread is about! its about some sort of king of the hill with a minor species!

We have that just keep fluffing the leaderboard and then pm’ing people your standings. lmao

1 Like

Thought I’d read that it was about “Endgame Content”. @orolyn and I were offering endgame content. You offer an exclusive race as something to fight over; whereas I offer that all races ought to be minor while the player entity rules over them. Now every bit of population everywhere becomes the hill we fight over or even try to push onto someone we know is unprepared to govern them. It’s much more rewarding than sitting on golden planets daring the server to challenge your position.

3 Likes

Just give us some super challenging PVE content with pirates! How ****ing hard could it be!?

HACK IT IN FOR A DAY! TEST IT! SEE HOW IT GOES!

SOMETHING!!!..`112320

1 Like

I reckon with king of the hill, there will be a lot of people who either can’t compete or don’t want to compete. Wars are pretty stressful and most people can only enjoy them for 1-2 weeks if they are strong willed.

To make the game more enjoyable you have to go deeper to more fundamental game elements, such as the inidividual. In this case the individual would be the “player entity” dragons mentioned. Some people like macro playstyle while others prefer micro. This in effect gives players a choice whether to focus on themselves or their empire. Or both, if they really want to.

3 Likes

Indeed and that is why every healthy MMO need challenging and fun PvE as PvE is much less stressful than a PvP war and great to switch between the two. That is what I did in Eve and why it lasted me so long. Probably spent 80% doing PvE and only 20% PvP as PvP in FFA, full loot MMOs, is stressful and hard to find good fights.

Yes it would be great if there are certain elements of your “player entity” that you can’t lose to others. Which is what experience and/or skills are in other games. Problem in this game is that all your power lies in either colonies (most valuable to lose) and fleets (easier to lose as they can be mass produced).

And if you lose both = perma death. No MMO that I am aware of has successfully pulled of perma death. Gamers simply don’t want to spend so much time to just lose it all. Works in MOBAs/RTS where a session lasts anywhere from 5-60 minutes. Does not work when it lasts for weeks/months.

tribal wars has been around for 10+ years and is everything you said. send a noblemen into your enemy’s village 4-5 times and his city is yours. https://help.tribalwars.net/wiki/Nobleman
March of empires comes pretty close. any player who gets “zeroed” often either quit or purchased a new account rather than started to simply regrow their army. 9 out of 10 quit. considering i am aware of players who would drop $100 USD every friday and a number of other factors, even though there is no exploration, nor full exterminate, i am adding it based on the game’s success.
Mafia city (i think that was the name) and war and order are very similar to MoE. once you get zeroed, your considered a farm, there just isnt a realistic bounce back.

should i go on? each of the above continues to play out while your logged off and if you get caught unprotected whether by items or by oversight from your friends, the results can be painful and game ending.

No you should not because the vast majority of MMOs does not support permadeath and for good reasons. Sure you can find one of a million games (browser games at that) that does but that does not change the fact that the vast majority of gamers won’t put up with spending weeks building up something to lose it in a day. The fact that you are arguing for it is probably why this game is bleeding players so badly.

1 Like

Well, first the argument is causing the game to bleed players? Next, March of empires is on steam and Google play, not a browser. War and order is on google play. Mafia city is on google play. also, so what if they were all browser based games? A successful game is successful, stop attacking things just because they are contrary to your points, or at least get some kind of information about them.