Advance Wars By Web [2.1r]

Shangri-La (Design Map by Hellraider)
Categories: S-Rank, Global League, Persistent League Maps, Map Committee Favorites

[Games on this map]
[Play on this map]
[Map Analysis]
[Check Favorites]

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: 7.63 in 32 ratings
Map Committee Rating: 9.33 in 3 ratings
DuelStriker (06/22/2009 02:33pm):
Cool! Possibly the best map made within the past few weeks :D
Falkensparrow (06/23/2009 09:53am):
No remove the city FTA counter I think.
And u watch way too much cyberchase too.:)
airob (06/23/2009 11:49am):
lol at roads cut by rivers
benbever (07/03/2009 04:33pm):
Looks very good. Nice setup and fta counter.
The towers are a bit too contested, but that's just my taste. Interesting map.
Falconewing (08/22/2009 02:37pm):
OMG MY DESIGNER USER AGAIN POSTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mattimus (08/23/2009 03:37am):
so many opening choices!
Aesthetically pleasing like most of your maps.
Nice terrain mix(the chokey mountain passes and the open valleys)
Good for FOW.
Interesting base placements

eriora (08/29/2009 01:32am):
very good!
mrapex (09/05/2009 01:30am):
Good map but quite frankly I dislike this play style... Two divided fronts sucks for me,
especially when there not even and it's 2 bases vs 1... If anything this is another hq
rush map.
Hellraider (09/05/2009 03:01pm):
I care a lot. Also, the fronts aren't divided.
mrapex (09/09/2009 10:36pm):
I'm commenting on the map, not the tourney. It doesn't matter what I like or don't like
as long as it's fair. Mindurownbuisinessplzthnx.
Last Edited on 09/09/2009 10:37pm
Hellraider (09/10/2009 08:53am):
The fronts still aren't divided. And I still care as much as before.
Mattimus (09/10/2009 04:30pm):
the two vs1 isnt really an issue unless the two tries to rush the mountain pass on the
lone factory. Which is pretty difficult. At least in FOW. I find the huge battles
usually occur in the north and south plains where the fronts are not divided at all.
mrapex (09/19/2009 02:40am):
Stop trolling hellraider, I wasn't even talking to you at all, there was no reason for any
other comment besides refuting my analysis of the map.
Hellraider (09/20/2009 06:55am):
So basically you don't care that I don't care? Fine with me, as long as you understand that
the fronts still aren't divided.
Meta Rexy (02/08/2010 12:07am):
This map is pretty difficult to play on...
Perhaps it's due to my own inexperience with unconventional maps like this, but I got
beaten back on the second front whenever I focused on one. X_X
That's not to say it's a bad map. It simply is different.
DraconisMarch (07/20/2011 05:40pm):
Remove BM starting city. Too much STA.
blanci1 (09/03/2011 07:11am):
...This looks like a really great battle here with many choices...
@ben..maybe the comms have been moved ?, they dont look very contested now. ...

@mrapex.. .. Certainly it is a very unusual type of frontline. However this playstyle is
great imo and also good just because it is different.... maybe you could try playing quite
a few games on it just to get accustomed to it ! A good CO may sometimes find himself in
unfamiliar and hostile environment..he he.

@hellraider/mrapex ... you two seem to be continuing a controversy from elsewhere?.... so
its difficult to follow properly.
The frontline is oscillating or waving or zig-zaging quite strongly but not exactly
divided in reality but in practical play (looking at games) one finger becomes quite far
from the other and they are certainly getting close to being like divided.
Of course close is relative, but i think its worth trying to see where the other is
coming from.

@metarexy .. yeah.. it plays out on some games almost like a mixed up bases map.
Last Edited on 09/03/2011 07:18am
K-Man (09/18/2011 12:18pm):
I don't know if comments made here will affect rules for League changes (or whether this
is the right place to post them) but stealths need to be banned on this map. The huge
distance of the airports makes it take 3 days for a fighter to even reach the front close
to the other's airport, and even then the divide caused by the mountains and sea makes it
near impossible to re-locate the stealth without causing harm to your fighter, just
allowing the stealth to go around your front (which is easier in a 2-front map) and take
out your fighter, plus the time it takes you to get that fighter deployed, your other
front defending your HQ will be harmed because you're not using your airport to help
defend, giving the opponent a better chance to hit your HQ. Due to the divided nature,
stealths I think need banning, unless you have a good reason as to why they shouldn't be.
xushu (10/12/2011 11:46am):
Lots of choices, lots of strategy, mixed with a very open, large map means never a dull play. I
am a little biased that Sasha as BM is overpowered, but eh, that is more of an opinion than an
evaluation. 9/10
Red11 (11/12/2011 09:12am):
Less river in the middle?

Possibly remove Lab and make a single north-south river in the center, removing elbows, for
a cleaner, more exciting centre.
Last Edited on 11/15/2011 05:49pm
ProtoDemn (02/14/2012 09:40pm):
I could be mistaken, but I think this map favors Sasha, especially if Sasha is RS. She
steals BM's city to gain 1100 at a cost of BM's 1000. I think you should ban her from this
map. Again, I could be mistaken, just trying to help balance the game out :)
Last Edited on 02/14/2012 09:41pm
walkerboh01 (02/15/2012 01:18am):
I don't think this map favors Sasha any more than any other map favors Sasha.
sniper06 (12/08/2012 02:30am):
yep idt if we set rules about scop as fast and we choose hachi and bm lol XDD i guess
airob (06/11/2013 10:10pm):
This map couples two things i really like but that are almost excluding of one another:

1- big unit production rate
2- fast-paced game (non-stalling)

Itīs awesome.
Slazzy (01/08/2015 12:31am):
7.77 in 30 ratings
Map Committee Rating: 8.80 in 5 ratings

Wow, god's number, and 3+5=8,+880=888,=a new beginning
Slazzy (01/08/2015 12:37am):
Bible says that there will be great signs from heaven, and horrible things will happen,
fortunately it will be undone, all of history. time has been cursed.
Dzedefiler (10/25/2015 12:08pm):
i agree with (mrapex) what this map represent is allin vs allin,, the side with 2 bases need to
overrun the side with 1 base of the opponent and rush for the HQ because as always 2
stream production lines are better than 1, by the time one of the players sends some
reinforcements to the other side of the map from their 2 bases line it will be to late to save
your HQ entrance.

while the idea of 2 separate fronts is definitely nice it would balance some if it would be 1
base vs 1 base and the other side 2 bases vs 2 bases. at least if the owner of the map
wants quite a macro game instead of a cheessy game it is right now,,

at least it is super situational. for example the only way any player can defend his 1 base
side, is that one of them is collin and the other player is kambei, colling being as always super
offensive and kambei being such tanky and defensive even cheapest units from kambei can
block the way from enemy units.

for example on that last idea of mine of collin vs kambei, people may think that kambei can
choose to attack the 1 base side of the opponent with his 2 bases, but in this type of game
situation he wont, he needs the funds to defend the agression he is going to receive at his 1
base side, so he needs to spend more there rather than in his 2 base side.

so for me this would be very entertaining match, not easy for any of players without the
unbalance match we may receive if the game is set to be random player vs random. with
may end in a completely disadvantage to one of them.
Jackie Milton (01/16/2017 05:29pm):

(The "T" stands for "That's not english")

Also Collin and Kambei
Xmo5 (03/14/2017 04:50pm):
Aw snap! I think Jackie's colling you out!

[Refresh map]

Users Online
Email with any questions
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