V17 Beta, Discussion about End-Game
Version 17 is slowly being assembled, bringing a new Dark Name. The Fog returns from the previous game, and is now styled as a slowly-expanding region of control around your nobles. It's designed to guide you into expanding geometrically, adding new locations to your fog-sea by taking control of nobles on its perimeter.
The aim is that your agents will work better inside the mists, by increasing their infiltration capabilities (reduced security in all locations caught in the mist) and by preventing them from being affected by exile. We're rolling it out in beta form, in case you want to take a look at a potentially unstable, definitely unbalanced version of the game. Current feedback is that it doesn't do enough to help your agents, which is probably true, so we'll be thinking about maybe adding a new ability which helps you escape paladins more readily (teleport? Better disruption vs Paladins? Paladins fail to track properly if you're in the fog?).
We're also testing better file loading, as the initial build of Version 16 had some nasty crashes, which we believe were linked to non-English language settings/user-names. Hopefully we can get it loading files properly (game parameters and saved IO options) properly on all languages.
We also have introduced key bindings, as I realised, when trying to debug it on a French setting, that WASD isn't a very good key set for moving the map around, if you're using an AZERTY keyboard. So the game options, available in-game, should allow you to rebind those to whatever works best on your setup. Hopefully. Assuming it doesn't lead to catastrophic issues. Didn't on our machines, but, well, it's beta for a reason.
=======END GAME=======
One major change which we're now discussing is the end-game. Currently, there's no real difference between mid and end game, you just keep pushing darkness or monsters until you win. We're considering expanding it somewhat.
NPC nobles slowly gain 'awareness', which is their knowledge of you, your actions, and the apocalypse. They don't really DO anything with this information, however. The previous game, Shadows 1, had a 'lightbringer victory' counter, where the aware nobles could band together, and form an alliance which could defeat the player, if the player didn't interfere with it. This could bring an end-game threat, and make a dramatic final battle between light and dark.
We'll need to think carefully about it. We want to have a variety of strategies for the player to use to defeat them, both political and military, and we don't want them to just turn up and ruin your game in a way which would be unpredictable or unfair. They should make the game more fun, not just harder. One thing I personally like the idea of is being able to have a player noble be the sovreign of this 'empire of light', to trick the NPCs into voting you as leader of the resistance against your own forces. Playing both sides of the war at the same time is the kind of game I want Shadows to be.
To balance out the NPCs gaining advantages and defences against you, it's possible the player needs an end-game buff. Possibly in the form of 'ultimate abilities' which get unlocked at a certain point. Either every name would have access to an Ult, or the player would choose one from a list when the time came. We're not decided on if this is a good idea, or what form these abilities would take, but it has been suggested that the player needs a bit of a boost towards the end of the game.
So, anyway, that's the current state of the game, and our current focus. After this is done, maybe over the course of a couple of versions, we can look at overall balance. Scale down the monsters a bit, buff politics somewhat, probably. Maybe get a bit more options on the difficulty selection screen.
Files
Get Shadows Behind The Throne 2
Shadows Behind The Throne 2
A grand strategy game, revolving around political intrigue and ancient evils
Status | In development |
Authors | BobbyTwoHands, wquist |
Genre | Strategy, Simulation |
Tags | 2D, Dark Fantasy, GitHub, grand-strategy, Hex Based, Horror, Open Source, Singleplayer, Turn-based Strategy |
Languages | English |
More posts
- A New BeginningJul 25, 2021
- Version 19: EventsMay 02, 2021
- Version 18: Community Led DevelopmentMar 21, 2021
- Version 17: A new EndFeb 23, 2021
- Version 16: Bugfix and VideoFeb 03, 2021
- Version 16: Masque of the Red DeathJan 25, 2021
- Version 14: IndividualityDec 31, 2020
- Protagonists and AntagonistsDec 26, 2020
- Version 13: Faces of the EnemyDec 07, 2020
Comments
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
About the "playing both sides" part. Maybe give the leader the ability to control the armies? He effectively becomes Supreme Commander and has total control over the more noble nobles' armies (as the corrupt ones wouldnt let anyone 'steal' their control). Maybe even add a casus belli mechanic, wars can be against the enemy leader (suspected of enthralled), or just for taking a duchy. Failure to succeed means huge loss of prestige, so a lost war before elections could mean deposition. This also allows a player controlled leader to intentionally lose the war against the dark empire, ( as the enemy leader hasnt been deposed in X turns) but would mean he gets deposed, so a one time trick to give you an advantage. Though, maybe give a dark vs light empire war a special flavor, make it last a long time and never end unless one faction wins.
Casus Belli mechanics should probably be implemented sometime, along with occupied locations, so the territory only changes hands at the end of war between human forces. Probably doesn't need to be as complex as CKII/CKIII/Stellaris' approaches, but it doesn't seem too historically accurate for an entire empire to consume another in a giant war. And having cities only switch once might help a bit with nobles maintaining their positions despite their cities being invaded.
Not sure it can make it for the next version, as we're already going to try to add so much, but it would definitely make combat a bit better. Certainly there should be a "crusade" mechanic, because current if a nation is afraid of dark nobles they'll invade their country, but then give those very same dark nobles a vote in whether or not to pronounce them guilty. It means that invading a dark nation can suddenly just add a bunch of dark nobles to your population who then doom your nation, despite people being aware of them.
I also like the idea of reputation being 'at stake' from taking actions. We tried for a bit to have every vote be proposed by a person, whose prestige would change if the vote passed/failed, but it just made stuff more complex. Having the leader's prestige be affected by war outcomes could help.
I was also thinking of an agent who would benefit from deliberately losing wars against human nations. Will keep it as a surprise, but I think it could be fun, at least. Perhaps not very balanced, but an amusing way to play, and a game should probably try to be fun, not just hard.
As a sorta endgame I would suggest this:
A good alliance is formed and it begins to research a way to defeat the player. After X turns they unlock a ritual, which will either just defeat the player completely or just for a time being. Turns to research a ritual are determined by the number of scientific PoIs in the alliance. Ritual casting also takes time, but it is much less and is based on the number of religious PoIs in the alliance.
Pros:
- Gives players a way to counter it by shadowing or outright destroying Places of Interest.
Cons:
- Effectively just a timer, which can be disabled quite easily
After the ritual is done, the player is either
1) Outright loses the game and is forced to start a new one
2) The game "skips" ahead in time either by passing a lot of turns or by deleting a bunch of nations (70%?), spawning new ones and regenerating all nobles in the remaining nations.
Also, how about name-specific endgames, which disable one of the names? For example, humanity creates an alliance and it:
1) Destroys Deep One spawning pool, effectively removing the ability to spawn more deep ones for a long time.
2) Enforces usage of post-combat religious rituals, which disable the ability to lower the world's temperature.
3) Creates an anti-flesh poison to defeat flesh growth with ease.
And so on.
I really like these ideas. The NPCs already try to form alliances towards the end-game, so it makes sense to give one of them the title of "Kingdom of light" or whatever, and then have them begin work on some anti-dark ritual. The idea of it having a set number of locations you need to target to stop the ritual is also good, should let you work against them politically by shuffling a few key broken nobles around, agent-wise by targeting those nobles for enshadowment, or militarily by wiping them out.
The concept of having a "retry in 500" years is also great. It should be possible, with the current setup. Might be a few technical difficulties (saved games need to avoid getting too huge if they record everything), and gameplay ones (NPCs need to die of old age, so you don't get the same people 500 years in the future). Other than those issues, it's already possible to make the game play hundreds of turns to generate a history, so we could just delete all monsters, reduce shadow over time, then play forwards the game. Maybe you'd even have a tiny dark kingdom which managed to survive this age of light. If we can get this to work, we should also put it into the victory screen. Might be possible to get this in the next version, let's see how things work out.
Specific defeat conditions are also cool, but that'll have to wait a version at least, to keep this version from growing too huge, and leaving too long a gap between v16 and v17's releases.
Thanks for the suggestions, hopefully we can get something together which looks like what you were imagining.