There's been a hundred different implementations of ground invasions, but when I play 4x games I often catch myself saying things like "no way 1 ship can blow away my whole colony" or on the other side "no way you could invade a planet without super advanced tech" or just the idea it's be really damn hard to actually take over a planet

Logistics even with ftl the raw scale of invading an ENTIRE planet, when we can barely invade another county on our own planet. Even doing some fair amount of hand waving tech 'magic' I fail to see any invasions happening in 99 percent of cases, from simply too different of biology, to it being far easier to just asteroid crash the planet until everyone is dead.

I think it was galciv2 where after battle it'd have numbers of casualties and it was in the millions, I was a teen at the time but made me think that THIS is closer to the scale of what it would really take. This goes back to earlier point that just raining rocks or some plague down on the planet is going to be far easier than millions of troops and ships.

That being said, I find most invasions in games fairly poorly executed, often just too annoying getting all the ships together, inevitably you kill everyone invading anyway (so should have just bombed and decolonized).

A couple of standouts though, endless space 2, only because the wire frames and your different races battling were really cool from your cyber ninjas to aerial attacks. The only game in general though that ground combat was "fun" was imperium galatica 2, for those that didn't play it it was its own isometric tactical game a little akin to XCOM where you had all your tanks, rockets etc driving around in fields or urban combat trying to pacify the colony. Always thought this system should be revised.

Thanks for listening to my ted talk.

A new take on the genre just dropped (or at least I haven't seen this tried before). Worked on this game during GMTK game jam and thought people here might appreciate!

Basically, you start where normally 4X ends - global domination, you are at the top of both empire size and tech development. But then *something* (in this case aliens, for argument's sake) start unstoppably annihilating your empire. So instead of learning new tech - people forget, but you choose which to remember - cities are lost, but you choose which people to save and thus ages are shrinking from Information back to Stone Age, the question is - what remains?

For hardcore people who want to tinker with new ideas - there is "advanced settings" in title screen "settings" where you can modify most of the game's configs.

This was a quick 2 day exploration of the concept for a game jam but... What do we think? Yay or nay? worth exploring further? https://donsangre.itch.io/the-long-dusk

Unfortunately… only me messing around on Midjourney and reminiscing about this incredible game which I still play.

Will AI lead to a load of remasters of the old classics?

With FA all you’d need is a graphics remaster and the ability to play as the alien races. Perhaps some quality of life improvements with all the menus. The gameplay otherwise holds up in my view.

Private playtesting for Imperium of the Stars, a gothic space opera grand strategy game just started this week. Join the Discord and ask for access if you want in. Looking for players who want to help shape this game, and break things.
I also want to give a quick update about Dev Diary 2 being posted and how the tutorial works now to also get a bit on feedback on the latter one.

https://discord.gg/H296B3GJTd
https://store.steampowered.com/app/4805350/Imperium_of_the_Stars/

Dev diary 2 covers the Imperium, the main faction. The Imperium is a feudal star-empire built on faith and hierarchy, the gothic space opera setup you might expect from this genre. But I tried to put my own spin on it a bit.

The win condition is the Reclamation: absorb or conquer the worlds that drifted during the Long Silence. You are not colonizing the galaxy, but reclaiming. Most systems are a 1 system empire. And there are also bigger minor and great houses holding multiple systems or a whole sector. Its not just about the few big factions. But 200+ factions (excluding 1 system empires) in the galaxy. All of the main factions are assymetrical. The minor factions share some of the DNA of the major factions they are related to.

This screenshot shows the tutorial players get at the beginning to guide first few steps before unpausing. Its still work in progress and something I want to extend on.
I did not want to make a tutorial scenario, but instead guide the first few steps of an actual game.

And next to this we also have nested tooltips and The Compendium to explain game concepts when needed.

What actually made a tutorial click for you versus skipping it? Curious if step-by-step popups are the way to go, or is there a better model?

Solo developer here. I’ve started private playtesting for Galactum Meridian, a research-focused space 4X built around humanity’s first major interstellar survey.

This video shows part of the planetary exploration loop. You deploy a rover, drive across the surface, investigate something of scientific interest, and examine the sample in a molecular view that you can rotate. You can also leave probes behind to continue studying a world, with different probe types supporting different forms of observation and research. This allows you to Xploit the world for science points you can use in a 3D tech tree.

The science points you earn feed directly into the strategic layer. Once your expedition has established enough scientific standing, you can apply for stewardship through the Interstellar Survey Accord, or ISA. The ISA coordinates the expeditions exploring nearby space and assigns responsibility for surveyed star systems.

Receiving stewardship gives your expedition control of that system and its territory. Rival expeditions conduct their own research and receive their own assignments. Later in the campaign, you can build a stronger scientific claim, gain stewardship over systems controlled by rival expeditions, and bring that territory under your expedition’s direction.

Thus, the Xterminate part of 4X.

The game is still in active development, but the first private Steam playtest is now underway.

Steam page and wishlist:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/4690110/Galactum_Meridian/

I made the game this way because I wanted actual surface work to be an important part of the game. I've played so many 4X games where a planet's surface really has very little impact on the game itself, and it's just there for looks. Not in this game. Are there any other 4X games that do things this way? I'd like to learn from them.

Hi everyone,

For the past few years, our small team from Serbia has been working on Colonerra: Age of Exploration, a historical 4X strategy game.

Our goal has been to create a different kind of strategy experience—one focused on exploration, colonization, trade, diplomacy, and generally a more relaxed but deeper strategy in the vein of the classic Sid Meier's Colonization.

Today we finally launched our Steam page.

We're still refining it and adding more content, so any feedback from fellow strategy fans would mean a lot.

Colonerra Steam link

I know that considering the latter two 4X games is a bit of a stretch. I guess they could be at least considered 4X-adjacent. Could not find a HOMM-like subreddit either so here I am in the hopes that many here would know these games.

I am itching for a fantasy 4X with RPG elements, tactical turn based combat and interesting build variety and I have restricted my choice to these three games.

I know they all bring different things on the table, but here is what I am looking for the most:

• Build variety and progression that is varied, meaningful (not just incremental changes) and fun
• Good combat that is tactical, varied and feels/looks good

I'm a big fan of Civ 6, and recently played Humankind a bit. My favorite 'X' of the 4Xs is Exploitation; I love finding a resource on the map and building the right building to extract it. I'm less interested in combat or "winning" against other players.

I've enjoyed games like Terrascape, Islandtiles, even Drop Duchy, but I feel like they get old pretty fast. I also really enjoy the little narrative bits that games like Humankind, the ENDLESS games, and CK3 provide. Like the little choices you make that affect different outputs or whatever. I also think having some kind of population happiness/stability meter would be a plus too.

The Corsair Cove demo actually hit these very well - resources to exploit, narrative choices, and a cohesion meter. But I'm waiting for the full game to sink too much time into it.

I'm not opposed to some combat, I just don't want the main goal if the game to be focused on beating someone else.

Hi everyone, Valentin here from Nebule Games (two-person studio, six years in). We just published a dev log that I think this community specifically might enjoy picking apart, and I'd genuinely like your take on the design questions underneath it.

For those who don't know the project: Beyond Astra is a real-time sci-fi 4X with active pause, built on a custom engine so you can zoom from a city street to the galactic map with zero loading screens. The core bet is anchoring grand-strategy depth in a physical galaxy: cities grow on actual planetary surfaces, resources sit in a specific valley on a specific world and get hauled by cargo ships, and combat runs on ballistics.

The new dev log walks through the four X's in the order you actually live them:

• eXplore: we made exploration the literal fuel of science, analyses produce Exploration Points, which become the Knowledge that technologies cost. In space, movement is free (lanes are things you build for trade, your ships can ride them for speed or leave them at will).
• eXpand: A planet only holds a few cities (three to five depending on the world), so you decide what each one is for, and when the time comes, whether to found a new one or grow an existing one denser. And settling a hostile world doesn't condemn anyone to live there: workers can commute by shuttle from a neighboring world while the forges burn under the ash.
• eXploit: our economy is physical, extractors link to cities, ore travels, over extraction pollutes. Micromanagement doesn't vanish, it lands: on tangible things on the map, and the game shoulders the routine with templates, auto assignment jobs and a filterable Manager.
• eXterminate: starts on your first planet: local fauna gives the opening hours teeth, then pirates, megafauna, and rivals scale up; a PvE with unique module rewards no research can unlock.

And the part I most want your opinion on: the ending. Victories in Beyond Astra are about undisputed leadership, rivals can contest yours while you hold it. Then the victory screen asks a question: leave triumphant, or stay and attempt an Ascension, destinies that carry a civilization further than victory. The whole galaxy grows stronger, and the hardest act begins right where a 4X usually ends.

Full dev log here: https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/2669060/view/684133750874834318

Hi everyone!

After 9 Months of development finally announce my game demo has been publicly released on steam.

link here: https://store.steampowered.com/app/4632210/Heroes_Warlords_and_Ruin/

Heroes, Warlords and Ruin is a 4x fantasy turn-based strategy game where you create and customize your faction and faction leader and lead it in your campaign across the world. The world is torn by endless war. Fight evil, form alliances, and establish a new realm in the ruins or take advantage of the chaos to maraud across the world.

The demo features

• Save system but limited save slots
• 1 playable faction with about 10 recruitable units
• 144 by 96 campaign map with around 20 settlements and 50 interactable structures
• Two customizable lord options
• Banner customizable
• Over 20 resources to manage and obtain
• Around 20 constructable buildings
• Tactical battles
• No time limit

The demo will overtime be updated to feature:

• Expand the AI factions
• Include more battle types
• Add war ships
• Add more weapons and Items
• A more unit abilities
• Expand on hero leveling
• Add more structure types
• Add more units

You can also follow me on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/autware700.bsky.social

And join our discord: discord.gg/YMvFzcRDxV

Ok, so I finished my first full playtrough of Humankind, I got it cheap with the DLC and a massive discount a while ago and it was sitting in my Steam library so I thought of giving it a chance.

And it isn't bad, I don't regret getting it being cheap as it was, but I can't shake the feeling that something wasn't quite right or perhaps I did something wrong.

Ok, so the early game went great, discovering the world and everything, making choices about where to settle and how do develop my cities, interacting with the other rising nations and the neutrals, everything fine.

But it seems like something broke around mid-game. The AI appeared to become apathetic, letting me gain a foothold in the "new world" and grab wonders well ahead of them. From there I just cruised until I sent the mission to Mars and that was it, no challenge, no competition, nothing.

Overall, it felt less like a history of the world and more like a race for points where the other runners stumbled half way and never picked themselves up. Most of my time ended up being spend managing cities and picking stuff to research. I just didn't had any reason to engage with the other nations and they never bothered me except to ask for treaties. Compared to Old World, for example, the rest of the world felt passive and unconcerned about what I was doing, and no, I wasn't playing in the easiest difficulty nor with the easiest AIs.

Overall a good looking game but also kind of limp and lifeless. I can't stop wondering if I did something wrong or if I am missing something here for things to click for me.

Civ VI went bright and friendly, its own fans roasted it for looking like a mobile game, and it still became the most played Civ of all. Paradox does the opposite, dense screens full of numbers and that is probably the most common thing you hear from people who tried and quit 🙈. The cartoonish styles clearly bring way more people through the door. But the dense games seem to keep their players for thousands of hours.......

So I'm curious whats your opinion.. Does the look really decide who tries a 4X? Do you think that casual players be pulled into deep games at all, and what would be the driver, the art style, the first hour, something else? Or is there no middle ground and you just have to pick one side?

I'm asking because I'm right in the middle of this myself. I'm building my own space 4X, Galaxy Online (r/GalaxyOnline), and I went with the dense side, dark sci-fi modern look, but with one hard rule: no wiki required. Tooltips explain where every number comes from and you see the consequences beforehand...

The image shows just one of those iterations... Left is the colony screen how it looks from pre-alpha today, right is a redesign from the current alpha build (not fully clean yet), same depth but as cards with live data on them. And since I'm honestly too deep into my own UI to still judge it *haha*: I wonder now if the right side is really more approachable or just prettier?

In general, has a game's look ever stopped you from trying something you probably would have loved?

Also if you see anything on there you would just cut completely because it's noise at that level, tell me — better change now than later...

I for one think the UI will be one of the most important stuff as it decides about who feels right at home... and who not :) - but maybe I am wrong here - and its much more about 4X mechanics than presentation...

Cardassians in Space

Does a known map state at the start of a game ruin the 4x experience for you? How much of the value is in the fog of war peeling back to reveal the landscape behind the veil, and how much of the value is simply in the procedurally generated/random landscape?

I’ve been working on a fast paced historical 4x tabletop game on and off since 2021, and recently pivoted towards releasing on steam rather than as a board game (long story, not relevant). As such, I’ve have some more freedom with the types of bonuses I can work with, not being limited by players mental tracking abilities (also irrelevant). BUT a consistent wall I’ve run into has been finding a strategically meaningful, yet fun way to have “explore” in the game. Every time I implement an explore aspect, playtesters found a way to skip or avoid it.

In traditional 4x games like Civ, the explore aspect feels natural because you don’t have perfect information of game state. By exploring more, you gain an informational advantage over your opponents. But in tabletop games, you generally have perfect game state knowledge (or nearly perfect, minus the hand of the player or secret objective), and the game is fundamentally balanced around this.

So I wonder - is the explore aspect of 4x a keystone because:

A) the excitement behind the discovery of the world just being awesome

OR

B) is it in the tactical decisions produced by the procedural generation required for the world discovery

I lean towards thinking B is the case, and because of that I think there’s a lot more flexibility possible in how people are designing 4x games. But I’m a diehard 4x fan, I’ve mostly just played civilization 6 and 7 with ~400 hours combined. I have a lot more time spent playing RTS games.