|Creator: Walker Boh || First Published: 12/22/2014 || Players: 2 || Size: 24x21|
|For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!|
Walker Boh (12/22/2014 02:41am):
Remember that time I made a recording of myself recording myself? Classic me.
Xmo5 (12/22/2014 12:11pm):
I have this problem now where I look at new maps like this and I have a hard time deciding
whether they're actually really good or whether they're just such a refreshing change from
all the horrible maps I've been commenting on that they just seem really good.
Usually I tend to give you (and people like Mori) the benefit of the doubt because you
know about 1000x more than me when it comes to designing maps. I think I'll stick to my
guns and just nod and agree for this one too.
*nods* Yup, looks good to me.
walkerboh01 (12/22/2014 03:33pm):
In general it's really easy to tell the difference between a bad map and a good map, just at a glance. It's much
harder, and usually requires play-testing, to tell the difference between a good and great map. Often the small
intricacies of how fronts develop are really hard to predict (especially on maps like this where the support
routes are complicated and fronts can develop in a myriad of ways), and I find that's the biggest indicator of
good vs. great maps.
Xmo5 (12/22/2014 05:08pm):
I completely agree with you. I have no problem picking a good map out of a sea of lukewarm
piss, but I'm usually so happy to see a good map (and too lazy to do more thinking) that I
rarely distinguish/recognize the great maps in my mind. I've found that by and large,
people such as you and Mori are really good at mental simulation of what will probably
happen between competitive players so I usually assume they're closer to great. I end up
thinking "Looks good to me but I can't hope to understand how good as much as they do. It
has all the basic elements I'm looking for, but I don't think Captain Obvious needs to
tell walker or Mori that their map looks balanced."
What does a novice artist have to offer in the analysis of a masterpiece that his
well-educated artist/art historian buddy can't say much more meaningfully and with more
depth? Not to say I consider myself a preschool finger-painter to your Rembrandt or van
Gogh, but you get the idea. That said, I'll keep nodding and agreeing and giving you guys
the benefit of the doubt.
Oh, and you screwed up your reef symmetry.
Walker Boh (12/22/2014 07:53pm):
Well that's a shame, because there are tons of things about this map that I'm not sure will work
I mean, I only achieved a position of authority on map-making by becoming leader of Map
Committee when everyone else was inactive and then brainwashing people into thinking my
maps were actually good (because how could anyone become head of MC without being able
to make good maps??).
Also the reefs are asymmetric on purpose, as any non-preschool finger-painter would have
Xmo5 (12/23/2014 12:01am):
Of course they're screwed up on purpose. Once you can make good maps, you're allowed to do whatever you want with the
minor details because people know it's by choice, not ignorance. It's just like how abstract art works :P (Actually, it does stop a
non-Sami/Drake AB from getting a lander from the port to the far shoal in 2 turns if they also stop on the shoal 6 spaces from
the port. Somehow I don't see that being a major issue, but still.)
Brainwashing or not, I think my statement stands about you knowing much more about designing a good map than I do. There's
just something about maps like this that makes my brain shut down when I try to figure out how it will play out. I do alright at
making my own competitive maps from time to time but I find it easier to follow my own idea through to conclusion than to pick
up someone else's and figure out how it works.
On the other hand, I feel like I've become pretty good at critiquing maps around or below my level because I've done a lot of it
and I've also received a lot of the same criticism over the years. Something in my brain just breaks down a lot of times (but not
always) when it comes to looking at competitive maps like this and its probably as much laziness as anything else.
walkerboh01 (01/09/2015 02:14am):
Towers are too contested and dynamic around the main contested cities is a bit weird in the
Fronts are probably too open, and it's a little too easy to shift tanks around behind the front.
Terrain tweaks are definitely needed to direct unit flow a bit better.
Xmo5 (08/23/2017 06:56pm):
Ha, 3 years and a MC recruitment later and I still feel like my comments here hold a lot of truth to them. I
can really understand why good maps get some of the fewest comments; people just can't think of
anything constructive to say, and I can relate (clearly).
Walker Boh (06/25/2018 03:05am):
Updated with fog of war in mind.
Advance Wars is (c) 1990-2001 Nintendo and (c) 2001 Intelligent Systems. All images are copyright their respective owners.