Reallycontinents
Creator: BobCW || First Published: 04/29/2016 || Players: 2 || Size: 18x14
Categories: None
Rating: 6.33 in 3 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
Jackie Milton (04/30/2016 12:00am):
Really? Continents?
Really. Continents.
Really, Continents?
Really, Continents.
Really Continents!
Re: Ally Continents
Real, lycon, tin ents
Creates Lint Nylon
Real (l) y con tinen *ts*
Reallycon(t)in(en)ts/ten
BobCW (04/30/2016 08:55pm):
Technically, they're more like islands...

I have no idea if a air/ports-only map is viable, but I remember really enjoying playing on something similar in the
AW2 hard mode campaign, so here we are.
Xmo5 (04/30/2016 11:18pm):
Unfortunately, port/airport only maps don't play out too well on AWBW. Island warfare is especially bad when
you can build infantry, since they can wall off islands pretty quickly/cheaply, but there are still some main
problems that come about with maps like this.

The main complication is the fact that AW is centered around land-based control points. Funding, unit
production, towers, labs, HQs, etc. are all land based, and these features make up a very large portion of what
constitutes "winning" and "losing". On a map like this, pushing your opponent back means you've gained the
upper hand, but it doesn't provide you with any means of holding your new ground. Since you capture no
properties and there are little to no chokepoints/defensible "ground" in sea and especially air combat, all it does
is leave you exposed closer to enemy reinforcements and further from your own without giving you the tools to
compensate for that disadvantage. In a comparable land battle, you gain funding and/or repair points (which the
opponent also loses), building your momentum and making it easier to advance, despite your longer supply
lines.

Without that mechanic, it turns into a lot of back and forth, hacking away mindlessly. The lack of a true
meatshield unit in air/sea combat and the high range and mobility of air/naval units exacerbate the issue
because the units you advance are even more exposed to enemy attack and counterattack.

Anyway, that's just my thought. It might be worth reading through my introductory map making guide to help get
a handle on what works and what doesn't when it comes to AWBW maps. It's a lot more general than this, and
actually doesn't touch on this topic at all, but it's not a bad idea to give it a look since you appear to be new to
the site:

http://www.takeyourturn.net/t877-map-making-guide-i-introduction-to-awbw-map-design#5099

Hope I didn't hit you with too much at once! Having been the casual player/mapper who just came by to mess
around and have fun every once in a while, I can understand how a lot of this gets pretty overwhelming at first.
Just trust me, it'll make more sense the more you do it :)

Welcome to the site and happy mapping! :)
Xmo5 (04/30/2016 11:23pm | Edited: 09/12/2017 07:29am):
Also, RE: Ally Continents, I'll leave that up to your discretion, whether you want to call them islands or continents. I can't claim to
know anything about the tectonic activity on your map, so I have no way of judging how continental they truly are. (Though I've
always understood the definitions and distinguishing criteria to be fairly vague and subjective. Honestly people, how am I supposed
to be pedantic about something if you can't even come to a clear consensus about it?)

Edit quite a while later... lookie what I found! Someone who expresses my exasperation for me! (CGP Grey is the best!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uBcq1x7P34
RedBlupi (05/01/2016 07:18am | Edited: 05/01/2016 07:18am):
This map is actually pretty fun - you just have to play with FoW, 2000 funds per turn, and choose Sensei for
both players, so they can get their hands on some infantry. This way, I very much recommend it. :)
Xmo5 (05/01/2016 03:29pm):
That could certainly be an interesting mode to try, though many of my concerns still stand.
Jackie Milton (05/01/2016 06:27pm):
Ye. I will also add that the Anti-air on BH's side, which I'm assuming is an FTA counter,
gives BH an unfair advantage on defense. I would suggest putting an Anti-air on OS's side
as well. As for FTA, I have no clue how to counter it; my thoughts were to have a BH APC
in OS's base that can block some production facilities until it gets destroyed, but, I
don't know if that would work...

Second, to avoid the Sensei infantry spam (I'm assuming that is the gimmick of this map),
I would ghost all the island properties (ones not connected to the main base). What that
means is that you put a unit of any non-playable country on a production facility (city,
in this case). The units will disappear once the game starts, but two things happen: 1. no
units may be constructed on these tiles (or spawned by COPs) and 2. units cannot be loaded
INTO a transport on these squares. Otherwise, the tiles function as normal, and can still
be captured.

I do like the map. It's aesthetically pleasing, and it's not to chokey for sea units.

-J.S.M.
(The "S" stands for "Sensei is bae")
BobCW (05/02/2016 10:17pm | Edited: 05/02/2016 10:19pm):
Thank you for the comments everyone, including (especially!) the advice.

I assumed anyone actually playing on this would ban Hachi & Sensi, unless playing a mirror match, which in
retrospect would be way more fun, so forget what I just wrote :P The AA is indeed an attempt at a FTA counter,
figured I needed to do something but
didn't have any better ideas.
Xmo5 (05/02/2016 10:31pm | Edited: 05/06/2016 09:48am):
The problem with high starting funds is there is virtually no such thing as a fair FTA
counter. The concept hinges upon the fact that you can accurately predict what will be
build by each player on Day 1, and the fact that this won't change with the addition of
the counter. On a map with 2 starting bases and 3k total income, it's pretty clear both
players will build 2 infantry on Day 1, so giving BM a single infantry balances things by
leaving each player half a turn ahead and half a turn behind the whole game. Here, that
concept doesn't apply, because if you could correctly predict what each player would build
on Day 1 and gave BM half of that to start, OS would simply modify their strategy to
counter the starting units, since combat starts almost immediately and starting funding is
high enough to allow a lot of flexibility. Giving an AA introduces a whole new element
with an otherwise unavailable unit so I would avoid that.

EDIT: I should be clear that this is in the case with no infantry involved. There is a
widely accepted high funds FTA counter using infantry, which I do go into below, if you
have a week or so to trudge through my post.
BobCW (05/03/2016 01:37am):
Yeah, that makes perfect sense. I liked Jackie's idea of a BH APC in OS's main base. Alternatively, I could give
both players a starting AA, but then also hand BH a Black Boat (located some distance from any probable front).
Jackie Milton (05/05/2016 10:47pm | Edited: 05/05/2016 11:07pm):
Idk, it's kinda unorthodox, but I don't really know any other way to counter FTA.
But regardless Sensei vs. Sensei always arouses me, so 10/10 for feels.

-J.S.S.M.
(The "S" stands for "Sensei on Sensei action, nawmsayin?")
Xmo5 (05/06/2016 09:44am):
You had to go there, didn't you? But forreal though, double Sensei all de way across the sky.*

Ahem... Moving on.

As the resident FTA expert**, I'm not sure if there is a good way to account for FTA here
without introducing infantry. The best guess I can come up with is to make all of the
production facilities neutral, then place infantry directly on top of them so they can be
captured ASAP. You might have to make a lot of cities neutral so funding doesn't get out
of hand.. you can probably calculate it such that "Day 1" funding is the same in practice.
Why do all this extra work? The advantage with this setup is that you can set 50% of OS
infantry back one move, so that they capture half of their properties right before BM and
the other half right after BM. Like this:

Day 2- OS finishes capture on 2 ports and 1 airport
Day 2- BM finishes capture on 3 ports and 3 airports
Day 3- OS finishes capture on 1 port and 2 airports and builds on (up to) 2 ports and 1
airport
Day 4- BM builds on (up to) 3 ports and 3 airports
Day 5- OS builds on (up to) 3 ports and 3 airports

Really, this works better with even numbers of all property types (e.g. 2 ports and 2
airports total for each player) and is only really functionally beneficial if you could
theoretically use all of the properties you capture at once. In other words, if BM can't
legitimately fill 3 ports and 3 airports on Day 4 in practice, then the FTA counter is
imperfect. OS should be at 50% max capacity, followed by BM at 100% capacity, followed by
OS at +50% (to a total of 100%) capacity. For a reference, look at these maps designed for
high funds setting:

http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=55377
http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=55290

Since the AWBW metagame dictates that you fill every base every turn, number of bases
corresponds pretty well with player capacity and FTA is countered smoothly and effectively
by allowing access to certain bases sooner than others. It's basically the same as giving
BM an infantry on half of the bases to start, except this way you can account for the fact
that the first purchases can be other units, which is quite possible with high funds. Note
how the second map provides the counter equivalent to GS getting an infantry on the base
responsible for the "neutral base" capture*** (they're all neutral, technically, but the
ones within 1 move of capturing (ignoring the FTA counter effect (yes, I nested my
parentheses)) are functionally "starting bases" more so than neutral bases).

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

* Wow, wow, oh my god, look at that Sensei.

** While it's functionally accurate here, I really don't like the term expert. Sure, I
know more than the average bear about FTA, but "expert" always makes it sound... too
perfect. As if I'm infallible or that someone isn't better or can't become better. I'm
just a guy who knows some stuff; I use the term expert for the sake of clarity because
putting a paragraph like this in the middle of an explanation is a hassle and detracts
from the point, but nonetheless, I must provide the disclaimer whenever I refer to myself
as such. For now, just trust that I know what I'm talking about, but keep in mind that I'm
not the all-powerful authority on FTA :P

*** The AWBW convention is to put the FTA counter on the starting base responsible for
neutral base capture, while providing the other base with alternative important targets,
like airports and towers, such that both bases are effectively equal in importance.
Theoretically, with a perfectly designed counter, it doesn't matter which base it goes on,
but that's AWBW convention for you. Just like how we ban Colin, Grit, Hachi, Kanbei, and
Sensei* on virtually any competitive game because they're considered to be so good that
they're "broken". Javier is also broken with 2+ towers and Sturm's movement bonus
frequently makes him broken as well.

**** No, nothing had 4 asterisks, but I thought I'd mention that there are other good
forum resources apart from my map design guide. There's a CO tier list for example which
is pretty neat:

http://www.takeyourturn.net/t514-hellraider-awbw-co-tier-list-06-22-2012

There's also my FTA guide, though I went into a heck of a lot more depth here. Unless
you're confused about what FTA is, it won't help you much until I write the next level (or
two) of this guide:

http://www.takeyourturn.net/t878-fta-guide-i-introduction-to-fta

Poke around and you might find some others. Sorry for the monster wall of text! (Sometimes
I try to help too much... oops!)



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