Yeah it would...

However, I have just started new thread with some game mode ideas so hope there and tell me what you think

https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/331672

Moders input would be specially valued!

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.

  lil geeks cant agree on how to play with their spaceships - your so cute! Oh yes you are!

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?

If you're so much better than the other people on this forum then what are you doing reading it and posting in it?  For that matter, if you don't play the game in online multiplayer and prefer cowardly single player then what are you doing hurling insults?

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.

Agree 100%

Point here is that game does NOT need to be changed at all only expanded with couple of extra game modes and options - simple as that...

IC / SD - please consider this as seriously as you possibly can - pretty please - it would literally "open up" the game to so many more people than it currently does... 

*facepalms*

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

I barely use superweapons but i do have a Deliverance in the process of being built in my current saved game.  Can't wait.  But I think depending on the person, Entrenchment will make games longer or shorter....agressive-shorter...defensive-longer...this is obvious though...

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. 

lol wut?

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.

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.

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?

Read entire thread again

Nobody is talking about changing the game you, me and everyone else love but about expanding it with additional game options and game mode or two which would not change the game you play but would provide an extra option for guys who play online and fancy spending less than entire bloody evening just to finish single round...

Upcoming expansion sounds great to say at least and I have already pre-ordered it!

However, concerns are present if it will prolong already way too long online MP match...

Hence the suggestion not to change anything, expansion or the original game, but to create that already mentioned mode or two supported with a timer - kinda solution which would make everyone happy! SP people since you guys would get some extra game modes to play with too, as well as MP guys who would finally be having an option between Epic games (as they are now) or indeed shorter and faster game modes...

It's win - win solution!

Hope things are clearer now  

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

Lol, look at all those jocks who waste their time grabbing and holding each other, in California that would be so cute but I don't go that way!

OK got that outta the way. Just got the game, thought it wasn't anything special when I tried it on my uncle's PC after the official release long ago (he bought it 70% for looks, he likes space views) but I got that 25% off coupon deal in my email from Stardock. So, for $30 I gave it a go, and after a few hours of learning how things are done to get resources, I'm loving this game too much. It's different from MOO3 and Space Empires 4/5, and yet again different from Homeworld 1/2 and O-R-B. But, I think it combines the best of both game types to make a great hybrid game. I personally think a much larger tech tree would help keep you busy and alow more flexible games, but Entrenchment and it's other expansions sound like they will fix that problem.

One problem I have is the long game times, I'll have to dedicate a night off to just playing one game on SoaSE. within those 3 hours I could push in 5 or more Starcraft games. Accellerating resources seems to be a logical and easy way to fix this, but something is still missing when you play an accellerated game and I can't put my finger on it, it just feels like I'm not playing the game like it was designed to. Oh well, it's all fun for me. Remember, I bought this last night and played for about 8 hours, only as TEC so far, so gimmer more time

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 too enjoy the long sessions. It keeps me more involved than with, say, C&C3

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.

If i do do a MP game i make sure i have enough time...however that is rare.  I usually do single player so that if i accidently hit surrender it doesn't go on my permanent record.  Quit and Surrender are close to each other.  But i think it is fine as it is.  People just have to deal with it or don't play it if you don't like it...

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.

It gives your ships a 15% damage boost, 6% mitigation boost, and takes away the enemy culture bonus (admittedly minor for TEC, but Vasari lose their damage bonus).

Novalith is worthless. You need 2 of them to take out a single upgraded colony, and then you still need to be able to colonize it and hold it which means you need to be able to take out the enemy fleet, which Novalith does nothing against. And if you can take out their fleet, you don't need a Novalith to begin with because it's just a matter of a few minutes to take a colony.

On the other hand, the Deliverance Engine gives your fleet a big combat advantage over the enemy fleet, and once you take that out all their colonies become easy pickings. And you only need one.

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

I did not know that.  I'm glad this issue came up.  Thanks for the info.

So, you fire it into a gravity well when you're in combat or right before you jump into it?