Author Topic: Expansion vs turtling  (Read 3916 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Deoxy (OP)

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 50
Expansion vs turtling
« on: April 18, 2011, 03:52:10 PM »
I've explored out to approximately 4 star systems' distance in (almost) all directions, yet I haven't actually colonized outside my home system yet (several decent worlds for my race in the home system)... is there any advantage to continuing exploration?  Or is it better to not explore any more than you want to colonize in short order?

I've got invaders turned off - from what I've picked up, with invaders on, you want to explore as quickly as possible to give them more places to randomly show up (other than your home system, where they will wipe you out quickly).

I haven't run into Star Swarm yet (that I know of).

I have plenty of minerals in my home and nearby systems (at least for a while - there's never "enough", is there?).

So, what are the advantages and disadvantages of turtling vs rapid exploration?
 

Offline Thiosk

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 784
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2011, 04:01:27 PM »
I am 60 years in, and have only contacted one race.  I'm at the back end of a jump chain, so there is really only activity in one direction.  Alpha centauri is STACKED with minerals so I havn't had a pressing need for expansion.  I've focused on acquiring 100 m scientists and creating an enormous production base. I just ordered up 1000 automated mines and set up jump gates towards some very nice colonizable worlds, however I havn't found any more REALLY great mining systems.

After a horrifying defeat at the hands of some precursors, I'm rather hesitant to explore much beyond my current location without new engine, weapon, and sensor  technologies fitted on my vessels.  I have the production capacity to make any ship I should so desire, but not enough research base to make them very good.

Thus, I'm a turtle.  A big honking slow ass turtle.
 

Offline Yonder

  • Registered
  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Y
  • Posts: 278
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2011, 04:31:54 PM »
I am generally fairly turtly as well. I expand until I run into the first hostile ships (generally Precursors). I then stop any expansion and most scouting until I have researched, designed, and built sensor ships that can keep tabs on that class of vessel without being noticed in return.

I then build some of those and scout with them until I have found 2-3 nearby systems with nice minerals and colonization possibilities. At that point I stop all expansion until I have created ships that are faster than the enemy with longer range, I slaughter the enemy ships and move on from there.
 

Offline Felius

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • F
  • Posts: 40
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2011, 05:49:18 PM »
I explore like a madman, although the actual expanding is slower.   

I'm 41 years into the game, know 49 systems, surveyed 26 of them, have 11 unexplored jump points to send a ship through, found one NPR that I'm on my way of making them an ally, found precursors in 3 systems and I think the swarm in one, destroyed the precursors in one of these systems that was neighbor to Sol (their ships there were colony ships who fought by ramming :P), have colonized mars plus two planets outside Sol (one in the previously mentioned system that I destroyed the precursors, some ruins that I guess they were protecting were of some nice help setting up that colony, and another on a nice system also neighbor to Sol), fully terraformed them all (through a tugged orbital terraformer/habitat), plus some mining colonies.   

For my explorers, I make my survey ships double as explorers.   I make a geosurvey and a gravsurvey class, both with small commercial self only jump drives, with the only difference on them besides the kind of sensors is that the gravsurvey also carriers more engineering and maintenance storage.   If they enter a precursor occupied system they generally are destroyed, but they're pretty cheap, so I just build more.

Edit: Oh, also, I dealt with my colonies getting unrest because of lacking of protection by stationing some ground troops there.  They still complain, but the troops reduce unrest back to zero.  I'll have to actually give them some defense later, but I'll deal with that when I actually establish the colonies instead of just setting some infrastructure and population. 
« Last Edit: April 18, 2011, 05:51:55 PM by Felius »
 

Offline Starkiller

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • S
  • Posts: 211
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2011, 09:50:21 PM »
I'm a fast explorer, but slow expander. :) Found Precursers next to Sol, in Alpha Centauri, but I was quite
advanced, as I had refused to leave a mineral rich Sol, until I could defend myself. With a defense base on
each of the four warp points, and 4 heavy DDGs as a fast reaction force, I stuck my head into the noose.

Survey Alpha found a mineral rich system next door. Nobody there, but a wrecked ship showed that someone
had been. In Alpha Centauri, Survey Beta ran into Precursers. Fortunately, my survey cruisers have the longest
range sensor suite my tech can provide. They didn't notice us, so I sent in my Destroyers, sucked the Precursers
into range of my waiting ship by activating the survey ships active sensors. It was only the second time I was
able to ambush Precursers, as they usually do it to me.

There are advantages, and disadvantages to either method of play, though I usually turtle until I think my tech
can handle Precursers, at least. But NEVER get cocky. Steve has a nasty inventive mind, and Aurora has a tendency
to swat egos down rather abruptly. :)

Eric
 

Offline Deoxy (OP)

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 50
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2011, 08:24:49 AM »
It seems that there is NO downside to turtling - expand as much as necessary for minerals, then turtle and research until you run out.  Lather, rinse, repeat.

Since there are so few NPRs by default, nothing really happens until you go out and find it...

Hmm.  Invaders seem too aggressive (especially for "conventional" starts), but nothing else really gives any downside to turtling... seems like a weak point.
 

Offline Charlie Beeler

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1381
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2011, 09:23:18 AM »
It really depends on how you setup the game. 

If you have a small universe and start with several AI NPR's turtling could be a bad thing.  If you don't have AI NPR's set for game start you should be OK.  Precursors and Swarm should only generate as new systems are explored. 

Invaders are the wildcard.  Unless Steve has changed this again, they are not triggered until the first time you transit a jumppoint. 
Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics - paraphrase attributed to Gen Omar Bradley
 

Offline Rastaman

  • Azhanti High Lightning
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • R
  • Posts: 144
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2011, 10:31:32 AM »
The downside of turtling is money, you can afford more ships with more population and more trade. Although without a very active colonization effort it takes a long time before the colonies make themselves felt.

But sometimes it doesn't matter. I started a game with 1 NPR and I'm pretty sure that this NPR is one jump from Sol but around 2 secondary stars which orbit the primary at over 1600 billion km, and there are no LPs. So they will never reach a jump point themselves.
Fun Fact: The minimum engine power of any ship engine in Aurora C# is 0.01. The maximum is 120000!
 

Offline Deoxy (OP)

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 50
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2011, 02:05:19 PM »
It really depends on how you setup the game. 

If you have a small universe and start with several AI NPR's turtling could be a bad thing.  If you don't have AI NPR's set for game start you should be OK.  Precursors and Swarm should only generate as new systems are explored. 

Invaders are the wildcard.  Unless Steve has changed this again, they are not triggered until the first time you transit a jumppoint. 

That info on Invaders makes me want to give it a try - I just might.

The other point (about starting NPRs) is a good thought... but the game seems to point you starting with only one, or at most a few.  Do "veteran" players often start with several NPRs?  That would seem to make turtling a lot less viable... but then, it would also make "conventional" starts that much less competitive.
 

Offline Narmio

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • N
  • Posts: 181
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2011, 07:59:05 PM »
I'm currently playing a game with 10 starting NPRs and an NPR-generation chance of 0, just to see what it's like.  I'm about 25 years in now, and while it's not actually that slow to update there are one or two battles a year that take a few hours real-time to resolve using Auto Turns. Luckily I have several computers and typically just throw on a movie when that happens.

I've explored about 30 systems and I have not actually encountered anything but the Swarm and several bunches of what appear to be Precursor wrecks yet.  I'm actually wondering whether most of the battles I'm seeing are Invaders vs NPR and by the time I actually do find their homeworlds there will be nothing left but smoking, twisted glass. Or maybe they've run out of minerals and are dead in space, who knows.
 

Offline dooots

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • d
  • Posts: 129
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2011, 10:49:35 PM »
If you turtle you miss out on early ruins and possibly NPRs to conquer both of which can be a great boost but come with danger.
 

Offline Deoxy (OP)

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 50
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2011, 09:17:28 AM »
If you turtle you miss out on early ruins and possibly NPRs to conquer both of which can be a great boost but come with danger.

The effort it takes to take out precursors and exploit ruins seems to be about as much, if not more, as just doing the research yourself, at least from what I've seen so far... but maybe if you get lucky with higher tech ruins it's worth the trouble?

I know there are at least a couple of tech types you can only get from ruins - are they really worth it?  And how likely are you to get them?  Seems pretty low to me, but I've only exploited a couple of ruins so far, so maybe I've just been unlucky.
 

Offline Hawkeye

  • Silver Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2011, 10:01:25 AM »
IMO, the beauty of Aurora is, both work.

If I roleplay a race of explorers (and I like to think humanity would fit that bill), turteling when you could explore is simply a no-go.
If, on the other hand, I roleplay a very cautious, self-centered race, turtling is perfectly all right.

In other words, I realy don´t think of it as: "Is it the best way to play?" but as: "Does it fit the race I imagine?"
Ralph Hoenig, Germany
 

Offline dooots

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • d
  • Posts: 129
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2011, 06:25:51 PM »
The effort it takes to take out precursors and exploit ruins seems to be about as much, if not more, as just doing the research yourself, at least from what I've seen so far... but maybe if you get lucky with higher tech ruins it's worth the trouble?

I know there are at least a couple of tech types you can only get from ruins - are they really worth it?  And how likely are you to get them?  Seems pretty low to me, but I've only exploited a couple of ruins so far, so maybe I've just been unlucky.

It depends on how you start and how many and what kind of ships you have to fight.  Some times you get lucky and although they are higher tech it is not all that hard to clear them out other times you are not so lucky.
 

Offline LoSboccacc

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • L
  • Posts: 136
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: Expansion vs turtling
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2011, 06:59:21 AM »
It depends on how you start and how many and what kind of ships you have to fight.  Some times you get lucky and although they are higher tech it is not all that hard to clear them out other times you are not so lucky.

so, how low tech a player warship can be before starting expansion?

I mean, what's the absolute minimum to search for an attack fleet to have some chance of success in an early expansion centered game?