AW/FE by Web

AWBW/FEBW Forum
It is currently Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:50 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Can I haiz Dim3?

Critique and discuss the design maps on AWBW

Moderator: Forum Mods

Can I haiz Dim3?

Postby Completeduck » Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:49 pm

Can I haiz Dim3?

Inspired by 2p small immigration by maq, I tried to create a normal 1v1.
Infantry for counter, and Carrier to discourage aerial assaults on the Northern and southern bases, so they are the strong point of each side.
I WANNA BE THE GUY!
Completeduck
Anti-Air
Anti-Air
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Corneria

Postby xushu » Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:05 pm

Here is my in-depth analysis:

FTA Issue- The BH infantry solves the 'OS gets an airport first' issue, and the starting funds are 3k, so looks good

+1

Pre-Deploy Issue- The carriers are land-locked and meant to be an air unit deterrent. I am slightly concerned with how much space has been given for them to move around (it makes it hard for an opponent to take out the carrier), but I have seen more egregious offenses on other maps. All in all, okay.

+1

Fund Issue- Each side can potentially earn 19k (assuming that you capture all the cities/airport) which is nice for unit production without having too much of an issue with easy tech ups.

+1

Base Issue- As it stands now, I feel that two bases per side feels small. I would almost like a third base center/near the HQ. Given the size of the map, I don't think three would be too many.

+1 with reservations

Terrain Issue- There is a fair amount of terrain variety, allowing for a variety of play styles. The east and west wings look a touch plain heavy, but that is not a terrible thing.

+1

Com Tower Issue- Two com towers, so no 'Javier omg' moments. They are almost too out of the way, seeing that it would take eight turns at the fastest to reach and take some manpower away from a front, but again, that is not a really bad thing.

+1

Aesthetics Issue- Seeing that my eyes did not explode upon viewing it, and there is not a real issue with blandness in my humble opinion, no problems here.

+1

The only thing that would be a make/break the map for me would come from playability... so playtesting would be in order to flesh any other problems out.

So, until that happens, I think it is a safe 7/10. (up to +3 for good playtesting, naturally)
"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die. " Sima Yi
User avatar
xushu
Tank
Tank
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:42 pm

Postby Completeduck » Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:50 am

Requested Edits made
I WANNA BE THE GUY!
Completeduck
Anti-Air
Anti-Air
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Corneria

Postby xushu » Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:20 pm

As Taz replied on the map comments, a neutral base near the HQ would make the "2 base and an HQ" FTA infantry stronger and more fair. I'm liking how the new base is placed now. ^_~
"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die. " Sima Yi
User avatar
xushu
Tank
Tank
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:42 pm


Return to Design Maps

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group