Pacifist Tactics
Creator: Headphone || First Published: 09/01/2011 || Players: 2 || Size: 11x11
Categories: Toy-Box
Rating: 6.17 in 6 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Headphone (09/01/2011 10:57pm | Edited: 09/01/2011 11:14pm):

---PLEASE READ---

This map has STA for it to be fair, play two games against someone on it at the same time.
One game with you going first and another game with the other person going first.
The person to HQ cap in the least amount of days is the winner.

The point of this map is to match wits without attacking. Enjoy.
Mori2 (04/05/2013 09:56am):
Oh man, I forgot all about this one. So cool.
the-deadly-shadow (10/25/2014 12:09am | Edited: 10/25/2014 12:22am):
It suprices me that until now no game has been started on this map. I suggest the use of missiles or cruisers,
carriers instead of fighters with more movement. turning weather into snow might help too (and banning olaf).
Meta Rexy (10/25/2014 12:18am | Edited: 08/11/2018 10:12pm):
Yea... perhaps Green Earth needs the fighters to help defend itself, while PC should use
APCs, or something with a bit less movement than fighters at least.
If you were to reverse the sides, and give GE fighters and PC APCs, you would also need to
turn all the GE cities into airports and set funds per city to 0 to avoid the fighters
from draining fuel and to avoid GE building anymore units...
Great concept, but it needs a bit more tweaking.

EDIT: The formatting of this comment screwed up the page for me. So I fixed it. Please
disregard.
Nyvelion (08/03/2016 08:50am):
GE seems to be missing an APC?
Xmo5 (08/10/2016 01:50pm):
Nah, that's just so PC can escape. They need to get themselves to an HQ and capture it
while the GE APCs need to try and prevent the infantry from getting there. Even if they go
straight to defending their HQs, one of them will have an opening because there are only 7
APCs.
Meta Rexy (08/11/2018 12:25am | Edited: 08/13/2018 06:46pm):
The player trying to block the infantry shouldn't have units with LESS movement than the
units defending the infantry. If this is really about matching wits without attacking, you
should be able to place the units wherever you need to, without worrying about movement
costs getting in the way. This map is small enough that the fighters can help the infantry
get onto the HQ in four days and the APCs cannot always keep up with them.
As I said in my last comment a few years ago, I still think that GE should have fighters
with airports everywhere (And funds per city at 0) instead of cities and APCs, while PC
should have tanks or recons to help maneuver.

COs don't really matter here, but if you don't change anything you can allow the APC
player to use Sami/Sensei to at least get up to 7MP to match a little more evenly. In
fact, I'd recommend that for now. The player using fighters can have Eagle to reduce fuel
consumption.

EDIT 2: Upon further test games, you can make the argument that it's part of the game to
exploit your opponent's movement options. So... perhaps both should get increased
movement. Recons and fighters is the best way to go.

Also, perhaps you should leave a combination of cities for one player and airports for the
other player (with 0 funds of course) to allow both players to refuel their units. Running
out of fuel shouldn't be happening in this game. :P
ichbinsehselber (08/11/2018 06:39am):
nice idea for a (kind-of) puzzle map!



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