User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 120 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 92 out of 120
  2. Negative: 19 out of 120

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. Apr 18, 2014
    3
    A buggy mess on release, with imbalanced factions and an ambitious but flawed single player.

    Eugen seems to have taken one step forward and two back since AirLand Battle. The maps are much more interesting and help prevent the trench warfare found in ALB, however the layout is the same, whether you are fighting in China, Korea, Japan or Vietnam, it's always gentle hills, slight
    vegetation and clusters of villages. No swamps, no urban sprawls, it's like the just changed the art style for the Scandinavian maps.

    The units are a let down as well, there's no effort with minor details. The Australians and Canadians use the British voices. Every French MLRS has "Friedland 1807" written on the side. Ships glide soundlessly through the water and their massive deck guns use the same sound effects as the small autocannons on an APC.

    Eugen have also seen fit to play favourites, with the French decks recieving a huge variety of vastly more advanced and powerful units, extending well beyond the games time frame, and when coupled with the new "Coalition System" leads to an unstoppable Eurocorps faction that 99% of players will be using online.

    The multiplayer is also a frustrating mess, with most games consisting of one team of extremely skilled players, usually Eurocorps players, waiting endlessly for desperate or new REDFOR/PACT players to join their matches. Overall, the "REDFOR" factions seem rather underpowered or largely forgotten, a left to a disadvantage in multiplayer. Realistic, perhaps, but unless they're improved it will have negative effects and lead to players ignoring multi altogether.

    The campaign is the only improved aspect since Airland Battle, but it still feels underwhelming, with no satisfying conclusions, merely a little box saying "you won."

    Overall it's still a pretty game, and definitely better than most RTS/RTTs out at the moment, but with so many steps back from it's predecessor, a poorly implemented Naval aspect and a development team who disregard or outright mock player suggestions, this is definitely not worth buying over Airland Battle or European Escalation.

    Avoid.
    Expand
  2. Apr 18, 2014
    3
    I was in the closed beta, and what I saw was a horror ; every possibly dumb design choice was made : - No UI improvement, like showing the exact road a unit would use when deployed. - Radar SAMs becoming overly costly with a 50% price hike. - Decreased detection range against choppers, which combined with the point above and more open maps contributing to helospam. - 20+ frontal armor tanks being horribly trolled by all the HEAT weapons in the game, as those can engage any value of armor and still cause 1 HP of damage minimum and cause suppression. Where's the authenticity when one knows the latest tanks of that era were generally optimized to defeat HEAT weapons in real life ?
    - Couple the above problem with the proliferation of low-cost (40-pt or less) vehicles with high accuracy HEAT weapons, and you got a recipe for disaster.
    - Laugh at how much firepower SMGs have ; under 455m, they utterly outclass assault rifles and battle rifles.
    - Artillery and MLRS becoming overpowered, the former being able to reliably kill anything that isn't a tank without any spotting, and the latter easily destroying armor.
    - Infantry getting shafted by HE weapons because the new formation is extremely tight compared to the previous ones. Get a good laugh when a single RPO shot kills an entire squad at around 300m.
    - Useless unit additions such as the CAESAR or the Il-102 ; CAESAR being added, as in the words of an Eugen moderator, because France needed a high-end arty unit (implying the AuF1 wasn't one), while everybody was expecting West Germany to get a truly-needed high-end arty piece. The Soviet Il-102 is a completely useless addition, as IRL it was completely outclassed by the Su-25.
    - Laughingly strong French bias in the game, stronger than in the 2 previous Wargames.
    - Ships being horribly unbalanced and coming in numbers you shouldn't expect in a *realistic* game ; you can deploy more frigates than you can deploy high end tanks. And don't get fooled by Eugen/Focus' marketing ; there are no NATIONAL navies. "Your" navy are the assets of the side you're on.
    - MGs on transports still unrealistically underpowered compared to the MGs carried by the infantry.
    - Cluster bombs having reached a new level of uselessness with the change to damage computation for 0-1 armor...and for still doing ZERO damage to infantry.
    - Wheeled APCs still being incredibly overpowered because of their mobility advantage for nearly no cost penalty compared to tracked ones.
    - Recon units detecting nearly nothing.

    I probably forgot some other stuff, but if you also read Lemonadrian's comment, you'd know what a lot of Wargame veterans feel about this new release. The conclusion is Eugen/Focus had potentially a great game, but they've wasted their manpower on always more units instead of focusing on the truly important things that make a great game :

    - UI
    - Realism
    - Game mechanics
    - Balance
    Expand
  3. Apr 27, 2014
    3
    Fun game, when it works. MANY crashes, bugs, and disconnects. Extremely frustrating when there is no LAN option, and I get disconnected every match from my friend in the same room.
  4. May 12, 2014
    4
    Wargame Red Dragon is the worst game in this series. It's been reduced to infantry and artillery. And the naval part is a joke. All the same bugs and flaws from WEE are still here, and Eugen doesn't care about fixing anything. One month after release, and it still behaves like beta software. Unfortunately, if you want to play Wargame at all today, you're stuck with WRD, because the player base has moved to the newest game. Expand
  5. Jun 21, 2014
    0
    I was addicted to this game. Can't control myself. In the end, the game banned me for complaining the units on the forums. That's good because I can finally stop playing.

    If you want to play this game, have good self-discipline or otherwise, you will end up like me. Annoying the forums for better units. What was I thinking? Same as to you when you are mad at the unbalanced units.


    Hope you find this review useful. All in all, the game is outstanding but lethal.
    Expand
  6. Aug 7, 2014
    0
    This game is an obvious ripoff to World in Conflict / RUSE but is needlessly slow and boring, where you have to manually adjust everything like an autistic sloth, among many other annoyances, in which I could go on about all day. This game somehow got attention through steam-hype and mysteriously gets a drastically unrealistic user rating presented here. The entire Wargame franchise is quite bland, it doesn't even bring solid graphics, which would alleviate the mundane burden of control and actually make the game worth putting up with. Please keep in mind that the graphics here are not even on par with games that are 7 years older than this, but rest assured that it's the gameplay that ultimately ruins it. Although simpler and more arcade-like, World in Conflict is much more fun. More "depth" (lol) does not necessarily equal more fun, especially in the case with the Wargame series. Expand
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 19 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 19
  2. Negative: 1 out of 19
  1. Jul 23, 2014
    90
    Red Dragon should open the wish list of every gamer who shares the view that RTS games should promote strategic thinking, not fast clicking. [06/2014, p.66]
  2. Jun 16, 2014
    80
    The best war sim around. [July 2014, p.86]
  3. 80
    New units, a little bit of polish and that’s about it. But it stills works like a charm! [Issue#242]