Aggression: Europe 1914

[ShadesWolf]

A new strat game for you to maybe keep your eyes on guys.... However it does look a little like The Entente: WW1 Battlefields to me so I dont know what to think.




Buka Entertainment gave us a peek at its upcoming PC strategy game, Aggression: Europe 1914. Contrary to what the title may imply, Aggression isn't just based around the first World War--you'll be able to control either Germany, England, France, or Russia from 1910 to 1950 and attempt to lead your nation to domination in Europe. The game is very similar to the Total War series in that it has an overarching strategy component where you view the map territory by territory and manage your production and diplomacy. Each of the four primary nations has unique strengths. The Germans have the best technology, for example, while the Russians benefit from having the largest population to draw from. Each nation can also ally with other nations like Italy, Spain, Hungary, and Turkey to help you in your quest for domination. You'll control individual cities where you can develop your technology in a huge tech tree that stretches from early firearms and no armored vehicles, on up to nuclear weapons.

When there's a conflict, you can choose to control your troops directly in a tactical map view that will show destructible environments with what seemed to be well over 100 infantry and vehicle units onscreen at once. There are special hero units that command each of your armies, again with their own special powers and bonuses as they lead troops into battle. Aggression also offers flying units once you develop aircraft, and you can call in artillery support or airstrikes on the tactical map as well. The most impressive weapon of course is the nuclear bomb, which causes a massive swath of devastation on the battlefield.

Though all we got to see was a series of noninteractive movies on the game, what we did see of Aggression: Europe 1914 was impressive, so we'll be keeping an eye on the game, which is very early in its development cycle. Expect the game to finish sometime in mid to late 2007.




http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/131/933172_20060512_screen004.jpg


http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/131/933172_20060512_screen002.jpg


http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/131/933172_20060512_screen008.jpg

[Rodion Romanovich]

Looks like MTW but with ww1-ww2 setting. Could be interesting, but I wonder if they will properly depict how important the navies were to the outcome of the wars in the period.

[screwtype]

Looks like crap to me ~:)

[Zalmoxis]

You never know how it will turn out, but it does remind me of the Total War campaign maps.

[Krauser]

I was looking through the Gamespot coverage of E3 and found some info on a new game. Just look at this picture and see how closely it resembles RTW. The description says "Aggression: Europe 1914 is a real-time strategy game that gives you the chance to rewrite the darkest history of the old continent." It looks like a bad mod of RTW.

http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/131/933172_20060512_screen004.jpg

[Viking]

Well, one way the campaign map has to loke like..

[stalin]

You could argue that RTW's campaign map is a ripoff of RISK

[Zalmoxis]

I believe there's a thread on this in the Arena, since the screenshot looks like the one there. The game, however, is based in WW1, so it's not technically a rip off.

[Zenicetus]

Well, if nothing else, you'll be able to play out the alternate history of WWII with no USA involvement in Europe!

Speaking of which... nuclear weapons don't sound all that realistic without American involvement. Aside from the basic native and imported brainpower (which any of these countries could have assembled), America had the excess industrial capacity needed for the massive enrichment process. And it had the geographic isolation to run those plants without fear of air attack. If any of the four playable factions in this game manages to ramp up that much industrial capacity, and can protect it from air attacks in the restrictive space of the European theater, it means they've won the game anyway and don't need nukes.

Oh well, I guess it's not intended to be historically accurate. It could still be fun, especially if they're including some of the wild aircraft Germany had on the drawing boards at the end of WWII. I can see it now... waves of Gotha flying wings zooming over the Channel....

[discovery1]

Might be useful if there is a war waging deep in Siberia, or if there is a war bewtween a European Contenential power and the US, the euro controlling all of Europe.

That aside the game looks interesting.

[Wishazu]

Geologically i dont think Europe has changed massively in the last 2,000 years or so. Obviously the map will look similar but other than that i dont think it looks that much like RTW. Looks like an interesting game though mate.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Ditto screwtype's assessment.

"well over 100 infantry and vehicle units onscreen at once"

Big deal. ~:rolleyes: It looks like the game's equivalent of TW's battle system isn't very equivalent. Looks to be standard low-quality rts fare.

You'd think they'd opt for more troops, not less, when dealing with a conflict like the Great War or WW2.

[Simmons]

It looks like a bad mod of RTW.
Actually I think it looks better than RTW less cartoony more photo realistic if you get what I mean.

[BDC]

Ditto screwtype's assessment.

"well over 100 infantry and vehicle units onscreen at once"

Big deal. ~:rolleyes: It looks like the game's equivalent of TW's battle system isn't very equivalent. Looks to be standard low-quality rts fare.

You'd think they'd opt for more troops, not less, when dealing with a conflict like the Great War or WW2.
Yes, I hoped by 100 units it meant maybe 100 units of dozens of men... But no it isn't.

Can't really see a battle stretched over 100km with millions of men being represented by 50 men a side on a tiny map, destructable buildings or not.

[Dutch_guy]

Looks like crap to me ~:)

Well to be fair, the game is pretty early in it's development cycle, as mentioned in SW's post.

I guess a lot can be done/improved in a year.

That said, I don't plan on following this game...

:balloon2:

[Krauser]

Actually I think it looks better than RTW less cartoony more photo realistic if you get what I mean.

I think it looks more artistic but not really that realistic. There aren't enough polygons. Where are the mountains and rivers? I was just saying that it looks like they're copying the RTW type of gameplay. You've got real-time battles when armies meet and then the main map that shows who controls which provinces. The same basic idea.

[Viking]

There are several games built up like that, I believe.

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

That map portion reminds me more of MTW than RTW tbh, probably because of the boundary divisions.

Do the character pieces have drag-and-drop capabilities as well? ~D

[Kralizec]

Are we going to dismiss every post-DuneII RTS as a rip off? The TW series were inovative in a number of ways, it's good that some other developers are recognising that and try to improve on it. The game looks interesting, I hope there will be a demo.

[Krauser]

Are we going to dismiss every post-DuneII RTS as a rip off? The TW series were inovative in a number of ways, it's good that some other developers are recognising that and try to improve on it. The game looks interesting, I hope there will be a demo.

There's a difference in that RTW(and maybe previous TW games) is a hybrid between RTS and turn-based strategy while Dune II is only a RTS. The reason I see this game as a rip off is because it also seems to be a hybrid real-time/turn-based strategy but with much less production values. Some of the screens show a campaign map like RTW's with cities, provinces, and armies marching around which seem to be turn-based. The other screens show the battlefield which appears to be in real-time but the graphics in all respects don't seem to be as high quality as RTW's. Less polygons, lower quality textures, and maybe even 2D graphics in some areas.

I wouldn't think this is bad except it seems that the people making this game saw how successful the TW series is and just want to cash in to this market with a cheaply made game. Just like how there are 20 new military shooters every year. Only a few of them ever turn out to be good, with the rest of them being made solely to cash in on the success of recent military shooters like Battlefield 1942 and Medal of Honor.

[limitedwhole]

In my opinion, realtime/turn based hybrids are simply the superior staregy format. The more game companies move towards this format the better. That isn't to say that real time combat sims have no plcae, but to say that their is something hokey about being unable to plan what you ar egoing to producein a southern city because you keep getting attacked in the north ini realtime and can't spare the time to scroll down to see the rest of your empire. I was seriously miffed when Lord of the Realms moved to realtime. I saw THIS as a hopeless attempt to cash in on realtime based strategy rather than making a marketted improvement on realtime/turnbased hybrids which is what Lord of the Realms was always the best at before RTW. If i could find my Lord of Realms 2 disk, I would still play it. Although the combat was inferior sceenically, there was something superior in the effect that it was no so "videogamy" with the ability to perform 30 Cav charges in one battle with the same cav unit. The battle staregy was still tactically sound relying on moveing blacks of men to occupy space. What could be better than buying ale from a travelling merchant to throw a feast and rasie your happiness. Always buy ale! The travelling merchant aspect made this game rock hard! Pillaging food tiles made this game rock hard! Designing castles made this game rock hard! Supply lines made this gaem rock hard! Wish I could find it.

[Mikeus Caesar]

I've heard rumours the actual combat is like Empire Earth, with battles consisting of about a hundred men each.

And anyway, if it was a bad mod of RTW, the game would fail instantly. Imagine RTW's AI trying to comprehend trench warfare.

[ShadesWolf]

I see somebody else has found Aggression Europe 1914.
We now have two threads on the subject.

[frogbeastegg]

Merged.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Speaking of games of this type - strategy games with ww2 and ww1 involving also the large scale strategy - as in a campaign containing the entire battle front(s) rather than just smaller missions - are there any other games of this type out yet? I'd love to try a large scale ww1 and/or ww2 strategy game for variety (too many swords, pike and axes the last few years ~:) ). Can anyone recommend any specific title(s)?

[discovery1]

HEarts of Iron 2. There are two largish threADS on it and its expansion, at least one is still on the first page of the arena. There is a WW I mod for it, but its still .1, and even when it is 'done' I doubt it will live up to its full potential since the creators seem intent on simply porting over their work for Hearts of Iron 1 and not using most of the new stuff in Hearts of Iron 2.

[ShadesWolf]

Speaking of games of this type - strategy games with ww2 and ww1 involving also the large scale strategy - as in a campaign containing the entire battle front(s) rather than just smaller missions - are there any other games of this type out yet? I'd love to try a large scale ww1 and/or ww2 strategy game for variety (too many swords, pike and axes the last few years ~:) ). Can anyone recommend any specific title(s)?

Victoria is an excellent selection me thinks :2thumbsup:

[Csargo]

I might have to chech this out looks interesting

[roman pleb]

(clears throat) Booooooo:jawdrop:
Horrible graphics. It looks like crappy MTW meets AOE with its "100 people on screen at a time" thing.