Wargame: Red Dragon

 PC
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 19 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 19
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 19
  3. Negative: 1 out of 19
  1. 4P.de
    Apr 28, 2014
    73
    This is more an add-on than a sequel. It even shares a lot of the strengths and weaknesses of AirLandBattle as well as European Escalation. The addition of naval warfare adds a new, welcome facet, but in the end there is still a lot of room for improvement.
  2. PCGamesN
    May 9, 2014
    70
    Wargame: Red Dragon is more of the same excellent, very serious strategy that experienced players have come to expect. If you’ve exhausted AirLand Battle and still want more, it would be silly to ignore Red Dragon. But if you’re looking for an entry point into the series, then this is not it. Pick up AirLand Battle instead. It’s still one of the best modern RTS titles you could have the good fortune to play.
  3. Eurogamer Italy
    May 5, 2014
    70
    Red Dragon is stuck between bland new features like the naval combat and an urgent need to ease the steep learning curve.

Awards & Rankings

94
#94 Best PC Game of 2014
86
#86 Most Discussed PC Game of 2014

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 214 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 156 out of 214
  2. Mixed: 27 out of 214
  3. Negative: 31 out of 214
  1. Dogman
    Apr 17, 2014
    10
    This game is incredible. The graphics have been enhanced immensely and the game looks incredible. The new units and the ships are very fun toThis game is incredible. The graphics have been enhanced immensely and the game looks incredible. The new units and the ships are very fun to play and add a new dimension to the game.

    The old spam tactics from Airland battle are completely gone now due to the many new changes to the units, the mechanics, and the balance.

    The game is even more tactical and the large maps add a whole new strategic dimension to the game.

    The new factions are all unique in their own way and add alot of character to the game.

    The best strategy game without any doubt since both multiplayer and single player are now extremely fun and provide many many hours of gameplay.

    The best RTS on the market!    … Full Review »
  2. Lemonadrian
    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    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.    … Full Review »
  3. COKE_DEFENDER
    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    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    … Full Review »
See all user reviews »