Wait for the expansion pack....You bought the game knowing it didn't have a single player, and if you didn't, that's not stardock's fault.
No, I knew it didn't have a campaign
. That's different than not having single player and being a multiplayer-only game. SoaSE was not
pitched as multiplayer-only.
They pitched it that SoaSE was 4X enough and big/epic enough not to need
a campaign, because you'd carve your own history in the same way as a 4X such as Civilization or GCII. "It's so big it doesn't need a campaign to provide a good single player experience", anyone who was concerned about the lack of campaign was told. GalCivII could get away with not providing a campaign (and yet it does offer one) and still provide a satisfactory single player experience. That's what was promised with SoaSE, but it doesn't come close to delivering on it.
If they had pitched SoaSE as a "multiplayer-focused RTS with a few 4X elements and (only) skirmish-class support for single player" (which is how I see SoaSE right now), I wouldn't have been so disappointed. For what it is, it's very well done, but seeing the trajectory of the patch efforts, I've begun doubting whether even the expansion will do the trick. I'm thinking Ironclad just doesn't care much for single player support (heck, Ironclad's only now finally
fixing the empire tree pause bug, an annoying single player issue discovered the week of the inital release).