Cài đặt Steam
đăng nhập
|
ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
wargameAB is more about micromanagement,
and "Unity of command" is more about careful strategic planning.
in first game you need to understand the situation momentarily, know all the variables of your units and make decisions fast. in the second you can take as much time as you need, but you have to think many turns ahead, like in chess (actually, you have to plan the whole operation for every turn even before game begins, just like in "Panzer general"\"panzer corps").
both games are good, and both games are hard. so, get them both
Wargame: AirLand Battle (WAB)
• Realism: Arcade
• Difficulty: Easy (Singleplayer) / Easy (Multiplayer)
• Period: Cold War
• Setting: Western Europe
• Scale: Squad Level Combat (i.e. Squad Tactics)
Unity of Command (UOC)
• Realism: Historical
• Difficulty: Moderate (Singleplayer) / Very Hard (Multiplayer)
• Period: Second World War
• Setting: Eastern Front
• Scale: Divisional / Corps Level Combat (i.e. Operational Tactics and Logistics)
Thank you nice break down.