Radio courtesy
Creator: Harmony Bunny || First Published: 05/28/2008 || Players: 2 || Size: 19x17
Categories: None
Rating: 7.11 in 9 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Harti1990 (05/28/2008 11:32am):
looks very messy and FTA-ish.
Harmony Bunny (05/28/2008 11:36am):
Messy? Open your eyes, if I didn't want it to look so, it wouldn't be the same map at all.
Metalic_Dragon (05/28/2008 12:15pm):
1 infantry isn't an appropriate counter for 5000g starting income and 3 bases, IMO.
amthc356 (05/28/2008 03:53pm):
This is win
blanci1 (05/28/2008 11:44pm):
personally i think theres something visually interesting about this map. Yes it looks a bit
chaotic at first , but only like many maps of real-life places. I think after a while studying or
playing one gets to learn your way around so to speak ,,, like when you fist arrive in any
new place. So theres a fundamental point here about map design.... why should they look
neat and tidy anyway? ... i think we need to encourage all map-types and not be dismissive
without a strong reason. This kind of map at least requires players to study carefully the
terrain .... im sure real generals often have to work with such difficult to read maps.
The close proximity of enemy bases and HQs is fantasy-stuff, ive not yet played a map
with such extreme placements ... has anyone else ?... tell us if this is playable. Probably
fast and furious ..and over quickly?
i agree with metalic... fta counter is insufficient... perhaps try putting a mech near a
base... i prefer not actually on a base because it makes it hard to see said base. A mech s
worth a little over half the first pay day but i think the extra 500 sets off the inconvenience of
not being able to choose the counter unit.

Harmony Bunny (05/29/2008 11:08am):
@Blanci: Well. I thought I was going to wait for years before someone says that. I've nothing
else to say that "You totally got it":. A map don't need to be nice-looking to be playable. And
when it's not nice at all, you MUST test it before you criticize.

I might appear completely conceited but I tried to foresee every possible tactics. How people
will use black boats, copters, rockets, and eventually bombers and battleships (why not?).
The result is here.

As for the FTA counter, I admit that if I put infantries on my maps, that's only because I don't
want people to comment on by just saying "FTA!" ^^ I don't really care about what the proper
FTA counter is. I don't even believe a FTA counter is necessary on any map. If you're
weaker than your opponent, you'll lose no matter what you've got as a FTA counter, and if
you're stronger, you'll win.

By weaker and stronger I mean "If you use a wrong or an appropriate strategy." The skills of
the different aw players are pretty close in fact.
Glenstorm (06/13/2008 05:56pm):
But thats the problem with FTA, it allows the player with the weaker strategy to win if
they benefit from the FTA. On some maps, it is impossible for the second player to win if
the first player executes a specific strategy, like a recon rush. Most others the
advantaged player is just able to gain control over a few center contested cities. Yes, it
is possible for a disadvantaged player to win through superior play, but its not fair.
Saying FTA doesn't matter is like saying it doesnt really matter if one side gets 2 extra
starting cities. All of this only applies if you care about your map being balanced/fair,
though.

On this particular map, I am having a ridiculously difficult time seeing exactly what
effect FTA would have because its hard to figure out what units can path where :P

I agree that a map doesn't need to be nice looking to be playable, and ugly features can
add some really interesting gameplay, but theres really no reason to be ugly for the sake
of being ugly. Remember, people have to look at it while they are playing on it ;). The 2
reefs don't seem to add anything to the gameplay, so I'd probably suggest removing those.
I'd probably need to play a game on it to be able to fairly comment about the rest of the
map, but it looks like it could be fun.

@Blanc - The HQs are actually really far apart from the enemy bases, not only are there
sea tiles in the way of the short path, but you have to walk over a base to capture it,
meaning HQ capture is probably not a possibility on this map unless the opponent is
practically routed
blanci1 (07/16/2008 04:14am):
yes glenstorm youre right about quick HQ capture... it looks close but you cant get
through! ..... like i said.... this map would require careful study ! to catch all the important
things. Im more sure about the opposing centre bases being close !
Meta Rexy (09/24/2008 09:23pm):
I'd appreciate it if you replaced the shores unusable by naval units with roads.
It would make things a lot easier to see.
8/10. Looks solid. At first I thought you were crazy by keeping the HQs so close by but
now it makes more sense when I noticed the sea squares.
Good job. But it looks really messy at the moment :P



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