River City Showdown
Creator: Where no one knows || First Published: 07/12/2006 || Players: 2 || Size: 20x10
Categories: None
Rating: 8.82 in 17 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Where no one knows (07/12/2006 12:25pm | Edited: 05/18/2007 01:42pm):
Okay, So this is my first map, I think I did a decent job on it, but I've yet to test it. I tried to
counter FTA as best I could, any help on this would be apreciated, and CONSTRUCTIVE
critisism is welcome, and encouraged.

:D
kees (07/12/2006 12:47pm):
looks nice. Well balanced, enough neutral proporties, and one BM infantry to undo FTA
(First Turn Advantage)
Where no one knows (07/14/2006 08:24am):
Okay, first few tests ran smoothly, it plays fair and I found it fun, please play and rate :D
Deoxy Knight (07/16/2006 09:18pm):
Pretty chokey, no?
Where no one knows (08/08/2006 07:28pm):
A Little, but it plays well despite this, as it being chokey is kind of the point, theres not
supposed to be a lot of room to move, and infantry are still movable anywhere.
jhuni (10/15/2006 01:56am):
Nice center, and nice FTA balance 9/10
Béorgit (06/18/2007 01:51pm):
I think FTA is kinda bull****, your giving BM more advantage now then leaving OS & BM as
they are, specialy on this size of a map... since BM has more then enough time to build up a
defence or counter, anyways I'll still rate it a 7/10

Béorgit (06/19/2007 10:30am):
hmm... if you really wanna do something against the "FTA" place the infant on hte HQ not on
the base... else you would give the advantage to BM
twinblade (06/22/2007 08:14pm):
Umm... please don't try to make the arguement that FTA doesn't exist. It does.

I don't see how BM now has an advantage. I think its pretty even.

Good map.
jhuni (06/27/2007 09:23pm | Edited: 06/27/2007 09:23pm):
RE: { I think FTA is kinda bull****, }

FTA has been proven to exist for the following reasons:
If player one skips his turn he automatically gains a turn of funds plus he can copy whatever
blue did so he can automatically gain whatever 'supposed' reactionary advantage BM can
get and thus FTA is automatically in most symmetric maps. This has been agreed on by most
experts of this site. This helps prove the existence of FTA:

http://www.amarriner.com/awbw_forum/viewtopic.php?t=8032

Analysis of the following map demonstrated some exceptions to the two base one infantry
balance postulate: http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=9594

The wide spread usage of the map, whirly postulated the 'two base one infantry' concept of
balance. http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=9594


lindsay40k (12/10/2007 04:52pm):
Having chokepoints plus Com towers makes Javier extremely powerful.
rast2 (03/06/2008 07:50pm):
My version of this map: http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=35354
DuelStriker (04/03/2008 03:39pm):
The starting cities should really become neutral cities.
rast2 (05/11/2008 05:40pm):
This map is almost two years old.

Would it be an A-rank by today's standards?
mrapex (06/21/2008 12:54pm):
BM INFANTRY ON WRONG BASE
benbever (06/24/2008 10:17am):
Why is this still A-ranked and in the leagues?
It has narrow front(s), somewhat contested bases, and central contested property :/
Tha map is not bad, but I think we have better maps today.




Advance Wars is (c) 1990-2001 Nintendo and (c) 2001 Intelligent Systems. All images are copyright their respective owners.