1vs1vs1vs1 map! by silver.Exe
Creator: Silver.Exe || First Published: 11/04/2014 || Players: 4 || Size: 40x40
Categories: None
Rating: 9.50 in 2 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
excomotive (11/06/2014 08:05am):
I would check out this guide on good map design: http://isndev.omgforum.net/t674-map-making-guide-
aesthetics-and-terrain-variety-by-smackcakes

The terrain distribution is lacking quite a bit.
Silver.Exe (11/06/2014 02:42pm):
Yea, I know, it wasn't an accident.
Silver.Exe (11/06/2014 02:42pm):
And i have read it.
Xmo5 (11/06/2014 05:47pm):
Not to be rude, but I would suggest reading it a few times. I know I did and even
consulted it regularly for a while. Here are some issues I see with this map:

1. As excomotive mentioned, the terrain is very clumped. It doesn't have to be spread
thin, but it would be nice to not see so many groups of 4x5 or 4x6 size plains all stuck
together. Put some terrain variety in those large empty areas to make it look nice and not
empty because as it is, it looks fairly bland.

2. It would be nice to have some convenient pathway through the diagonals as well,
probably by adding some road. Adding cities and properties to capture will help as well.
Currently, it not only looks bland, but will see no action. If that's what you want,
there's no point in making the map so large. Alternatively you can make lakes in each
quadrant to at least make them look nicer.

3. Ironically, the only part of the map that will attract units will not result in a good
battle because there is an *absurd* amount of bases/cities for no reason. If they're
captured evenly, it will turn into a mass infantry spam with a few indirects here and
there that will accomplish nothing but killing the swarms of infantry, maybe some recons.
If anyone starts to gain an advantage, they will likely have an easy time capturing more
and more properties as their funds and meatshield spamming quickly snowball, leaving them
a powerhouse with no true opponent. It doesn't make for strategic, balanced, or fun gameplay.

4. 13k is a lot of money to start with, and you certainly don't need to start with 6
bases. I would bet money that Day 1 will see a lot of APCs, infantry, and recons in a
massive race towards the center which, by the way will mean you have:

5. FTA issues. As you read the guide, I'm sure you know what FTA is, so I won't explain
what it is, but I will explain why it's a pain to counter. Do you know why most maps give
the second player 1 infantry to counter FTA? Its because these maps usually have 2 bases
and an HQ (3k total) which pretty much locks you into making 2 infantry on Day 1. By
giving player 2 an infantry, you've made sure that 1/2 of their bases are a turn "ahead"
of Player 1's equivalent base, while the other 1/2 is a turn behind. This theoretically
balances the FTA assuming the bases are of approximately equal value. Here, you have 6
bases each and 13k worth of funds which means you have to think of better ways to counter
exactly half of a turn. The problems is people are smart and will counter your FTA counter
by buying something different on Day 1 than they otherwise would have. This means that FTA
isn't balanced anymore because your initial assumptions about players' starting strategies
are no longer valid. The best you can do in this situation is make an educated guess and
use trial end error to find out, keeping in mind there might not be a solution at all. As
I alluded to above, the "race for the center" concept only magnifies this. Also, it does
another thing to FTA. Normally, diagonal corner players don't interact early in the game,
so placing players 1 & 2 in diagonal opposites and players 3 & 4 in the other diagonals
means that each player is either next to 2 players that go "first" or 2 players that go
"second". This allows for FTA countering by normal methods. If this isn't done, OS would
be ahead of BM who would get a counter, BM would be ahead of GE who would need a counter,
plus a counter to counter BM's counter. YC would be similar with +2 for GE, but then YC
would have 3 counters and be next to OS... who now needs a counter. Then you start the
endless cycle over. This map will have very heavy conflict in the center almost
immediately, meaning that the diagonal corner philosophy is more or less out the window
depending on how things work out.

Please keep in mind I'm not trying to be mean or rude. I want beginning map makers to
understand that there are a lot of things that go into making a fun, balanced, and
aesthetic map. These are some important things to keep in mind for this map, and are
fairly typical of what new map makers need to work on. Unfortunately most don't pick up on
it because they're convinced we're just being narrow minded and that they know better. I
promise you we are trying to help you make better maps and with practice, you'll get there.
Silver.Exe (11/06/2014 06:07pm):
Ok, I didn't read it, I repeat: IT WASN'T AN ACCIDENT.
Silver.Exe (11/06/2014 06:09pm):
I mean, this s a map to have a little "joke" time, because it isn't really "a serious map" made it like that because I
REALLY WNTED IT TO BE LIKE THAT.
Xmo5 (11/06/2014 06:45pm):
"It wasn't an accident" and "This is a joke map" are not necessarily the same thing. As a beginner
map maker, you have displayed similar characteristics over your only 3 maps which, believe it or
not, I have payed close attention to. I keep an eye out for new map makers because generally
they're the ones that need help with learning and understanding the map making process. I know
because I've been there before and my early maps sucked something awful. (I deleted most of
them)

If this was legitimately intended to be a joke map, it was cleverly disguised as a typical map you
would see from an inexperienced map maker and wasn't described as a joke map. I'm not sure the
title qualifies as a joke title and you left no comment to declare any such thing. I interpreted your
comments as complacency with your design because that's exactly how most people are when
they first start making maps on the site.

I apologize if I criticized a map that was not meant to be taken seriously, but I recommend that you
leave a short description comment on your future maps describing, at a minimum, how the map is
meant to be played and if you intend any special instructions. Usually that's how people clarify if a
map is meant for FoW or not, if funds should be abnormal, if there should be teams and what they
are, and if necessary, that the map is a joke map. Remember that we aren't in your head lol
Silver.Exe (11/06/2014 07:51pm):
And i have read it.
Silver.Exe (11/06/2014 07:53pm):
lol
don't worry.
Silver.Exe (11/06/2014 08:21pm):
lol
don't worry.



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