I'm afraid that once preset maps are being used only one or two strategies will be viable, which is horrible since this game has already little versatility.

Besides if you want to do a fair 1v1 game vs another pro player why not just play on razor's edge?

I doupt that. expecially if balancing continues after release.

And. razors edge has planets. therefor, resource rock counts, artifacts, militia, and planet bonuses may not be even.

When things fail-- play with the map 'storm front' then you will know the truth about your game-style. 

Bobby's lost something...

His mojo was stolen by this:

what's most funny about Sinperium's post is that the new 'grandmaster' wins by doing a ridiculous number of very simple tasks very very quickly.... which brings us back to starcraft.

I think both map preferences have benefits and would hope that both would be standard play. However, the broken symmetry on existing pre-made maps is apparently enough of a deal breaker for the online community. I'm always up for more options, so I would vote for more options and then let the chips fall where the may involving the online 'standard'

There are some real anaolgies there to how some "Pros" play as well.

Nantucket situation for sure!

Not seeing a high intellectual sins game is really only attributed to the quoted individual above.  Sins is all about screwing with other people and forcing their hand, that is if you have skill enough to do so.  Riddle king can baselessly declare that others are at fault when in his own writing he shows his extreme creative limitations.  He will no doubt tag along on my posts like a pimple on my ass.  Just remember that he has delegated himself to this position of his own free choice. 

Its fun dealing with lickspittle like riddle king.  Everyone should have their own forum sidekick.

My paper disproves spock

Sareth you cannot convince me sins is a high intellectual game by talking to me about creative writing. Your failed attempts to convince me with ideologies that don't mix is a show sign of your style. If you want to convince everyone that sins is a high intellectual game to justify the time you spend playing instead of studying, working or looking for work or better work then there's no need for such a silly venture. Just accept it is a game that some people learn naturally faster and find it lots of fun and those who struggle and take longer.

Just because they struggle to figure out the in and outs of this game doesn't mean its a high intellectual game. I think the limiting factor here is your brain being unable to accept the fact some people just learn games faster than others and find it easy.

I need no justification for how I spend my time, I take responsibility for everything I choose in my life, that is how I am.  I don't allow any sort of delusion to come into my life and I headhunt weakness and fear in others around me.  I keep my motives pure and my focus sharp.  I play sins because I enjoy it, and I especially enjoy playing the other intelligent players who are on ICO (this is where the "high intellectual part comes in").  Also, your creative limitation has nothing to do with your writing.  I am talking about the thought process behind the writing, and how I view that to be limited. 

I am not confusing the game's learning curve, with "high strategy".   I have no confusion about learning curves.  The discussion is actually centered upon what occurs after you have learned the game.  Are you able to take it to a higher level(and sins is a game that you can)?  This ability translates to all things in life.  It is the "barrier of mediocrity" that separates people in society.  Sins provides an easy way for those who normally wouldn't ever penetrate this barrier to learn how to overcome it.  This takes constant practice, and losing the right sort of thinking for even a short while can really set you back a long ways towards achieving your goals.  

There are many other games that resonate with people in this fashion, sins is resonates well with me because it has several advantages over many other games i've played.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, as you are one of those hard minded people that can never be convinced.  Ever wonder why I posted threads in the past the way I did? Because my goal was to determine which people in the community were just like you and do so for all the players on these forums so that new players could retain proper perspective.  I don't care If I come off as looking bad as well in the process (an inevitability of negative association).  The point is that the threads give people a map to the existing bias so they can better help the developers by avoiding all the crap.  Also, If I keep the negative focus of those few bad eggs then others with good ideas will have relative safety to voice their ideas.  This is how you maintain a breeding ground of innovation, to keep the crop strong so that the developers can harvest it.

RiddleKing - noun: 1) a troll on the SoaSE forums that is not to be taken seriously under any circumstances  2) a source of entertainment that is to be enjoyed, not trifled with

Sareth that was too much much for me to read but i can assure you i will later during the day. As for Seleuceia well we go way back and I'm shocked   you can be so observant.

The premade maps bore because they are not LARGE enough, the only "map" I like to play and fits my play style is the huge multi star map with over 150 planets. I like long games with epic space so we can all build up then have wars worthy of the big screen.

The only premade map I like is whirlwind since there is enough space to make a large empire and fortify it, while having boarders close enough for interesting "mental dialogue."

Clearly there are a number of mechanics that need to be worked out, however

it certainly cannot  adequately be described as matter of symmetry. While SoaSE is an RTS, it

is more importantly a 4X. As such game length and greater number of base game elements (unit roles, buildings, research...etc) is a major detractor both in popularity in the community. This makes as you describe am accurate

and fair rating systems more difficult where a DoTA match could last 20-40 min or SC match rarely going more than 2 hrs

Obviously this isn't all but my main point is every game has its own personality, knowing your preferences can help from ruining your expectations.

Also I'm a long time chess player, and there is an enormous gap between Chess (if you want to call it a TBS) and SC or SoaSE and not just because they are RTS. BTW Fischer realized randomness was a necessary element needed to continue competitive chess and that is how chess960 came out. If perhaps Deep Blue had faced Kasparov progressively in chess960, Kasparov would have been kicking it's ass to this day since the book of openings would be much larger.

I think personally that as human computer interfaces evolve the 4X gaming community will grow as the macro-management heavy SoaSE can be more seemlessly integrated with RTS like SC where quick micro is valued. In the meanwhile there is important research still being done in RTS AI and design.