[2.1r] [Home]
Login | Register


Rivers Galore V 0.4 (Design Map by BountyFrog)
Categories: Casual Play
























[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: 7.00 in 1 rating
Map Committee Rating: 0 in 0 ratings
Comments:
BountyFrog (08/11/2015 01:01pm):
Thoughts? Suggestions? And don't forget to rate please.
Xmo5 (08/12/2015 10:26am):
The centers of the top and bottom edges feel very... empty. I think it's an ideal place to
include cities etc. to encourage conflict between the neutral base and the base by the HQ.
You can certainly afford the extra cities because you'll have a hard time supporting 3
bases and an airport with the current income.

Also, as a final note, the correct FTA counter here would be to make that CI city neutral
and to give them an infantry on their SW base.
BountyFrog (08/14/2015 11:33am):
Ok thanks, I'm still learning about alot of the FTA counters and stuff. Also, I will fix the emptiness.
BountyFrog (08/14/2015 12:12pm):
Ok there... Anything else that could be better?
Xmo5 (08/14/2015 12:44pm):
Nice changes- this looks a lot better already. Couple of things I would change:

1) The FTA counter here should be a pre-deployed infantry for CI on their SW base. In an
ideal world (of 2p maps) where each player starts with 2 bases, adding an infantry on a
base on the second player to move gives them a 1 turn boost on half of the map, while the
other half of the map they are equally behind their opponent who was able to build first
on that side. This isn't always a perfect counter because it requires each battlefront to
be equivalently important, and also that the starting bases feed different fronts. In this
case, it doesn't matter which base gets the infantry, but since it's never perfect, common
convention is to give the infantry on the base that will capture the neutral base, while
making sure airpot/tower (other important target(s)) are the job of the base without a
counter. Nearby cities should be similar too. Anyway, long story short, is that the best
counter here is the one I mentioned. The pre-owned city is a fairly imperfect (but the
best we have) counter to a single starting base where the infantry would reverse FTA, not
solve it. Here it should be neutral.

2) Be careful about making 1-wide choke points near the fronts- it will lead to stalemate
because it's easy to take down any size army if it has to come at you single file. Ever
seen the movie 300? Neither side could win (for a very long time) despite the drastically
different army sizes. You'd see something similar here, except the armies would start out
the same size (about). Anyway, I'd be sure to make the path a little wider and/or provide
alternate routes in the vicinity. The biggest offender I think is the bridge over the
river in the top/bottom middle.

3) Funding could be a little higher to support 3 bases and an airport, so it couldn't hurt
to add a couple of cities near the starting bases to allow for a natural progression and
earlier access to funding. If you hit the point where vehicle use starts becoming viable
("early mid-game") but you can't afford to build any yet, then the game will get an
awkward start.
BountyFrog (08/14/2015 01:56pm):
Ok... I understand and will change to accommodate for the 2nd and 3rd points... But I am completely lost for
what to do for the 1st xD from what I understand, I get rid of the pre-owned city and give blue an inf on a base
not near an airport/com tower?
Xmo5 (08/14/2015 02:06pm):
Correct, the base that will be responsible for capturing the neutral base is the one where
you want the infantry to be. The city itself is fine, so long as CI doesn't own it.

Haha, also, that's a lot of cities! When I said a few I meant something like 2-4 per side! xD
Last Edited on 08/14/2015 02:19pm
BountyFrog (08/14/2015 03:54pm):
Ok fine I will lower the city amount :P and I will make a better FTA counter.
BountyFrog (08/14/2015 04:00pm):
How's that?
Xmo5 (08/14/2015 04:14pm):
Looks good, definitely an improvement. I moved it from Casual Play to New.

Some other factors to fine-tune/consider are making sure the center and/or other locations
don't become too crowded and keeping in mind where the battle fronts will form. Make sure
that the fronts are where you want them to be (ideally not around chokepoints, though in
some cases it can work if other fronts are more open) and make sure there are things to
fight over that can help you advance one way or another. In other words, if I push an
opponent back a few spaces, what is my potential reward? Is it enough to help me hold my
ground now that my reinforcements are farther away while the enemy's are closer? Also,
think about what items you personally want to be focused on and how much. If you want the
tower to be contested and important, put it slightly behind the front so an advance could
result in tower capture. If you want it safer, place it accordingly. If you want attention
in the middle, make sure there's sufficient motivation and enough paths to get there.

I can suggest specifics in a lot of cases, but often times it can take away from what the
original designer intended and there's usually more than one solution. So just be mindful
of those things and plan how you want your map to be shaped, then make changes that you
think will accomplish that goal. Remember- subtle changes can go a long, long way when you
get down to things like this.
BountyFrog (08/14/2015 04:35pm):
Hmmmm.. I never thought about it that way... It makes sense though, all of it.


[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