Follow on G+ Follow on Twitter Subscribe the Facebook page Subscribe the RSS feed Receive notifications of new posts by email

Endless Space: 3rd Free Add-on On Steam Today

By on December 19th, 2012 11:00 am

Endless Space | Lights of Polaris add-on

Amplitude Studios releases their third, and last of their planned free content add-ons for Endless Space today, available later on the day on Steam.

This third free add-on’s name is Lights of Polaris, and is part of Amplitude’s update plan for Endless Space, which comprised three free add-ons for their space 4X game till the end of 2012. The first add-on, Rise of the Automatons, brought a new custom faction, a new trade route UI panel, improved AI and upgraded diplomacy. The second add-on, Echos of the Endless, injected some “ambience” and “life” content, namely random events, wonders and cosmic objects such as comets, black holes or anomalies.

According to the publisher, this third free add-on will now bring:

Holiday Special

  • New Polaris Factory Wonder
  • New Oros Gec Faction Hero

Steam Features

  • Steam Achievements
  • Steam Cloud

Community Feedback & Balancing

  • Battle Actions in Auto (auto battle cards)
  • Enhanced Battle Action AI
  • Refactored Faction Traits
  • “No Pirates” Option
  • “Hide exploration flags in the galaxy view” Option

See the full release note here.

Note that your saves may not be compatible with this new update. So, if you’re in the middle of a game probably you should play it safe and disable Steam’s auto update for Endless Space as soon as possible.

Well, that seems to be it with respect to free add-ons for Endless Space, but it’s not the end of the line for this space 4X game. In the summer, Amplitude announced an expansion (paid content) for Endless Space, where battles improvements seem to be the big focus. You can read more about it here.

\Edit: There’s an extra free DLC planned for the coming months with the rewards unlocked in a past Steam free weekend event. Thanks Eleazzaar!

For more information on Endless Space checkout our review and the AAR ”Playing the Amoeba”. Information on where to buy can be found on our game’s list page.

     Subscribe RSS

Tags: , , , , , , ,


  1. Eleazzaar says:

    The new content “won” during the steam free weekend is still forthcoming– so the paid expansion is not the next upcoming change to ES.

  2. DevildogFF says:

    Please god, let them fix diplomacy in this game and I’ll actually be interested. Without a decent diplomacy system, the game just feels blah. I know that it’s doing a lot of good things and that the recent ambience add-on did some great stuff for it, but that ho-hum diplomacy kills it for me.

    At the very least, pull a page out of Distant World’s book. At least their diplomacy was satisfactory. And if you really want to win me over, look at what Dan is doing with Stardrive or Microprose did with Moo1 or Moo2. What’s the fun of exploring the universe if there isn’t any intriguing alien species to interact with?

    Meeting your first alien species shows up as a little drop down indicator. Not some sort of huge diplomatic ordeal or video or even a conversation.

    No. Fix this.

    • BBR91 says:

      Agree. There needs to be more of everything if this game hopes to compete in the genre. I’m having fun with it as it is, but it feels like such a clinical experience. I feel completely out of touch with my race when playing in the galaxy map. Pretty much every game aspect needs improving, and I hope they do it well, even with paid expansions. They already added a lot to the game with free patches.

      On topic, this “add-on” is not yet available on Steam it seems.

      • Ashbery76 says:

        A good diplomatic system is nothing to do with irelavent eye candy but indepth options and an A.I that understands how to use it.

        • SQW says:

          If you ignore the graphics, ES is actually really sub par. Omission of many game mechanics that has become standard in 4X in 2012 combine with a terribly inadequate strategic AI made me wish I can get my money back. ES devs should just set up the company as a pure graphic studio or make a shooter where pretty picture actually carries weight.

          Despite the bugs, I’d rather play SOTS 2.

        • slyostinato says:

          I’m going to have to back up SQW’s take on ES – “really sub par”. I won’t go into alot of details as to why I feel that why because everybody has their own threshold and tolerances on games. But I’ve done my best over the months to help steer friends and colleagues away from this game until Amplitude Studios pulls their head out of their ass, or in this case, their ego, and start focusing on things other than eye candy. Every one of their patches/add-ons have been heavy on eye candy, graphics and simply adding things to the game that they already know how to do. They really do avoid tackling the very hard tasks. I also agree with SQW’s viewpoint on ES’s future. Perhaps they should just focus on being a pure graphics studio and hire themselves out to gaming studios to serve as the art department for others. This game STILL is not where it should be after being on the market for 6 months and 3 patches later. I’ll reiterate my previous evaluation – this game is not worth the full price they are asking. Once it hits the $5 bin, then maybe.

        • peschiNL says:

          always find it funny that the biggest criticism from people that only played it when the game launched. the game changed a lot last couple of months. This is a strategic game above anything else.

  3. DevildogFF says:

    And honestly, why can’t someone just make an updated Master of Orion? Just take all the same mechanics and give us a new paint and polish and I’d be ridiculously happy.

    It’s like Firaxis with X-Com. That was a near-perfect example of how to revive a classic. Take the core gameplay, make it prettier, give us some added depth and streamline some of the more tedious aspects, and then call it a day. Add some expansions (hopefully) and you make money.

    Someone please do that with MOO1 or 2. I don’t care which. They were both amazing.

    Hell, maybe I should just make them myself, like Zero. I’m not nearly as smart as he is, though. I’m not sure I could teach myself how to program like he did.

    Sorry. I’m grumpy this morning, haha.

    /end rant

    • Adam Solo says:

      Well, you do realize that it took Firaxis and 2K four years, a lot of people and some million dollars to develop XCOM:EU? :)

      There are some games on the horizon that will try to do what you and many of us are after, a true successor of MoO2 or MoO1. Among those, more or less indie, are: Star Lords, Horizon, Beyond Beyaan, M.O.R.E. (Kickstarter), Predestination (Kickstarter), and others.

      If nobody makes it in the end – StarDrive, Endless Space with expansions, and all these new attempts, then I volunteer to do one. You’re on board right? :) It’s very hard to make a great game.

      Note: I’m not suggesting that future space 4X games must all “try to be Master of Orion”. Just look at Distant Worlds: Legends, a perfect example of an excellent space 4X game that is very different from Master of Orion games. Of course, there’s a big chunk of 4X gamers that secretly crave for Master of Orion “The Return” or “The Evolution”. And that’s what I was talking about in this comment.

      • DevildogFF says:

        Yes, I’m on board. Definitely!

        I know it takes a great deal of time and resources, but I’m ready for it! :)

        Of those games, however, it looks like only Horizon or MORE really has a chance. I bought in to Star Lords alpha and they seem very…uncommunicative. I have no idea if they’re even making the game still. They spoke of an alpha update before year’s end, but they could learn to be a little more involved on their forums as we haven’t heard anything since.

        Of course I have high hopes for Stardrive, but I’m trying to keep my expectations in check. I’m an active part of the beta, so I know how the game is shaping up, but I – WE – have been burned so much in years past that I’m just trying to stay realistic. That’s not to say that Stardrive isn’t shaping up to be a classic, because it most certainly could become one. Fingers crossed.

        • Adam Solo says:

          Regarding Star Lords, I received word from the developers and they seem to have plans for before the end of the year ;) Let’s see what they are going to do. But, I agree, they should do something about the lacking communication.

      • Zeraan says:

        I know that things were very slow on my end lately, but I will finish Beyond Beyaan, even if it takes me another few years! But if you’re impatient, you can use Beyond Beyaan’s source code as a launching pad for your non-commercial game which should help cut down your development time.

        I think what most people secretly wants is a 3D version of Master of Orion 2 (same 2D gameplay mechanics, but just prettier and less micro). Maybe I should consider hiring a 3D programmer to 3D-ize Beyond Beyaan? :P

      • Serge says:

        Such a huge cost was the cost of their ego. If instead of “reinventing” game mechanics they would just updated graphics, AI and added some new aliens&trinkets cost would be order of magnitude less and the game would be better. But leaders wouldn’t have bragging rights about “reinventing” the game. “Reinventing” look a lot better on resume than just reproducing.

        • slyostinato says:

          Agreed…especially about the ego part. ES needs to refocus and get back to building a game and not just pretty art that appears on the screen for players to look at. This is why people still play MoO2 and Alpha Centauri. The graphics are dated but the game play and mechanics are compelling and addictive. I can’t really say that about ES.

        • Adam Solo says:

          I think Serge was referring to XCOM:EU.

        • eleazar says:

          People are still playing MoO1&2 and SMAC, because making game mechanics that work that well is an exceptionally hard thing to do, and thus rarely achieved.

          It is not as if the only reason ES isn’t as compelling as MoO or SMAC is because Amplitude didn’t put the bullet point “Compelling Gameplay” on their schedule. They tried. They didn’t reach 4X gaming’s high point. Few do.

          I only played a few games, but i think ES is a good game, not yet a great one. But i think their strategy of focusing on some 4X elements, and leaving out others is ultimately a better plan for eventually getting a great game, than M.O.R.E.’s method of promising everything conceivable, and trying to get it all to work together from the start.

  4. David Carron says:

    At what point would you do an update/re-review?

    • Adam Solo says:

      Now that I think of that, the best and cleaner would probably be to review the expansion. However, I remember to have said that after the free-DLC phase is over it could be a good time for a re-review.

      That will depend on Keith’s availability also, since he’s the one following Endless Space closely. I’m afraid that I can’t promise this. There are a lot of games to review and re-reviews are reserved for special cases, like debacle or seriously lackluster releases. We can’t make a habit of re-reviewing games, or one day no game is released in finished state.

      For instance, soon I’ll publish my Sword of the Stars 2 re-review. But, this is a special case (on a negative sense) as we all know.

  5. Mezmorki says:

    I never played Master of Orion 1 or 2 (I should probably leave huh?) – but in anycase I wonder how close Starbase Orion compares to it’s inspiration? From what I can tell they are really similar. Of all the 4x offerings I’ve tried recently (I’ve messed around with most of them) I like Starbase Orion by far the best. Too bad it’s iOS only – although the developer has plans to port it to PC/Windows + Android.

    • DevildogFF says:

      Starbase Orion is heavily influenced by those two great games. I’ve played all three and while Starbase Orion is definitely the best IOS 4x game, it still doesn’t hold a candle to those two greats.

    • Adam Solo says:

      “I never played Master of Orion 1 or 2 (I should probably leave huh?)”

      Not at all.

      Put simply, there are several types, or styles, of space 4X games. Master of Orion games, later the Space Empires series to an extent and the Galactic Civilizations series represent only a style of space 4X gaming that is played in turns and where ship design and colony building aspects are paramount. Combat focus varies. Several offer deep tactical combat while others don’t. Endless Space fits here.

      Then, you have the space 4X / RTS stream with the Imperium Galactica series, Distant Worlds, Sword of the Stars and Sins of a Solar Empire. These last two have a strong focus on tactical combat but lack a detailed colony building aspect. Distant Worlds doesn’t offer detailed colony building either.

      So, there are different flavors to space 4X. Master of Orion games represent one style, one many love no doubt, because it was one of the first. But, space 4X evolved and there are now many flavors for different type of players. And this just on space 4X. General sci-fi, historical and fantasy 4X offers even more flavor combinations, with games like Alpha Centauri (one of the best ever), Europa Universalis, Total War games and of course, the inevitable Civilization series, among others.

      So, if you like 4X don’t go anywhere, you’ll find plenty of reasons to follow this site ;)

      • Mezmorki says:

        Thanks for the detailed response! While I haven’t played MoO1 or MoO2, I have played the following:

        Alpha Centauri
        Galactic Civ 2
        Sword of the Stars 1
        Sins 1 + Rebellion
        Distant Worlds
        Star Ruler
        Endless Space
        Lost Empires
        Starbase Orion

        I’m pretty familiar with the genre, but just missed one of the defining games somewhere along the line! I’ll proably pick up MoO 1+2 on GOG, since it’s only $3.00!

      • Alex says:

        I would love a rebirth of IG especially the Colony building.

  6. Chris says:

    Man, ES is getting a lot of hate here which I do not fully understand. The game is great, I like it a lot and played it tons of hours. This expansion is a welcome addition and makes the game even more worth my time.

    • peschiNL says:

      I agree, I guess its very easy to hate a game, because you can compare it the zillion 4x games out already. I always judge a game on his own merits, and ES stands on his own as a very solid 4x game. specially the UI is something at last done right in a 4x game. When I now return to any other 4x game I just see what ES done right from the start where other 4x games still fail miserably.

  7. Mark says:

    I’ve been wondering about whether to get this game or not, but after feeling a little burned by my rather impulsive buy of SOTS II, I’m reluctant to get it. Some people say its good, some say its bad. Maybe I’ll just wait for something better to come along, there don’t seem to be any shortage of 4x games in the pipeline.

    • Mezmorki says:

      ES is tough for me – there are things I really like about it and things that I just can’t stand.

      What I like:

      – The system-level focus of development; it’s a good scale and amount of detail to manage relative to a big galaxies.
      – Interface in general is very nice and easy to understand.
      – Underlying mechanics (e.g. costs, production volumes, eonomics, etc.) are fairly easy + clear to understand; and the graphics + iconography ties into the research nicely.
      – I don’t mind the battle card idea behind combat, but I do hate the way combat is handled outside of the battle card system (see below)
      – Tech tree is nice and diverse
      – Ship building + customization has a good level of detail. Some reasonable choices, good opporutnities to make ships to counter the enemy.

      What I can’t stand about the game:

      – Fleet management. I despise fleet size CAPs. Can we all just admit that games with Fleet size limits have them because of either an unresolved design issue or technical defeciency in the game?

      – Fleet movement / combat initiation. Is this a turn based game or a real-time game? Enemy fleets will move during “your turn” and initiate conflicts. Totally random and irritating. To make it worse, when there are multiple fleets fighting multiple fleets at a locaton (as a consequence of the fleet size CAPS) there is no way to control/tell what fleet will fight what fleet. Also totally stupid. The whole movement system is garbage. You also can’t tell how many turns it will take to move a fleet somewhere ahead of time, nor can you specify a route for fleet movement. This is all terrible.

    • peschiNL says:

      you seem to made your mind up before you asked this question.

  8. Towerbooks3192 says:

    I have a question though. Is it still worth having a look after all these add-ons or I should still wait for the/an expansion? I know its not Civ V but comparing it to civ V, how’s the depth? I kind of didnt give the game a chance because it wasnt as deep as distant worlds

    • Chris says:

      I think Civilization 5 and Endless Space have the same kind of depth, it has some deep systems but it’s not that hard to manage or understand.

      Also I think there is no game that has the depth of Distant Worlds besides of Aurora.

      I liked ES for it’s smooth and fluid gameplay, everything works nicely and is displayed to you in an informative matter.

      • Towerbooks3192 says:

        Still thinking twice about checking it after the add-ons. I think the major thing that bothers me with ES was the combat system. I know its not the usual combat system to 4x games but I am not sure if I will be playing rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock the whole time I will be conquering the galaxy since I think its combat system is basically choosing the right move for the phase like rock paper scissors and I usually play on Civ and other 4x games on conquest victory condition

  9. fafrin says:

    I have to say I’m with Chris on this,I really like ES I’ve been playing it almost constantly since it came out and the add on’s have spiced it up at just the right time for me,I suppose there will never be a game that makes everyone happy,If they brought out MOO as a new game now there would be people complaining that they don’t like something or other about it.

    • Chris says:

      The game has definitly some flaws but it’s far from being a bad 4X game, besides with the recent sales the game is even more worth your money. I got it for half price and I do not regret my purchase at all.

    • Mark says:

      Are the criticisms listed here fair though? If so it sounds like a pretty lackluster sort of game, even if it is playable.

      And what’s with the idea of playing cards to fight space battles. I’m having a hard time visualizing that working. It just sounds very jarring and forced, the kind of thing that would really break suspension of disbelief. I mean really, cards in a space battle?? Couldn’t they come up with anything better than that to simulate random factors?

      • Chris says:

        It seems like you have not played the game, the concept might not be perfect but it’s better than most 4X game, furthermore you can customize your ships which creates more depth. A card system might sound a bit confusing at first but it works well.

        The only thing I dislike about it is that there are not that many cards and that you always rely on the same cards in some cases.

        • Mark says:

          No, you’re right, I haven’t played, I’m trying to decide whether to buy it or not. When I heard that you have to play cards (of all things) in space battles, I thought it sounded very wrong. There must be more to it than that though, more to tactical battles than just playing cards? There must be formations, maneuvers, weapon groups, firing arcs, shield strengths, recharge rates…etc. Right?

          All the things you would expect from a tactical space battle. Surely the card playing isn’t the ONLY input the player has in tactical battles, because that would be…..underwhelming to say the least.

        • slyostinato says:

          @Mark…no, choosing cards is the ONLY input you have during a battle. You don’t get to decide a battle formation, you don’t get to decide which ship fires first, nothing. It’s like D&D or if you have children and have played Wizard 101 with them. You go out and ‘collect’ these battle cards during the course of playing the game, so your deck gets even bigger and bigger, so to speak, and you have more cards with different options to choose from. In ES, you ‘collect’ these cards by laboriously working your way up the research tree. Oh, and on occasion, you may get a special card during a promotion of a hero. That’s it! You can create different ships to do different things if you like to diversify like that, but again, you only get better ships and better weapons by grinding away at that research tree.

          I’m a more mature gamer (given the kid reference), so I have a higher standard now on what is worth my money and what isn’t. The bar is set much higher for me now. If you have bucks to burn and want a nice ‘novelty’ thrill, then you will say that this game is nifty. If you want something deeper, that compels you to play it over and over again, then not. I don’t believe it has the depth of the most recent Civ games (give IV or V). It is NOT a Distant Worlds. It is a much lighter game when compared to DW or the classic MoO2.

          My suggestion – before you plunk down your money on this, go to one of those…ahem…”demo” sites and take it for a test drive. If you like it, then go buy it.

          For me, this game is heavy on glitz and light on substance. Even with its dated graphics and interface, I STILL find MoO2 way more enthralling than ES. What do I like about this game? The ships are pretty to look at, and you will ONLY get to see them during battles. The background music is nice. But, ohhh, those damn cards. You are on a ‘card’ timer during the battle. If you don’t pick a card in time, you don’t get to play a card. The problem here is this: there is so much information on the battle cards that can affect things that you either 1) memorize EVERY card so you are not stumbling around to know what you want to play 2) print out the card screen and have it setting in front of you while you play this game (and every time you collect a new card, you will have to print out yet another screen) 3) try to be a speed reader and read the cards before the timer runs out and hope you picked the one that was most advantageous to you. Oh, you can’t watch the pretty ships fight if you want to have enough time to study and choose your cards. The card selection screen covers up the entire battlefield. So, you either watch pretty ships fight or you have to ignore the battle show and just study the battle cards screen OR you can watch a little of the show and then try to be a speed reading demon to pick something at the very last minute before your timer runs out. Yeah…for a TBS game, the battle part of this game is hosed up!

        • Adam Solo says:

          Maybe you can now completely skip the card system with the new feature “Battle Actions in Auto (auto battle cards)”. Didn’t tried it yet though.

        • Mark says:

          @ slyostinato

          Thanks for clearing that up. Looks like this is not the sort of game for me. I like deep strategic and tactical choices in my 4x games that immerse me in the world, not simplistic card games posing as a weak substitute for tactical thinking. What the hell were the devs thinking??, this is supposed to be a 4x game.

          @ Adam

          lol so even the crappy card game can be put on auto, which leaves the player to do what exactly? Sit back and watch the battle with absolutely zero input? Who thought that would be fun? I hope some of the many upcoming 4x titles don’t drop the ball on space combat the way this one seems to have. Some of us like to have more to do in space combat than put our feet up and watch the pretty, flashing lights.

        • Adam Solo says:

          You realize that probably the best 4X games of all time (Civilization games up to 4) don’t offer more than putting units against each other and watch the “flashing lights”. Who thought that could be fun?

          Of course, space 4X can be a bit different, since people are getting used to flashy tactical combat. But that was not how these games have started.

          For many people, what’s important is the game’s strategic part. These are strategy games after all. Tactical aspects have been mostly introduced by MoO with a great reception, but you could still offer a great 4X experience with no detailed tactical combat if the player believes that the auto-resolve is competent enough.

          For god sake, Galactic Civilizations 2: Ultimate Edition is probably one of the best space 4X experiences of all time and the only thing it offers is cinematic battles with zero input by the player except when designing ships in the first place, that ES also offers.

          I’m not defending ES with this comment, I’m just saying that tactical combat is not on the genesis of 4X games. It’s cool when you have it, but really not essential.

        • Mark says:

          Yes, that’s a good point, but I do love my tactical combat in 4x games and when it isn’t there, or is crippled or simplistic, it just doesn’t seem to measure up. I guess I have been spoiled by MOO II.

          So how does the strategic game play in ES measure up? If its good enough I would certainly consider getting it, even though the tactical combat is clearly…….bad. After all I agree with you that a good strategic game can be worthwhile by itself, but unfortunately I’m greedy and would like to have both :)

        • Adam Solo says:

          Yes, of course. It’s totally understandable that you like your tactical combat, and you want to experience that side. It’s your preference, your style. I have nothing against that. Yes, MoO2 really spoiled most of us. Even sub-optimal, the combat really brought additional value.

          So, when made right it’s nice to have tactical combat, but it’s not essential in a 4X, that was my only point. I prefer a 4X game with no tactical combat and good strategic layer any day to a mediocre strategic 4X with good tactical combat.

          For the strategic layer of ES all I can suggest is that you read our review if you haven’t already.

        • Mark says:

          @ Adam

          “I prefer a 4X game with no tactical combat and good strategic layer any day to a mediocre strategic 4X with good tactical combat.”

          Actually I think I’m the other way around, I would gladly put up with a mediocre strategic game (although probably not a bad one) in order to experience truly awesome tactical combat. I never managed to get into Galactic Civilizations simply because the tactical combat was so blah.

          I do agree with your point though and I can see that ES might well be a worthwhile game in its own right, simply because of the strategic layer. I guess I got a little carried away when I learned that all the tactical combat consisted of was “cards”. Like you pointed out, there’s a lot more to a 4x than just the tactical side.

  10. lammaer says:

    There was a promise they will make combat more interesting in one of the 3 DLC to be shipped (eg targeting ships)…. looks like that didn’t happen.

    • Alex Ryden says:

      I think they plan on re-working the combat system with the paid expansion they will start working on in a few months, with one more free expansion before that.

  11. GJD says:

    I am firmly in the camp of the more strategic 4x spacegames such as GalCiv2 and ES. I don’t like to micromanage my ship design and tactical combat. Fortunately, the make games for everyone these days :)
    Strangely enough I do like SINS, but in that game you can also play more strategic and leave the combat up to the computer, while you focus on expanding your empire.

    RE ES: I think it is great that the devs keep coming with new free content. It seems the game is a big success (in contrast to more tactical orient games such as SOTS2).

    • Mark says:

      So what’s your opinion of ES’s strategy layer. How does it compare to say GalCiv2 (a game I have played)?

      I’m probably the opposite of you, I love detailed tactical combat and micromanagement, but if the strategic game-play is good enough, I will probably end up biting the bullet and getting it anyway.

      • GJD says:

        Well I believe that ES is indeed even more strategic than GalCiv2, because GC2 has more micromanagement at the colony level. Actually, because of this website I started playing GC2 again this week. I must say the game has aged quite well and the AI is still quite good. A big difference between the two games is that GC2 doesn’t use starlanes, but has free movement. This adds a lot of more movement options. While ES looks better, GC2 plays more fluid. I doubt whether ES’s AI is even a bit as good as GC2’s, which is renowed because of its excellent AI. Let me know what you decide.

        • Mark says:

          Ugh, I totally hate star-lanes so that’s pretty much made my decision for me. Actually all this talk of GC2 has inspired me, I don’t think I gave it enough of a chance last time. I might break it out and give it another go. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

  12. Ashbery76 says:

    The new add on’s have improved the experience a fair bit.The new events,wonders along with exploration buffs have made it more fun.The options to auto battle with cards and better diplomacy is also a good change from vanilla.

    Endless space has starlanes but you can research warp tech and it opens up.The thing I like about starlanes it is gives strategic choke points adding a space terrain element.Open systems also make it harder for the A.I as they strugglle with big picture strategy.

    • Mark says:

      Hmm, unfortunately in my case, starlanes only destroy my suspension of disbelief and immersion. I didnt know about the warp tech research though, it wouldn’t be as big an issue for me if there was a way around starlanes and you weren’t forced to use them. SOTS I and II is like that, I know that humans have to use starlanes, but I just never play them.

      • NothingToSeeHere says:

        The problem with the warp tech research is that the tech levels required to bypass starlane travel are really quite high up the Expansion tech tree and the no-starlane travel is cripplingly slow. Almost every engine tech research option on the way to bypassing the lanes makes your fleets move a lot quicker, so unless there’s a tactical necessity to bypassing the lanes, you won’t find you use it too often as just following the lines is quicker.

        Ergo, you spend most of the early-to-mid game using the lanes and only occasionally not even in the late game. So, if you find starlanes a dealbreaker, you’ll be stuck with using them a lot, even with the option of bypassing them.

        One of the things that really drags Endless Space down for me is the total lack of depth to the various races. Playing the Cravers is just like playing any of the other races, with different pictures and ships. Expansion disapproval? For Cravers?! Why? Ah yes, we are a cyborg insect race created as a living weapon that consumes everything including ourselves, but we disapprove of our territory getting larger!

        Likewise, it strikes me unlikely that a proud warrior race like the Hissho deals with dissident citizens on strike by building them bigger supermarkets.

        • Mark says:

          Yeah, your post really only confirms the conclusions that I came to myself. This is not my sort of game so I’m going to give it a miss.

Related Articles:

Post category: Game Patches, News & Announcements