Hi hi. I know this is probably super early and way presumptuous of me... But I play with an econ heavy, early ultra defensive style. I prefer a strategy where I minimize my raiding, sacrifice my early and even mid-game offensive power in order to power level my econ. Yes, I realize it might be a bit too "sim-city" for some people. I try to maximize my defenses, turrets and shields so that I can easily fend off raids all for the hope of becoming a very strong late-game economic powerhouse. I did a lot of 2v2 in Forged Alliance where my teammate would raid while I covered our base. (Yes, I'm a Zerg player in Starcraft as well. Can't crack my defensive shell or you leave me unchecked and you're going to have a bad time later). I've heard mention of there being "no shields"? I know the community probably won't know the balance that's coming. 1. If the devs read this, I wonder if it's possible that this play style would still be viable? 2. Does the community think this would still be something that's welcomed? Or is this play-style shunned?
there have been several threads that deal with this and you can probably find them with the search function, however the general consensus seems to be that any play style should be viable, but it might not be optimal.
Considering the fact that you'll have to eventually fend off stuff like asteroid attacks, pure turtling may not be the most beneficial route to take. (Perhaps against the AI, but knowing Sorian, it's unlikely.) But really, you (and other turtle/norush20 players) should consider breaking out of your shell and trying more offensive plays. Sure turtling is "safe" and "easy," but eventually it becomes very monotone, following what is essentially the same recipe over and over with little promise of success. The meat of an active strategy is what makes the game exciting, and multiplayer all the more worthwhile. A lot of players stick to the turtling comfort zone because there's less effort involved, and I guess it's more relaxing to watch enemies smash against your defenses like a tower defense game. But if you play that way, then what's the point in playing at all? There are better tower-defense games out there. I used to be a heavy turtler in the TA days, surrounding my base with guardians and speed-building Berthas (and Vulcans -_-). I had to force myself to try a more active playstyle, and in the end it's much more enjoyable. So while turtling may be a somewhat viable option in PA, now's the time to break from that habit and try to play actual strategy. (Especially since the UI will be oriented towards making it so much easier.)
They've said no bubble shields. More specifically that it will be implementable but not done by them, because it messes with long range combat in an undesirable way. They haven't ruled out the possibility of more unconventional unit or structure hardening options though.
Find people who played TA and ask them. TA had no shielding whatsoever. From what I remember back in those days, when I played defensively I typically used walls a lot to control enemy movement, carefully placed superior turret defences and tried to maintain a range advantage above all else. Neutralising enemy artillery was my first priority with either my own or small strike teams (typically a number of bombers) and second priority was expanding/teching up. With such a vast amount of land to cover, you should consider placing plenty of outposts across the map and expand upon the important ones, like choke points. Information as usual, is your best friend and most sought after resource. Shields just make your bases tougher by applying an extra layer of HP. Just know your bases are a little softer and play appropriately Hope this helps.
Also i believe that in Sup Com a single artillery shell could destroy half your base if it landed in just the wrong spot due to cascading explosions, the shield prevented any attrition. In TA you didn't rely on any group of structures as much and relied on redundant structures and production to weather artillery until you could stop it.
TA also featured hills as an artillery defense. Big berthas shot low flying shells, which would strike hills and mountains. It was really cool. You're going to find that anything is viable in bronze league. Skilled players will always strip down strategies and find out what's viable and what's not. It's just what they do. The general trend is that sitting in your base, refusing to grab resources, and refusing to deny enemy action is suicide. It doesn't matter what game it is.
I like to turtle as well. Maybe not so much as OP, but i like building a good defense. good enough so that when i take my army out, i don't have to worry too much about my base being undefended. For me it's about sensory overload: i don't like my concentration being dragged in several directions at once. I can handle being attacked in several directions at once, but it's work and not-fun for me. The solution for me: defensive. built heavy defenses and husband them, while building an army (and patrolling the walls). then when you've got enough, take the lot and squash someone. dealing with 10 problems at once may be someone's idea of 'awesome', but for me it's just stressy. Thus: Turtle.
You have three bases per planet over four planets. Your opponent(s) launch coordinated attacks across them knowing you can't split your attention. You suddenly have to handle 12 different battles at the same time...? Seems pretty likely (if only a little exaggerated) to happen in PA.
