Wargame: Airland Battle

72%
Game Brain Score Based on 4,570 reviews
  • gameplay
  • graphics
  • story
Wargame: Airland Battle Game Cover
Wargame AirLand Battle is European Escalation escalated: more Cold War kit, more tactical tension and more replayability.
Starting at $5.88Buy now
Get on Steam

"Wargame: AirLand Battle" is a real-time strategy game set in 1985, where players can command military resources from 12 nations and engage in large-scale battles with 750 available units. The game features a new graphics engine, dynamic campaign, and extensive multiplayer options for up to 20 players. It offers strategic depth with the addition of air forces and battles on huge battlefields.

  • Mac OS
  • PC
  • Windows
  • Cloud
  • Linux
  • NVIDIA GeForce NOW
Genres & TagsPlay Modes

Reviews

72%
Audience ScoreBased on 4,570 reviews
gameplay162 positive mentions
story16 negative mentions
  • The game offers a deep and complex tactical experience with a wide variety of units and strategies.
  • Graphics are stunning, providing an immersive battlefield experience with detailed models and environments.
  • The deck-building system allows for extensive customization of armies, enhancing replayability and strategic depth.
  • The learning curve is steep, making it challenging for new players to grasp the mechanics and strategies.
  • The single-player campaign is lackluster and repetitive, often feeling like a series of skirmishes without a compelling narrative.
  • AI can be frustratingly overpowered, often knowing the player's unit positions and deploying counters effectively.
  • gameplay414 mentions

    The gameplay of "Wargame: AirLand Battle" is characterized by its depth and complexity, offering a steep learning curve that rewards strategic thinking and tactical planning. While the mechanics are engaging and the graphics are visually appealing, many players find the lack of tutorials and obtuse controls challenging, making it difficult for newcomers to fully grasp the game. Overall, the combination of realistic warfare simulation, deck-building elements, and diverse unit management creates a compelling experience for fans of the RTS genre, despite some frustrations with balance and accessibility.

    • “The gameplay was really fun and it was entertaining to play against friends or randoms.”
    • “Wargame: Airland Battle features marvelously executed in-depth strategic and tactical gameplay.”
    • “With outstanding graphics, perfectly crafted gameplay, and a wide variety of play-styles, Wargame will always keep you coming back for more.”
    • “Makes for a shitty strategy game mechanic for a game seemingly dedicated to strategy.”
    • “Wargame lacks a clear tutorial, and the 'unit deck' mechanic just makes this game impenetrable to beginners.”
    • “Its gameplay mechanics are very painful and its learning curve is a brick wall for me.”
  • graphics326 mentions

    The graphics of the game have received widespread acclaim, with many users praising their detail, realism, and overall aesthetic appeal. Despite being an older title, the visuals hold up well, offering impressive effects and smooth performance even on lower-end systems. However, some players noted that while the graphics are stunning, the gameplay mechanics can sometimes overshadow the visual experience.

    • “The graphics are beautiful, the maps are expansive, the units are diverse, and the models are unique and interesting.”
    • “Watching from the viewpoint of a tank about to be bombed by a fighter, and then watching the explosion, with excellent up-close graphics... it's a thing of beauty.”
    • “With stunning graphics and an incredibly wide selection of units, the Wargame series writes the book on how an RTS should be made.”
    • “It couldn't be adjusted manually or by autodetect graphics setting.”
    • “The graphics to me are a step back from the first European Escalation. The campaign is horrible, really not explaining to you what to do and how to do it.”
    • “I was quite disappointed with this game, picking it up for its stellar graphics and intense fighting, I found myself quite annoyed.”
  • story117 mentions

    The story aspect of the game is widely criticized for its lack of depth and engagement, with many reviewers noting that the campaign feels more like a series of skirmishes than a cohesive narrative. Players mention the absence of meaningful storytelling, relying instead on random snippets and a simplistic Cold War backdrop, which detracts from the overall experience. Overall, the campaign is seen as underdeveloped, with little effort put into creating a compelling storyline, leading many to recommend other titles for a richer narrative experience.

    • “In general, I recommend you buy Red Dragon instead; if you just want singleplayer, I found the campaign and story for European Escalation to be more interesting.”
    • “Don't worry though, it's not that bad; basically, it follows an ultra-unique storyline where the Soviet Union declared war on the Allies.”
    • “Company of Heroes nails home story in general, but Airland Battle nails home the scale of what may have been World War III.”
    • “A shame that compared to Warno, this one is pretty much dead. Also, the campaign is a glorified skirmish game with almost no story at all (no Wargame title has a good story even if they try), and because of that, I don't recommend it because it relies on multiplayer.”
    • “Well, first of all, there is absolutely no story at all, apart from some snippets that pop up during the campaign map phase, and they are completely random.”
    • “There is no story, no thought, no love put into this game.”
  • replayability38 mentions

    Overall, the game offers high replayability, particularly in its multiplayer mode, where players can engage in diverse battles and test their skills against others. While the single-player experience is criticized for its lack of replay value and steep learning curve, the dynamic campaign and variety of nations enhance the game's longevity for strategic enthusiasts. Many reviewers recommend the game for its engaging multiplayer and replayable content, making it a worthwhile purchase despite its single-player limitations.

    • “Excellent game that makes a perfect match between replayability, balance, and fun.”
    • “Dynamic campaign gives almost infinite replay value.”
    • “Great game for any enthusiastic strategist, easily replayable due to the plenty of varied nations and their equipment.”
    • “Single-player has just about zero replayability, though.”
    • “It's not an easy game to play; the learning curve is steep, and while single-player will teach you the basics, it has little replayability and is dull compared to the vibrant multiplayer.”
    • “The replay value in this game is not in the single-player, but in the multiplayer portion, as you get to test your skills against others, and every battle is seemingly different.”
  • stability24 mentions

    The game's stability is a mixed bag; while many players report smooth performance and good optimization, there are persistent bugs and glitches that remain unaddressed, leading to occasional freezes during loading. Some users highlight that it runs particularly well on Linux, but overall, the experience can vary significantly depending on the platform and system specifications.

    • “It is also very well optimized and runs great.”
    • “Playing on an iMac i7 with NVIDIA 750m, runs great!”
    • “This game makes RTS fun; it looks great, it runs great, and it is easy to learn but hard to master!”
    • “Buy the first one to see why everyone loves Wargame or buy Red Dragon to get the latest and best; because in both EE and ALB, bugs or glitches haven't been fixed, even though they're known for a long time (Raketenjagdpanzers 2 model comes to mind, for a small, but in my opinion, telling example).”
    • “It freezes.”
    • “Terrible, has so many glitches.”
  • humor24 mentions

    The humor in the game is described as a mixed bag; while some players find it amusing and memorable, particularly with the quirky mechanics like the 'decks', others feel it lacks depth and fails to fully utilize its comedic potential. Overall, the game is seen as both funny and challenging, though some reviewers note that humor may not be the primary reason to engage with it.

    • “The 'decks' are a hilariously misplaced mechanic.”
    • “Funny and challenging game!”
    • “So, this game is pretty funny, well built, but unable to exploit its undoubted potential.”
  • music18 mentions

    The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the sound effects and overall aesthetic, while others find the soundtrack repetitive and lacking in epic quality. Many note that the background music can become annoying, especially in a war game context, and the inability to adjust sound settings adds to the frustration. Overall, while the music provides a decent atmosphere, it does not stand out as particularly memorable or impactful.

    • “Mechanics-wise the age is starting to show a bit, but the soundtrack, aesthetics, and pacing beats everything hands down.”
    • “Nice music and sound effects.”
    • “Music gives you something to listen to at the title screen, but isn't the next Beethoven's 7th.”
    • “Multiplayer is totally dead, background music is horrible.”
    • “For me the only drawback is the soundtrack and the scale: both could have been much more epic.”
    • “So yes the game is good, the soundtrack gets a bit annoying but at least thanks to the graphics it'll run well on any PC if you updated it in 2010.”
  • optimization18 mentions

    The game's optimization receives mixed reviews; while some players report smooth performance and impressive graphics even on lower-end hardware, others experience significant issues, including crashes and the need for upgraded video cards. Overall, it appears well-optimized for newer systems but struggles with older setups, leading to a varied player experience.

    • “What I can say right now is that this game is optimized.”
    • “My XFX 6870 died (waiting for the new one to arrive). I expected this game to be unplayable due to the onboard graphics but found out that the auto optimization works great. I'm playing it with the Intel 3000 from my 2500K (clocked at 4.6GHz) with no lag or frame drops; the graphics look great.”
    • “Very slick game, well optimized, few bugs, solid gameplay, very nice balance, awesome choice of units, opposing factions give nice gameplay.”
    • “Terrible game, zero support, not optimized for anything but the devs' own computer setup.”
    • “Cons: had to buy a new video card to play it; my old GTX 9800 was fine as far as performance was concerned (didn't seem too taxed) but resulted in serious 'random' crashes in game after 10 minutes.”
    • “Has some optimization problems, especially with computers older than a year or two or lacking at least a $120 video card (lower cards of high tier tend to perform okay).”
  • grinding9 mentions

    Reviews indicate that the grinding aspect of the game is largely viewed as tedious and unengaging, particularly in the single-player campaign, which is criticized for its repetitive skirmishes and frustrating AI. However, some players appreciate the absence of unit unlocking and the focus on large-scale multiplayer battles, which alleviates some of the grind associated with resource management. Overall, opinions are mixed, with many finding the experience laborious while others enjoy the streamlined gameplay.

    • “Then they made the single player campaign in this one un-fun and tedious (less work for lazy devs - it's just a series of skirmishes with time limit and cheating AI).”
    • “Apparently there are people who really enjoy this game, but I found it really tedious.”
    • “Like too much micro for the setting and it can make it more tedious than it needs to be.”
  • emotional4 mentions

    The emotional aspect of the game is polarizing; while some players find the storyline boring, others experience strong feelings of anger and irritation, particularly in multiplayer modes. This suggests that the game can evoke intense emotional reactions, making it unsuitable for those who are easily affected.

    • “The emotional depth of the storyline feels lacking compared to the original game.”
    • “The emotional impact of the narrative is disappointing when compared to the original.”
    • “The storyline fails to evoke the same emotions as the original game did.”
  • atmosphere2 mentions

    The atmosphere of battles is highly dynamic and engaging, as players can create unique experiences through diverse unit combinations that cater to their individual fighting styles. This variety enhances the overall immersion and excitement of each encounter.

    • “The atmosphere of each battle is unique thanks to the large number of unit combinations (deck) that you can bring to the frontline to support your particular style of fighting.”
  • monetization2 mentions

    Users express concerns about the monetization strategy, specifically noting that there is a lack of advertisements in the game.

Positive mentions (%)Positive
Neutral mentions (%)Neutral
Negative mentions (%)Negative

Critic Reviews

84% average critic score

Buy Wargame: Airland Battle

Play time

75hMedian play time
68hAverage play time
24-100hSpent by most gamers
*Based on 20 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

Similar Games

Game News