Not inappropriately, my first Armored Brigade II casualty was a Fox. One of two scout cars secreted amongst trees on the eastern edge of the Bohemian village of Staré Sedlo, the AFV in question decided to take on a mob of approaching Soviet T-62s and BTRs on its own, and finished up brown bread as a result. Moments after it was set ablaze by a supersonic suppository, I noticed the ‘SOP’ customisation panel that might have saved its life.
As it turned out, that mismanaged FV721 was the only British Army vehicle that perished during the decidedly one-sided defence of Staré Sedlo. Disadvantaged by an unfavourable venue and objective location (both of which were hand-picked by Yours truly) the Soviets lost over a dozen AFVs to Challenger tanks and Carl Gustaf-armed dismounts during last night’s failed assault.
Starting my AB2 career with a cakewalk cooked up in the skirmish generator, was perfect as it gave me ample opportunity to wire-brush rusty skills (Mechanically, pauseable real-time AB2 is almost identical to its predecessor, so that wire-brushing didn’t take long) and savour and admire AB2’s headline improvement – commendably austere 3D graphics.
Habitués of THC will know that I don’t always approve of 2D wargames acquiring an extra D. Too often the abandonment of sprites seems to lead to lost legibility, compromised framerates, and minimal ambience and immersion gains. In the case of AB however, because the new optional perspective makes reading lumpy battlespaces much easier, and isn’t accompanied by eye-straining, FPS-sapping textures, models, and lighting effects, I’m more than willing to park my prejudice.
In fact I’d go so far as to say the new camera is a game changer. The ability to view scraps at any angle and any height, allows AB2 to envelop the player almost as effectively as more granular/realistic peers such as Combat Mission and Graviteam Tactics.
While improvements such as 3D graphics and more authentic information sharing bring Veitikka’s creation tantalisingly close to CM in immersion and realism terms, series newcomers who purchase expecting a friendlier, more compendious, more moddable alternative to CM: Cold War need to bear in mind that although, yes, AB2 is indeed friendlier, more compendious, and more moddable than its closest ‘rival’, in certain respects it’s a significantly simpler animal.
Not immediately obvious from the screenshots is the disconnect between the game’s scenery graphics and pathfinding routines. Fairly large terrain grid cells mean the M60A1 in the above screenshot couldn’t hide between the buildings at A, or use the apparently navigable gaps/alleys at B, C, or D to reach spot E. Now I’m accustomed to this inherited engine flaw, it’s not that distracting, but it may concern and catch out anyone coming straight from CM or GT.
Fortunately, Steam-bound AB2 boasts features that more than make up for its somewhat deceptive settlements. Features such as an ace skirmish generator.
Commanders wanting a break from prefabricated scenarios and campaigns can pluck their own battlefields from eight large European master maps, and quickly populate them with hand- or computer-picked forces drawn from a seven nation (USA, USSR, Finland, West Germany, GDR, Britain, and Poland) 1965-91 armoury.
Letting skirmishers purchase aggro assets, and choose things like engagement type, season, time of day, weather, ground conditions, and level of destruction, obviously isn’t that uncommon, but name another wargame that also lets you place VLs, mix things up with ‘dummy’ VLs, and risk everything by participating in frays as a ‘player character’.
My second AB2 scrap ended prematurely because I’d ticked the ‘player character’ box. While I was busy maneuvering laden Marders and hungry Leopards, I failed to notice that the dismounted scout section my avatar was part of, was trading fire with a nearby BMP. When the duel ended predictably, so too did the battle!
(To be continued. Once I’ve a few more engagements under my belt, I should be able to provide useful assessments of AI, etc.)
Lovely write up! Got me tempted to give it another chance.
I have always had a bit of soft spot for AB and was quite excited for the sequel. I was involved in the recent beta test and although I got a 20% discount for taking part I have not purchased it yet as I was unfortunately a tad disappointed with the beta. I actually found the switch to 3D didn’t do the game any favours other than really dating it compared to its peers. Probably not helped by how much Broken Arrow I have been playing (which is fantastic btw, surprised you
haven’t mentioned it yet)
The order delay, whilst novel, is still hugely frustrating and units don’t seem to show any initiative. I was hoping the sequel would add and improve on lots of aspects from the first game but it really felt the only thing they had added was the new perspective. It maybe the full release is much better though, and the beta wasn’t helped by using the same maps from the first game to add to my disappointment. I was hoping the sequel, like all sequels should be, would be bigger and better.
I just feel the world has moved on a bit and AB is really showing its age. The painful delay for orders getting though and quite poor AI not address either. You also hit the nail on the head with my own thoughts about the disconnect between units and terrain.
Still tempted to pick it up though at some point but might wait a bit until it’s on steam and see how much is improved between now and then. For now I am impatiently waiting for Broken Arrow.
I can see why some people would be put off by AB2’s simple 3D visuals. Personally, I like them. I think they give the game a distinctive look (a rare quality these days), and make parsing the action really easy.
Oddly, there doesn’t seem to be an option to play without command delays in the current Matrix build, but there’s an ‘easy mode’ which significantly reduces the delay.
AI is something I intend to scrutinise in coming days. In the handful of battles I’ve played thus far, while I’ve seen AFVs pop smoke when nervous, I don’t think I’ve witnessed any unbidden reversing or repositioning.
I read a forum comment recently in which the commenter complained that the AI didn’t use period/faction-appropriate tactics when attacking. While this would be lovely to see, I think I’d be content with ‘sensible’ tactics – scouting, not leading with support weapons… that sort of thing.
There are eight master maps in AB2 at present compared to five (?) in AB, so definite progress there.
Thanks for the reply!
Interestingly my beta copy of AB2 still loads up so I have given it another shot.
I was perhaps a little harsh in stating that the 3D perspective didn’t do much other than date the game! I actually think it is a huge step forward from the first AB and the new perspective really helps with LoS as well as giving a great sense of scale, particularly in long range engagements. That said I don’t think its the graphics that bother me anyway, as you say they are clear and distinctive (and I am all over function over form, although I may also have been a tad spoilt just recently with both Broken Arrow and Sea power naval combat in the missile age, both looking absolutely amazing!!) what does however really bother me is the disconnect between units and the terrain, especially buildings.
For example one thing I love about Combat Mission, is positing my tanks behind buildings, or behind cover, you can also chose which direction to face units. Or say in something a bit more arcadey like Men of War or the Eugen war games is having infantry squads that I care about and can micro-manage a bit. I can place units in buildings, or hide them in long grass, or position behind walls. In AB none of these things seem possible, its like the buildings are not even there and your screenshots around path finding illustrate that well. AB just feels a tad lacking in soul to me in infantry combat, and that feeling seems far worse in 3D, open fields etc just feel barren and sparse. To be fair I think infantry combat is a difficult thing to simulate in war games, especially ones of a larger scale.
AI is a tricky one to judge, and lets be honest not many games get it right, but if I am defending in AB it just feels like the AI sends an endless stream of vehicles and infantry at me, and it doesn’t fell like much thought went behind it. I have recently been playing a fair amount of Flashpoint Campaigns Red Storm again, and when the AI attacks the route the enemy units take, seem far more strategic and thought out (and thus realistic) but I haven’t played enough of AB2 to really say much more than that.
Promising news on the additional maps in AB2 though! That really should help bring some additional variety, and if the first game was anything to by I expect more DLC and units will be added as well. One of it’s pluses really is the huge variety of units it contains. I really wish they also added the option to play without command delay though, it’s got to be such a quick fix to give that as an option!
All this said and done I am a compulsive game buying, so I am sure I will pick up a copy and enjoy my time with it.
It wouldn’t surprise me if your opening paragraph didn’t put you in PETA’s crosshairs, Tim.
This game is amazing. So much easier to play for large engagements than Combat Mission.