Suggestion- Seperate ICO game lists » Forum Post by Twilight

I agree, it would be nice to have a marker of some sort. I seem to recall something like that on Battle.net... the StarCraft Brood Wars players had a little emblem next to their name to show that said game was Brood Wars (instead of original). And many other games have the version number of the game right next to the match listing. It'd really be nice to consolidate the lists so that we could see what's up without having to open different versions of the game to do so.

As an aside... what the hell? Entrenchment is way more fun than vanilla! Did Entrenchment not sell well or something?

Successfully updated karma reason!

idk, but i am kinda getting annoyed. I think people just don't want to end up fighting SB in online multiplayer because they think they're immortal or something...

Successfully updated karma reason!

Weird, I had gotten the impression somehow that Entrenchment was where the action was. Perhaps I should switch over to Vanilla for online play, but since that screws up my keymaps....

Successfully updated karma reason!

Star Bases are nothing that a squadron of Carrier Cruisers loaded up with bombers can't solve.

In retrospect I think that Vanilla SOASE just offers a different mode of play for MP. Without the Entrenchment features you really have to rely on your fleet to both attack and defend, and doing one will leave you weak in the other, it's more 'active', yet also less complicated (incoming flame detected).

Entrenchment is a longer term and more strategic (as opposed to tactical) mode of play, that allows for opening up multiple fronts of battle and either defending or conquering them simultaneously. Vanilla is a matter of harassing and out-flanking your opponent.

Vanilla is like playing a medieval battle... skirmish, harass, lure, and charge the ranks in when the time is right.

Entrenchment is like trying to manage both the Atlantic and Pacific theatres of WW2 at the same time.

Diplomacy will be great... it will be the above description of Entrenchment while trying to placate allies and manage domestic strife, while organizing espionage on everyone, lol!

-Itharus

Successfully updated karma reason!

I hadn't thought of it like that. Still, i don't think EVERYONE who plays does that kind of game. There's got to be SOME people who play entrenchment. Probably late at night is when i should check, since those games will be longer.

As for Bombers eating through starbases like swiss cheese, we know that, but i have a sneaking suspicion that there are more people who go ICO than these forums, who haven't read about it a hundred times here. And not everyone will figure it out on their own. Those people see a starbase and say "OH CRAP, I'M GONNA LOSE MY CAPITOL SHIP!" without trying to come up with a viable solution that DOESN'T kill their fleet.

Successfully updated karma reason!

WHIPperSNAPper2008

Join Date 03/2008

+126

Quoting ,

quoting post

I'm getting tired of trying to play a game on ICO and ending up having to switch over to Vanilla. I have no problem with people without the expansion still wanting to play, but it seems like EVERYONE plays vanilla online, since in 3 days i haven't seen a single entrenchment game. (Yes, i know that's not a long time, but you'd think i'd find at least 1)

I think there should be a seperate list for the expansions, or failing that, at least a marker of some kind so we can see what version the host is using.

I agree that we should be able to see available games for both versions and, ideally, seamlessly join either one if you have Entrenchment.

I'm surprised to see that you say most of the action is for Regular Sins because I think it's the other way around--it seems to me that it's harder for people to find games in Regular Sins and easier in Entrenchment. Maybe it depends on the time of day you play. Every time I load up Regular Sins I'm disappointed by the meager offerings--comp stomps, FFAs, or games with bad settings (slow speeds). I contrast, you'll find the bigger (and in my opinion more interesting) games in Entrenchment--3v3, 4v4, and 5v5.

Successfully updated karma reason!

WHIPperSNAPper2008

Join Date 03/2008

+126

Quoting Agent of Kharma,

reply 3

Weird, I had gotten the impression somehow that Entrenchment was where the action was. Perhaps I should switch over to Vanilla for online play, but since that screws up my keymaps....

I have looked into this keymap issue and it is an eyesore. Basically, Regular Sins and Entrenchment use two different versions of the uimappings.setting file and they'll overwrite the current one with a new, default version. To get around this, set up your keybindings in Entrenchment. Save it, and close the game. Then find your Sins Application Data Settings folder and make a copy of uimappings.setting and call it uimappingsENT.setting. Then open up Regular Sins and set up your keybinds and save. Copy the uimappings.setting file again and call it uimappingsREG.setting.

It kinda sucks, but when you want to switch from one to another, you need to copy the saved settings file and then rename it to uimappings.setting. So if you want to play Entrenchment and you just played Regular Sins, you need to copy uimappingsENT.setting and change the name to uimappings.setting.

Me? I'm using my uimappings.setting file for Entrenchment so after setting the keybinds, I made it a "Read Only" file. When I load Regular Sins I have to either reset the keybinds from scratch or swap out the files. However if I reset the keybinds without swapping the files, when Entrenchment loads I'll have my keybinds back.

Hopefully they'll fix this with the next patch but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Successfully updated karma reason!

WHIPperSNAPper2008

Join Date 03/2008

+126

Quoting CallenExile,

reply 5

As for Bombers eating through starbases like swiss cheese, we know that, but i have a sneaking suspicion that there are more people who go ICO than these forums, who haven't read about it a hundred times here. And not everyone will figure it out on their own. Those people see a starbase and say "OH CRAP, I'M GONNA LOSE MY CAPITOL SHIP!" without trying to come up with a viable solution that DOESN'T kill their fleet.

Don't worry, you'll understand the value of starbases and what you need to kill them off once you have some experience with playing Entrenchment online.

A bomber swarm is a good way to kill them, but a smart player can anticipate that and set up some hanger bays of fighters to chop them down or keep some carriers around (so you're gonna need a lot of bombers and perhaps some fighters). You can also take them down with a large fleet backed up with repair vessels, however, you might not want to get too close to TEC starbases because they can blow up, taking out your entire fleet. (Just go around them or attack them with bombers or the special anti-structure long range attack ships--Orgov and Starfish.) A fully upgraded starbase with nearby support fortifications can be very hard to kill. However, they cannot travel between gravity wells so you can just go around them and because they are expensive, your opponent will have a smaller fleet.

I was very skeptical of Entrenchment before it was released, but it's won me over and I much prefer it over Regular Sins. The starbases add new strategic considerations and make the game much more interesting, IMHO.

Successfully updated karma reason!

i definitely prefer entrenchment. The starbases, if upgraded in the right direction, can even equal extra tactical and logistics as a sde effect

ie Argonev can become your shipyard and repair bay, or a trade port. Or a massive squadron depot. Vasari can become phase stabilizer. Don't know what else, though. I prefer TEC. Advent is a mystery to me as i don't generally let their SB get built, because for some reason it slows down my game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

An Orkulus can be upgraded to have a higher population cap than Asteroids (and they pay taxes). It can also double as a trade port or two. Although with as many offense/defense options as the Orkulus has, you likely won't be using those at all unless you are placing a new starbase well behind the lines just for giggles.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I put starbases everywhere i can, and the ones behind my "Locked Front" (The area i have claimed as my last line, being planets i refuse to lose) i use the ones behind that front as replacements for my frig factory/trade ports/hangar defenses/repair bays.

Successfully updated karma reason!