Nerevarine
Creator: BamboozleIV || First Published: 02/18/2015 || Players: 2 || Size: 25x21
Categories: B-Rank, Standard
Rating: 0 in 0 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Everdan (02/18/2015 04:47am):
Decent map.

I like the four "mini-fronts" in the centre, which split and join up again on both sides. The com towers at the sides
along with the 2 base + airport v 1 base situation is a nice touch, though the towers may end up being too
contested. I personally wouldn't be comfortable with that but it's largely up to you.

HQs are quite vulnerable, all things considered. I was initially worried that Sami could rush the HQ as P2, but
no, it's counterable by sending your first infantry from the southeast base to sit on the HQ. Still it doesn't look
very safe, especially because you have a 2 base + airport vs 1 base situation (1.5 bases? Technically the
central base can support the HQ as well but not very well) on the side of the HQ. Personally I'd move the HQ to
the other side of the map, or move the airport more towards the centre. Though this is also up to you, it's not
necessarily bad to have vulnerable HQs, and I don't have the experience to say with any certainty whether it
works on this one. Maybe one of the MC members can add something.

2 com towers per side is a bit much. Either Javier is banned forever or you remove a couple. I'd remove the
central ones since the vulnerable HQs already ensure quite a bit of fighting in the centre...

Map also has quite a few chokepoints. Normally those lead to stalemates but it might work here because of the
many ways those chokepoints can be bypassed. Still, I'd remove the mountain 3E, 1N of BH's HQ. The centre
looks congested, but perhaps that's to counteract the vulnerable HQs by allowing players to build a defensive
line.

Also, you might have STA because the base with the FTA counter is located closer to the neutral base, the
neutral airport, and most of the neutral properties, which isn't nice. To fix that I might consider one of several
things, such as moving the neutral base backwards, redistributing cities to be closer to the non-counter base,
moving the airport to the other side of the map, or placing the FTA counter such that it starts capturing the
neutral base a day after BH does. If you don't want to change too much the last option is probably the best.

That's all for now, cheers!
Bamboozle (02/20/2015 12:11am):
Thanks for the feedback old sport.
The four comtowers was entirely a mistake that I somehow overlooked - they were meant to be cities, thanks
for pointing that out.
For the HQs being vulnerable, I felt that having the need to defend the HQ would force a front in that area which
could threaten both the allied HQ and the enemy comtower, although I can see how it can be a problem if
rushed early. I think I'll wait for some playtests before making a definitive edit to that though, but odds are I
probably will change that.
Chokepoints here were intended to open up some strategic gameplay since I tried to add ways to, as you
mentioned, bypass them. I removed that mountain you specified as it did look like it would congest up the
battlefield a bit.
I was always taught the preowned infantry of the second turn side should be closer to the important objectives
for more balance inbetween the first and second turns -- if I were to, for example, move the inf to the opposite
base wouldn't it result in a small case of FTA on that neutral base/airport front? Then again I'm not entirely sure,
I'll probably just end up doing the option you said, but playtests I think would help illuminate the situation here.

walkerboh01 (02/20/2015 02:13am):
This is really good. With regards to HQ's, adding a preowned black boat to the HQ seems
sufficient. The position is fine, but you do want to deter an early HQ rush.

With regards to STA, I agree with Everdan that it could be a problem on this map due to the
uneven fronts. Moving the FTA counter does not address the issue - leaving it on the side it is
now but moving it back just gives very severe FTA. Everdan, if you would like more details
about why your proposed counter doesn't work, let's talk about it more on the forum.

I think the best solution is to shift the tower or airport to the opposite front (tower is a better
option since it affects gameplay less drastically), make the current neutral base preowned and
the central preowned base neutral, and shift some of the central properties on BH's side slightly
to the east so that the lone base will be responsible for capturing more of them. That should
more or less balance it out. After you do that, you might want to shift terrain on the sides slightly
to have the front still develop in the correct locations.
Xmo5 (02/20/2015 05:59pm):
To expand a bit on the STA/FTA thing, you're correct in that the counter goes on the "more
important base" meaning the one that will capture the neutral base, but ideally, the two
fronts are of similar value. For the same reason that putting the FTA counter on a
weak/"less important" front results in FTA, putting it on a strong/"more important" front
results in STA. (Importance here is basically a matter of key properties that will be
captured early on in the game)



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