I suspect that many of the people who bought the game are simply just...wussies.

Sadly, Sins has some online multiplayer issues that may have driven some people away such as the minidumps problem and most importantly, the inability for people to host games unless they have configured their router properly.  (It's sad to see 12 people idling in the Lobby waiting for someone who can host to put up a game.)  Of course, the 1.1 patch will fix the hosting problem, but who knows if that will result in increased player counts (either from retaining new players and/or by getting people who played it online before to start playing it again).

I suspect this is a far more crucial component of the issue than people simply being 'wussies'.  There's no shortage of games worth playing online at any given time and if it's a tossup between a game that works with no added effort and a game that apparently requires a 10-page networking how-to to get going, effortless play wins.

If 1.1 makes setting up a game with my friends into a hassle-free experience, I for one would be happy to give it a try.

Fractured community. Its a sad but it happens often. Currently two versions are coursing the net. The unbalanced 1.0 and the beta 1.095 further dividing the playerbase. Adding to this is that the patches are only distributed wich some people still refuse to use. Before figuring out how to get the beta trough impulse (by enabling "prerelease versions" in some obscure menue for it actually showing up) you should take note that in 1.0 usually there are always a few games goin, the Beta is pretty empty. A lot of people have upgraded to beta, testing gameplay, writing reports (see beta feedback) and basically we just wait for it being finished, not participating in multiplayer 1.0. And actually this is not your standart RTS with a 30 min to 1 hr scope, it varies greatly with mapsize. I would not recomend playing anything larger than "small" with people you do not know personally or are friends with (see  "Quitters" in the multiplayer forum). The best way to deal with that is to organize yourself in one of the various clans recruiting in the apropriate forums.

I would not mind playing online if I know the games did not take so long. If I had the time, however, I think it would be an amazing game to play online.

Well... for me the longest time I was running a half gig of RAM... caused lag on larger maps (especially with fast settings) so getting booted wasn't high on my priority list.  I have a full gig now, so I'll probably try coming on again so long as the ADD types who only play on fast settings aren't still running the show.  Clcikfest = Boring.  There's something to be said for not having all the techs done at end game.

ABSOLUTELY.  I keep checking the site/forums hoping for a more stable of this game to be available, but between the patches and persistent erros, it really is more trouble than it's worth to play online.  Personally, I find this all quite ironic considering that there is a "Gamers Bill Of Rights" posted on this site, and SoaSE is guilty of requiring patches, not being released in a complete form, etc.  Heheh.

I think that you hit the nail on the head there Brenil.  Not long back I was part of EVE online which I had been playing for about 4 months and enjoying it, after a while I joined a player corp and it all started to go downhill big time.  I started to get pressured in to doing this, that and you must kill them - then I started to get called stupid for some of my decisions and after a while I thought 'is this all I have to look forward too when I play?' so I quit and never went back.

My point is that there is never any sort of respect online unless your amazing - I will try Sins online once I played hard alot, but the end result is that a human is not going to play like the AI and the odds are I will get beaten easily.  What happens after that point is the important bit, if I get the usual crap of 'you suck you noob' then frankly I cant be botherd to continue to play.  I dont have to win to play a game, but I do have to have a little respect to continue to play online.

Sadly, we have to put up with occassional jerks in order to enjoy the joys of online multiplayer--such as having challenging opponents that don't play like mindless AI algorithms.  It's like that in the FPS game that I play, too.  I don't think the jerk factor in Sins is real high you're bound to run into a couple jerks here and there (as you are with all online multiplayer games).

I certainly agree, if you wish to value a victory, you must know defeat.  That is fine.  I think the problem comes from when the actual premise of a game is purely to win or lose, then it becomes more important than actually having fun.  I know most RTS games I've played online in the past were never very 'fun' in of themselves so much as they were about winning online.  I catch that more in RTS more than any other genre.  That is not to say I haven't played RTS online that were fun and not about winning, several mods (DoTA being a prime example) for Starcraft and Warcraft were all about fun and not so much about winning.  Also, one of my favorite games of all-time was a quasi-RTS, Myth: The Fallen Lords, and I enjoyed that game online more than any other in the many years since, win or lose.

Sins on the other hand has a similar problem to most RTS, online it's all about the victory pursuit and being skillful, not just enjoying the game itself, whether you're godlike skillful or a lonely newbie.

It certainly makes sense that some strategies and tactics should be better than others, that goes without saying.  However, when said strategies and tactics begate real strategy and tactics (or indeed, even common sense), then you travel down a road many of us don't wish to tread, which is that of a strategy game that knows very little about strategy or logical force composition.

I would much rather field a balanced and 'realistic' fleet in Sins than using the pros have learned and do away with the logical (and fun premise of this setting) formation of battlefleets and naval tactics.

1)  Seeing 40-50 or more LRMs massing up and attacking a settlement without a capital ship or much support and having said force completely annihilate a balanced fleet with capital ships is obsurd, period.  It smacks of typical RTS mentality where you use the best and most questionably balanced unit to the maximium foresaking the setting you're playing in.  Need a good example?  Try this:

In the RTS game Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War, Winter Assault, a new faction was introduced, the Imperial Guard.  Anyone who knows the setting know that the Imperial Guard is a force of all 'normal' humans in a crazy galaxy of supermen, aliens, witches, daemons, and other assorted farout killing machines.  In this expansion, a few imbalances and bugs brought about a curious online 'strategy' of Imperial Guard players, where they would mass up and bayonete buildings to death.  And this worked.  Know what?  Everyone started rushing with Imperial Guardsmen and bayoneting buildings to dust.

I suppose that's an example of a practical strategy.  Maybe, but to me its friggin' retarded, in the same league that some 'fleet compositions' in Sins online is.

2)  Capital Ships should indeed be feared opponents to deal with seriously, but the recurring theme of focusing firing on them has made them nothing more than toy support.  This is a design issue that needs to be remedyed, because rightfully a capital ship shouldn't be manned by 5-10k personnel and massive weaponary, only to be skulking in the shadows of a line of frigates.

3)  I know full well what Sins is about and I actually do (and have) enjoyed playing it online.  When people use their brains instead of their instincts to win (at any stupid cost) and merely wish to play a space opera out with other people, its really, really, really, enjoyable.  Yet when someone wants to win at any cost, that's when this game takes a nose dive online and unfortunately, most RTS are the exact same way.  All of them have annoying 'strategies and tactics' and most of the time you'll find many people willing to forgo any attachment to the setting or logical force composition just to add another virtual notch to their egos.

In short, the problem with Sins online is that its more about winning and losing than actually having fun.  That's why many people chose to have their fun offline.  Sins needs more focus online than simply win totals and number of games played.  Just reading these forums, its like any other RTS forum, where people compare wins to loses in a number of games played and state that as their experience and reasons for butchering the setting they're playing in.

This game is no RTS.

If you rather go and play COH thats fine. Better than deciding in game to leave because its to demanding and spoil an entire game session.

This game is not aimed at the quick pace of RTS gaming. Rather its comparable to CIV or Alpha Centauri or Age of Wonders or a Master of Orion. Its a totally other sort of game than your traditional RTS. Its for players wich can play a match for a few days with breaks, maybe an hour or two a day, and thats not exactly aimed for mainstream RTS audience.

And to be honest for us strategy gamers its godsent. Because, belive it or not, in comparision to traditional turnbased strategy games its speeding up the gameplay to new heights and is very welcome change because of paralell gameplay (and not turn switching).

It can be a quick RTS as well in small maps, but as you mentioned some things work different in small maps. Because this game is more than just a RTS. If you abuse it to be one do not complain about missing a few things.

Whilst COH is a very good tactical (in combat) battlefield representation it misses the strategic element wich is present in Sins (overall strategy). This is because Sins is a hybrid of RTS and strategy genere. Your problem is simply you want it to be a RTS wich it isn't. Its not Homeworld.

And personally i do not think Sins has a problem with tactical depth. It uses the same elements wich a COH also uses: differnt units, special abilities, defensive buildings, etc. Pretty much the same mechanics in combat. Maybe a bit more automated - wich you can turn off. But that is neccesary because of its scope. Plus it has three factions instead of COHs two (well with the expansion it are kinda four for COH). It also has a vastly deeper techtree and choosing a route does not keep you from taking another route wich is different in COH. Selected choice IS selected choice and can't be changed.

This is of course only my personal opinion and i force nobody to agree.

I also enjoy RTS, particular COH, but the two games are simply of a different kind. The one you can fire up for a quick online skirmish and the other is the choice for batteling special friends wich are a bit deeper into strategy games than most people. Its not the same kind of game, and its not the same kind of audience.

Somebody said its a realtime representation of a turn based strategy game. Thats a very apropriate description i think. Its a hybrid, and a really good one. Like Dwarfen Fortress (wich is singleplayer only and ASCII).

So good that it confuses the hell out of RTS players.

Micromanagement won't win you battles, APM won't will you battles, fleet positioning won't win you battles, buildques won't win you battles. What will win you battles is how you manage your empire economy, technology and production and how and where you engage into battle. I disagree here.

And as far as i know a balanced fleet defeats a homogenous, if say pure Assilants meet a fleet of Halycons, Guardians and Illlums i know on what i would bet. So i am not with you on this one either.

Its not for mainstream audience and we might not be as numerous as the RTS players but we are very peristent. A main reason is that there is seldomly really progress in the genere and usually we stick to games for decades because we have to. And, seriously, this IS a great leap ahead. This replaces finally MOO2 for me, to give you an idea.

So even if you do not share my opinion you might understand my point of view now.

I recommend waiting DOW2 in your case.

One of the big myths about this game is that it takes forever to play.  Most games are decided in under an hour-and-a-half and anything other than a multistar is decided within two-and-a-half hours and usually less than two hours.