Do you play to the very end?

Just curious: Do you people all play to the very end or just until you know you have won?

I'm playing on painful and, being evil, my amazing unpopularity generally forces a conquest victory on me. - In the present game I have spent most of the game simultaneously fighting a war with 4 of the 5 other major races (drath, torians, terrans and krynn). Only Korx liked me and surreptitiously grew hugely powerful in the background before forming an alliance with me and uselessly leaving me to do the dirty work...

However now only Korx and Krynn are left and I can't be bothered crushing them.

It's a typical scenario: I play until I have secured the win and then start again.

Does anyone else do this?
15,699 views 41 replies
Reply #1 Top
The great dilemma...

To win by virtue, or by default.


I usually take it to the end, especially if I want to see the end stats.
Sometimes I just like to see how many ships I have destroyed, compared to how many of mine.
Reply #2 Top
If you might post to Metaverse, you have to take a potential victory all the way. Of course if you are clearly going to lose, or it has become too tedious to possibly, maybe, could be chip away the leader, you can retire at any time (and virtuously post the loss, OF COURSE!)

drrider
Reply #3 Top
The Metaverse is the only thing that keeps me going all the way to the end of the game. I have the same problem with all strategy games - there comes a point where it is so blatantly obvious I am going to win that it's just not fun anymore. There is very little challenge in kicking an empire when it's down.


Reply #4 Top
But..but..but..Marshal -- you're EVIL! I thought kicking them when they were down WAS the fun part?!

drrider
Reply #5 Top
But..but..but..Marshal -- you're EVIL! I thought kicking them when they were down WAS the fun part?!

drrider


Evil can get bored too...you can only kick someone so much before that gets old too.

If I wasnt posting scores to the metaverse I would almost never go for a conquest victory. I used to always go for influence or alliance victory, but if Im trying to score, its usually conquest, unless I get really bored with the mopping-up part.

Sentient species taste better... Sentient species taste better...
Reply #6 Top
If I wasnt posting scores to the metaverse I would almost never go for a conquest victory.


Well, and there you have it. It is the slowest, but it is worth the most points, and once you have won is no more difficult to get than any other type of victory.

When I play offline games, usually to try strange/ridiculous new strategies, I will never take a game to the end. Once you have 51%+ of the total planets on any size map, you have won for sure. The rest is (boring) mop up.

But, if playing for score, you have to take it all the way to the end. AND if you are playing for score, why not have the stamina to grind through a boring military victory and get 4x the points?

- Wyndstar
Reply #7 Top
Evil can get bored too...you can only kick someone so much before that gets old too.


now if the game offered various ways to slowly torture them to death, and the ability to see the pathetic little expressions on their faces go from terrified to hopeless and whatever else... that might get me to play to the end all the time
Reply #8 Top
I only play to the end too because of metaverse posting. I dont really go for higher scores but i do like having the record of my wins (and someday losses). But I havent gone for the military victory yet. My current game i plan to, just so i can eventually have one of each type of victory.

I usually let it end with a political victory. One of the things I liked about this game was that you wren't forced to turn on your allies to get a victory. My last game i did "force" an influency victory by giving the Yor peace with one planet left and used the 10 week period to make sure the build queue for each planet was less than that time so things would be built.

I agree with Wyndstar, that a military victory should not be weigheted any more than another type. They are rely all the same, except for maybe a technology victory. Its just a matter if you feel like building all those transports etc. MAYBE if the vbery last AI would surrender when they were clearly doomed it would be better. Or just score the games the same regardless of the victory type.
Reply #9 Top
I always play to the end
Reply #10 Top
I understand that multiplayer is not a big selling point for the company but man this game would have so much more life if it did    Probebly only hardcore people playing at this point anyways but man being able to play against other plays would be insanly awesome ..the AI is to stupid to be fun when you get good at this game
Reply #11 Top
I play to the end every time...mostly because I like the victory cutscenes.   (spelling?)
Reply #12 Top
I only use conquest victories and i cannot bear to play to the end. Mopping up is just too time consuming and boring as hell.
Reply #13 Top
I rarely play til the end, but that's partially because I rarely go for the conquest victory -- I usually go for an alliance victory when possible. Also, I tend to play on the larger maps, which usually means that I'm more ready for the game to end once I've reached that "critical mass" (where you know you're going to win).
Reply #14 Top
Hello! I always play to the end unless I know I'm going to lose...

I play to the end because I like to see the other empires cower under my reighn and I like the mop up part (sometimes) because I get to look at how great my empire is, and aknowlege that I am the most powerful one on the board, that I........ am AWESOME!!!  
Reply #15 Top
Hi!
I only use conquest victories and i cannot bear to play to the end.

Errrr.... well ... khmmm? Would you care to explain how you mix those two goals, because you can't win militarily if you don't mop-up the rest of the opposition?

Mopping up is just too time consuming and boring as hell.

Yes, and that's the reason why I usually chose the easiest way to finish the game, after I've achieved an unbeatable position. My usual disregarding of the scores helps here quite a lot.

BR, Iztok
Reply #16 Top
Let me put it this way, i rarely press the last turn button where it's going to go to the victory cutscene ...
Reply #17 Top
Perhaps a trigger for conquest victory could be implemented where under certain circumstances all the other civs surrender to you. Victory conditions could be something like your military power is 3x that of the remaining civs combined AND the same requirement for your population and/or manufacturing power (shipbuilding potential), or some other aspect of empire power. Another idea is to simply downgrade the points for a conquest victory. It would have some collateral effects, like skewing scores and rankings on the metaverse, so that should be considered too. This might also prevent people from conquering everything but a few enemy planets, then sitting back and running up the score for few years with population and tech. Even though I have done it myself a number of times, I think it's an artificial way to inflate scores.

Sentient species taste better... Sentient species taste better...
Reply #18 Top
I always play to the very end an any game I play. And I never quit or surrender. The only exception to this rule is if the game actully sucks.
Reply #19 Top
Like when you get stuck with one planet on the corner of the map?
Reply #20 Top
Some possibilties to make the end game more fun:

1) Reasons to keep a defeated civilisation around... basically, add enough diplomatic options to turn other nations into your servants. One way alliances, for instance, that would force them to come to YOUR aid when attacked, but not vice versa... forcing them to follow your line in any UP vote... full control of their foreign policy... those kind of things. The only risk inherent in it is that the civilisation might pick the pieces back up and attempt to breakk free from your domination! Otherwise, you gain a proxy through which to wage war or distract opponents, and they get to keep breathing.
2) Last ditch, costly strategies that could allow a short term resurgence for a desperate civilisation, but at a price. For instance, the use of alien artifacts that give you a HUGE ability bonus initially, but after which will decay until your abilities are worse than they started!
Reply #21 Top
How about a new type of victory? it would be called an economic victory. where you have like three times the production (and research) of the top player in production and research.
Reply #22 Top
How about a new type of victory? it would be called an economic victory. where you have like three times the production (and research) of the top player in production and research.


wouldn't that be more like an industrial victory? i'd imagine an economic victory being based on BC income.
Reply #23 Top
I usually play through to the end, usually for a conquest victory, but it can become tedious. It would be more "realistic," and less tedious, if enemy civilizations surrendered sooner than they now do. As it is now, they tend to stubbornly keep going long after their military is devastated and the outcome has long been obvious. Perhaps another interesting development would be the "collapse" of a civilization that is doomed to lose, with the various planets going every which way to different civilizations, or becoming independent ("Pirates" etc.) sort of like their remaining ships do in the present game system. Anything to make the final stages of the game more varied and interesting.
Reply #24 Top
i always play to the end metaverse or not...and you are all forgeting the easiest but proably longest victory to get: technological victory.

and being evil is always fun...i dont kno wat yalls is talking about  
Reply #25 Top
I think I've played almost every game so far to the bitter end, whether I'm just trying out a new strategy or submitting a game to the Meta (just gotta see that cinematic ending )