BGC_LazyRiver1.1
Creator: ApolloFensky || First Published: 04/04/2015 || Players: 4 || Size: 25x25
Categories: None
Rating: 0 in 0 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
the-deadly-shadow (04/05/2015 05:46pm | Edited: 04/05/2015 05:48pm):
I think this is a decent map. On this site we use something called FTA(First turn advantae). OS has the
advantage of being first. That means that if OS does exactly the same as the others, OS can produce an
infantery the fist turn and the second turn an arty. Sending them to the central base as quick as possible and
using the extra turn to prevent an enemy from being able to capture a central base.


The only solution for the battle being decided early by such things is moving the bases back. I would suggest
moving the base to the bridges (on the opposite sides of the forest)

However it is still a real disadvantage for the ones who move last. This can be solved by swapping BM and YC.
So the ones early are crosswise. Furthermore GE and YC are giving an infantery to compensate the fact that
they are late.

If you like the center to be contested you could put other properties there. But bases are too decisive once one
side can get them all.
ApolloFensky (04/05/2015 06:57pm | Edited: 04/06/2015 10:22pm):
Edit 1.1: Made the requested reccomendations!
-Provided FTA Balancing (Swap BM and YC, added inf to GE and YC)
-Trimmed edge for aesthetics
-Adjusted edges for new trim (might consider moving the airport)
-Removed 1 city per faction, due to removing the contested bases back

As always, comments are appreciated!

---------------------

Thank you for the comment! I saw that you posted on a fellow team member's map as well
about the FTA, and it's been an interesting conversation so far! I will say one of the
most prominent debates that's going on already in our little chat is if FTA is a
legitimate claim or not.

I for one, agree with the idea that FTA is a possibility and should be corrected, as it
seems it's a long-argued debate in this game already, resulting in the pretty much
standardization of the +1 infantry to BM as generalized by the map Whirly.

However, one of our members thinks that balancing FTA is unfair and gives BM the
advantage. The user makes reference to a game of chess, where white going first has little
advantage to black, using theories presented in the idea of 'Black is OK!'. In essence,
having an additional unit makes BM earn more money because of the advantage when capping a
city, earning more cities and money then one from OS.

Of course, the player who has played my 1v1 map has played OS, and has won every time,
which makes me wonder if it calls for FTA balancing. I would like to request you to review
BGC_Quickdraw and give your opinions on that as well, and would like to contact you
somehow. Thanks in advance! -Ap
Xmo5 (04/07/2015 10:32am):
It's nice to see there's some engaged conversation about FTA with some of the newer
players- it shows you're thinking about the game mechanics which is always good!
Unfortunately, I don't think there's any way you'll convince any of the players here that
it isn't a legitimate concern because there's been a lot of work put into analyzing FTA
and its counters. I'll explain a little bit which might help:

FTA is more complex here than it is in chess for a few reasons, the most important of
which being the fact that in AW, *every* unit moves *every* turn. In chess, you get one
move before the other player gets to go, which minimizes how much of an advantage can be
gained in a single turn. When you move every unit, there might appear to be little
difference in the beginning, but ultimately it means that when the armies clash, they will
be closer to the player that moves second (since OS gets to move in first) and that will
be at a substantial disadvantage. Primarily, there are 3 aspects to consider when
countering FTA: Unit location, unit number and value, and funding. The infantry counter
has been popular because it does a good job balancing these factors between opposing sides
over the short and long term. Why? Because if you use it properly (when each player starts
with 2 bases and both bases are equally important) both players are half a turn ahead and
half a turn behind. BM's infantry might reach the battlefront first in one area because of
the counter, but OS's infantry will reach first in another area. BM might capture some
cities first, but if the counter/map is well designed, BM will get the first vehicle (due
to funding), but OS will get the next 2 before BM gets their second etc.

Hope that helps a bit!



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