Casual players: Be wary of venturing onto ICO for multiplayer

it happens in all RTS games not just Sins its been happening for years im quite surprised at your complaining doesnt really make much sense since you even said yourself make your own game also the so called Pros even use smurf accounts because no-one wants to play them so you have to see it from there point of aswell

I waited in that game lobby for 45 minutes, during which I chatted with the host and informed him of my inexperience.  He knew it was my first time online.  If he thought I was a smurf, he should have kicked me when I joined, not when the lobby filled up.  I was kicked because the others didn't want to play with a noob, even though it wasn't designated a pro game.

I wasn't the only one kicked -- the host kicked several other inexperienced players as the lobby filled up, all of whom had been waiting for quite a bit.  There's no excuse for that.  It's irresponsible and rude, and especially so since Sins already suffers from a lackluster MP scene.  That one host probably helped to turn off several potential MP players last night, permanently.

I think his complaining is perfectly appropriate, although as you said that's the way it is with just about any RTS nowadays and so it shouldn't just be directed at the Sins crowd.  Those multiplayer setups simply don't cater to the casual crowd.  Some people like it that way (non-casual players, for the most part), but most others (the more casual group) don't and that's why it's a problem with no easy solution.  You will ALWAYS have "smurfs," "spammers," and whatever other un-fun approach to gaming there is.  MMO's are structured in a way to mostly sidestep those conflicts of interest by labeling certain areas as PvE/"care bear friendly", have level limits on PvP, or some other way to keep things somewhat even handed, but RTS's really can't so they'll always have a group of players you don't want to deal with who will eventually drive many players from the field for good.

I personally avoid the issue by doing a LAN with friends/family instead of dealing with such problems/twerps, but not everybody has that option available to them.  It's a shame, as multi-player is pretty fun when you have a group of players you enjoy gaming with.

I used to do the same thing with my friends and family but it has become somewhat of a six way stalemate. We know each others strategies, and when we come up with a new strategy before the game is over its been countered by some one. so we have put an end to the LAN night.

But now, Four months later im getting that familliar itch to play SINS again. Playing against my friends and family is out of the question untill we either get diffrnet people or we come up with more completely diffrent strategies. So until then i am stuck with playing against the AI set to unfair. I was surprised to find out how rusty i have gotten with my strategies.

I recently decided to go onto ICO but have been stopped with an unreliable internet connection. Along with the intermittent connection and my noob relapse i can't find anyone to help me find my berrings again. So if anyone out there would like to get a game going with me that's understanding about my situation just contact me.

I think the only reason anyone would call him complaining is simple your one of the "experienced" players. Theres always that group that has the upperhand and when someone calls foul (cause there is something wrong there) that person is just a complainer. Get over it. The guy should have put up the EXP Player in the Title. These same players bitch and moan about the lack of players online. Which in most part is their own damn faults as to why people dont play online. The "EXP" players have their heads up their asses.

I was there and saw the whole thing.  I was even thinking to myself, "This isn't a very good way to encourage new people to play this game."  I think his Exoitgo's gripes are legitimate.

We should start doing that.  People have called the games "skilled" or "5v5 skilled" in the past but perhaps the guys who've been doing that lately haven't been titling them that way.

I'm not sure it's solely the skilled players' fault, really.  At one time the game had higher player counts and people could find games for all skill levels.  However, this game has never had very high online multiplayer player counts, which is the root of the problem.  When games start to have low online player counts, you end up being left with a core of regular players who are skilled at the game and who all know one another, making it hard for new people to break into the scene. 

If there is any blame to go around, I'd put it at the feet of Ironclad and Stardock for not decisively exterminating some of the bugs that plagued the online game early on, such as the rampant mini-dumps, ICO disconnects, and desyncs.  (I know, it's easier said than done and I'm sure it drove them nuts.)  I think they also needed to do a little more to promote the online game, such as some sort of an online multiplayer tutorial.  Another problem is the lack of a "hot seat" ability which would allow dropped players to rejoin games where they lost their connection or minidumped.  They could also eliminate the smurfing problem. 

The game also needs auto-download for custom maps which would fix problems like bad starting positions on random maps and also get more people personally involved with games while increasing the overall fun-factor though a market force--that the best maps would prevail and get played and if hundereds of maps were available, many would be likely to be more fun than the standard maps.  (Heck, they won't even release a set of select custom maps as an Impulse-based optional patch.)  (If you map for the game, you probably want to play it and promote and host your maps, too.) 

It's easy to point the finger of blame at the small clique of regular players who have been playing the game for months if not for over a year, but if the online multiplayer player counts were where they should be for a game that must have sold over 700,000 copies by now, this wouldn't be an issue.

My bad for making it seem like its all online players. I was just trying to point out that why alot of current SINs players dont like to go online myself included isnt the conditions of the MP but the people who actively play MP. Ive caught nothing but hostility in the past for being "inexperienced" as some have put it.

I love playing against other people. Once i get a good handle on things. But RTS is always one of the harder communites to get a foothold in because people can be very snobbish and rude.

I'm guessing the two guys were Ferdie and Dead Rat since they were wearing their new Smash Brothers clan tags.  That's just what our clique does; we prefer 5v5 where captains draft-pick the teams.  It makes the games more interesting IMHO.  (They don't take as long as you might think, actually; most don't last more than 2 hours.)  I was on last night as [DT] Dirty Sanchez, btw.  It did seem like a particularly slow night.

Yeah, we argue about teams.  When you're going to invest at least an hour in a game, you want it to be competitive.  Normally we draft-pick the teams which solves this problem.

Eeeyup.  You stumbled upon a Sins clique composed of experienced and good and excellent players.

I agree with you that this is a big problem.  When I host, I try not to boot people for that very reason or at least give them some sort of an early heads up.  It's not good and it's not fair for people to spend time waiting only to get booted.  When I see people join with 0-0 records or few games played, I try to find out if they are new or if they are smurfs.  (Smurfs can be booted without sympathy and are welcome to rejoin under their other established names.)  I do think at the least that the host should explain to new folks that if 9 other highly skilled players join they're going to have to boot them in order to have balanced teams so that it isn't a game of 5 v 4 or try to make some sort of accomodation (get the two or three best players on the team with the new guy).

The rudeness towards new players is definitely uncalled for and bad for the game.  Those guys really aren't bad guys once you know them.  They are good folks to play with.  (I'm sure you know how this is--if you know them and you're friends with them, they aren't bad guys even though they might not be the most welcoming to new folks.)  What happened to you last night is absolutely nothing personal--they just wanted to have a competitive 5v5 game with their friends.  Some folks don't realize that today's nooby is tomorrow's competitive skilled player and their online friend.  Even if they had let you play, I doubt you would have had a good time in that game.  Those guys would have steamrolled you.  Even the skilled players get beaten up by other skilled players all the time.  (It's no fun feeling that you are the sole or primary reason why your team lost; it doesn't sting as much when you feel you can spread the blame around, which might be one reason folks prefer 5v5.)

Smurfing is a big concern.  A "smurf" is a skilled, experienced player who creates a new player name so that he looks like he's a brand new player.  The smurf's goal is to fuck up the teams so that he'll be on the winning team.  For example, if people think the smurf is new, then he'll be one of the last players picked in the 5v5 when he really should have been one of the first three players picked, which means that he is a windfall for the team that picked him.  If the host thinks you are a smurf and you don't tell him who you really are (or convince him that you really are a brand new player), you could get booted.

On behalf of the skilled online multiplayer Entrenchment community, I apologize for my friends' poor behavior and any poor behavior I might have exhibited.

Please do name the names, btw.  We enjoy light-hearted trash talk, gossip, and innuendo here.  (Note that not all of those guys read the forums, though.)  Who was the host?

This is a large problem that plagues other games with small, insular, online communities.  I wish I had a good answer for you.  I would say that you need to be patient and look for the games the pros aren't setting up.  They are more likely to be 2v2's and 3v3's.  It's also going to be easier to find games like that on Friday night, and during the day on Saturday and Sunday.  You might also have better luck with regular Sins and not Entrenchment in those regards.  Once you have about 20 games under your belt, you'll probably be more welcome in those 5v5 games.  It's also easier to get into them later at night when fewer people are around and they desperately need someone to join in order to fill it.  You might also consider joining a gaming club where the games are set up over email and you have to join at a set time.  PM me for more info and I can hook you up with one.

The player counts have already dwindled.  In fact, they were never very high to begin with.  The most I've ever seen online was 250 people, and that was back in April or May 2008.  I think that activity will carry on for about another year until everyone has moved to Starcraft 2 or other games.  I don't see Sins as having the player counts it needs for online multiplayer to last much beyond that time, at least not outside of the Hamachi-based pirate communities, assuming that those are even active at all.  It's also possible that a small group of 30 people could continue playing it for as long as ICO is still up.  There are still people who play Unreal Tournament (1999) capture-the-flag 5v5 pug matches greedily, if you know where to look, and that game is almost 10 years old now.  I'm guessing that there's about 50 of them who do that.  (There must be over 1000 people who play regularly on the UT99 public servers.)

Hang in there.  It really is a great game once you get up to speed and become competitive.  Hosting your own game is also a good solution.  You might title it "noobs please" or some such and I think most of the skilled players would respect that.  One thing you could do to keep them away would be to have the game's speed settings set to "Normal" speed.  (We prefer fast everything.)

I wish that Ironclad/Stardock would come up with some sort of a way to "bin" players by skill level or at least online experience.  Perhaps they could create some sort of a second, optional ICO for people whose CD keys have fewer than 30 online games against non-AI opponents on them or some such.

The underlying problem is that your record is unestablished.  You had no games played, and therefor the other players in the game had no idea how experienced you were.  You could be a completely new player, or you might be a very experienced player who had just made a new account.  There is simply no way of knowing, and unfortunately many on both sides of the equation lie about their skill level.

In practice, we online often use "pug" (pick up game) to decide teams.  In this scenario, two players are chosen to be team captains.  The captains then alternate picking other players in the game to join their team.  Self-interest ensures each captain will try to pick the best players first.  Unfortunately, players with unestablished records are essentially gambles.  They could be very good or very very bad.  This throws off the balance of the game and can ruin it for everyone else if one team gets a complete newbie and the other gets an established veteran.  Unfortunately, while most people like you are innocently trying to get their first games in, there are lots of people who are abusing the system and leads to mistrust that poisons first experiences.

That said, the host was extremely rude to have not laid out the ground rules ahead of time and confronted you when you joined.  If you don't want unestablished records, don't wait 45 minutes to actually tell them that...

That ready to play thing that stardock has might help somewhat but I don't know not having tried the beta.  I have been a host and kicked questionably noob players by their records myself and while I hate to do it too much, I do see the reason it is done.  Personally if someone has waited a while then I will not kick generally.  Having a low record player is always a crapshoot given the large amount of smurfs in the ICO community.  Smurfs ruin team games because they end up stacking things.  ICO and the players in question as well do not seem to be doing anything to stop it though.  If I kick players out, it is generally because I think they could be smurfs and someone I know better is wanting in.  Having noobs aren't so bad if you can even out the team balance with noobs but the problem is most of the times they are smurfs instead and most smurfs LIE about being new.  At any rate, I know it sucks being kicked out after waiting to start a game(especially 45 minutes if it was as long as you say).  Don't take it to heart though.  If you play more and become better known then this won't happen.

[_]-Greyfox

That blows. Comp Stomps are the way to go

...and when you get tired of watching the AI suicide on starbases and waste money on seige frigates...and being to long for a real opponent...then what?

I sympathise with you and personally I will (as a experienced player) leave the game myself if the host kicks someone like you who has been waiting for awhile.

One time me and 2 other were tired of it, we left the game, started our own smaller game, and rounded up the players that had been kicked.  As we were about to start the larger game with the rude kicking host was still waiting for people.

I invite all to join me to stop this behavior.  If a host kicks someone who has been waiting for several minutes to make room for a friend who just came online, then you should leave.  If enough are willing to stand for this nobody will be kicked because they know that kicking the "new guy" will result in half the players leaving with him to start another game.

If a "noob" joins a "skilled" game then he should be kicked.  But only then.

I never kick anyone... and I remember those that kick me...

and in general... players who kick are assholes.

 I totally second the motion that... if someone kicks one person... everyone else should abandon the game and leave the asshole to play by himeself.

A lot of people online are assholes. 'Sides, you didn't miss anything; thats a shitty map anyway.

I will admit I do kick some people.  Whether or not I kicked you at somepoint, I have no idea.  According to Whippersnapper, the person was in my clan though.

Usually I limit my kicking to people who GREEN UP when everyone is still on team 10.  I don't want a COMPLETE idiot playing, as it will ruin the team balance.

Other than that, if you act normally, I don't boot.

just tag the games Pro or noob problems solved

That never gets old!!!

There's a reason why I avoid multiplayer these days ...

I have heard of solutions before in other games. Set up maps of new players only. Kick out anybody from a well known clan or that is experienced. Poetic justice in a sense. The problem is that when the players get better and better, eventually, they tend to get on par with the well known clans. Both sides hate each other and a hate war ensues. Of course, for official tournaments, they have to play against each other. It proves interesting at times. Often the newer players occasionally win. Sadly, its no way to solve these problems.

But the truth is, if you want to expand your fan base, you've got to treat everyone fairly. Maybe take 1 new player per person and give them some time to build up to make it interesting. Of course, how many people do that? I think that the older players for this reason are responsible for some of the blame.

I don't think it was a DT person, Howthe.  I think the particular host in this case was one of two people, neither of which is in DT.

Ah. 

Funny thing is, for Sins, all the clanners like eachother.  There really aren't any feuds.

Unfortunately, any RTS' custom game interface is generally like this after the newness wears off and the community if left with just regulars.  If you give the option for people to pick their team, they're going to stack the teams in most cases.  People might SAY they like fair games on forums, but in-game they are perfectly happy having 3 100-5 players vs. 3 5-20 players.  And I can't say I blame them.  Unless you're playing an EA rush fest RTS, RTS' take a long time for a single game.  If I'm going to commit an hour to a game, I want to maximize my chances of winning said game.  If a terrible player joins my team against a bunch of pros, I'm going to bail.

Ordinarily, the solution is to have arranged team ladder so skilled players who know each other can play other skilled players; and let the newbs play custom matches with other newbs.  ICO doesn't have any ladder, and so the skilled players and bad players are mixed in the same player pool.  This leads to disaster like the OP experienced, and completely killed any chance ICO has of ever making a comeback.

I remember seeing you in the lobby, and I appreciate your response, though you were very polite and don't need to apologize for yourself.

I understand that pros enjoy playing with each other, and I think part of the problem was that the lobby initially filled up with a few noobs in addition to good players, leading us noobs to think the teams would get evened out but we'd all still have a fun-filled 5v5 match.  Oh well... at least I now know to be more wary of this in the future, and join noob-only games or host my own games.

Your responses have been encouraging, I think I'll give it another spin in the future.  Perhaps most of the regulars on ICO are considerate enough to avoid being kick-happy, and I just had an unlucky night, cause even though I'm a noob it's still exciting to join a game every once in a while with more experienced players, even if I get raped, because at least I can watch and learn from the best.  Hopefully other first-time players will read this post and learn enough to avoid having a bad first experience like I did.

The problem is more complex than pro vs newbie.  Let's illustrate this with a hypothetic situation.  Here are the (fictional) players in the game:

• SuperAwesome (team captain; very experienced, has a record with hundreds of games)
• UltraPro (team captain; also very experienced with hundreds of games under his belt)
• TheVeteran (has played hundreds of games, solid player, but not as good as the pros)
• RisingStar (only played 60 or so games, but has an excellent record)
• AverageJoe (a decent amount of games and a decent record; nothing out of the ordinary)
• TheUnknown (a 0-0 record; no one knows how good he is, but he's actually a complete newbie)
• PapaSmurf (a 0-0 record as well, but he's actually a very experienced player)
• CompStompa (has played about a dozen games and won almost all of them.  However they're all comp stomps and he's not very experienced online)

So SuperAwesome takes the first pick, and he chooses TheVeteran.  UltraPro picks next (normally second pick gets 2 picks) and chooses RisingStar and AverageJoe.  Now SuperAwesome gets two picks; he chooses CompStompa, and decides to go with TheUnknown as his final choice (after all, both TheUnknown and PapaSmurf both have 0-0 records).

So, let's look at the teams:

SuperAwesome (pro), TheVeteran (great), CompStompa (newbie), TheUnknown (newbie)

vs

UltraPro (pro), RisingStar (great), AverageJoe (average), PapaSmurf (pro)

Although both team captains did their very best to even out the teams, this is going to be an absolute slaughter. They couldn't predict who was newbie and who was pro among the 0-0 records, and the result was a horribly mismatched team.    For this reason, people loath to play with unestablished accounts.  It has nothing to do with not wanting to play with newbies, and everything to do with being unable to affirm how good (or how bad) they are.  As far as records indicated, CompStompa should have been equal to AverageJoe, and Unknown and Smurf should have both been beginners.  However, that's not necessarily the case, and the result was that the game was ruined for everyone.

By the way, although this example is wholly fictional, it's based on my real-life observations.  You'll find, especially when you're team captain and have to start picking teammates, most players fit into one of those archtypes.  I learned about Compstompa the hard way... great looking record, but it's all vs the AI!

Once again, the guy who waited 45 minutes before kicking you was nothing short of a jackass.  If you're going to kick unestablished records, do it when they join, not after they've been patiently waiting for nearly an hour