Sexy new airplanes might not be the best thing about Airland Battles

palpable_hit

The fine folks at Eugen Systems, one of our latest greatest hopes for real time strategy, have been awful at thinking up names for their games since their debut with Direct Action, which was clearly not about fighting wars through proxies. I would be hard pressed to come up with a more generic and uninteresting title than Wargame: Airland Battles, their next game. All I can deduce from that title is that there won’t be any naval units.

The main bullet point for Airland Battles is the addition of aircraft (pictured) to the same basics from Wargame: European Escalation. Which is another awful title for how all it tells you is that you won’t have any battles on continents that begin with the letter A.

But for me, there’s something even sexier in Airland Battles than the sexy airplanes. European Escalation appealed to me partly as a collectible game in which you unlocked awesome Cold War units. But one of the problems with that game was the “deck building” that followed the unlocking. There were no meaningful rules about how to arrange your deck. You just chucked stuff into the box. There. Deck built! There was no incentive to use the less useful units. Of all the toys in that very generous toybox, most of them go unplayed with.

Eugen has a very different idea with the deck building in Airland Battles, which gives your deck bonuses if you restrict your cards — err, units — to certain themes.

For example, if you create a Marine infantry Deck from 1980 with 100% Russian troops, you will receive very high bonuses, compared to a Deck made up of little bits from all nations on your side.

Read more here, where the developers spell out in detail what they’re doing and why they’re doing it. Airland Battles is due out this spring. It’s not soon enough.

  • Halcyon9000

    I really like that take on deck building! Color me excited.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dglenny Damian Glenny

    W:EE was my favourite game last year, and I was already looking forward to W:AB (good grief, the acronyms get worse – if they add ships and get W:ANC I will be very upset) very, very much if not only to watch a Warthog remove those stubborn T-80Us from my way. But the more I read, the more excited I get – the deck building changes are fantastic all by themselves, but there was a larger interview the other day where they discussed dry-to-everyone-else-but-exciting-to-W:EE-veterans things like increased AP falloff over distance and infantry urban spread and so on.

    One of the main problems with this game is that it is very hard to communicate how good it is without sounding like some sort of grognard. “Tank goes boom” normally helps, though.

  • limper

    I was already looking forward to this and planned on buying day one. However i thought i knew what to expect – airplanes. boy was i wrong, and in a very good way :D This, at least potentially, means that multiplayer doesnt get stale for a long time.

  • jeansberg

    The larger focus on deck building sounds interesting. I bet it will add more flavor to 2vs2 for example. A team that specializes their decks to complement each other will surely have an advantage.

  • Mercanis

    The Americas, Africa, Asia, Australia, and Antarctica. Well would you look at that. They do all start with “A”!

    Correction:
    “I would [be] hard pressed”

  • tomchick

    By the way, Airland Battles also has what looks like a bitchin’ dynamic campaign. We don’t get enough of those in RTSs. Rise of Nations and Endwar come to mind as among the great rare examples.