Two ideas to address late-game slowdowns
1. Limit the total number of mines that can be built by all players collectively in the game
Once this limit is reach NO MORE mines can be built and players must capture other player's mines if they want additional mines.
2. Have the cost of mines escalate on the basis of total mines built in the game by all players rather than escalate individually for each player.
Player A builds the first mine in the game—50 drillers. Player B builds the second mine in the game—100 drillers. And so on...Perhaps the increments would need to be lessened but the idea is to make late-game mine building very expensive.

The intent is to avoid the late-game rush to build mines at the expense of military engagements that I am seeing in all my games.

I like both of these ideas, and agree that I've seen mostly just building mines at the end of the game in the games I've been in.

These limited number of mines might also might be an incentive to build mines early. The games I've been in where a couple mines were built in the first couple days were more exciting. People suddenly had a target instead of just feeling out their borders.

I also thought rewarding rating points based on how many players are left at the end of the game might help people play aggressively (fewer players left, more points; lots of players survive, it's closer to a tie).

rkduke wrote:1. Limit the total number of mines that can be built by all players collectively in the game
Once this limit is reach NO MORE mines can be built and players must capture other player's mines if they want additional mines.

I don't think there should be a hard limit. Escalating prices (either the current method or your next point) do create a soft limit to what is actually able to be achieved without too much military compromise.

rkduke wrote:2. Have the cost of mines escalate on the basis of total mines built in the game by all players rather than escalate individually for each player.

This might be something to explore. Although it would be carnage for time machine calculations

And I'm not sure these fixes will hit the issues that I'm seeing in a lot of my games. Generally each game gets to a point where everybody remaining had been working together to eliminate others and now begins the neptunium race because they don't want to backstab each other. A player coming 2nd ends up conceding that they can't win because they don't want to backstab the current leader. If mines are not able to be built then I don't think that means people will change that mentality.

Maybe outposts could be more valuable to the neptonium race. For instance, what if for each generator you had you got 3 or 4 neptonium, but none for each factory.

Right now taking someones outpost isn't going to matter that much to my neptonium race, only how many mines I have. Taking an allies mine is a huge betrayal, if we've been working together I might prefer to just come in second. Creating more soft targets could possibly help.

Champinoman wrote:And I'm not sure these fixes will hit the issues that I'm seeing in a lot of my games. Generally each game gets to a point where everybody remaining had been working together to eliminate others and now begins the neptunium race because they don't want to backstab each other. A player coming 2nd ends up conceding that they can't win because they don't want to backstab the current leader. If mines are not able to be built then I don't think that means people will change that mentality.

Simple answer: player anonymity!