Differences with AWBW game

First topic message reminder :

---------------------------
EDIT-- just found Old Forum Topic with same title!
Differences between AWBW and AWDS by GIPFace
http://www.amarriner.com/awbw_forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13838
nice heated debate!


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

Blanci wrote:
   However at awbw i d think grit is broken on nearly all maps ive seen. Please explain what is different in your other version of AW to make grit less effective.

Mara Saragon reply

If by "other version" you mean AWDS, that's a topic I'll happily discuss. (..)

I will state briefly that the biggest difference by far is the charging system. It's not merely "faster," that's just a lazy shorthand I use a lot. In the older games, CO Power charging was based on funds, and the funds of damaged units fed that bar. (I.e. Infantry feed 1000g to the bar, Tanks 7000g, etc.) In AWDS, each power star is instead worth 100 "points" to begin with, increasing by +20% with each use until reaching +280% on the 9th use; on the 10th use, it resets to +100 for the rest of the session. Each unit has a set points value in this charging system. Several units share points values: Recons, Tanks, AAs, Arties, T-Copters, and B-Boats all are worth 100 points, which is to say they are worth the exact same to your power bar when killed. This completely changes the rules of cost-effectiveness. In the latter case, 6 dead Recons will charge Andy's SCOP the same as 6 dead Tanks. It makes no sense, therefore, to tech up past Recons until you have a few mixed in with Infantry to charge your bar.

This ties into production slots, maximizing how many units your SCOP affects, etc

Blanci wrote:Question for maraSargon and CWT /awDS folk......  Do you guys ever play or appreciate no-power game.?
Isn't this a common ground with awbw as game is equal in this case.

If you mean the game option of totally turning off powers (including D2D), I don't bother with it. It's boring as shit.

If you mean just choosing not to use CO Powers, I also don't bother with that. It's boring as shit.

I mean I know there's untapped balance discussions in there, but it's still a game, and my first priority while playing any game is fun.

MaraSargon wrote:the game option of totally turning off powers..It's boring as shit.

LOL.
So I suppose you joining our No Powers League would be out of the question ?!

Seriously though, i think it depends a lot on the map in question.

Quite a few awbw league/competition maps are too narrow with not enough contested cities and not enough interesting choices in general. This often leads to boring standoff situations which i presume is your main concern (as pointed out with examples on CW/T? website). I do agree. In fact I am convinced this is what led to many of our good players drifting away from AWBW. The fact that it was/is difficult for strong players to make progress against even half decent defense. And this also stretches games out for inordinately long times... simply hoping for your opponent to get bored and make an error.

This situation and the standard awbw kind of map arose from considerations of balance and fairness. And so most maps ended up rather similar in certain ways and many other interesting possibilities were basically dismissed as dodgy without proper consideration, unfortunately! I give examples later, or perhaps refer this discussion to an ongoing debate properly in the Design Maps subForum.

However, let me just say that I have played on lots of other maps here at awbw which are very rich gameplaywise . Its not only the map ... there are other factors too..like fog, and funds per city, predeployed units , any of which lead to more gameplay choices (strategies and tactics) and is thus more difficult to play, allowing more creativity, less boring standoff. (( i should say some awbers may disagree but plenty agree with me too )) . We can leave fog debate for later, as some people just dont like fog anyway and focus on the other aspects here.
Many map features promote fluid interesting games while others favour standoffs and massive buildup.  As well as those already mentioned we can add backwards properties give more deployment choices, forward HQs, mixed-up bases maps, having air and sea with available funding. I defer to map design subforum for more on these.
Let me take just one example... Mixed Base Maps.  We have a lot of these at AWBW but we never yet had any competion with them, though their fairness is not in doubt in general (some cases must be careful if bases are too near enemy) but in general for example Walker made lots of them and said they were balanced enough though later decided that he personally didnt like them. I think really they take the gameplay to new places where experienced players just dont want to go. But a major point about mixed base maps (which i pointed out frequently) is that they have massive amount of frontline ..and generally lots of contested properties.. and it is more or less impossible to get a static standoff when your forces are stretched so much. There has never been a draw or standoff on any mixed base map yet , perhaps it could happen but its almost impossible. CO powers are not necessary to get an exciting and fun battle.  (im not saying i dont like CO powers.. they too are an interesting additional element).
Apart from mixed base maps there are lots of other maps too which are fun. Also many horrible standoff maps could be made better by introducing more contested properties (or increasing funds or play in fog). I dont think it is sensible to dismiss NO Powers Games out of hand.

Also there is another fundamental reason why at least some of us AW players should consider the No-Power Mode seriously.
If we really wish to explore nd understand the depths and possibilities of AW then we really need at some point to break it down into simpler elements. Chess experts consider end game opening game combinations etc aspects seperately.  In AW too we need to break things down, and one obvious simplification is with no powers. I think learning about no Power AW can help in getting to grips with full blown AW.  So only on this basis you really cannot dismiss no power AW.

But we do need to work more to ensure we have more fluid gameplay maps.

I didn't say No Power mode is invalid, I just think it's boring. Anything else is putting words in my mouth.

You don't have to tell me twice about trying out other map types or game settings. Been experimenting with them for years. For example, it's generally understood that Black Bombs have no counter in low fund settings; but in high fund settings, it's starting to look like Stealths might be a feasible counter. Okay, sure, the jury's still out on that, could be totally wrong, but it's cool that such a counter can even be considered.

I think it might be an interesting challenge to balance some maps around non-default settings, but unfortunately such maps have never been popular outside some of the DM's War Room maps.

Yeah sure,  But I want AWBW players in general to realise that NoPowers is not necessarily boring if played on maps or with conditions which stretch the gameplay and imagination.

And you did say that you dont play much on certain map types or conditions.  For example have you tried proper fully mixed up bases maps?   Examples
Ring Around the Roses  by Kreugster
http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=53600
Dark Forest  by " I am Not Airob"
http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=49969
If you try these you can see that even with no powers there is a lot of difficult deployment choices and very challenging and boring standoffs very unlikely to develop(never yet seen).

This is just one kind of map/condition which is fun even without powers.

Blanci wrote:Yeah sure,  But I want AWBW players in general to realise that NoPowers is not necessarily boring if played on maps or with conditions which stretch the gameplay and imagination.

And you did say that you dont play much on certain map types or conditions.  For example have you tried proper fully mixed up bases maps?   Examples
Ring Around the Roses  by Kreugster
http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php?maps_id=53600
Dark Forest  by " I am Not Airob"
http://awbw.amarriner.com/prevmaps.php
If you try these you can see that even with no powers there is a lot of difficult deployment choices and very challenging and boring standoffs very unlikely to develop(never yet seen).

This is just one kind of map/condition which is fun even without powers.

I have zero interest in maps that are not AWDS-compatible. (Also your second link is broken.)

Thanks. Link repaired.
Just wondering how these maps might be incompatible with AWDS ?

Blanci wrote:Thanks. Link repaired.
Just wondering how these maps might be incompatible with AWDS ?

Well only the first map is incompatible, but it's the only one I could see at the time. Anyway, it's incompatible because AWDS only allows maps up to 30x20.

I recently found Old Forum Topic with same title!
"Differences between AWBW and AWDS" started  by  GIPFace
http://www.amarriner.com/awbw_forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13838
nice heated debate!
( the old forum seems to be read-only at the moment.. cant post there)

And there are interesting arguments about the strength/brokenness of Grit, not only in awds but even within the AWBW CO power charging system. It seemed Kamuscha was intending to play using Grit against Gipface (using a non-broken) in awbw to try to demonstrate Grit  strength, while Gipface intended to show Grit weakness (even within awbw system).
Does anybody know if that challenge ever materialised?

PS. For any recent new and chinese players .. " broken" CO is a CO who is so strong that they easily beat all normal COs.

After reading more details in this thread i think a challenge is in order......

Theethers Challenge !!

Ok... So i play Grit and any moderately experienced player is invited to join the game as Max.

For more info as to rationale i m afraid you ll have to read theethers post and stuff herein.
But in any case anyone fancying Max is welcome to try.  Good luck .. You ll need it. He he.

Just join the game in public waiting.

Hachi does not have a 20% attack boost on all direct units d2d......

New theether challenge test game, grit v Max in public... Any fair experienced player welcome to join test game preferably as Max ( as per theethers challenge above).

The previous test game turned out to be grit v hachi.. But it never got far maybe due to opponent not liking random weather.
Personally i think fog and random weather is the most realistic game mode and is more challenging and rewards good strategy (both solid or daring) above brute force calculation.
EDIT... i suppose a test game neednt have random weather , but weather change can be anticipated, and could be regarded as the norm by some.
..... i suppose the present most common conditions of no weather does need testing first.
However fog is very common choice in friendlies and is used in tourneys sometimes.
We need test with and without.