Average User Score: 8.1Jun 10, 2013There is tons of units but there isn't any strategy inside. The ranked is a competition between helo rushers and campers. Attacking isn'tThere is tons of units but there isn't any strategy inside. The ranked is a competition between helo rushers and campers. Attacking isn't rewarded due to the very poor gamemode.
The solo campaign is wasted by this poor gamemode and silly rules for the battles. And there is nothing to really help.
So well the mutiplayer in 1v1 isn't interesting, the solo isn't interesting... it left the 2v2 and above:
2v2 is a bit like 1v1 but you need to find a good partner. Above this, the narrowness of the maps make the game less interesting than SC2 battle.
One of the great feature of the game, the 10v10 servers is nothing more than a kind a Warhammer 40K battle between chaos' hordes as it is quite impossible to get a start of cohesion with the whole team when you have the luck to start at 10 pact vs 10 Nato, which is rare...
Well... for me this game is the caricature of what should an RTS. The game feature tons of units, tons of vaired stuff just to attract the casual gamer and steal its money with a nice package but an empty game… Expand
Average User Score: 8.2Dec 22, 2012Wargame is not a strategy game for strategy fans. It is a kind action/RTS which isn't requiring true strategic skills. Rush/blobs/artilleryWargame is not a strategy game for strategy fans. It is a kind action/RTS which isn't requiring true strategic skills. Rush/blobs/artillery camping are the main tactics used by the Top100. Playing something else requires a lot more skill than your opponents. It is sad. The game owns a kind of unseen charm with its lots of units and the graphic engine. But the game modes are a massive incentive to blob, rush and artillery camping. If you like games with deep strategy thinking looks for something else.The same if you like simulation. the game isn't a simulation at all.… Expand