Disunion – Wargame: European Escalation’s Multiplayer

By Adam Smith on February 13th, 2012 at 9:39 am.

A New Model Army

A coded message has just reached me from the lofty frontline of a Europe escalated to previously unimagined heights. After running the string of numbers and expletives through the Unigma Machine, which translates marketing language into actual information, this is what I have learned. Wargame: European Escalation’s multiplayer modes will permit the following: customisable armies, hundreds of unit selected from hundreds of unit types, battlefields up to 150 square kilometres in size and eight-way warfights, with the option for teams and solo generalising generaleering. You may glean more from the video below.

All is klar?

Anyone preordering before the 23rd February release, either through the official website or Steam, will receive access to the multiplayer beta. Furthermore, anyone buying the game after release will receive access to the finished multiplayer and the single player as well.

__________________

« | »

, , .

28 Comments »

  1. Enzo says:

    Give me World in Conflict 2.

    • GinSoakedBoy says:

      It really does, which is definitely a very good thing. However, it was hard enough to keep on top of your forces in World in Conflict. Keeping track of your forces in this game is going to be mind boggling.

    • Turin Turambar says:

      @GinSoakedBoy

      What? It was very easy to be on top of your units in WiC: you usually managed 2-4 groups, and the pace of the game wasn’t very fast.

    • GT3000 says:

      A fair few of you are jumping to conclusions, I have the multiplayer beta and here are my impressions. You operate on a fixed point income, and you gain points my holding strategtic points on the map which can only be held by Command Vehicles. Once the units are gone, it’s nigh unlikely you’ll be able to gather enough points to fully recoup your losses. It’s incredibly realistic. Fuel and ammuition are key parts of the game and I’ve seen more than my fair share of tank advances fall short because they didn’t have their supply chain in effect. It’s very realistic when it comes to the weapon systems of the times and you certainly won’t be just throwing men and machines about willy nilly unless you have a clear advantage which is difficult to come by. Recon is king and Artillery is queen which means that the game is balanced, it’s certainly not a pick up and play for 5 minutes kind of game. The shortest match I played was 30 minutes on average, there’s a lot of deception and subterfuge at play, blunt attacks get rebuffed fairly quickly. Definitely the strategy man’s game.

    • Muffalopadus says:

      I finally registered at RPS just to say…I’m thrilled to finally find one other person who loved World in Conflict.

      It was an excellent game with a surprisingly good story (at least, I thought so at the time). Regardless, I loved the game, but this game looks massive! I’d probably have an aneurysm if I play it. My doctor recommends that I stop playing SC2 for the same reason.

    • 1q3er5 says:

      Who doesn’t want World In Conflict 2. Most people who played it know it was a damn good game- extremely well polished. The explosion effects in this game look pretty LAME compared to WIC. Seriously I think WIC has the best explosions in a game to date: napalm, heavy artillery, daisy cutters, carpet bombing and nukes that left huge craters behind and massive plumes of smoke. Multiplayer was fun if your team wasn’t full of noobs. Its actually very satisfying when your team works together backing each other up but frustrating when your tanks are left naked because a support player decides to buy artillery pieces instead of anti-air units. Seems like some concepts from WIC are in this game – makes me wonder if any ex-WIC developers are helping make this game. I don’t see any urban settings either i guess it would be too taxing for the RUSE engine, i would rather they used WIC’s engine and upgraded it a little bit for scale.

  2. DogKiller says:

    I will probably end up getting this just because it has so many of my favourite military vehicles in it, and I’m a sucker for Cold War type scenarios, but I kind of wish it looked a bit more realistic. I know it’s more RTS than wargame, but the hordes of infantry just running towards the enemy while getting blown up kind of irks me a little bit. On the other hand, I did see a ridiculous amount of tank variants in the video.

    • syndrome says:

      The key selling point is obviously something which is not realism. And that’s funny because the whole point of having that true scale terrain is to have a realistic combat setting. Otherwise… Hey look, a three-headed monkey!

      Top score TOP CORE! HRAD CORE Tanks in pyjamas. Oooooh syrup craving cookie soldier. This guy Angelina. BROADWAY. game is shit.

    • Bonedwarf says:

      Syndrome just made the post of the year. Were this Reddit, a million upvotes.

  3. Mudshovel says:

    I’ll wait for a demo.

  4. Tony M says:

    I’m intrigued, but I still have no clue what the gameplay is like watching that video. Show us a minute or two of actual gameplay.

  5. Persus-9 says:

    I think you need to check the calibration on your Unigma Machine. I got from the video that the maps are up to 150 square kilometres in size not 150 kilometres squared in size which would be 22500 in square kilometres.

  6. rocketman71 says:

    Yeah, sounds good, but if like RUSE it’s not going to permit offline LAN play, I’ll pass.

    Thank you so much, Eugen.

  7. TT says:

    I´m still not sold. Gameplay footage would have been better.
    My impression is another game trapped between realism and power-ups, where realism is confined to the 3d elements (modeling) and the mechanics are plagued by “accessible”, “fun”, or whatever is the current jargon.
    wait and see.

    (edit)
    ps: found some gameplay
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-saP6-QG7I&feature=related

    • Meneldil says:

      I think this is about as realist as a not-niche-RTS can get. It will have moral level, different ammo, hundreds of vehicules, each with dozens of stat points, crews that act differently based on their experience and what not.

      The “Wargame” part of the title refers to tabletop wargames (which are obviously not realist, as people can’t keep tracks of dozens and dozens of stats), not to “Garry Hoopper’s East Front : the Battle for Stalingrad, from may 7th to december 14th” and other completely hardcore (and quite frankly boring for 99% of players) PC turn based wargames. Remember that it still is a Ruse-like RTS, and that, according to this video, it will try to get big on the multiplayer and e-sport side of things, despite being much more deep than say, Starcraft II.

      Edit : that being said, I’m no fan of the infantry playing it a la 14-18 too. It definitely needs to change before the game is released.

  8. Plasmamate says:

    In fact, it’s more hardcore and complex than WiC.
    Here is a video explaining the game mechanics (: http://youtu.be/NVeNnQT7uF4)
    and some 1vs1 Gameplay here (: http://youtu.be/tLoVWwmWggE)

  9. coldvvvave says:

    > 23rd February release

    Red Army Day? I wonder if it’s on purpose.

  10. Gaytard Fondue says:

    Over free hundred and sixty different units?

  11. Schmitzkater says:

    Here is an infectiously enthusiastic French guy explaining it in minute detail for an hour:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVeNnQT7uF4

    He makes it look really fun in a sort of Ruse-On-Steroids -way.

    • Examiner2 says:

      I actually watched that whole video, now I’m very interested in the game. I prefer RTS’s where it’s primarily focused on units as I can’t effectively micromanage bases and things of that sort.

  12. Danny252 says:

    What is that accent? French Australian? I can’t understand a fair bit of what he says…

    Why is it so hard for developers to find a native of a certain country to speak/write/check things? If I were deciding to put out a french version of my trailer or translate a game to French, I’d find a frenchman to do it, rather than be laughed at by the entire population of France/Quebec/etc.

  13. thecaptain says:

    I’ve been waiting for someone to make a game like this for ages. Played the multiplayer beta all weekend.

    Units are precious, vulnerable, deadly, and hardy.

    You start with most of your forces on the map, and will spend much of the game trying to keep them alive. You get reinforcements, but if you lose the point value of units that you start with (Usually enough to deploy 20+ tanks and supporting vehicles) you’ll lose the match.

    An RPG to the rear will kill a precious MBT. Overwatch from cover is the best way to keep other units alive. Maneuver, flanking, and artillery suppression win tank battles. Artillery is useless unless concentrated, corrected by recon units, and used at the precise moment. A good tank shot will one-shot an enemy vehicle. At close range, even ‘old’ tanks can cause significant hurt.

    ‘Spam’ isn’t a problem, as the most powerful units have low ammo supplies and drink up supply. A tank can usually carry 20+ tank rounds, and can fire off most of its ammo in a few minutes of combat… leaving it up to you to resupply them between skirmishes. “Amateurs study tactics. Professionals study logistics.”

    Units are slow moving cross country, and waste fuel compared to using road movement… but are comparatively vulnerable moving on the roads. A simple move fast command will instruct units to use roads, which is great and speedy as long as you know they’re not going to run into any surprises.

    The ‘infantry running towards the enemy’ in the trailer is a bit silly and not reflective of the full game; in actual gameplay, you want to advance them under cover, keep them in their vehicles when moving and in forests when dug in, and never encounter unsuppressed enemies.

    ATGM’s seem powerful, until you realize that ammo is precious and scarce, and green units firing missiles will miss often. Veteran ATGM teams or cavalry units can bloody a spearhead or enemy recon units, but will crumble in the face of an enemy assault.

    Panicked, suppressed, or temporarily disabled (stunned, detracted, knocked out targeting computer, turret traverse disabled, etc) enemy units will operate at minimal efficiency, giving your units enough time to finish them off for good.

    A massed Warsaw Pact tank rush will crumble against dug in defenders, unless you use combined arms, lots of recon, attack at the decisive time, and where they are weak. If you want to keep tanks with unstabilized guns alive during an assault (most soviet tanks), you need to use bounding movement, suppress the defenders, and have something decent in overwatch.

    If you band box your units and attack the enemy head on, you’ll lose every time.

    The only things I’d add are the ability to put markers on the map for teammates, see an icon on the map for orders I’ve already given, and better customizable hotkeys.

    If you thought WiC was small groups of pretty, throwaway units causing pretty explosions, at ridiculously short ranges in between god-like off-map strikes, you’ll love W:EE.

  14. DK says:

    It’s as great as Close Combat, Dangerous Waters, War in the East or Advanced Squad Leader. One of the best Wargames ever made.

    It’s going to utterly fail financially and Eugen will probably not exist by next year.

    • BoboDaHobo says:

      I’ve been surprised by the turn-out on the beta. There were almost 600 players on last night at around 5:00 PST, and I’ve had no trouble finding friendly matches (still haven’t gotten into ranked). Considering that ALL these numbers come from people who have shelled out money to play the game, and it’s still only the “Beta,” I’m hoping we can expect good things for Wargame.

      Y’know, aside from how wonderful the game actually is (which it so is).

    • timmyvos says:

      Men of War isn’t exactly a mainstream title and DMS is doing quite well. The Russians and Germans and other assorted Eastern Europeans are usually quite interested in these kinds of games so hopefully it won’t bomb there.

  15. Dominic White says:

    I’ve heard almost nothing but glowing praise about the beta, from both hardcore strategy grognards and more casual sorts alike. It looks lovely, does a lot different, and seems to go outside the regular rock-paper-scissors approach in favor of something a little more flexible and realistic.

    I’ll be buying a copy tonight. I really hope Eugen do well. RUSE was tragically underrated (poor advertising, people freaking out about UbiDRM that wasn’t even there, and a lot of hate from ‘pro’ RTS players) and they really do deserve a bit of success, especially as this sounds like an even more distinct and unique game.