Wargame: AirLand Battle

Wargame: AirLand Battle

View Stats:
Add something... And you get the coolest game ever!
Take this game and how well it handles strategically deploying forces, then add EA's Battlefield to the game. Multiple players order forces to deploy in strategic areas. Then, other players assume the role of maybe a leader of a platoon riding in on a Blackhawk helicopter, or they are the hotshot jet pilot flying in from the air corridor. Each player that comes in follows orders from the "generals" like this game already works, and each player on the frontline has some autonomy on how to go about it, but if they stray too far off course, they are awol (up to the general's disgression how to handle this situation) and their platoon will stop following them. Then they can go off to die without recon, and get blown up by an F-117 or something.

The scale of the battlefield is so large, that one human infantry cant possiblly do much all on his own.

You would proably have to have two different game engines running diferent versions of the game for both generals and frontline players, but just imagine how awesome this game would be!

I would pay 300$ for this game, if it played even halfway decently.
Last edited by Bob the badass builder; Mar 2, 2014 @ 6:58pm
< >
Showing 1-13 of 13 comments
H2CO3 Mar 2, 2014 @ 7:08pm 
I have thought about this too. And I would probably pay similar price! I have spent a while trying to find a game like that, but haven't been able to! It would certainly be an exciting game! One of my friends told me that the game MAG is sort of like that... but I don't think it is complete. Let's get Eugen on this idea! Or get Eugen to handle the commander side of it, and EA to handle the FPS!
Sawis Mar 3, 2014 @ 1:29am 
There is Arma 3, High Command module plus subordinates and then some.
corpsman-up Mar 3, 2014 @ 8:35am 
This has been done before, to certain extents. Arma did this with it's High Command module (which is actually pretty good), I think there is one F2P game with this concept, and some rather unflavorful and generic shooters have done this. It would be a really cool concept though, and I'd like to see it happen. Maybe not in a Wargame title, but if Eugen coop'd with another dev to make the tactical portion while Eugen made the strategic portion, and released it as a seperate series I'd buy it just to experiment.
Evil Unk Mar 3, 2014 @ 11:25am 
Getting enough players can play at the same time , who have headsets and mics, can play for the same amount and are willing to play as a team would be tricky. BF2 was pretty close to gettign it right. ARMA 3 is big enough, just needs dedicated players with hardware that can run it smooth and willing to all get together.
Planetside 2 is kind of like that. Have a few thousand people on the server/map at a time, with some in tanks, planes, transports, jeeps, etc.

Join a 50 man plattoon, which is divided into 5 man squads. Usually the platoons are in groups of 3 or 4 other plattoons in an alliance or clan or something, so somone is practically controlling 200 people at a time. Take that 200 and throw it at a enemy base with it's 200 man army, and you have quite the tactical fight and lots of people yelling at head sets :P

A lot of people have mics, usually the platoon leaders and squad leaders is all you need to have mics for. The rest just do what they are told.
ivan01rch Mar 4, 2014 @ 2:15am 
Sounds just like Planetside.
Mhiester Mar 4, 2014 @ 2:34am 
How would this work for the simpicity of the terrain and the statistical nature of the fighting in this game?
Legatus Hamster Mar 4, 2014 @ 9:26am 
No. Strategy games can't involve an FPS layer, simply because many players won't follow orders. The other way around, implementing RTS-lite bits is possible to an extent (see BF2 and BF4) although still severely limited.
Grey Buddhist Mar 4, 2014 @ 12:40pm 
Only way this might work is if your friends took control of something like 1-5 of the units (NOT fps though...still rts). That way the leader could have an idea of the 'big' picture and try and command the whole army (his friends and their sections).
But adding any fps element would just turn this into the game Battlefield or one of those others that we are not playing.
Mark.223 Mar 4, 2014 @ 4:45pm 
Heroes and Generals did this. It was an awesome game, but server creation was difficult and so the game died.
harlequin Mar 7, 2014 @ 10:22am 
I've thought about this before, but with the Total War series (Chivalry-like combat for the players controlling individual characters), and while it was a fun thought it's not viable. It requires too many players (it'd have to be a very popular game and with great servers) and the player who controls the strategic part (deploying and sending factions/armies to certain locations and having them do this or that) would be, inevitably, bothered by the slow response or poor control of the battlefield players.
balticnapo Mar 7, 2014 @ 1:57pm 
Wouldnt work with out a real good fan base. Because at the end, maybe all the players would only want to play commander. Look for example Natural selection. Well the game is actually good but the maps arent huge and are usually small COD maps so to say.
Silver Mar 12, 2014 @ 3:23pm 
the game you want already exist: its arma series ;)
But i agree that this would make a very interresting Mod for wargame too.
< >
Showing 1-13 of 13 comments
Per page: 15 30 50

Date Posted: Mar 2, 2014 @ 6:57pm
Posts: 13