you don't have to alienate them...as I said earlier, if that is what you want...then play a small map with resources turned up to fast.  Or even a medium map.  Now I do agree that there are things that need to be tweaked within the expansion itself...just don't agree with the OP's general rant about the game taking too long.  That is one of the main aspects of this game.  And you can play longer games online, you just need to put out more effort to coordinate with a group that will actually get back on and play the same saved game again and again until it is over.

Some peeps just want a glorified hurry up and click as fast as you can to pad your records and stats and not enjoy the true meaning of the game.  I am in three seperate groups right now playing varying versions of the game and have had a blast in all 3.  And they have all 3 been long games.

EXACTLY!!!

Taking it even further, i would like to see homeworlds start with defense structures free.  That would prevent some rushing (i think).

 Before sins came out, i always wanted a game where empire building actually felt rewarding. You know, not just constantly bombard your enemies with the "max units", but to use real world strategy that most people forget goes into real wars. Once i tried my first 5 sstar map against multiple unfair AI, i was hooked, NOT when i finishede quickstrike on easy with 10 cobalts. So, there's something to be said about a sense of accomplishment. Also, what feels better, seeing your 16 cap ships destroy the enemy capital planet while your hundreds of other frigates finish off the structures as a nova bomb closes in, or seeing your lonely bomber frigate bomb the planet with 10 lrfs watching? I think you all know the answer, or at least i hope you do.

pce, fingerz

"bluer skies await"

it seems to me that those who are in favor of faster games are missing the point... any type of ultimate game ender, must do this to win, rushing, spamming, etc. destroys the purpose of the game. the point is to explore different strategic depths, and have multiple ways of playing viable. i think what Ironclad was trying to do with Entrenchment was good; namely, end these spam tactics, especially LRFs. the mines, i think are especially good for this, although a limit is needed. obviously the balance still needs work, but a balance can be struck between all the units and other aspects of the game. the next expansion will be on diplomacy, i believe, and hopefully it will revamp the diplomacy system so that it becomes a viable way to play the game. for those of you who don't like diplomacy, fine, dont use it. but the point of an RT4X, as this game was billed, is to build a true empire, not just spam specific units if you want to win.

The mines are great imho, they are like walls in Age of Empires...

I just bought it today, and having awesome fun.

Perhaps the dev team can have options for which tech is enabled or not, or an option to turn off Entrenchment ?

Personally I rather have an option to choose the techs (like SupCom did).

i dont have the entrenchment beta, but i thought that ironclad said that you could shut off entrenchment for multiplayer if you wanted

that was it