Moth's Siege
Creator: Saltpeter || First Published: 11/16/2007 || Players: 3 || Size: 21x30
Categories: None
Rating: 10.00 in 3 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Saltpeter (11/16/2007 09:03pm | Edited: 11/16/2007 10:54pm):
You must ban Rockets for this map to be plausible, otherwise OS would be nigh-unbeatable.
I recommend making some of the more powerful units lab units. Something to make the effort
of getting to the lab worth it, so that OS would seriously consider investing the time.

This is a 2v1 map, OS v BM/GE. I believe that, since the plane of symmetry only splits two
allied players, that the FTA does not break the fairness...unfairly. o_o

OS has a fortress, complete with defensive rocket installments, two airports, six bases, and
a plethora of strategic places to place units. BM and GE, set up deep in the forest, will have
to act quickly to gain the upper hand. Between them lies one comm station. It's up to them to
determine who between them gets it. I expect this map would make for a rather cool fog of
war match.
Lord Doom (11/16/2007 11:13pm):
I want to see what happens when someone makes infantry and mechs lab units, with one
infantry per person before someone gets the lab
Saltpeter (11/16/2007 11:18pm | Edited: 11/16/2007 11:19pm):
That would...be so unbearably cool. I love that idea. It would also spell a very quick defeat
for BM/GE if they lost both of their infantry. OS could still possibly win, though.

If anyone gets the lab, it would be OS, obviously. Banning infantry and mechs would put so
much emphasis on getting the lab that OS would surely do it, and that lab is the single most
easily defensible tile on the map, so they would have it, probably for the rest of the game. It
would be best as a decision rather than a must. If the
strongest units are made lab units, then not only would it be more of a decision(Low-tech
battles can be cool, too.), but it would take longer for the lab to be reached, due to less
damage being done to the pipes.

Update: I am adding one infantry for each player, just so Lord Doom's suggestion could be
carried out.
DuelStriker (11/17/2007 08:22am):
I feel BM/GE could use a neutral base, not too far from them, but not too close to OS either.
Other wise, I like it. But one other thing: "WTF DUDE, MY ROCKETS RAN OUT OF AMMO???!!!!
WHY NO APCS????"
Saltpeter (11/17/2007 09:47am):
Well, for the rockets behind breakaway pipes, you buy APCs, break the pipes, and send the
APCs in. I did it that way to make things seem more like OS was having a final stand. You
HAVE to compromise the rockets' defenses to maintain their usefulness. I'll add breakaway
pipes for the two in the corners, too.
DuelStriker (11/17/2007 12:13pm):
Ah, I see that, good idea.
Patorikku (11/18/2007 10:50am):
This is a very well done map, better than my current maps, and it does indeed make it very
hard to defeat OS without banning rockets. Challenging for BM/GE in a good way.
Saltpeter (11/18/2007 11:25am | Edited: 12/13/2007 07:05am):
I'm playing a test game on it right now, and Pat is on the GE side.

I feel that OS may have a smidge too much advantage, but that advantage is due to being a
single player, while the opposing side really needs to coordinate to overcome OS. The single-
player advantage is evened out by the fact that BM/GE combined mean two sets of COPs,
while OS has only one, but then, no one has used any COPs in the game yet, so I may make
a second judgement on this.

Edit: Yeah. When this game's over, I'm going to give OS a city in the center column of the
map,
and make two of OSs cities in the combat zone neutral(they will definitely be two of the six
within the range of the rockets). That will give the two teams even income at the start.

Edit 2: Finally made the change.



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