I was working on a board game set in the Endless Legend setting. But it's weird after having played so much Humankind I just find it disappointing now. Basically the premise was you play as one of the (starting) main faction hero's leading the last survivors of a minor faction to the Vaulter capital where they had also been building the Temple of the Endless. Unfortunately the Necrophages destroyed the Temple. Fortunately for the Vaulters this resulted in allowing the Argosy re-launch to succeed because it diverted Necrophages to the Vaulter capital. 

As board games go it was fairly familiar. Your hero explores the ruined city and gets ambushed, triggers event cards, discovers other minor faction survivors, discoverers cultist (minor faction) survivors, or, mind-controlled (minor faction) survivors. It was meant to be a co-operate game with a competitive variant in the end. The combat was pretty simplified pretty much stacks of explorers / militia versus stacks of other factions or necrophages. There was non-combat conversion as well but it was a slower process and ultimately a riskier process. 

In the first 1/3rd of the game players had a freeze after every 3 rounds, then a freeze after 2 rounds, and then a freeze at the end of every round. Freezing would mean that your population could starve if you didn't have a stockpile of food or a combination of technology researches unlocked. Research was more fun than in EL because if someone researched something you could research it for less or research something that branched of their research - remember it's co-operative. Each round players would play immigration orders and different populations would go into different work camps (food/labor/teaching/militia) - effectively this was meant to represent immigration from other surviving minor faction settlements. There was additional actions you could migrate workers between player boards or in between camps with a migrate instead of immigration order.

Ultimately though I now feel very uninterested in the project. Maybe it was just to much Victor open-dev where population sacrifice was the optimum play strategy but it's weird that I still feel that  game just rewards you for more dehumanizing thinking. I liked the idea that in this board game I was designing the focus could be on saving the people in your work camps. Instead of just like attacking a minor faction camp because it's a faster way to assimilate them. But now I just expect that I'd miss something in my design and the supposedly co-op game I was making could end up being just as inhumane. I suppose the only difference would be that due to the mechanics at least the decision to let one workcamp starve over another might be something you're encouraged to plan with another person. I can't rightly say if that's worse, or, worser.

Wow, nice job! I got a pleasure reading your thread!

Thanks!  Glad you appreciate it. 

Aw nerds and skittles. I found my pile of notes. >.< I suspect that testing the game myself may have made me very concerned about it being too darned fiddly. Plus setting it up was kind of a chore.

Uhm I don't have access to any of the files or prototype stuff at the moment but I can see if uploaded it. I'd definitely pair down the systems a bit. I think, exploring was kind of tedious but ... testing it for 3 players meant I was doing the bulk of the exploring myself hehe

they're ridiculously popular and a bunch are available online as software programs you can buy or you can use tabletop simulator or tabletopia or visit Board Games Arena or a few other sites.