Combinatorial Combat
Creator: Cadeor || First Published: 08/21/2024 || Players: 8 || Size: 50x50
Categories: None
Rating: 10.00 in 1 rating
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Cadeor (08/21/2024 10:39am | Edited: 08/22/2024 05:32am):
This thought experiment pits 8 players in an all out combinatorial brawl against each other. The goal is to secure the most properties or eliminate the other players first.

Suitable for FFA / 2v2v2v2 / 4v4

As with many of my FFA maps, players a given two choices between a comm-tower or two cities as a "tech tree".

Recommended settings:
-Unit cap off;
-Unit bans:
- subs to prevent blocking naval corridors,
- t-copters to prevent HQ cap cheese.
-CO Bans:
- Sami
- Kindle

TA Notes: due to the small size of individual combat squares, the FTA setup has been arranged to give each player a dominant FTA/STA. In the top part of the matrix, there is no counter infantry for later players giving FTA. In the bottom half, there are Freds for later players, giving STA. The intent is that it will balance out overall and provide a 'strong side' / 'weak side' across the matrix as a whole, and players are incentivized to be strong in their rows.
Meta Rexy (08/21/2024 05:06pm | Edited: 08/21/2024 05:12pm):
2 cities is not enough to offset the loss of a comm tower on a map like this. The inability to consistently 2HK enemy units on cities is far worse than being a little behind on income.

With how close each square is, I wouldn't be surprised if players started base locking enemies with artillery from another square.

I'd also ban Sami and Kindle here, with how small each square is.
Cadeor (08/22/2024 05:31am):
In 1k funds, i think the choice is easily for the comm tower, which I think is fine to help players clear opponents off high defense terrain. In higher funds, I think the choice is more meaningful, especially depending on the CO's picked. I think locking should be part of the map, but if some want to play without that, then indirects can be banned.

I agree, those two should be banned, although I think I neglected to ban Sami in the initial games I started
Raedel (08/22/2024 06:39pm):
Whoever has an airport, even if it might take a bit to fight over, is just going
to bum rush a b and t copter to start whacking hqs.
This also let's them get the starting bonus eventually anyway.
Cadeor (08/23/2024 11:16am):
Yeah, I decided between no airports or including. I think the airports will help improve the overall playability, [i]but[/i], the
HQ/upgrade cheese is why i recommend banning t-copters. I do see some merit to allowing players to eventually get all
upgrades as the game gets into the later stages
Bleggaman (09/03/2024 02:31pm):
There is an error on the 8th island (all the way on the right), 6th row from the top (brown vs scarlet).
One of the top shoals is an ocean, allowing scarlet to get the top left port for free.



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