User Score
8.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 208 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 17 out of 208

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 14, 2012
    6
    Game is confusing and unintuitive. All in all meh would be the word I would use to describe it, This game is a far cry from micro and tactics of games like starcraft, company of heroes, command and conquer, or end of nations. I guess if your a ruse or men of honor man this might appeal to you but I would rather play just about anything else.
  2. Mar 7, 2012
    5
    Average game average score. Believe the rest saying that there are simply too many units and too few choices. Pick it up during a Steam sale or on the sly but whatever you do don't pay full price. *Especially not during the "Extended Beta". The units are poorly balanced and the major balance changes soon after release show the apple is far from polished. You'll find little in the wayAverage game average score. Believe the rest saying that there are simply too many units and too few choices. Pick it up during a Steam sale or on the sly but whatever you do don't pay full price. *Especially not during the "Extended Beta". The units are poorly balanced and the major balance changes soon after release show the apple is far from polished. You'll find little in the way of strategy. It's fun for a little while until you realize the game is hard capped by supply at about 30-40 minutes LONG before you deploy half the possible units.

    The campaign is fine but don't expect it to blow you away. At least it's not going to drive you to mute the cinematics like RUSE did. Sadly the strategic depth RUSE offered through ruses is absent, leaving a game that would have been impressive five years ago. Average average average average average - wait until it's deeply discounted.
    Expand
  3. Feb 26, 2012
    6
    Far far far too many units, for a start. When you hover your mouse over you get an alphnumeric codename that will leave you scratching your head, so it's very hard to remember what you're up against. Something like over 300 unit types to get your head around - I'm all for diversity but this is insane! Singe-player missions are tactical, but having limitations to the number of units you canFar far far too many units, for a start. When you hover your mouse over you get an alphnumeric codename that will leave you scratching your head, so it's very hard to remember what you're up against. Something like over 300 unit types to get your head around - I'm all for diversity but this is insane! Singe-player missions are tactical, but having limitations to the number of units you can have per game is really unfair. You get points and then you can spend them, let's say on a bunch of tanks. Now imagine they all get creamed in some well-oiled computer ambush, then tough luck you can't buy them back, you have to use some other unit type. Makes me miss the old base-building malarkey of C&C and SC2 somewhat. I also, personally don't like how you can't see any enemy units on the battlefield at all until they are in firing range. At least with RUSE you could see where the units were, even if you didn't know what they represented. So, what this means is that you have to keep sending out recon units everywhere, and of course as soon as they see a tank or something equally dangerous, it gets blown up. So effectively you mass your army and send them out completely blind 90% of the time. Ok, now for the maps - they are ok, but far too samey, I guess I would have liked to have seen more diversity. On the plus side the game runs really smoothly, and despite my criticisms it is fun to play. It's a hardcore realistic military-RTS that delivers some interesting tactical situations you wouldn't normally find elsewhere. However, I have to say that having units that run out of gas/petrol, although ultra-realistic, is just darn annoying. Expand
  4. Feb 11, 2013
    5
    No a horrible game, but I couldn't really get into it. It was very slow and had little player control. I can control where the units went, but they would just derp about and get sniped by enemy tanks in bushes. I wasn't a fan of the call off map units with some points I earned.. I'm more into the traditional RTS.. Wasn't my kind of game.
  5. Jan 18, 2013
    7
    I haven't played this game much i wish i could but text is to small its good RTS game alot of fun with friends No real bad points but does take a while to understand and master but well worth the time investment if your into RTS games
  6. Apr 23, 2012
    5
    A potentially great game that, while fun in Custom Matches, becomes tedious and boring in Ranked Play. As someone who came from Company of Heroes, which has many of the same percentage shot and penetration mechanics as WG:EE, I was appalled at the lack of testosterone in Ranked Play. 4/5 of your games, which could be over in 15 minutes, will be drawn out into extended camp fests. Win aA potentially great game that, while fun in Custom Matches, becomes tedious and boring in Ranked Play. As someone who came from Company of Heroes, which has many of the same percentage shot and penetration mechanics as WG:EE, I was appalled at the lack of testosterone in Ranked Play. 4/5 of your games, which could be over in 15 minutes, will be drawn out into extended camp fests. Win a battle or two and your opponent will thumb his nose at you by parking his but in a massive forest for the next 30 minutes, requiring you to summon massive amounts of arty to dislodge him (BORING). Expand
  7. Feb 19, 2013
    6
    Thing that ruined the game for me was the online experience. Invested over 50 hours in this game before coming to this conclusion. Online hardly requires tactics or team work. Players simply unit spam or arty spam and camp. No cap on artillery units either. Nearly every game i played was just a mass spam of one unit. Another thing that bothers me is the vast size of the unit tree, halfThing that ruined the game for me was the online experience. Invested over 50 hours in this game before coming to this conclusion. Online hardly requires tactics or team work. Players simply unit spam or arty spam and camp. No cap on artillery units either. Nearly every game i played was just a mass spam of one unit. Another thing that bothers me is the vast size of the unit tree, half the units are so alike there is no need to add so many different variants. So complicated at times that it would confuse some of the most hardened RTS players. Maybe grab this during a Steam sale.. Expand
  8. Jan 3, 2013
    5
    Wargame has a base for greatness, but cant really get around some of the flaws in the game, the interface arent that great, the lack of teaming units like eg. in starcraft or almost any other game is really frustrating.
    The developers also seemed to be hooked on missions that is with a time limit in singleplayer, wich for me is a big turnoff. If you expect a game where you can drink your
    Wargame has a base for greatness, but cant really get around some of the flaws in the game, the interface arent that great, the lack of teaming units like eg. in starcraft or almost any other game is really frustrating.
    The developers also seemed to be hooked on missions that is with a time limit in singleplayer, wich for me is a big turnoff. If you expect a game where you can drink your coffee, and watch a movie while you play then you will stop playing 1/3 way throug the singleplayer missions. I am glad i bought it on sale, not full prize. Would i buy it again? I am not sure, even on sale.
    Expand
  9. May 26, 2015
    7
    Great tactical depth and huge emphasis on effective positioning and scouting.

    Unfortunately the AI is incompetent and will happily rush into your killzones. The campaign design has (over)compensated by giving the AI a huge numerical advantage (and no difficulty options). As a result some scenarios REQUIRE replaying to learn all the AI's actions and saving/reloading when things don't go
    Great tactical depth and huge emphasis on effective positioning and scouting.

    Unfortunately the AI is incompetent and will happily rush into your killzones. The campaign design has (over)compensated by giving the AI a huge numerical advantage (and no difficulty options). As a result some scenarios REQUIRE replaying to learn all the AI's actions and saving/reloading when things don't go your way. I gave up after basically getting stuck in two campaigns. (In the DLC campaign the devs have for some reason disabled the save function.)

    There's also just too much to do in too little time. Units pick their own targets but still need manual positioning, and positioning is all-important. An infantry unit just inside a forest will be spotted and destroyed; further in and he'll lay an effective ambush. But you don't have time to properly position so many units while managing air assets, recon, logistics, and manually targeting every artillery strike. There are no speed options and you can't do anything while paused (even look around).

    Buy RUSE instead. The pace is slower and micro is less intense. The campaign is also much easier, though the AI is every bit as stupid.
    Expand
  10. Apr 19, 2012
    7
    Its a great game but its way to hard for avarage gamers, also the hardware you need to play it is just insane. It reminds me of an awesome game world inconflict.
  11. Jun 2, 2013
    7
    It's a very meticulous, detailed game but the difficulty level sucks a lot of the fun out of it. The challenge level is punishing with no way to change to a easier setting. As a result it lacks the appeal of classic FPS games like Company of Heroes and the Command and Conquer franchises.
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 28 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 28
  2. Negative: 0 out of 28
  1. May 20, 2012
    70
    A solid tactical simulation of armored warfare 1975-1985 whose real value is in the multiplayer mode.
  2. May 11, 2012
    84
    Eugen Systems put the "real" back into RTS. The result is spacious, subtle, deeply satisfying tactical gaming. [June 2012, p.84]
  3. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Apr 25, 2012
    60
    Over-complicated tactical-strategic RPG is way too fast and complicated for the beginner while unsatisfactory for any advanced gamer. [Apr 2012]