Turtles in RTS. Best tactic?

[demoman_chaos]

I doesn't work in Total War. I was playing Rome online a long while back (before everyone's armies became the exact same) and came across a Greek player who had all of there hoplites in a circle around their archers. It was easy to see what his plan was, shoot me to death until I sent my dudes into his hoplites who would keep my men away with their spears. Unable to break the line of spears and get to the squishy people behind them, I would be defeated.
Problem is, it didn't work. I shot his dudes to death, then my army plowed through the few remaining goons. Why didn't it work? HERE [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuJXms-rgh8] isa video I found that explains it better than I.

Turtling works in build-type RTS like C&C or Supreme Commander, but not games like Total War were you have to use what you have and that is all you have.

 

[Disaster Button]

Turtling is my primary tactic. I just seem to do it very well without even trying. I usually turtle and send out little strike forces to maintain a good control of the map or to cripple enemy forces large enough to break through into my base. Then when I feel like I'm adequately defended I usually steamroll from my base right to the other side of the map and usually do significant damage, often ending in victory for me.

But because I naturally Turtle I find it very difficult to be an effective rusher which is something that makes me a little sad.

I believe the only game where Turtling has been a little difficult is Dawn of War 2, but then it isn't a build type RTS.

 

[naab]

(This does not apply to Starcraft/Age of Empires)

What? I always turtled when I was a casual RTS user and most people did that too so they could see huge battles with the big units. In fact if you play starcraft all the noobs have NR 20min which means you don't attack for 20 minutes and they play on MONEY MAPS so they don't have to expand and can turtle. Rushing a dedicated turtle is bad play unless you found a hole. You expand and macro when they turtle.

There is no offensive rush. Any decent player takes map control and resources and swoops out of the sky like a badass, grabs the turtle out of the water flies high as it can and drops the turtles on rocks and swoops down and eats its guts NOM NOM NOM.

You don't read.

 

[ploppytheman]

My Deadspace DL just finished so this is my last post.

In an RTS you can expand, tech, harass, macro, micro, scout, and a few other things. If an RTS is designed properly turtling should always lose on equal skill. Whenever you build defenses you are losing in other areas, and when you stay in a small area, you lose map control and resources associated with that. Turtling can work as a part of an overall strategy, aka how Terran wall early, or how Protoss wait for +1 Attack to move out or w/e, but turtling by itself is bad, its really called being contained. If you are contained you will almost always lose. You may be yelling "THIS IS SPARTA" at your monitor but in reality turtling never works. Sure you may play against some Persians who run into your wall to die in mass but someone like, I don't know, Hitler will make a retarded large gun/missle that can bombard you from safety while taking all of Europe.

Turtling doesn't work. Defender's do have an advantage IRL, but RTS is not RL. I mean we all know of Sparta, the Alamo, etc etc. But think of how boring it would be if defenses were stronger than offense. Why go offense ever? It wouldn't be a game it would be like Koreas staring at each other flipping the bird for years and years. And that Chinese guy... iono he wrote the Art of War said "He who defends everywhere defends nowhere". There is no way to defend more than a relatively small area and its highly dependent on geography.

Ok I'm time time to murder zombies and stuff.

 

[Crazyshak48]

I think the effectiveness of turtling depends on the game and the map. Some games (C&C 3, for example) have powerful enough defenses to make turtling viable, while others it is very difficult to manage (Homeworld is a good example). Some maps are ideal for turtling because of terrain which can make concentrated defenses murderous, (for instance, if the only way into your base is one very narrow pass). Some larger maps it's no good because resources are scattered far and wide and it's better to have mobile units that can defend a larger area rather than concentrating all your heavy defense in a few small baskets. Varying your strategy depending on the game and the map is very important to being successul.

As for delivering the kill shot from a turtle strategy, I've found that usually there are three options (generally speaking):

1. The Steamroller: Classic, but there's a reason for that. Consolidate your logistics, build up your forces, then go for broke. Furthermore, unless you completely deplete your resources, you're still left in a strong defensive position to rebuild and try again (unlike a rush, which leaves you wide open). The downside: This requires significant amounts of resources, and you'll be vulnerable while you establish your supply line.

2. The Guerrilla: This strategy usually focuses on chopping the enemy's resource line and building up a small but powerful force to exploit your advantage once the enemy is vulnerable. Isolating powerful units from their escorts and annihilating them is also effective, but the cornerstone here is resource denial. The more time and money your opponent spends trying to keep his supply line intact is less time and money going into offensive units. Mobile but hard hitting units are most effective at this (bombers, attack helicopters, mobile artillery, stealth units, etc.). The downside: This requires a lot of careful micromanagement and multi-tasking, and if your mobile units run into enemy heavy forces, you're going to have trouble.

3. Pure Turtle: How does this work you ask? Slowly advance into enemy territory, destroying opposition as you go, and then fortifying each position you take with base defenses and other fortifications. The goal: Eventually creep closer and closer to the enemy base, and try to lock them in with your base defenses. Then, send in your main forces and superweapons to deliver the killshot. The downside: This requires TREMENDOUS amounts of resources, time, patience, and skill. Furthermore, I've never really seen it work against anything but an easy AI. Although I've never really been bold enough to try it against a human player.

Anyways, sorry for the text wall, but those are my thoughts on my preferred RTS strategy

 

[ploppytheman]

(This does not apply to Starcraft/Age of Empires)

What? I always turtled when I was a casual RTS user and most people did that too so they could see huge battles with the big units. In fact if you play starcraft all the noobs have NR 20min which means you don't attack for 20 minutes and they play on MONEY MAPS so they don't have to expand and can turtle. Rushing a dedicated turtle is bad play unless you found a hole. You expand and macro when they turtle.

There is no offensive rush. Any decent player takes map control and resources and swoops out of the sky like a badass, grabs the turtle out of the water flies high as it can and drops the turtles on rocks and swoops down and eats its guts NOM NOM NOM.

You don't read.

No u. I got into RTS through C@C where every strategy is mass units with telsa coils and move out. I think I own every C@C up to the two newest and I have played a lot of other RTSs. The single player is 99% build up defenses and amass an army while fending off bee lines off a few units. Just because I reference SC in argument to casual users didn't mean i didn't read your post. When I first got starcraft I sucked, I turtled/massed because thats what ALL OTHER RTS TEACH and I have had to relearn how to play, and I'm plat in SC2 Beta.

If you can defend from all angles then the game is flawed. Thats why Starcraft has been around for a decade, is the only real pro gaming, is the national sport of Korea, and is RTS perfection. Playing some idiotic Yuri's Revenge or any C@C is just blatantly IMBA and thats why they churn out those games. I've been playing RTS since I was probably 5 and sim city before that. I remember playing Red Alert in 4th grade, thats like 15+years of RTS.

I don't really care if you think your strats are good because I'd wreck you in SC/SC2 trying some turtle strat. I look at how the pros play and try to imitate/build on that rather than go "lol I am the best evar I haz towas".

 

[naab]

(This does not apply to Starcraft/Age of Empires)

What? I always turtled when I was a casual RTS user and most people did that too so they could see huge battles with the big units. In fact if you play starcraft all the noobs have NR 20min which means you don't attack for 20 minutes and they play on MONEY MAPS so they don't have to expand and can turtle. Rushing a dedicated turtle is bad play unless you found a hole. You expand and macro when they turtle.

There is no offensive rush. Any decent player takes map control and resources and swoops out of the sky like a badass, grabs the turtle out of the water flies high as it can and drops the turtles on rocks and swoops down and eats its guts NOM NOM NOM.

You don't read.

No u. I got into RTS through C@C where every strategy is mass units with telsa coils and move out. I think I own every C@C up to the two newest and I have played a lot of other RTSs. The single player is 99% build up defenses and amass an army while fending off bee lines off a few units. Just because I reference SC in argument to casual users didn't mean i didn't read your post. When I first got starcraft I sucked, I turtled/massed because thats what ALL OTHER RTS TEACH and I have had to relearn how to play, and I'm plat in SC2 Beta.

If you can defend from all angles then the game is flawed. Thats why Starcraft has been around for a decade, is the only real pro gaming, is the national sport of Korea, and is RTS perfection. Playing some idiotic Yuri's Revenge or any C@C is just blatantly IMBA and thats why they churn out those games. I've been playing RTS since I was probably 5 and sim city before that. I remember playing Red Alert in 4th grade, thats like 15+years of RTS.

I don't really care if you think your strats are good because I'd wreck you in SC/SC2 trying some turtle strat. I look at how the pros play and try to imitate/build on that rather than go "lol I am the best evar I haz towas".

And your obviously stupid... I never said it was my strategy, nor am I saying I'm better than anyone else in any RTS for that matter The fact you even brought up your skills shows your arrogance. Anyway, I said what I needed to say. Get back on topic.

BTW - If you didn't care, you wouldn't have replied.

 

[Sephychu]

Well I think that a turtle's only weaknesses are speed, and getting rolled onto their back, so here's my theory:
Duct tape two turtles together face to face and attatch rockets to them.
They will be unstoppable...

Oh wait.
This thread is about the RTS strategy.

Never mind...

Hell, that would work anyway.

I think Turtling is quite valid. If any strategy is totally unbeatable, the problem is with the game balance, not the cheapness level.

 

[Altorin]

I think the effectiveness of turtling depends on the game and the map. Some games (C&C 3, for example) have powerful enough defenses to make turtling viable, while others it is very difficult to manage (Homeworld is a good example). Some maps are ideal for turtling because of terrain which can make concentrated defenses murderous, (for instance, if the only way into your base is one very narrow pass). Some larger maps it's no good because resources are scattered far and wide and it's better to have mobile units that can defend a larger area rather than concentrating all your heavy defense in a few small baskets. Varying your strategy depending on the game and the map is very important to being successul.

As for delivering the kill shot from a turtle strategy, I've found that usually there are three options (generally speaking):

1. The Steamroller: Classic, but there's a reason for that. Consolidate your logistics, build up your forces, then go for broke. Furthermore, unless you completely deplete your resources, you're still left in a strong defensive position to rebuild and try again (unlike a rush, which leaves you wide open). The downside: This requires significant amounts of resources, and you'll be vulnerable while you establish your supply line.

2. The Guerrilla: This strategy usually focuses on chopping the enemy's resource line and building up a small but powerful force to exploit your advantage once the enemy is vulnerable. Isolating powerful units from their escorts and annihilating them is also effective, but the cornerstone here is resource denial. The more time and money your opponent spends trying to keep his supply line intact is less time and money going into offensive units. Mobile but hard hitting units are most effective at this (bombers, attack helicopters, mobile artillery, stealth units, etc.). The downside: This requires a lot of careful micromanagement and multi-tasking, and if your mobile units run into enemy heavy forces, you're going to have trouble.

3. Pure Turtle: How does this work you ask? Slowly advance into enemy territory, destroying opposition as you go, and then fortifying each position you take with base defenses and other fortifications. The goal: Eventually creep closer and closer to the enemy base, and try to lock them in with your base defenses. Then, send in your main forces and superweapons to deliver the killshot. The downside: This requires TREMENDOUS amounts of resources, time, patience, and skill. Furthermore, I've never really seen it work against anything but an easy AI. Although I've never really been bold enough to try it against a human player.

Anyways, sorry for the text wall, but those are my thoughts on my preferred RTS strategy

or 4. which I see most of the time, is "turtle until I lose".. or the "Hope for Allied Victory"

 

[Roland07]

My RTS experience is pretty much limited to Blizzard (including SC2) but assuming the general tactics are roughly the same for most strategy games, I just let people turtle. It limits their economy by definition, so while they're hunkered down, snickering about steam-rolling me to themselves, I try to ensure I have double their income, and can completely reverse it on them when they push out. Keeping a scouting eye on them is obviously important to ensure they're not doing some sneaky cheese like a mass drop or something, but turtles often destroy themselves just by hoping you don't out-macro them.

 

[Weaver]

In company of heroes with victory points I don't know if it's so much turtling as it is defending a victory point you caught

If you commit too much resources to the VP though the enemy could just walk behind you and easily axe your supply line then artillery the shit out of your defenses.

 

[Cheesebob]

In a good game, there is no uncounterable tactic, and everything you do is a valid tactic. Turtling slows the game down though and shows weakness.. I can't see how Turtling can win you a game though. You turtle. He's now surrounding your shell, looking for a crack in your armor. Once he finds it, you're dead.

Where is the "I win!" part?

Supreme Commander. You can build an artillery cannon which kills shit by firing across the freaking map.

 

[SAMAS]

Against a computer, sure. I find that Human opponents need a bit more flexible of a defence, preferable something creative that they can do jack squat about. See, the thing about turtles is that they basically form a wall, which is embarassingly obselete in anygame with flying units.

Recipe for success:

1. Build large airforce.

2. Ignore the enemies impressive fortress and fly directly past it.

3. Get blown to hell by SAMs on the wall, behind the wall, and scattered throughout the base

In a good game, there is no uncounterable tactic, and everything you do is a valid tactic. Turtling slows the game down though and shows weakness.. I can't see how Turtling can win you a game though. You turtle. He's now surrounding your shell, looking for a crack in your armor. Once he finds it, you're dead.

Where is the "I win!" part?

Supreme Commander. You can build an artillery cannon which kills shit by firing across the freaking map.

That, and the Nukes, not to mention the shields and anti-nukes to protect you from the enemy's superweapons. SupCom (and it's spiritual predecessor Total Annihilation) is almost custom made for turtlers.

 

[Georgie_Leech]

Against a computer, sure. I find that Human opponents need a bit more flexible of a defence, preferable something creative that they can do jack squat about. See, the thing about turtles is that they basically form a wall, which is embarassingly obselete in anygame with flying units.

Recipe for success:

1. Build large airforce.

2. Ignore the enemies impressive fortress and fly directly past it.

3. Get blown to hell by SAMs on the wall, behind the wall, and scattered throughout the base

If they have that many anti-air units, they've likely neglected ground defence. If they have both, they've likely spent too much on a single base, allowing me to expand. If they've did it for all their bases, good for them. However, doing so would likely result in only defence, making little able to do anything to counter building a massive hammer of units to wipe it out. My point is that against a human opponent, Turtling is far too static a strategy, with little room to alter beyond make the turtle stronger. Every strategy has a way to work around it, even my own. The best strategies are the ones that allow for adjustments on the fly.

Besides, I've never seen a defence anywhere that didn't have at least one hole. There always is one, if only bcause of something they didn't anticipate.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I thought this was some how going to be about a TMNT in an RTS how disappointing.

So did I actually.

OT: Turtling is the tactic I usually use in RTS and it certainly isn't a foolproof strategy. It usually works against most AI though, except in StarCraft. I did win a match against a co-worker by turtling once.

 

[Volafortis]

Tech rushing > Turtling (generally)

If you don't give a turtle time to build up, they die quite easily, because they either have thin all-over defenses, or easily exploitable holes.

For example, in Starcraft 2 (using it as example, because I've been playing it most lately)

Terran are the most common race for turtling. Generally, they have either a ton of anti ground units around the perimeter of the base, to which I counter by rushing to air. If they realized I was protoss, and assumed a void ray rush (which is stupid, because I never void ray rush), they'll have anti air all over the base, and then I just proxy pylon or warp prism a ton of charging zealots into the base.

However, there is no "win-all" strategy in any RTS. It's all about initial build order, scouting, and responding.

 

[Count Igor]

Turtling is my strategy. I find it alot more fun than just building units, especially if you build walls/blockades/sandbags etc in a maze with units/structures around every so often.
Makes it feel like a real battle.

 

[Miumaru]

As long as you don't cheat, I am fine with it. My brother for example, hates rushers, but he goes too far and often tries to forbid it. (In BFME2 anyways)
Though I also rarely play RTS games, especcially against people, and usually am raped by a massive army before I even make my first vehicle contruction building. (C&C3 is the only RTS really I have played online)

 

[Mr.Black]

Its easily defeated as long as were not talking those little zergling things in Starcraft as they were a bit imbalanced.

Starcraft and imbalanced don't make sense in the same sentence. It's the epitome of balance!

I am not a fanboy.

 

[RaphaelsRedemption]

I would define my style of RTS play as "teching" not "turtling". "Turtle" I have always understood to be a defensive style of play, relying on outward defenses and not engaging the enemy. "Teching" however, I believe to be about intentionally not engaging the enemy for a certain amount of time, until research has been done, resources have been collected and an army of superior units can be produced. It's playing smarter, not harder, and is often less wasteful of resourcs.

For instance, I play Supreme Commander; Forged Alliance with my boyfriend. He's a rusher, I'm a techer. He regularly runs out of resources and needs me to back him up. I will support him, and then when I am ready, will regularly single-handedly destroy all remaining enemy units. It's not to say either tactic is better; in fact we work best together and in a multiplayer situation are often nearly unstoppable with our rush/tech approach.

Some RTS games are more suited to teching than others. Warzone, Forged Alliance (actually, ALL the Supreme Commander games), and Age of Empires are among the most tech-friendly. Among the less would probably be C&C games and Starcraft.