Strategy Games in General: Turtle, then Explode

[aelf]

This is where scale really comes in. I mentioned how the unit scale (few and expensive units) limits mindless spamming. The scale of the battlefield helps with the problem you raise. Fighting typically happens around a few key positions that might be very close to each other, so you can afford to focus on, say, the middle portion of the map without worrying too much about backdooring (although this does happen, especially when individual enemy squads slip through - but a few shouldn't be hard to handle anyway).

In any case, if you really hate micromanagement, then RTS is probably not the genre for you in general. Though I've found that in Supreme Commander turtling is highly rewarding in single player. You can even turtle in your base area for most of the game and still win if you defend and tech up properly, since higher tier units and experimentals are so much more powerful.

 

[MobBoss]

Not all RTS are the same. The unit mix and balance in one game might be a bit more pro-zerg style than turret/turtle defense and vice versa. Part of being good at RTS is recognizing what your opponnet is doing, and then going for the counter to that strat. If you guess wrong, you lose. But if you guess right, it puts the odds decidedly in your favor.

For example, when I was playing starcraft II on the ranked ladder, I lost a ton of games early on, till I started getting the hang of recognizing what others where doing, and knowing the simple counter to that. Also, learning the art of the simple misdirect, while your main push is somewhere else. I played Protoss as a preference, and when I started using the strat of landing a load of dark templar in someones rear base right after I probe their front line to distract their attention, I started winning a ton of games. Think I had a 20 game win streak at one time. By the time I stopped playing so much I had turned my win percentage from around 33 percent to up around 75 percent and was top 20 on my particular ladder.

 

[sophie]

In RTS, usually early agg=zoning others for cheap cost=real mad other players who are behind=win win.

I don't think pure turtle really works out that well early, because in most rts most early game rushes beat whatever early game defense you have.

This. Most competitive AoEII games are over within 10 minutes.

 

[Rub'Rum]

Don't talk about CoH or you're going to lure that guy who's obsessed about it and he's going to come and tell you how CoH is more awesome than you. I can't remember his name.

 

[GoodGame]

Don't talk about CoH or you're going to lure that guy who's obsessed about it and he's going to come and tell you how CoH is more awesome than you. I can't remember his name.

Me? But I'm not really obsessed with it since CoH online is like dead. Haven't booted it up in like months.

But on CoH, I'd say it does favor turtling as an option with some armies/strategies, but allows micromanagement and indirect fire as an alternative option. It's really much more of a tactical RTS than most RTSes.

Turtling in CoH is more challenging since weapon range and sighting is modeled (e.g. a snipers shoots longer ranged when mounted at elevation or has a buddy spotting for him), but not in the melee sense (i.e. you don't build walls generally since the "walls" have very limited strength and effectiveness, and walls of tower defense is usually too costly, and slow). So to turtle well you really have to have man or create chokepoints that are well sighted (including having spotters). And then there's still the possibility of your turtle shell being dismantled by indirect fire and micromanagement.

I think the balance of turtling (buildings), micromanagement (grenades, off map artillery), sighting rules, and mix of direct and indirect fire units made the game so awesome. That and the resource system which simplified the typical RTS economy without completely eliminating economy.

 

[Rub'Rum]

No, I don't think it's you. I was never quite good at RTS, but I tend to turtle. It's the only way I actually get to look at the game for a few minutes.

 

[FriendlyFire]

While CoH does make turtling hard and/or ineffective, ifor me that just made it a lot harder, irritating and less fun. I'd go watch some fighting in one area for half a minute only to find out the enemy had killed everyone I had in another area and pushed deep into my lines. I like to be able to enjoy and watch the game, not just see everything in a blur of motion when you have to be everywhere at once.

You've allowed the enemy to build up too much. Turtling is a dead end game for most of COH (with exception to Brit amo rush).

Best off playing certain maps which encourages lane fights. Except even then a good player like me will be taking the fight every which way. I rarely leave more then an MG or a pio ideling on defence more for fog of war.

You want a big ball and put a ton of pressure on the enemy.

 

[Maniacal]

That isn't quite what I meant... and I don't care. I don't find it to be very fun, I vastly prefer Men of War.

 

[Rub'Rum]

There he is! Run for your lives!

 

[aelf]

There he is! Run for your lives!

I lol'd

 

[Dachs]

Turtle-then-explode is a terrible idea in Advance Wars for any COs but the Broken Trio (as distinct from the Broken Quintet) - and they're broken chiefly because they can turtle and fight offensively at the same time.

Grit/Hachi/Colin/Kanbei/Sensei 4 lyfe

 

[FriendlyFire]

That isn't quite what I meant... and I don't care. I don't find it to be very fun, I vastly prefer Men of War.

Thats the problem with joinning a six year old game which has the a high population of veterans and a broken automatch system.

It also has a tough learning curve given the huge number of complex mechanical systems.

 

[Maniacal]

Thats the problem with joinning a six year old game which has the a high population of veterans and a broken automatch system.

It also has a tough learning curve given the huge number of complex mechanical systems.

I don't play multiplayer.

 

[Akka]

It seems that (in single player) almost every strategy game with a resource/economy element will heavily reward turtling and only taking easy or necessary fights until you have such a massive economy that you can afford to out-produce your enemies; in addition you'll be making superior units at a faster rate. This strategy works in everything from Civ to Hearts of Iron to Empire Earth to Rome: Total War.
Does anyone know what I am talking about?

Most of them also heavily reward micro-management of cities/buildings, so much that you spend 2/3rds of the game wading through menus for a battle that lasts ten minutes.

I'd say that's because an AI is not another player.
Turtling is the (no insult intended) "noobish" way to do things. It's the most commonly method used, because of our simple caution as humans.
As single player games must be available to newbies (you can't really require someone to completely master a game before being able to start the campaign, can you ?), they are simply easy enough so that we can play as newbies and still win.
Also, AI, being much less efficient than humans, tends to rely on simple raw numbers advantages to give a bit of challenge, and this kind of setting make turtling more efficient.

So well, it's not as much a design decision to reward turtling, than an array of factors that makes it a reliable choice.

Usually, in a well-balanced game with competent human opponents, turtling isn't all that good.