Wargame: Airland Battle

[h1]The Greatest in the Series![/h1] [hr][/hr][i]This is the best game Eugen ever made. It is vastly improved experience from European Escalation without all the bad things in Red Dragon. It features CO-OP campaign and is historically balanced, something which Red Dragon sorely lacks.[/i][hr][/hr] [h1]The Best game from Eugen[/h1] Wargame Airland Battle is the best game developed by Eugen entertainment. It was sharpest improvement from European Escalation in quality and it is missing all the bad things which they had added in Red Dragon. This is the best game this studio had ever created before they lost all of its talent from internal problems. [list] ːsovietː [b][i]CO-OP[/i][/b] [*]The greatest strength of this game is that it has a CO-OP campaign. Why developers had scaled back and removed such an easy and yet, great feature is beyond me. All it takes is to allow a second player into a single player match, but Eugen simply could not be bothered to keep their game great... ːcozyhoi4eagleː [b][i]Historical balance[/i][/b] [*]Eugen does not understand what wargamming is. They balance their games like it would be an RTS. They do it around win rates and nerf vehicle's characteristics. This is absolutely terrible idea. If vehicle was amazing historically, it must remain amazing and in this game. Eugen however completely lacks any understanding of that. They then proceed to add unhistorical vehicles like Patriot or Buratino. Vehicles which would never be deployed at a scale which we are fighting in this game. These are strategic level assets and Eugen had a lot of trouble balancing them out. In general, developer is clueless about history, about correct weapon types, about historic strengths and weaknesses in this game. This is the game where USA has the best AA weaponary and USSR is the weakest in armor department... They are utterly clueless. ːsteamsaltyː [b][i]Lack of Bias[/i][/b] [*]Developers have bias towards Nato side. Their units are simply better. This is a result of lack of historical understanding. They do not understand history, more particularly, how good or bad were Warsaw Pact vehicles. Developers thus solely balance through their impressions. This has an impact where Warsaw Pact vehicles are unreasonably inaccurate for no reason. Tanks have unhistorical reload rates stemming from debunked myths. This bias also manifests in certain vehicles like Leclerc MBT being unreasonably too good. Another issue is that when developers converted accuracy from Airland Battles to Red Dragon, Warsaw Pact vehicles received less accuracy than Nato vehicles. Developers were caught by the hand by me for being bias and they only could provide an outrage on the forums. ːWarː [b][i]Realistic maps[/i][/b] [*]Another fundamental problem with Red Dragon is that it does not put much effort in their maps. Those maps are plain bad as they are filled with choke points and vegetation. Red Dragon is simply not realistic and do not represent actual maps on which armies would clash. Even more, due to how badly they are designed, Red Dragon heavily empowers infantry which can hide in vegetation. While in Airland Battle you can employ full set of tactics. You can encircle the town. Fight with armor formations on open field. Use armor to outflank the enemy. In Red Dragon however none of these things are true. Maps are small. They are full of choke points and infantry can hide anywhere and everywhere. ːbustlingfungusː [b][i]Perfect Organism[/i][/b] [*]This game is an outright improvement over European Escalation. However, Red Dragon is a stagnation. It introduced poor naval fighting and developers instantly backed away from it. Everyone just ignore naval warfare while it pollutes maps and GUI. Furthermore, there are no concerns about P2W DLCs, factions are not over-tuned, game is more realistic. It is lean and healthy game without all of the BS which is present in Red Dragon. [/list] [h1]Eugen's Zenith[/h1] This is the high point of Eugen Studios. Later they had created still popular, but flawed Red Dragon. Afterwards, they started doing nonsense. They created Steel Division which nobody liked. Instead of developing Wargame further, they started work on Steel Division 2 for some reason. Then they realised that they have to pay the bills and they made a lot of too powerful paid factions for Red Dragon, a game which people actually want to play. Then they proceeded to rush Warno launch, because they wasted all this time doing nothing and competitors started to release their products. Warno itself has lower production values than Wargame. Airland Battles was their last truly great game. From that point onward, it was just downwards journey with them. [i][url=https://steamcommunity.com/groups/Calicifer/discussions/0/3764481114695021267/]Calicifer's Reviews[/url][/i] [quote]If you are interested reading full review or want to discuss something with me, please follow the provided link. I do not allow endless discussions under my reviews, because it rarely ends well.[/quote]

Mit Errungenschaften zum Freischalten (Achievements) und noch mehr Kampagnen wäre es echt ein Traum! Ich bin mehr im "Single Player" unterwegs und lege mehr Wert auf solche Sachen :). Mir macht das Spiel Spaß! :)

Рекомендую к прохождению в случае бага графики засветка изображения белым цветом, разноцветность нужно перевести игру в параметре настройки изображения на DirectX9 и только на него, потом переставить на автоопределение, включить параметр Полный Экран В Окне( не полный экран(!!!) полный экран при автоопределённом Direct11 включит цветовую коллизию, а Direct9 сделает тени и деревья мерцающими с то чёткими текстурами, то размытыми!!!( не автоопределение, не Direct11, не Open-GL бета версия, при первой перестановке параметров).08.08.2022г

Fantastic milsim RTS, it's a shame this game is so obscure. If you do play the game, stick to single player or lobbies with friends, people have a chronic habit of leaving matches. Many of those that don't leave will yell at you for not knowing how to play well.

[i]Wargame : Airland Battle[/i] reprend les bases et les points forts de son prédécesseur [i]Wargame : European Escalation[/i], à savoir une interface soignée, de grandes cartes mais surtout une quantité incroyable d'unités militaires qui sont modélisées avec un réalisme saisissant. Pour autant, la campagne du premier opus était captivante alors qu'elle est très décevante dans ce volet car elle n'a pas du tout la même consistance. En outre, il y a trop peu de nouveautés notables et l'introduction de l'aviation n'apporte, à mon sens, rien de positif (les avions sont loin d'être indispensables et leur efficacité laisse à désirer). Par ailleurs, le jeu est vraiment très difficile (trop peut-être ?) et cela entraîne très vite frustration et découragement alors que je n'ai pas eu du tout cette sensation dans [i]Wargame : European Escalation[/i], la difficulté y étant beaucoup mieux dosée. Enfin, la mise en place d'une limite de temps pour les batailles est vraiment un gros point négatif, ce qui m'a grandement refroidi. Je ne recommande donc pas [i]Wargame : Airland Battle[/i] mais j'affirme qu'il ne s'agit pas d'un mauvais jeu. Son manque de réelles nouveautés par rapport à son prédécesseur est la principale raison qui m'incite à le déconseiller mais nul doute que bon nombre de joueurs y trouveront leur compte et leur plaisir, ce qui n'a malheureusement pas été mon cas.

cool concept, but the balance is god awful. The enemy ai have nearly unlimted spawns, always knows where your units are, and is able to use as much artillery and air support as it wants. Counter fire the enemy artillery if you dare, because the ai will just blow up your guns with planes. "But i have AA!! I'll be safe" naw. Your AA simply does not work. The enemy's does though :). Yes im salty, yes this game still needs massive work that it will never get.

The game is awesome. However I see it quite unbalanced. The learning curve is steep, which is not a problem, but even in the easiest setting it is impossible to win after a hundred hours of playing, following the tutorials and watching all possible Youtube playthroughs.