Game Diversity

from AshesoftheSingularity Forums

Hi, I've not currently bought the game but I've been very interested in it since it's announcement. I was wondering how the strategic choices between expanding resource building or building a stronger army affects the game-play.

 

For instance in FA it was whether to rush eco or focus on a more guerrilla game play, from the videos I've seen so far of Ashes I'm not seeing that same early game strategic diversity, it seems to be cap some resources and expand for the rest of the game.

Thoughts?

19,065 views 2 replies
Reply #1 from AshesoftheSingularity Forums Top

Expanding is necessary, otherwise you will lose on Victory Points. The game does not lend itself to turtling. I realize that is not really your question though.

The strategies have not really been fleshed out right now. The seed/nexus is very strong, so it will be effectively impossible to win with a rush snipe tactic. But rushing may still be effective for hurting your opponent's econ in the early game, depending upon map size (even the small maps take a fair amount of time to traverse). As for rush vs. boom, I think the trade off works because, though you still need to expand, you need to put extractors on the various resource points to pull in more faster, and building them takes away resources for units. Radioactives, needed to build advanced units, are also needed to build Quanta complexes (or whatever they are called) for research and global abilities. I think there are a continuum of workable strategies, though the differences in this game are subtle because expansion is necessary either way.