Newbie-ish player looking for advice on what to work on. (Entrenchment 1v1 Advent Replay incl.)

Wall-o-text warning

from Sins Forums

I've been lurking on the forums here for a few days and you all seem like a helpful bunch. I could use some advice on how to practice for multiplayer matches. This is a long post so bear with me. I'm the rambling sort.

 

Let me give a bit of background first: I bought sins a few years ago and never really got around to playing it seriously. I was big into FPSes at the time and the idea of me spending hours per match learning how to play an RTS game (new to the genre besides single player C&C:RA2) wasn't very appealing. So after a couple games against the AI I dropped it and went on to other pastures that got me a more expedient killing fix. Now after watching the GSL and other SC2 tourny stuff, I recalled my purchase and decided to try to learn how to play RTSes. SoaSE felt like a slow paced game and I decided it was a decent choice for my first foray into army building goodness.

 

Anyhow, I've put about 25 hours into the game and I feel like I'm stuck at the middle-ground where I can murder the AI 1v1 on pretty much any setting and starting position but a decent human player will mop the floor with me. I have a basic grasp of how to expand and start an economy while balancing aggression and tech. This particular replay was a small-random I fought against a hard AI. I wanted to work on smoothing out my macro so I picked an opponent that wasn't really a challenge to beat. Not to mention the horrendously stacked starting positions in my favor. But really, I'm sort of at a loss on what aspect of my gameplay I should be trying to improve upon first.

 

Replay DL link: http://www.mediafire.com/?a4qw4nu8ceuuqku


It's about 100 minutes long. 8x might be preferable.

 

Significant shortcomings in my play that I am aware of:

- A couple hiccups with the initial expansion. 1.) I actually lost like 20 seconds of mining from my second metal extractor on my HW. Failure on my part.  2.) The ice world expansion would've gone so much quicker had I sent two or so more ships. 3.) A few situations where initial colony spending could have been done more efficiently.

- I should have dedicated a scout to checking out the dead asteroid. After initial mapping I knew it was going to be the chokepoint. The first attack by the AI caught me off guard. In fact, more active scouting in general should be a priority for me. I wasn't aware it was an aggressive AI until the first encounter.

- I teched to carriers after Illums but I never had the capacity to make them in reasonable numbers. I should have gotten defense vessels instead and added a few of them into my fleet comp once I started to go heavy illum. I had limited strikecraft defense. (see mid-game engagements) Speaking of tech, I should have incorporated 3-4 guardians a lot faster after reaching them.

- I tend to build in "waves" when my attention is elsewhere. This occurs when I want to milk the lower upkeep for a while, but much of it is also my macro being sub-par. My Goal was aggression after I stabilized and I should have been building up fleet at a more consistent pace.

- When I have a lot of resources to burn and I don't want to increase upkeep, I tend to research a lot to get rid of it. Should be smoother and more consistent too. Also I shouldn't have teched to stuff like HC just for the sake of lowering resources.

- My fleet micro is terrible to non-existent. Besides grouped fleet movement and cap/cruiser abilities, I really have no idea how I should be moving my fleet in engagements. I also lose LFs while expanding because I don't really care. (though I should be caring) At this point I'm just trying to crush the enemy with superior firepower.

- I overbuilt defenses on the desert planet and the dead asteroid choke point. Phase Jump Inhibitor + 2 Repair is probably all I ever needed.

 

Finally, a couple questions:

Was my opening okay? Besides smarter fleet control and more potent aggression, what other possibilities should I have taken into account if the enemy was a human player?

Would it have been worth it to invest even more in logistic slots/trade? I am under the impression that it wouldn't have paid off in time for it to be worthwhile. (Sometime in the middle of my rampage through the remnants of the AI empire)

Was my fleet composition okay for this match? Was it right to later on build more LF to hunt down the AI's carriers? Or should I have gone for more illums?

How should I be microing the illums to get the most bang for my buck?

Any other suggestions on how to practice to prepare for human players? Should I just dive in and get stomped a few times until I learn the ropes?

 


I appreciate any advice or constructive criticism.

 

 

strategy
10,375 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top

One question, is this the latest version of Entrenchment?

Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

One should assume such, considering that he posted it today...

DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

Well, my game says Entrenchment 1.051. Unless Impulse is lying to me, I would assume that it is the latest release version.

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

A critique of your replay:

Your first problem was in strategic choice of planet colonization.  While your choices were acceptable from an economic standpoint (a tad too much backtracking), they left you militarily exposed.  By 7:30, you'd scouted enough of the map to know that the desert planet Hercynia is a choke point between you and the enemy.  You should have bee-lined for it with your Progenitor, or at very least the dead asteroid Tercinida.  Simply capturing and holding Hercynia would likely been enough to win easily, cutting off the AI from attacking.  The planet wouldn't be colonized by the AI for another 20 minutes; you had the opportunity.

Ignoring the dead asteroid Tercinida was a massive blunder.  The AI was slamming you with units all over the place, and you could have plugged its advance with one colonization job, but didn't.  Instead, you sent your Progenitor running in circles and let the AI capture this critical choke point planet, giving it free reign to attack you while leaving you defending multiple planets.

Later, you had problems with using "hold ground" behavior.  This is very important at times, but in this situation it held you back.  Your illuminators weren't able to use their side beams because they were too far away, and you missed the opportunity to chase down retreating enemies (who would be stumped for several seconds by phase jump inhibitors) by standing still.

You became much too tech-heavy.  They were good tech choices, but you should have built up your fleet a bit more before pursuing them.  Your capital ships were fine (can't go wrong with Halcyon and Progenitor) and you stomped the AI pretty well once you get some momentum. 

Your micro/macro isn't terrible.  You've got a ways to go, but you've certainly made some strides.

Was my opening okay? Besides smarter fleet control and more potent aggression, what other possibilities should I have taken into account if the enemy was a human player?

If the enemy was a human player, you'd have needed to scout a lot more voraciously and definitely bee-line towards the enemy.  You can be rest assured, victory and defeat on this map hinged on controlling Tercinida (bonus points if you could manage Hercynia, but a competent human player wouldn't let you do that).

Honestly, though, your start location on this map was jaw-droppingly good.  You had four asteroids just sprawled out in front of you, lots of planets in the back for later expansion, and nothing that would require civic investment initially.  You could have easily gone for a pure-military rush and kicked the snot out of your enemy with a start location like this.

Would it have been worth it to invest even more in logistic slots/trade?

You were in a position where you could have played the long-term if you'd wanted to.  Really, once you held Tercinida it was over anyways, and it was up to you as to how you wanted to finish it.

Was my fleet composition okay for this match? Was it right to later on build more LF to hunt down the AI's carriers? Or should I have gone for more illums?

Your fleet composition was alright.  The AI's carriers were mixed in heavily with assailants, so you'd probably have been better off with more illuminators than disciples in this case.  Disciples are great when the carriers are being flighty and you need to chase them down, but the AI tends to stand and fight, so you don't need to worry so much about that.

How should I be microing the illums to get the most bang for my buck?

Get them right in the enemy's face, guns blazing.

Any other suggestions on how to practice to prepare for human players? Should I just dive in and get stomped a few times until I learn the ropes?

You're probably at the point at which there's not much more you can learn from the AI.  You can always practice more, but otherwise you're ready to jump into multiplayer.

Keep in mind that most people play with quick-start on in multiplayer (you start with a capital shipyard, all three extractors, and two scouts already built) and you'll have an easier time finding games in Diplomacy than Entrenchment.

+1 Loading…
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

It never hurts to ask, Syneptus.

Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Darvin3, reply 4
A critique of your replay:

Your first problem was in strategic choice of planet colonization.  While your choices were acceptable from an economic standpoint (a tad too much backtracking), they left you militarily exposed.  By 7:30, you'd scouted enough of the map to know that the desert planet Hercynia is a choke point between you and the enemy.  You should have bee-lined for it with your Progenitor, or at very least the dead asteroid Tercinida.  Simply capturing and holding Hercynia would likely been enough to win easily, cutting off the AI from attacking.  The planet wouldn't be colonized by the AI for another 20 minutes; you had the opportunity.

Ignoring the dead asteroid Tercinida was a massive blunder.  The AI was slamming you with units all over the place, and you could have plugged its advance with one colonization job, but didn't.  Instead, you sent your Progenitor running in circles and let the AI capture this critical choke point planet, giving it free reign to attack you while leaving you defending multiple planets.

[/quote]

I see. Holding the desert world would not only serve as a choke point to funnel attacks, but also would prevent the enemy from expanding further. And then I could safely take other planets with a secondary fleet as my budget allowed. I didn't even think to take the desert world. I was content using the dead asteroid as the initial choke point, but I blundered there too.

Later, you had problems with using "hold ground" behavior.  This is very important at times, but in this situation it held you back.  Your illuminators weren't able to use their side beams because they were too far away, and you missed the opportunity to chase down retreating enemies (who would be stumped for several seconds by phase jump inhibitors) by standing still.

Yeah. I was busy playing sim city while that one battle was going on. I'll use it more sparingly. It's just annoying when I need to keep moving ships back into position because they decided to go do something stupid.

 

You became much too tech-heavy.  They were good tech choices, but you should have built up your fleet a bit more before pursuing them.  Your capital ships were fine (can't go wrong with Halcyon and Progenitor) and you stomped the AI pretty well once you get some momentum. 

Your micro/macro isn't terrible.  You've got a ways to go, but you've certainly made some strides.

I do have trouble deciding how to spend resources. I just feel that raising my upkeep often will end up butchering my economy unless I also keep up trade, which is another sink. Research is less cost effective but more convenient, I guess. I still like the ship/shield techs though. Even though I know teching HC was a complete waste of my time and I probably should've stopped researching earlier.

 


Your fleet composition was alright.  The AI's carriers were mixed in heavily with assailants, so you'd probably have been better off with more illuminators than disciples in this case.  Disciples are great when the carriers are being flighty and you need to chase them down, but the AI tends to stand and fight, so you don't need to worry so much about that.

Yeah, I noticed that the AI was building a ton of assailants. My disciples melted in most of those engagements. At least they served as cheap fodder and damage though. But if even more illum spam is the way to go against them, so be it.


You're probably at the point at which there's not much more you can learn from the AI.  You can always practice more, but otherwise you're ready to jump into multiplayer.

Keep in mind that most people play with quick-start on in multiplayer (you start with a capital shipyard, all three extractors, and two scouts already built) and you'll have an easier time finding games in Diplomacy than Entrenchment.


I'll play a few more rounds against the AI to get a bit better. And yeah, I'll get diplomacy when I'm ready for people.


Thank you for all of the advice.

Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top

I didn't even think to take the desert world. I was content using the dead asteroid as the initial choke point, but I blundered there too.

Yeah, sometimes you need to get in your enemy's face early.  This is obviously a lot more dangerous against human opponents, who can scout you coming and try to intercept you, but against the AI it's often risk-free and shuts them down early. 

Yeah. I was busy playing sim city while that one battle was going on. I'll use it more sparingly. It's just annoying when I need to keep moving ships back into position because they decided to go do something stupid.

Try "local area" targeting some times.  It's a nice hybrid between the two.  Your units won't run to chase some scout that warped in on the far side of the gravity well, but they won't sit still acting stupid, either. 

As for playing sim city, try to "interleave" your actions.  Instead of doing all your management at once, do a little bit and then check in on the fight, then do a little bit more and check in on the fight.  Often times it's easier to use hotkeys to zoom in and out rather than the mouse wheel when doing this.

Research is less cost effective but more convenient, I guess

Very true, and it's a great place to put your money... if you're winning.  If you're neck and neck, you need to be investing in the best returns possible, and that means a larger fleet.  Your fleet was pretty small, so you could have definitely afforded another upkeep level and would have felt a tremendous increase in power from this.  That will weaken your economy, but that's the reality of the game and if you play it right an opponent who doesn't fleet up with you will die.

You don't necessarily need to spam trade to afford upkeep.  Another alternative is keeping your casualties down so you don't need to replace units as often.  If you can significantly outmuscle the enemy, this actually isn't too hard to do.  Putting up trade ports and playing the long-term is another alternative, but don't expect to go on the offensive if you choose this route.

But if even more illum spam is the way to go against them, so be it.

Destras and Defense Vessels would also have worked nicely.  Disciples have their place, but they excel more for their speed and resistance to strike craft and will generally lose to long range frigates and heavy cruisers, which are the more popular "bread and butter" unit.

That said, the Advent Disciple is definitely the strongest light frigate class unit in the game, and a swarm of them can be quite dangerous since the only frigate that can outrun them is the scout.