[2.1r] [Home]
Login | Register


Blastwave (Design Map by SmackCakes)
Categories: A-Rank, Base Light



















[Games on this map]
[Play on this map]
[Map Analysis]
[Check Favorites]
[Export map as text]

Ratings go from 1 (awful) to 10 (near perfect).
Discuss this and other design maps and get tips and
suggestions from other users at the AWBW Design Maps Forum

Rating: 7.69 in 89 ratings
Map Committee Rating: 8.00 in 3 ratings
Comments:
SmackCakes (06/16/2007 12:52pm):
Just wanted to try something a bit different with this. It's actually a fairly regular 1
on 1 at the core. I put the HQs forward to keep things interesting, and the bases back to
promote vehicle use. The main difference here is that black boats can reach just about
every tile to do repairs. landers also have free reign and make for a super fast way of
deploying things like rockets. and both make extremely tough blockers.

The ports are only really intended for deploying black boats and landers, which is why
they are locked by shoals. Though I guess if you could find the cash and didn't mind
blocking your port then a battleship or carrier might make an ok stationary gun, but I
imagine if you build a cruiser you'll probably be a quite disappointed.

The pre-deployed infantry is obviously to counter FTA. I chose to move him a little bit
back off the base this time, because there isn't really a split path here, the forward
base is just plain more useful than the rear base. So giving PC first build from it would
probably count for more than half a turn. Where the infantry is now he can still reach the
port or a city first (even some middle cities) but not the airport or properties to the south.

Nobody (06/16/2007 02:56pm):
map is great, maybe add some reefs :) 9/10
Edit: And maybe you could place the ports on ocean, so that ppl can use more sea units,
except for black boats and landers, if you want to allow it o_O
Last Edited on 06/16/2007 03:03pm
Riukken (06/17/2007 10:41am):
+2 Decent terrain variety.
+2 No choke points!
+1 FTA Counter
-1 Needs more neutral bases, put 1 or 2 neutral bases in the middle of the map.
9/10
jhuni (06/20/2007 05:45pm):
7.5/10 (round it down to 7/10) because of slight imbalances, air dominance over sea units, a
lack of defense starts and good terrain variety...
Last Edited on 07/05/2007 02:04pm
jhuni (06/22/2007 05:02pm):
More reasoning is given.


The terrain variety is bad.
There are(
Two 3x3 sea clumps.
Four 3x2 sea clumps.
Two 3x1 plains.
And something like 90 shoals with 9+ 1x10 shoal areas.
)
I would say that isn't very good terrain variety.

As for the city heavyness issue, nobody in their right mind is going to build landers. Given
15,000 funds per turn a lander is 12,000 dollars which is most of their money already.

Building a t-chopter is far more logical because the lander is going to be used to transport
mostly infantries and the lander costs a lot of funds. The user will have the airport before
they have enough funds to even consider wasting money on a lander.


As for the slight imbalance:

The most common form of FTA balance is certaintly the one you use in your map. However,
sometimes if the infantry is a turn behind and or not in the range of a city the solution can be
imbalanced.

In this case the infantry is a turn behind the other base and thus that is cause for a slight
imbalance. It is merely a slight imbalance. I would move the infantry a turn ahead.

SmackCakes (06/22/2007 06:09pm):
Firstly only a complete retard would consider a 3x3 area of sea (which by the way doesn't
exist here) or 3 plains tiles in a row "terrain clumping"

Secondly how is there a problem with terrain variety? Every terrain type in the game with
the exception of pipes and reefs is present here, and it is all spread reasonably evenly
throughout the map.

Obviously the exception to this is shoals. But that's because the whole point of this map
is to allow blackboats free movement. Jhuni seems to think this is bad because it deviates
from whatever notion he has of what a map should be like. Well guess what! Not every map
has to be like that, and do you know why? Because that would be boring!

There are over 25 thousand maps on awbw to date. I bet I could easily find you 10,000
where blackboats don't have access to every tile. If you don't like that sort of thing
then go play on one of the 24,999 other maps. But If you'd like to try something a little
different then that is what I have tried to do here. Sorry if in an effort to make a map
that was interesting an unusual to play on, I strayed from the typical terrain ratios.

As for blackboats and landers... actually t.copters can't replace them. t.copters can't
move as fast as black boats they can only carry half as much as black boats. They can't repair
other vehicles as blackboats can. And also t.copters get killed in one hit by anti-airs. A
blackboat can hold out 10 days against a tank.

Also it takes 1 day longer to capture the air port, and it takes a t.copter 2 days longer
to get to the com tower. Which means it takes 3 days longer to capture your com tower with
a t.copter. which also mean there is going to be 3 days when your opponent has 2 com
towers and 20% extra attack while you have none! So to respond to your questions... no
that isn't attractive at all.

Moving on to landers... a lander can get a rocket from the base to the middle in one day.
and a tank too if you like. In fact using a lander you can move 2 tanks up to 12 spaces in
one day. you can deploy a rocket 11 spaces away in one day. can you do that with a
t.copter? NO! so shut the hell up.

As for FTA counter, this is the real clincher. Because it shows just how poor Jhuni's
understanding of balance is...

So the infantry is a day behind is it Jhuni? Well let me ask you: if the infantry is a day
behind how come Pink can get to the port before Black? How come Pink can capture a city on
the first day when Black can't? how about those properties in the middle? Oh look pink can
get there first too. see you just don't know what you're talking about. yet you bombard
everyone with your half witted opinions. That makes you an asshole.

What Jhuni wants me to do here is place the infantry on the base. What he doesn't
understand is that the bases here are not equal. The forward base is primary. Most of the
properties on this map will be captured by infantry built from that base. If I give Pink
first build from that base it will be almost as bad as using a pre-deployed infantry on a
map with only one base (essentially giving Pink first turn) Jhuni is actually (through his
ignorance) advising me to do something which will make my map unfair. The way it is now PC
can get the port first, or they can get a property first, they can even get a middle
property first. In contrast BH can get to the airport first. It's "balanced" if I move the
infantry forward PC will be able to do everything first and will essentially have 80% of the
first turn and an advantage.

as for middle properties... there are no middle properties here. there are properties
close to the middle. But that is a good thing because it encourages fighting. Having
nothing near the middle makes games stale.
Last Edited on 06/22/2007 07:59pm
thougar (06/22/2007 08:11pm):
[quote="smacky]That makes you an asshole. [quote/]

this is true

[quote="The Asshole"]Two 3x3 sea clumps.
Four 3x2 sea clumps.
Two 3x1 plains. [quote/]

Who cares? the map looks aesthetically pleasing, is balanced and is, like Smacky has said,
different. I think the blackboat's being able to travel anywhere could add a whole new set
of tactics you could use on this map.

I give it a 9.

jhuni (06/23/2007 03:12pm):
Forgive my ignorance since I know it would please you I give your map 10/10.

1. A b-chopter on the airport can reach his own comm tower in two turns.
2. A t-chopter on the airport can reach the opposing comm tower in two turns.
3. Only sea units being used are landers and bboats, the sea will be completely dominated
by air units and not sea units, any push of sea units will be countered by air units.
Last Edited on 07/05/2007 02:02pm
SmackCakes (06/24/2007 01:14am):
yes it does *much love* ^_________^
Last Edited on 06/24/2007 01:14am
jhuni (07/03/2007 03:31pm):
Thank you smackcakes I'm sorry if I underestimated you eariler.

Don't forget what I said though...

Add reefs!
Last Edited on 07/04/2007 11:40am
DuelStriker (07/12/2007 06:33pm):
Attack of the Paragraph comments!!!!
*is blinded but still votes*
9/10

Edit: Changed to 10/10
Last Edited on 05/05/2008 03:30pm
SmileKZS (08/24/2007 08:29am):
stop the post wars. jhuni is too sarcastic. And when you all edit your posts...
Hey you idea

Conclusion on the map: A good trademark sprite map which is also playable.

Don't you want to limit the usage of air units to t-copter and/or fighter? The point of the map
is only about abusing bbts and landers. Air pwns ground and sea, yeah, but that is not the
point of the game. The terrain is carefully-placed. It simply tells you "you won't be able to do
this in x turns". I don't see a fault.

See what fun we can get outta a single map.
The Shifting Shadows (08/29/2007 03:15pm):
A Nice Blanced map. 9/10
Danny123 (09/19/2007 01:03pm):
I like it. Not only is it balanced, but it adds a whole new usefulness to Black boats...and not to
mention it looks really cool when you look at it as a preview.

There are no chokepoints, and this map will actually test your abilities as a CO.

I really like this map, so 10/10
sulla (03/24/2008 10:11pm):
peh 7 out of 10 at the most.
IchigoKurosaki (04/11/2008 06:18pm):
Interesting, definitely a favorite. 10/10
sellout2154 (04/23/2008 07:38pm):
Beautiful. Well, maybe not, but interesting anyway.
Dhomochevsky (05/02/2008 11:48am):
The map looks pretty cool and unique, nice one!
DuelStriker (05/05/2008 03:31pm):
Anyone who gave this less than an 8/10 fails.
Meta Rexy (10/31/2008 06:13pm):
The black boats and landers being able to transport units by use of shoals is quite
creative and a neat idea, but I think you should let other sea units fight because the air
units will crush them. Still this idea is awesome. :)
Personally I don't like how the map feels a bit too open with all the plains, shoals, and
roads, and not much forest... seems like you really like tanks... you could either use a
couple less shoals, remove a couple of roads, replacing them with forests, or you could
add another mountain... :P but that's my opinion
9/10. :D
rast2 (11/01/2008 11:44am):
Removing shoals would destroy the look of the map. But the roads in the four middle
columns should go.
sulla (11/15/2008 05:57am):
Smackcakes is certainly a very polite chap.
Last Edited on 12/13/2008 01:08am
Ian_the_pro (01/20/2009 04:33am):
since jihyungy sucks, 10/10
airob (05/03/2009 01:54pm):
the map is good as it is..my favorite map in all AWBW
Wootang (09/07/2009 11:43pm):
recons are the bomb on this map.
Falconewing (09/24/2009 09:30pm):
this map pwns all.
Cygnus (11/29/2009 07:25pm):
this is awesome.
jhuni (02/25/2011 02:14am):
The FTA counter probably works fine it is questionable though, and as I said before it is
only a "slight" imbalance, I didn't say boom BH will win every time.

And it definitely does look weird with all those shoals, but that is mainly a problem with
the way AWBW displays maps and not how this map is designed. Sorry if I went a little
overboard here though. It is not a bad map.

Once people like smackcakes came around the quality of maps on this site increased
dramatically, so I guess I was just looking for whatever small details I could to do what
I had been doing for quite a while, criticize maps.

Last Edited on 02/25/2011 02:17am
pen (07/25/2011 11:28pm):
Yeah, but I get the last word!!!
walkerboh01 (08/11/2012 03:54pm):
Psh.
pen (08/14/2012 10:03pm):
nice try.
Xmo5 (03/03/2013 10:22pm):
How often do you check this map to make sure you get the last word??
Mori2 (10/20/2013 11:21am):
Not often enough.
Nyvelion (04/26/2014 11:30am):
I get the last word. At least, I have on many maps that you have likely never seen before.
Jackie Milton (11/04/2015 11:33pm):
-J.W.M.
(The "W" stands for "Word")


[Refresh map]



Advance Wars is (c) 1990-2001 Nintendo and (c) 2001 Intelligent Systems
All images are copyright their respective owners
Created using pico
Launched on December 3, 2004
Page execution took 0 seconds