Rush, Rush, Rush: Halo Wars and the Endangered Turtle

[Tom Chick]

Kids these days - there were some on my lawn earlier today - just want to rush.

Read Rush, Boom, Turtle #12 (http://www.crispygamer.com/columns/2009-02-24/rush-rush-rush-halo-wars-and-the-endangered-turtle.aspx)....

[roguefrog]

(by the way, don't bother trying to explain all this to Total Annihilation or Supreme Commander fans, because once they start talking about adjacency bonuses, metal maps and Big Berthas, you'll never get them to shut up)

Way to continue the tradition of taking pot shots at us. But going as far back as Age of Empires III as the last RTS to embrace the Turtle? Really? Sorry Tom, but I turtled like crazy during my jaunts with SupCom online. In some games the other player would gobble up 90% of the map. I just turtle up with a shit ton of force fields, turrets, anti-air, artillery, and even an anti-nuke thrown in for good measure. I'd eventually boom out a super weapon for the win or at least die trying.

[Greatatlantic]

I think you are a little hard on Dawn of War 2, to say there is no RBT dynamic. Very early on players have to decide whether to spend Requisition on building power generators to tech sooner. Likewise, do they spend their early power on either squad upgrades (such as shotguns) or save it to tech to Tier 2 sooner and access vehicles. I'll admit that tactical finese plays a very large role in success or failure, but being able to field an extra unit earlier gives players an advantage to better contest map control. Similarly, getting a vehicle unit out before the player can access the proper counters is a large advantage (though one toned down since CoH).

Maybe turtling is gone, but there still is macro level desicions to be made, albeit challenging map control earlier or later. Honestly, I find this an improvement over a system that rewards players for picking rock instead of scissors at the game's beginning.

[Rock8man]

This is my favorite Rush Boom Turtle so far. Well, okay, my second favorite, on second thought. Nothing can supplant "Always Be Villagering". But in one way, this is the perfect introduction to the column, since it actually goes into Rushes, Booms and Turtles. Brilliant. I also love the friendly pot shot at Supreme Commander/TA. The truth is SupCom does all three, and it's a huge part of the game, and any SupCom player will recognize the Rushes, the Booms and the Turtles immediately as they're reading the rest of the article.

[Tom Chick]

Way to continue the tradition of taking pot shots at us.

I know, I know, but you guys are such low-hanging fruits.

But I'm not buying that Supreme Commnder is as turtlable* as TA. Supreme Commander clearly wants you to get out and grab those resource points rather than ceding them to your opponent. Besides, where are the metal maps? HUH? Oh, snap!

Also, Greatatlantic, I love how you insist that Dawn of War II has rushing, booming, and turtling, and then to prove your case, you describe something that isn't any of the above! FWIW, I'm not saying there aren't macro decisions to be made in DoW2. Clearly there are. They just aren't the traditional decisions of rushing, booming, or turtling.

-Tom

* My new favorite word that I just this instant invented!

[DustyTheHamster]

I pray for the turtlablity* of StarCraft2. I used to love building tight little bases and just weather attacks, till I was teched up and could march all over the people that just rushed.

-Mike
*did I use the word right

[beloved one]

Just to quibble, with RTS's, why is "Strategy" generally considered synonymous with economy building? Anything without this trait is tossed aside as an "action game", regardless of whether there are strategic decisions overlaying tactical ones.

Forgive my old chess geeky ways, but it's the game of strategy I was brought up with (maybe that was stratego), and there is no rush, boom, turtle to it at all. Classic strategy games tend to manifest strategy in positional choices, and DOW2 has that in spades!

*quibble quibble*

[Tom Chick]

Mr. One, it's helpful shorthand to distinguish between the larger picture (strategy) and the more immediate concerns of units fighting (tactics). But you're absolutely right.

However, the resource model in chess sucks. The only way to boom up is to get a pawn all the way across the board? At least in checkers any unit can be used to boom up your economy.

-Tom

[Chris Nahr]

So now I finally understand what those weird RTS players mean when they talk about rushing, booming, and turtling. Thanks, Tom!

[roguefrog]

I know, I know, but you guys are such low-hanging fruits.

But I'm not buying that Supreme Commnder is as turtlable* as TA. Supreme Commander clearly wants you to get out and grab those resource points rather than ceding them to your opponent. Besides, where are the metal maps? HUH? Oh, snap!



Barring metal maps, (in which the entire map is one giant infinite resource point allowing players to boom/rush/turtle all at once and sky rocket up the build curve so quickly it is freakin' ridiculous) I'd argue Supreme Commander is just as turtlable if not more so than TA. This is mostly due to the Support Commander resource upgrade and more importantly tier one mass generator farms which allowed you to become self sufficient without the critical need to expand across the map. Expanding the laying claim to more resources helps, but the alternative is entirely viable. They actually address this in Forged Alliance by moving the tier one mass generators to tier two.

[jellyfish]

Not to be overly pedantic, but when you say "anyone facing a UNSC player needs to build n+n vehicles, where n is the number of Spartans the other player has", because "you need an extra left over to fight each one that was just stolen from you", I think it should be 2n+n. If you have n+n vehicles then all of your vehicles will be neutralized fighting off the captured vehicles and you won't have any left over for the initial task they set out to accomplish. With 2n+n vehilces, n get captured, n engage the captured vehicles, and n are left over to do what you want. Unless of course the whole purpose of the vehicle brigade is to engage the Spartans, in which case n+n would be enough for that.

[Tom Chick]

Not to be overly pedantic

I think the rest of your post blows that out of the water. :) But, yeah, I was trying to make a math reference when I should have just said "bring spare vehicles!" The only thing worse would have been if I'd tried to use a sports metaphor, such as "bring your A-side game".

Roguefrog, fair point about the resource generator farms. I'd forgotten about the whole power/resource generator interplay. But it still seems you're ceding a lot of resources to your opponent if you stay home. I'd be surprised if it's a viable strategy against two evenly matched opponents, but I grant that I'm probably not as acquainted with the nuances of SC as you. At any rate, it's a fair comparison to the way the Dutch work in Age III.

-Tom

[thinkingork]

Shouldn't DoW2 considered pre-turtled as it is impossible to rush the opponent's base?

[Tom Chick]

That's one way to look at it, Mr. Ork. However, I'm not sure I even consider it a base so much as a spawn point. Given the way Dawn of War II plays, I'd be inclined to say the turrets are there to prevent spawn camping. :)

-Tom

[thinkingork]

Furthermore, I do not think the Turtle tactic is endangered, it is simply disguised in another form. Using DoW2 as an example again, the new form of turtle would be spreading your units, capturing all the resource nodes and avoiding fighting. Artificially, it is different from the traditional turtle strategy which you simply sit in your base. But strategically, it is the same thing. You try to get as many resources as you can, tech up as fast as you can and spend as little as you can on units.

I think it is more accurate to say that the genre has re-innovated itself, instead of the change of style. The old gameplay is still here but disguised in a new form.

[mono]

In DoW2 there's that Tyranid leader dude who tunnels all over the map. I've been beat a couple of times when someone has tunneled all around the map and leaves practically his entire (growing) force in the tunnels. He just pops them out en masse from a hole near whichever capture point I attempt to claim.

It felt as if a bit of turtleage was going on in that strategy.

[caesarbear]

Furthermore, I do not think the Turtle tactic is endangered, it is simply disguised in another form. Using DoW2 as an example again, the new form of turtle would be spreading your units, capturing all the resource nodes and avoiding fighting. Artificially, it is different from the traditional turtle strategy which you simply sit in your base. But strategically, it is the same thing. You try to get as many resources as you can, tech up as fast as you can and spend as little as you can on units.

That's non-centralized swarming, not turtling. It demands a different skillset, enough to be a different strategy. It's actually an effective counter to a traditional turtle, so you could place it in the "boom" category.

[jellyfish]

Any strategy that involves map control is not turtling. Turtles stay in their 'shell'.

[unbongwah]

I only spent a little time with the DoW 2 beta, but it felt kinda like the RTS equivalent of UT2004's Onslaught mode, where gameplay is a tug-of-war over control points on the map. By changing the resource-management / economic model, it forces you to adopt different tactics.

Traditional turtling isn't really an option, because you can't build up your defenses without resources and you can't generate resources without seizing control points. The same with booming: economic development is tied to control points. Classic turtling & booming only work in games where you're able to build up your economy & defenses without ever leaving home. But classic rushing - in the "send units to overrun the enemy base as soon as possible" sense - doesn't really work either, because as Tom says, it works more like a spawn point in DoW 2. If you're rushing - or just camping - the enemy's base in DoW 2 while his other units are seizing resource points, you'll lose.

[zengonzo]

I'm a dedicated turtler. AoE was the last game at which I was competitively competent. So I can appreciate the notion that it is the Turtle's Paradise. I always felt safe in that game. I've never felt such security in an RTS since. I always feel exposed.

Recently got into Company of Heroes with a friend, and for a bit we'd play games as a team against other enemies, and we developed this natural partnership wherein he'd get out there in the field aggressively and draw fire while I concentrated on building up forces and defenses.

Just guess what happened when we finally played a match against one another. It wasn't pretty.

[Greatatlantic]

Also, Greatatlantic, I love how you insist that Dawn of War II has rushing, booming, and turtling, and then to prove your case, you describe something that isn't any of the above! FWIW, I'm not saying there aren't macro decisions to be made in DoW2. Clearly there are. They just aren't the traditional decisions of rushing, booming, or turtling.

-Tom

* My new favorite word that I just this instant invented!

Then let me repharse. To boom in DoW2 is to invest in your requisition in power generators. To rush is to invest your requisition into more units. To turtle... going by defitions is to invest in defense to stop a rush. As all Tier-1 units are suppressable infantry, I'd imagine that be spending your requisition on the a Devestator squad or Shuriken Platform.

Its not clear cut RBT dynamic, but I don't think it ever is (which you admit, but I think more so). For example, I've never perceived turtling as a worthwhile dynamic with out an appropriate eco development going on (i.e. boom). Best case scenario an opponent charges your defenses and looses a ton of troops. More likely, he'll see your formidable defenses and retreat with troops to be upgraded later. Most RTS games I've played provide players with pretty effective defense nullifiers further down the tech tree, e.g. trebuechets in AoE2. Meanwhile, even the most dedicated rusher will want to have wall in that game, so a few enemy calvary decimate his villagers.

DoW2 might be a baseball like game, where a 1/10 difference is the difference between an excellent and mediocre batter and a rusher and a boomer.

[Banzai]

This article just made me miss Kohan.

Oh yeah, and GET OFF MY LAWN!

[ydejin]

This is a bit off topic, but this seemed like the most appropriate thread to ask it in since y'all are already arguing about RTS semantics. What does the term "dance" mean in regard to RTS play and what is it's relationship to "kite"? I saw a post where someone said you could kite an enemy unit or you could just dance with it.

[mono]

I'm not remotely adept at RTS vernacular, but I think dance is to micromanage your units around opposing units, and to kite, is to run up and attempt to entice an enemy unit to pursue you into your weapon range.

[beloved one]

Dancing can take place with melee units, say my 3 axe dudes tangle with your 3. Makes sense to kill one first. Well, say you target all 3 of yours at one of mine. Well, I see its taking damage and run it back a little... your guys maybe chase it a little and try to path around my other 2 axe guys, generally just losing free hits and not hitting the focus fire guy. Eventually you have to give up on that target, and switch to other melee guys. At that moment, the focus fire guy (who stays near) re-engages.

Dancing is also effective if the other group fires untargeted... one or two units will inevitably take damage faster, and you can pull them back until targets are switched. Anyway, in short dancing is generally close ranged micro movements that allow you to maximize the duration of time you can spend dishing out dps, while spreading the damage among your close range guys as evenly as possible, and avoiding deaths. It ends up looking a lot like a dance, take one step backwards, then one forward, slide over from left side to middle, dragging your opposite number(s) with you, do-si-do.

Kiting, specifically refers to faster longer ranged unit(s) being able to loose a volley against short-range pursuers, run away to long range, and then loose another volley. The line/semicircle of ranged "kiters" form the kite fabric, their projectiles are the string tying them to the central point or line (pursuing melee units). The formation moves freely in the available space of the map, like a kite lazily flying around !

[ydejin]

Thanks mono and beloved.

[Aeon221]

Forgive my old chess geeky ways, but it's the game of strategy I was brought up with (maybe that was stratego), and there is no rush, boom, turtle to it at all. Classic strategy games tend to manifest strategy in positional choices, and DOW2 has that in spades!

*quibble quibble*

Chess does in fact have the rush/boom/turtle dynamic. Here's how!

First off, the primary resource in chess is board control -- central squares have the greatest potential for control, and are thus the most highly coveted.

A rushing player chooses to forgo control of these squares in favor of an early mate, either by pulling that ridiculous five move queen mate or through a four pawn attack -- doing so leaves you massively vulnerable in the midgame, with either an exposed queen or unsupported pawns and undeveloped majors. They'll also generally favor exchanging lots of pieces in order to prevent boomers from gaining map control -- if their goal is development and you keep nailing the pieces they bring out, they're wasting their time. The primary goal is to force an early endgame before the enemy has time to develop map control and contain you.

A booming player prefers to develop the rear while pushing a couple of supported pawns into the center in order to maximize map control (you know, the standard "p e4"...). Since most of the rush strategies are focused around exploiting the large holes inherent in the boom strategy, this is risky -- but the payoff generally makes it worth doing. Sometimes a sacrifice is used to expand map control (gambits), further reducing defensive capabilities, but generally the boomers prefer peaceful expansion with limited exchanges. Their goal is to force a long midgame where their superior position will have the most value, and to contain the enemy.

A turtling player generally forgoes the initiative and chooses an early castle and perhaps even a fianchetto (or, heavens, a double fi) with a strong preference towards controlling the less desirable side positions in order to minimize the number of possible attacks on their pieces -- but also their ability to engage enemy pieces. The more aggressive the opponent -- in other words, the greater the enemy preference for rushing strategies -- the more effective a turtle becomes. Their goal is to survive the mid game with as few losses as possible in order to dominate the endgame.

See? It's pretty obvious how the r/b/t dynamic plays a large part in chess, both in terms of the opening game and in setting the tone for the rest of the game. Sure, you don't send your pawns to lumberyards or some shit, but you also don't send your rifles off to lumberjack in Company of Heroes -- you fight for board space!

[jellyfish]

Something cute but silly!
And now with tic tac toe...
Rush starts with a quick x on the side middle (not corner) hoping you won't pay attention and allow him a quick win in 3 moves.
Boom goes for the center square, forcing a prolong exchange where his hopefully superior strategy will eventually lead to an end game victory.
Turtle goes for the corner where he will slowly expand outwards until he can get three in a row.

[salwon]

Chess does in fact have the rush/boom/turtle dynamic. Here's how!

Chess Strategy

I had the exact same analysis ready to go. Asshole.

Also, n+n = 2n, and 2n+n = 3n. Not to be pedantic or anything.

[beloved one]

Heh, how many people can line up the same misplaced refutation!

My point was that strategy in chess uses position rather than "economics". In the article Tom goes on about how DOW2 throws rush, boom, turtle out the window because it lacks the economic booming. As mentioned, the only mechanism for producing a unit is pawn promotion...

It's a silly analogy you suggest anyway, since it's not like in chess that I play p e4 (you claim a definitive boomer move!), and suddenly against a "rusher" I'm playing the game from a disadvantage, and doomed to a short game scrambling to avoid 5 move checkmates... or against a "turtle" looking to play a fianchetto I've countered him. Whether you favor gambits or early castling, there is no straightforward paper-rock-scissor relationship between the play styles as there are in RTS's.

[copet]

I pray for the turtlablity* of StarCraft2. I used to love building tight little bases and just weather attacks, till I was teched up and could march all over the people that just rushed.

-Mike
*did I use the word right

A terran player, eh? Haha :D Seems like theres always a unit skill (corsairs, sporecloud) that gets through, though :P

[Houngan]

I hate to do this, because I've always been a casual RTS guy, but I have to tell one story:

Back in the TA days, with MPlayer, I believe, as the dialup service, I remember a 3 person game. It was a metal map, which suits me fine because I'm a dedicated turtle. I had a serious relationship with the midrange cannon in that game (the one the L1 bots could build, but that cost a ton of metal) because it could REACH, baby. Dragon's Teeth to confuse and a steady stream of scout planes (my version of long range radar, just set an airport to building 100 scouts with a spaghettti patrol route programmed in) and those bastards would cork up ten time's their cost in enemies, just by superior range and big damage.

So we start out, and I turtle up. Roll a few dozens of solar panels and start straight in on a reactor. Meanwhile I'm playing exponents with my construction bots, spinning another factory and more bots out of each. Soon I have moho metal makers going and a stream of adv. construction bots set to spawn in support of the Berthas. Meanwhile my old L1 bots are wandering around building the cheap antiair gun. With a 200 unit limit, they built in a few seconds and were devastating.

So all this time I'm getting harrassed, owning any air that came at me but struggling a bit managing turrets to keep the ground foces at bay. Then one Bertha goes up, then two more in two minutes, due to my exponential constructors. The other players control equal 40%s of the map, and my little 20% looks sad and pathetic. However, they've both become accustomed to my steady stream of scout planes that impale themselves on their air defenses. Why not let your commander wander in range of this spy plane? And why not forget that the game was set to commander dies = lose.

So a few raking shots with the Bertha, and one guy is screaming at me. The other guy freaks out, but that's when the turtle explodes. The true power of the turtle is always to have something crazy being built that is going to absolutely Crush you guys, OMG if I had only had one more minute, I swear! So suddenly I had nukes come up. The trick to TA was to fire your nuke, then cancel it. This triggered the 5-10 second animation of the missile coming out of the silo, which normally made targetting a bitch. But if you sat through the animation, then you had a ready-to-go nuke that would fire instantly.

So I changed the scout route over his base and started group-firing my berthas. If you waited about two seconds between volleys, his attention would go away from the minimap and he wouldn't see the bullet path. Freaky telepathic timing, but it worked. All of his interior power and metal generation was dead in four volleys, which he couldn't place. Then one big air campaign to locate, then nuke, his commander.

The constant refrain? "But your base was so small!?" That's right boyo, meet the turtle.

H.