Logistix Ruins
Creator: Flawed Logic || First Published: 11/20/2009 || Players: 2 || Size: 20x20
Categories: None
Rating: 6.50 in 6 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Flawed Logic (11/18/2009 04:09pm | Edited: 11/18/2009 04:32pm):
Keep on your toes in this map, you're vulnerable everywhere, aid to your other half is
hindered by pipe seams and forest, divide your funds wisely.

airob (11/18/2009 05:31pm):
could this be considered symmetric? i mean, on base location terms?
Flawed Logic (11/18/2009 09:12pm | Edited: 11/19/2009 06:08pm):


Taz (11/19/2009 03:39pm):
The neutral bases are badly contested, which is generally frowned upon. At the very least
it messes up with the CO tiers (makes Sami and Sturm broken, for instance), and it makes
the battles over these factories decisive for the game (meaning a lot of games will end
very soon because one side manages to capture a factory while preventing his opponent's
capture) Often it increases dramatically any small initial imbalance. In theory, 1
infantry is a near-perfect FTA counter with the start labs + 2 factories, so this might
actually be balanced, but my two other points still stand.
Flawed Logic (11/19/2009 03:51pm):
Where should i put them then, i'm actually kind of stuck here, hence my not publishing it yet.
would it be a good idea if there were no Neutral properties?If the two comm towers were
factories?
Taz (11/19/2009 04:24pm):
Neither would be a good idea, because 2 factories vs. 2 factories is not enough for such a
map, and replacing the com towers by neutral factories would probably amplify the problem
dicussed above (although the opening might start to be complex enough to be interesting).
The two solutions I see are:
1) Replace the neutral factories by normal properties, and add a neutral factory near each
factory.
2) Use a total of 8 factories (4 for each side), all pre-owned, with an alternating pattern.
The second option would lead to very chaotic games, but why not.
And, anyway, playtest the map, that's the only way to see if it's any good.

Flawed Logic (11/19/2009 06:06pm):
Does This work a bit better, or do the factories kindof unbalance the game or something.
Taz (11/20/2009 12:14pm):
Kinda better. Btw, I just noticed the map was asymetrical, don't know how I could have
missed it. An asymetrical map can work, but requires a lot of playtesting.
Flawed Logic (11/20/2009 01:48pm | Edited: 11/20/2009 05:39pm):
It will be playtested, don't worry. Each base has 6 properties it can reach easily, the
rest are contested.

The above comments were made during the creation phase. The map is now in its finished
state, give no regard to the above comments.
chrisdaboss (11/20/2009 06:49pm):
Cool, 8/10
Flawed Logic (11/20/2009 07:13pm):
Why thank you chrisdaboss.
nirial1991 (11/20/2009 07:21pm):
Good job, it looks pretty.
Harti (11/20/2009 07:31pm):
nirial1991 (11/21/2009 12:21am):
... pretty.

Get some glasses dude
Flawed Logic (11/20/2009 07:40pm | Edited: 12/07/2009 03:41pm):
I don't think it's very pretty, but functional would be a better choice of words. It was
just designed in the vein of an a-rank map. it's a tribute thingie

Note:early testing seems to indicate an abnormally high volume of infantry for a map of this
size, especially in the early game.



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