saw it.

on this topic, I should say that while I understand that a practical mp scene won't work with standard games lasting 2 hours +, part of the appeal of the game to me is exactly that it is slower. but then, with fast settings and other tweaks, we can probably have the right dose for each person.

that said, the game could need a few other victory conditions that could make it easier to claim vicory if one team starts gaining the upper hand. a % of planets owned, of culture, of galaxy wide fleet size, econmic output, a lot of things come to mind and if it is variable, then players can agree beforehand what they want. if the want a quick game, they can say, ok 4 vs 4 and once one team ownes 60% or so planets, and 60% fleet size, it wins. not a clear victory yet, but that's what you get, if you want that value. else you can make it higher, but then it might take longer.

so those conditions can help keep game length in check. but the general pacing for me is good and I would not want it changed. you cannot play a game of this scope in 30 minutes like cnc or warcraft. there is just so much more stuff to do, so many more bases, units, etc. it would just be a huge, ongoing haste to rush around and give orders non-stop.

What about the Advent's useless "super" weapon, the Deliverance Engine?  If you strengthen the Vasari by giving them a worthwhile super weapon won't that make the Advent and TEC relatively weaker?

To support what someone else said, a Timer-killer mode where the player who gets the most planets/destroys the most ships/gets the most ressources, or something similiar, in a specific amount of time wins would be great and would get rid of that pesky "I only have 2 hours, I can't begin a game of SoaSE" problem many players face.

*facepalms*

The Deliverance Engine is by far the best of the three.

Hey, as a single play player, I don't care about how long MP games are.  I hope things won't be modified just to cater to the MP players....   If posts on the boards are to believed, they are in the minority anyway....   Maybe as a compromise there could be some sort of game setup slider bar that would allow the MP players to shorten thier games.  What if you could make a MP session timed??  Give the player with the most worlds the win if no one has managed to defeat all players by the time the timer runs out??  How about some sort of element like the crystals in Gal Civ 2 Twilight.  Mark certain worlds as "special" in some way and give each player a ticker.  The more of these "special" worlds you hold the faster your ticker counts down.  The player whose ticker runs out first wins....   Surely anything woudl be better than nurfing the single play experience. 

Course, no one has mentioned any nurfs, so I'm just speaking to a fear, that I alone may hold, that could be completely unfounded.  I can be silly that way. 

Some people prefer not to play online regardless of game length. I can pause when I want, don't have to worry about cheaters...and have my own "campaign".  I can't believe people are COMPLAINING about game length! I guess they would want a 20 minute no thought involved smash up.

There are two buttons to help you if length of game is a problem- PAUSE---SAVE. It's that simple. And if online---yawn---is your thing, play a more agressive game, that has got to speed things up.

[quote who="-=XX=-Nephilim" reply="13" id="1960046"]At SP guys above...

I do understand your point of view since I play SP too - however, there are some who prefer online MP... And there is nothing wrong with that so you should just respect their point of view too...

By the way, I started this thread with quote:

"...This of course is completely irrelevant when it comes down to SP since we can save the game X amount of times and eventually bring it to the end..."

Meaning, it is concerning online MP only

Totally no need to post in here if you are exclusively into SP aspect of this game.[/quote]

I have no problem with multiplayer. I don't want Ironclad to shorten game length for the small minority that will/are playing online. I havent played online, but wouldnt super aggressiveness  shorten game length?

Well it's basically a question of balance between the increased defensive capability (mines, turret/hangar upgrades, starbases) and ways to deal with them (scouts detecting mines, starbase buster ships, whatever else they're cooking up). Sins is a bit unique in the need for this balance since while in normal RTS games you just have the one map and once you break the main defenses you're pretty much set, but in Sins you can potentially do that for every planet. So if the new options to deal with upgraded defenses/starbases still make a planet defended by these new toys take 10 minutes longer to capture, and a player can potentially have 5-10-15 of these planets it adds up quickly.

So it's a valid design issue to give thought to, we just won't know until we see how the beta plays

I guess it's a matter of preference.  I LOVE long games.  Short sessions just don't cut it for me.  I'd rather play a single save game over w eek than play a gazillion Starcraft sessions.  It's just preference. 

I LOVE this game for it's length.  Not many RTS style games give you long sessions like this one.  I can't wait to get my hands on that beta of Entrenchment.   

I think many are making presumptions that may not be true about Entrenchment.  I've looked at all the pictures and watched the video gameplay, and I'm fairly sure Starbases will be buildable from the game start.  There seems to be a Starbase cap, just like Capship cap, so if you want to spend the bucks, I think you will be able to build a base from the get-go.

BUT, I'm sure it will be the most basic of bases, and from what I read, you may have to research and/or buy the expensive upgrades.  More importantly, there is a starbase counter: Missle ships.

So the game should not slow down, since if someone seems to be playing like a mega-turtle, you just fast tech to Missle Ships and Super Weapons.  Let him turtle; put the Superweapons on autofire, tell your factories to crank out a dozen Missle ships, and go get a snack.  Come back and mop up.  I don't think it will be longer (unless you play 1v1, both mega turtles, and neither wants to tech to super weapons), just have more units, which have more counters, and the ability to be a defensive player now, not just land-grabbing and rushing.

And I agree with above, I like Sins BECAUSE it's not over in 20 minutes.  I play Civ4, online sometimes, those games can go on for weeks, so Sins is almost "speedy" to us.  But a time limit, like "Best score in 2 hours" would be very welcome here.

IMHO the Novalith is by far the best.  I've used the Deliverance Engine before and it doesn't seem to have any sort of noticeable effect on anything.

I think the Deliverance will be able to shoot even on friendly planets in Entrenchment, to bolster the Advent's already impressive defenses.