93 replies to this topic

[Nid]

Protip: A good player will incorporate both Rush and Turtle techniquies efficiently in order to effectively defend their land and resources while applying pressure to the enemy for as much of the game as possible.

This kind of strategy does involve rushing early game, teching up fast, placing buildings and bases in effective locations and focusing, and producing units as quickly as possible.
I'm no master of it all myself but I've watched other players do this and it seems to be not only the fairest but also the smartest overall strategy I have seen.

Edited by Nidmeister, 04 June 2010 - 10:30.

[Warlock]

Completely agree with this article,

its still quite interesting to read though

[Zhao]

I just don't think "Turtling" Must = a line of defenses" You can defend with troops as well and i find that to be far more effective then 30 lined up defenses....

[BeefJeRKy]

Defending yourself with troops isn't the same as turtling. Those troops have mobility that the base defenses lack.

[Zhao]

Scope, on 4 Jun 2010, 11:47, said:

Defending yourself with troops isn't the same as turtling. Those troops have mobility that the base defenses lack.

But i still consider it playing defensively none the less , just using unit counters instead of static defense.

On a sidenote i don't really see why not all of Fallout completely agrees with the article.
I stop rushes it its nothing and i always have 30 minute none stop action filled games every-time and rushing didn't need to be removed to fix that.
maybe it might be because its a modding community (IE the people who didnt jump the online band wagon in the 1st place but got bored and decided to mod)
But I'm kinda disappointed. Especilly after reading comments with little or no background knowledge to support it from people such as Dutchygamer and Even Ion cannon.

I don't know it really is a turn off for me when i go to fallout nowadays.

[Wizard]

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 1:24, said:

Scope, on 4 Jun 2010, 11:47, said:

Defending yourself with troops isn't the same as turtling. Those troops have mobility that the base defenses lack.

But i still consider it playing defensively none the less , just using unit counters instead of static defense.

On a sidenote i don't really see why not all of Fallout completely agrees with the article.
I stop rushes it its nothing and i always have 30 minute none stop action filled games every-time and rushing didn't need to be removed to fix that.
maybe it might be because its a modding community (IE the people who didnt jump the online band wagon in the 1st place but got bored and decided to mod)
But I'm kinda disappointed. Especilly after reading comments with little or no background knowledge to support it from people such as Dutchygamer and Even Ion cannon.

I don't know it really is a turn off for me when i go to fallout nowadays.

Probably because we all have brains and our own opinions. Try listening to them perhaps?! Yours isn't the only correct voice in the crowd, no matter how many RTS games you play.

The online gaming community will produce people that love and loathe certain tactics. There will be thousands that like to exploit bugs or imbalances, whilst there are equally as many who chose not to. Some people don't like rushers because that simply implies that they'd rather win quick over a more sustainable battle/fight. Just because you haven't come across that doesn't mean people can't think like it.

And if you are turned off here because we aren't GR.org hawks......well.....

[Zhao]

Wizard, on 2 Aug 2010, 1:35, said:

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 1:24, said:

Scope, on 4 Jun 2010, 11:47, said:

Defending yourself with troops isn't the same as turtling. Those troops have mobility that the base defenses lack.

But i still consider it playing defensively none the less , just using unit counters instead of static defense.

On a sidenote i don't really see why not all of Fallout completely agrees with the article.
I stop rushes it its nothing and i always have 30 minute none stop action filled games every-time and rushing didn't need to be removed to fix that.
maybe it might be because its a modding community (IE the people who didnt jump the online band wagon in the 1st place but got bored and decided to mod)
But I'm kinda disappointed. Especilly after reading comments with little or no background knowledge to support it from people such as Dutchygamer and Even Ion cannon.

I don't know it really is a turn off for me when i go to fallout nowadays.

Probably because we all have brains and our own opinions. Try listening to them perhaps?! Yours isn't the only correct voice in the crowd, no matter how many RTS games you play.

The online gaming community will produce people that love and loathe certain tactics. There will be thousands that like to exploit bugs or imbalances, whilst there are equally as many who chose not to. Some people don't like rushers because that simply implies that they'd rather win quick over a more sustainable battle/fight. Just because you haven't come across that doesn't mean people can't think like it.

And if you are turned off here because we aren't GR.org hawks......well.....

Its the fact that when i was a RTS noob i used to think the same way Dutchy gamer or Ion cannon did.

now that im fairly skilled fairly experienced im sure i can make a good judgement on it , while others just sound like me when i sucked at RTSs and wanted to bitch and find excuses to stay away from gaming with certain people just because of there tactical preference in a game.

[Camille]

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 0:52, said:

Wizard, on 2 Aug 2010, 1:35, said:

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 1:24, said:

Scope, on 4 Jun 2010, 11:47, said:

Defending yourself with troops isn't the same as turtling. Those troops have mobility that the base defenses lack.

But i still consider it playing defensively none the less , just using unit counters instead of static defense.

On a sidenote i don't really see why not all of Fallout completely agrees with the article.
I stop rushes it its nothing and i always have 30 minute none stop action filled games every-time and rushing didn't need to be removed to fix that.
maybe it might be because its a modding community (IE the people who didnt jump the online band wagon in the 1st place but got bored and decided to mod)
But I'm kinda disappointed. Especilly after reading comments with little or no background knowledge to support it from people such as Dutchygamer and Even Ion cannon.

I don't know it really is a turn off for me when i go to fallout nowadays.

Probably because we all have brains and our own opinions. Try listening to them perhaps?! Yours isn't the only correct voice in the crowd, no matter how many RTS games you play.

The online gaming community will produce people that love and loathe certain tactics. There will be thousands that like to exploit bugs or imbalances, whilst there are equally as many who chose not to. Some people don't like rushers because that simply implies that they'd rather win quick over a more sustainable battle/fight. Just because you haven't come across that doesn't mean people can't think like it.

And if you are turned off here because we aren't GR.org hawks......well.....

Its the fact that when i was a RTS noob i used to think the same way Dutchy gamer or Ion cannon did.

now that im fairly skilled fairly experienced im sure i can make a good judgement on it , while others just sound like me when i sucked at RTSs and wanted to bitch and find excuses to stay away from gaming with certain people just because of there tactical preference in a game.

you're not making any sense :o

i think you just need to drop the attitude man, you're insulting more people than you're befriending. acting all high, wise and 'experienced' towards people you barely know usually doesn't work out too well.

[Zhao]

Camille, on 2 Aug 2010, 0:56, said:

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 0:52, said:

Wizard, on 2 Aug 2010, 1:35, said:

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 1:24, said:

Scope, on 4 Jun 2010, 11:47, said:

Defending yourself with troops isn't the same as turtling. Those troops have mobility that the base defenses lack.

But i still consider it playing defensively none the less , just using unit counters instead of static defense.

On a sidenote i don't really see why not all of Fallout completely agrees with the article.
I stop rushes it its nothing and i always have 30 minute none stop action filled games every-time and rushing didn't need to be removed to fix that.
maybe it might be because its a modding community (IE the people who didnt jump the online band wagon in the 1st place but got bored and decided to mod)
But I'm kinda disappointed. Especilly after reading comments with little or no background knowledge to support it from people such as Dutchygamer and Even Ion cannon.

I don't know it really is a turn off for me when i go to fallout nowadays.

Probably because we all have brains and our own opinions. Try listening to them perhaps?! Yours isn't the only correct voice in the crowd, no matter how many RTS games you play.

The online gaming community will produce people that love and loathe certain tactics. There will be thousands that like to exploit bugs or imbalances, whilst there are equally as many who chose not to. Some people don't like rushers because that simply implies that they'd rather win quick over a more sustainable battle/fight. Just because you haven't come across that doesn't mean people can't think like it.

And if you are turned off here because we aren't GR.org hawks......well.....

Its the fact that when i was a RTS noob i used to think the same way Dutchy gamer or Ion cannon did.

now that im fairly skilled fairly experienced im sure i can make a good judgement on it , while others just sound like me when i sucked at RTSs and wanted to bitch and find excuses to stay away from gaming with certain people just because of there tactical preference in a game.

you're not making any sense :o

i think you just need to drop the attitude man, you're insulting more people than you're befriending. acting all high, wise and 'experienced' towards people you barely know usually doesn't work out too well.

that wasnt my intention.

[Chyros]

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 2:52, said:

Its the fact that when i was a RTS noob i used to think the same way Dutchy gamer or Ion cannon did.

now that im fairly skilled fairly experienced im sure i can make a good judgement on it , while others just sound like me when i sucked at RTSs and wanted to bitch and find excuses to stay away from gaming with certain people just because of there tactical preference in a game.

No offence, but you're sounding like someone whose name a whole bunch of us have carved in our memories in a really bad way .

[Zhao]

Chyros, on 2 Aug 2010, 2:34, said:

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 2:52, said:

Its the fact that when i was a RTS noob i used to think the same way Dutchy gamer or Ion cannon did.

now that im fairly skilled fairly experienced im sure i can make a good judgement on it , while others just sound like me when i sucked at RTSs and wanted to bitch and find excuses to stay away from gaming with certain people just because of there tactical preference in a game.

No offence, but you're sounding like someone whose name a whole bunch of us have carved in our memories in a really bad way .

Probably failed by now but its more of a push for this community to get active again afaik i hardly know 90% of these people beacuse they don't really game online at all , at least anything having to do with zero hour (the reason this forum pretty much exists imo) , and really there hardly given a insentive to.

I've managed my small community (My network) For what has to have bein 2 1/2 years now and i still see the same people that were here when i started it still playing because the community is just well , active. Crack a few jokes discuss politics , discuss In game strategies Link a few funny youtube videos here and there we enjoy our selfs and the only thing driving that network is peoples willingness to improve in game.


And i've ALWAYS helped people improve in a game, why sit there and own him and then not even bother to give him a tip or two to find a reason to go on playing? , it could also serve as a innovate kick start But I've seen people stick to a community longer if there playing the same game (Or just doing something similar that everyone can get involved in) with people and then chatting a bit to get to know each other better , i don't see much of that here. instead i see people flipping out because someone got gold member position.

I go on steam and see just about every FS person playing at least 15 different games each, idk it just seems like fallout is crumbling to me just my opinion.

[Wizard]

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

Probably failed by now but its more of a push for this community to get active again

You most certainly have done. And you don't push, you ask.

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

afaik i hardly know 90% of these people beacuse they don't really game online at all

Erm, well you've seriously gotten your facts wrong there. ,

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

at least anything having to do with zero hour (the reason this forum pretty much exists imo)

This forum is about modding, has been for a while. Just because the community focuses on ZH doesn't make it the reason to be here. We've been around along time. ZH is an old game. Do you really think that every single one of us is going to be giving priority to a game that is that old?

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

and really there hardly given a insentive to.

I'm sorry, do you want me to pay people to join your hamachi room? If people need an incentive to play a game then you've lost it already.

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

I've managed my small community (My network) For what has to have bein 2 1/2 years now and i still see the same people that were here when i started it still playing because the community is just well , active. Crack a few jokes discuss politics , discuss In game strategies Link a few funny youtube videos here and there

Funny, that's what we do here to.

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

And i've ALWAYS helped people improve in a game

Oh wow. Sorry God. If you want people to play, you'll most certainly need to lose that attitude. People at FS play games with other members they consider their friends. They don't play because you are the Roxzors.

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

chatting a bit to get to know each other better , i don't see much of that here. instead i see people flipping out because someone got gold member position.

Shows how little you actually know about FS.

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 3:01, said:

I go on steam and see just about every FS person playing at least 15 different games each, idk it just seems like fallout is crumbling to me just my opinion.

And they'll be playing those 15 different games because they have 15 different games they want to play. You (and atm in time, most certainly you) aren't going to tell anyone what they should be playing.

If you want more ZH players I suggest you change your outlook and attitude and try a different approach. No one is going to want to play any game with someone with your mentality.

[Zhao]

I don't see why not.

And I've never gamed with someone who was Like "Dude your attitude sucks i don't wanna play with you anymore"

More or so "Thanks for teaching me how to play dude i appreciate it"

Edited by Aaron:Wii, 02 August 2010 - 08:21.

[Wizard]

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 9:17, said:

I don't see why not.

And I've never gamed with someone who was Like "Dude your attitude sucks i don't wanna play with you anymore"

More or so "Thanks for teaching me how to play dude i appreciate it"

It really looks like everyone in this thread feels that way to, huh???

[GuardianTempest]

Well, anyone an "Expanding Turtle"?

Also regarding RTS strategies, how do you classify mine?

It's mostly a turtle but not a steamrolling turtle. It's more of some strategic importance as sending a few squads of units(preferably durable ones) to wear out defenses at the same time rally main attack force(or cleanup force) out side the gates. Then launch a coordinated attack with all timers in sync. That's why I never start firing all of my SW's and GP's yet if I gathered that much yet. Although the opponent's a total wimp if the cleanup force doesn't get much fun with the wreckage and saboteurs will do devastation.

I want to know how do you classify this.

And as for this topic, screw hardcore rushing-elitist(no offense) if all they want to do is win and kill the fun. A turtle is also a sign of weakness unless they're actually going to steamroll from one side of the map to the other hopefully the enemy dies along the way or prefer long range bombardment which I am playing around with.

Also I like micro especially with powerful stealth units like Laser Burton with OICW(whatever) pack to slowly take apart defenses.

Wait does it really out-range defenses?

Now to get some eyedrops since that great irritation...ow.

[Zhao]

Quote

screw hardcore rushing-elitist(no offense) if all they want to do is win and kill the fun

Prove it.

[Wizard]

Aaron:Wii, on 2 Aug 2010, 16:47, said:

Quote

screw hardcore rushing-elitist(no offense) if all they want to do is win and kill the fun

Prove it.

What attitude I wonder

[walkingGhost]

I actually agree mostly with aaron; him being an arrogant little bastard doesn't mean he's wrong ^^

Most people have a negative attitude towards rushing because they get rushed (by better players) during their first online matches, and lose horribly.
If there is a large difference in skill, rushing might feel indeed like cheating for the loser, whilst, when turtling, you can at least kill some enemy units before getting steamrolled.
But for players of equal skill rushing makes games much more interesting and diverse, whilst turtling adds NOTHING to the game; turtling takes aways micromanagement (an important aspect of the game), and makes effectively everything short of artillery and superweapons useless.

All the RL- friends I play with were turtlers at the beginning, and reluctant to play games with "only" 10k starting cash. Nowaday's we play ALL our games WITHOUT defenses (tunnels excluded), because it's just much more fun in a shorter amount of time.

[Wizard]

walkingGhost, on 2 Aug 2010, 17:25, said:

I actually agree mostly with aaron; him being an arrogant little bastard doesn't mean he's wrong ^^

But it will affect his attempt to have people here go and game [in his hamachi room]. There is being a n00b and being elitist. As everyone will think they are in the middle of the two either ends of the spectrum this will put people off gaming with either polemic. If people like turtling it is their choice. If they have fun being annihilated by a better player or raging at a rusher, it's their call. There is no right way to RTS.

Edit: grammar

Edited by Wizard, 02 August 2010 - 16:32.

[Destiny]

walkingGhost, on 3 Aug 2010, 0:25, said:

I actually agree mostly with aaron; him being an arrogant little bastard doesn't mean he's wrong ^^

Most people have a negative attitude towards rushing because they get rushed (by better players) during their first online matches, and lose horribly.
If there is a large difference in skill, rushing might feel indeed like cheating for the loser, whilst, when turtling, you can at least kill some enemy units before getting steamrolled.
But for players of equal skill rushing makes games much more interesting and diverse, whilst turtling adds NOTHING to the game; turtling takes aways micromanagement (an important aspect of the game), and makes effectively everything short of artillery and superweapons useless.

All the RL- friends I play with were turtlers at the beginning, and reluctant to play games with "only" 10k starting cash. Nowaday's we play ALL our games WITHOUT defenses (tunnels excluded), because it's just much more fun in a shorter amount of time.

1. He's wrong on many occasions.

2. There are 6,8xx,xxx,xxx+ humans on this planet. Everyone of them has different preferences on everything. Then we narrow it down to RTS gamers. Everyone has different preferences on what they like.

3. False, turtling does not add nothing to the game. Turtling requires micromanagement. Artillery and superweapons are not the only way to break a turtle.

4. You cannot compare/force what you and your friends do with the rest of us who might like to turtle and play with 1,000,000,000 starting cash. Everyone has different preferences. There is no right or wrong. Trying to say something bad about turtling is the same as saying something bad about rushing.

[Zhao]

Quote

4. You cannot compare/force what you and your friends do with the rest of us who might like to turtle and play with 1,000,000,000 starting cash. Everyone has different preferences. There is no right or wrong. Trying to say something bad about turtling is the same as saying something bad about rushing.

Welll the hundreds of people who have cycled over time were turtlers at the beginning (even so was i) and after a while as walking ghost said they turned into 10k players who like to rush and play aggressive and this happen to anyone who gave it a shot so far.

I see this with all games be it starcraft DOW or C&C ZH , most players who end up taking a liking to online play go from turtle to full out agreesion with low cash value starts.

Not to say that turtling is bad is just that when against a real player he's not going to run his units directly into your defenses.

If you prefer turtling thats fine, i don't mind it we were all turtlers at one point, but it seems to me because turtling is alot more difficult online then against a "hard army" it pushes people away from playing online.

And from the hundreds of people i've played online with they all tell me the same story "well i was orginally defensive but after playing online for a while i started to use units alot more often then i did defenses"

Edited by Aaron:Wii, 02 August 2010 - 17:46.

[BeefJeRKy]

Definitely rushing is far more fun than turtling. Defensive play gets stale quick. And rushing doesn't guarantee success. A failed rush sometimes leaves the player doomed.

[HotSoup]

Ugh. Aaron, you are being a touch arrogant here, and Wizard is right in that doing so will not win you this battle or any others. It simply alienates you. You won't win friends by doing it, and only breed enemies.

However.

Wizard, why do you think being a noob and being elitist are the opposite ends of the spectrum. Thats just silly. There is being new and inexperienced to something, and there is being skilled and competitive at it. Elitism is something that can be held at any point; those who decry rushing as being lame are being just as elitist as skilled players who laugh at the idea of a no-rush game. I would also be hesistant to call even those elitist; its not an idea of one being better and those who follow it superior, its more a choice not to play the type of game they don't enjoy.

To be fair to Aaron, I don't think a single competitive RTS player would disagree with the basis of the article he originally posted. Decrying any tactic is a very silly thing to do in a game based on putting players' tactics, and their ability to carry them out, in a competitive enviorment. If, when you are faced with a tactic you cannot beat, you cry about it, call it overpowered and lame, and simply refuse to play with that tactic, what kind of player are you then? Sure, there is choice. When one buys the game they have the right to play it how they see fit with anyone who will play that way with them. If they don't want to learn how to deal with the tactic that defeats them, like rushing, they can make no rush games for those who share a similair mindset, or go to a simpler game, like DoW's highly simplistic Macro-based gamestyle, and enjoy themselves. That is their choice to make. Aaron, if it doesn't affect you, don't bother with it. You don't have to play their no-rush reindeer games. A player of greater skill will defeat the one of lesser skill no matter the ruleset imposed.

Turtling too is a tactic. If you cannot break a turtle, you do not deserve to beat it. Crying about turtling is the same thing as crying about rushing. Good thing in Zero Hour turtles are excessively easy to break. Just destroy them then have done.

The only actual problem with rushing is tha it changes the game, and the main issue with editing the original rules of the game to suit ones wants is that the game stops being balanced. Any RTS is only balanced in the original format. When you add a No Rush 10 minute rule to Zero Hour, you destroy most of the balance inherent in the game. You can no longer stop superweapons or tier 2 units as effectively, as the main counter to them in crushing the enemy who spent resources on teching up to get them instead of spending it on units. The balance in RTS's comes from that delicate dance of expanding your army and expanding your technology tree; adding no rush simply ruins it. That is why most No-rush games are also No Au, no SW, no Demo Bikes, no Battlebus, no Hummer games. The balance of these units disappeared when the rush was taken away. I think it also telling how excessively those games and those who play them ban things. Once they took out rushing, they found they couldn't beat superweapons, so they banned them. Then they found they couldn't beat Hummers, or Au, or battlebusses, and they did the same.

Edited by HotSoup, 02 August 2010 - 18:41.

[Erik]

Yea you cant simply take the 'real time' part out of RTS without crippling it. Realtime means speed so the faster one has the better chances, its a part of the gamedesign.

[GuardianTempest]

inb4FScivilwar

Really guys, isn't he supposed to be our good guy?