Wargame: Red Dragon

 PC
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

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
view
per page
  1. neldot
    Oct 16, 2015
    1
    I really wanted to like this game, because I love RUSE and I'm an old time RTS and wargames player, but I'm just unable to found any appeal in it. After playiing a pair of dozen of battles and an entire campaign, it continues to appear to me as an unbalanced mix between a complex real tactic simulator and a too fast arcade game, with very little maps, where all is a confused mess and youI really wanted to like this game, because I love RUSE and I'm an old time RTS and wargames player, but I'm just unable to found any appeal in it. After playiing a pair of dozen of battles and an entire campaign, it continues to appear to me as an unbalanced mix between a complex real tactic simulator and a too fast arcade game, with very little maps, where all is a confused mess and you can lost half of your units in a pair of seconds. Really disappointing.
    In brief, this game is too complex to appeal to the RTS fans, and too "arcadey" to appeal a real wargamer.
    Besides, there also lacks a medium NATO power like Italy, but are instead present very minor powers. A very bad choice to appeal the italian market.    … Expand
  2. OoohShiny
    Nov 11, 2015
    4
    Alright, i am pretty much a RTS freak, so of course i had to check the wargame series.
    It was an unpleasant first experience, because i got pretty much destroyed at the start of the easiest campaign.
    Anyway, i played it for hours, figuring it out, watching youtubevids, until i got a decent knack for it. As stated often, you dont play this game for the singleplayer. It is rather    Alright, i am pretty much a RTS freak, so of course i had to check the wargame series.
    It was an unpleasant first experience, because i got pretty much destroyed at the start of the easiest campaign.

    Anyway, i played it for hours, figuring it out, watching youtubevids, until i got a decent knack for it.

    As stated often, you dont play this game for the singleplayer. It is rather boring, even annoying, when you play on the same map for the 5. time, it feels like the campaign doesnt make progress.
    Anyway, a big bonus here are the starting videos, creating a nice atmosphere.

    The multiplayer is actual fun, be it against AI opponents or actual human opponents.

    But there are a couple of things that i need to mention that lead to a position that i cant rate this game above 4/10:

    The realism. You expect this game to be realistic, but is not. Sometimes weird things happen without you realizing why.
    Here are the 2 examples that stuck the most:
    Tanks run out of fuel after like 5 KM. This just doesnt make any sense, even if they were using the roads, on the big maps tanks are not able to cross the map diagonal even once.
    The vision of the units. As stated, in the campaign you fight several times on the same map, me even more since i had to restart the first campaign a couple of time.
    I just couldnt explain myself why my infantry got so utterly destroyed by my opponents, even if i chose the ones specifically against enemy armor.

    Well here is the solution: I had no scout unit nearby. Even with no tree, an enemy tank on an open bridge close to the city my infantry was in, will not be attacked until a freaking scout unit is nearby. Then suddenly my infantry crushed the enemy armor. It was a joke.

    It may sound like little stuff, but it just keeps piling up.
    However, it was an engaging experience, and the game is definitely worth a shot.    … Expand
  3. nijin
    Jan 23, 2016
    2
    TL;DR - This looks like a potentially great game, but the complexity of the mechanics are very high, and the tutorial is entirely inadequate. As a moderately experienced RTS gamer, I spent eight hours in-game and several more hours out-of-game reading manuals and watching replays, but this game overwhelmed me and I never got past the original learning curve. This is not a game for casualTL;DR - This looks like a potentially great game, but the complexity of the mechanics are very high, and the tutorial is entirely inadequate. As a moderately experienced RTS gamer, I spent eight hours in-game and several more hours out-of-game reading manuals and watching replays, but this game overwhelmed me and I never got past the original learning curve. This is not a game for casual players.

    Pros: Graphically impressive, very complex tactics, amazing level of detail in unit design (including visibility, perception, armor, range, damage, etc. etc.). Probably the closest thing to real-time realism on the market right now.

    Cons: Extremely steep learning curve, zillions of units and game mechanics to learn, and the developers didn't support it with a tutorial. The fan community has brought up various resources to help, but general feeling is that to get a proper designer tutorial, you'll be looking at getting the first game.

    The game is very complex, which means it'll take time even for those familiar with the older games in the series to pick it up. (First game was purely land, second game AirLand Battle introduced aircraft, this game introduces naval units.)

    I'm fairly experienced with other historical RTSes (although none are as realistic as this one) and I found the learning curve unworkable with the limited time available to me. I put eight hours in-game, trying out guides and putting what I'd learned from fan manuals into practice: my victory or defeat still feels entirely arbitrary.

    The fan community does have folks who are willing to tutor you, and there are efforts to put together a , and if you have a lot of time and attention to put into this game, it may be the game for you. (Likewise if you don't mind buying the first game and working through that as a prelude to playing this one.) Folks who find analysis to be fun in its own right, or who are detail oriented, may enjoy this game too.

    I found the time demands of learning the game to be too heavy. I disapprove of the designer's decision to essentially shortchange new players by removing the tutorial on the assumption that they'll have played the prior games. The fan support is very heartening, but it seems to reinforce the designer's laziness so they can get away with it.

    There's all the hallmarks of a good game in here, provided you can devote the very significant time and focus requirements to crack the shell. However, thanks to abysmal tutorial support and an unforgivable assumption that you'll buy and play the prior two games in the series (a business model that was already proven defunct in the 1980s with the Wizardry series), I couldn't recommend it in good conscience.    … Expand
  4. Orion987
    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.
  5. 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 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    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
  6. unknown14725
    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 playerWargame 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
  7. 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 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    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
  8. and0r
    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 isThis 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
  9. Suen
    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.    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
  10. Vasot
    Apr 20, 2022
    4
    First there is a very poor tutorial if you are new it's going to be hell to understand the game suffers from a non-comprehensive type of gameplay and a steep learning curve. Some times it feels like you have to play with a textbook and the micromanagement is atrocious. The notification system is poorly created by the developer it's difficult to understand what is going on during battlesFirst there is a very poor tutorial if you are new it's going to be hell to understand the game suffers from a non-comprehensive type of gameplay and a steep learning curve. Some times it feels like you have to play with a textbook and the micromanagement is atrocious. The notification system is poorly created by the developer it's difficult to understand what is going on during battles it's chaos everyone shooting and randomly some units are destroyed. Many units feel unbalanced for example old AA machine guns can destroy planes easier than ant-air missiles the game tries hard to be as realistic as possible but fails miserable. Some units feel unresponsive you tell them to attack and they do that in very slow motion (not sure if this is a bug or a stupid gameplay mechanic) The game is NOT entertaining it's not your typical strategy game and not in a good way.… Expand
  11. eldumloido
    Jun 1, 2015
    1
    Punishes those who bought the original game back in the day by asking the same price for the dlc and the full collection. No discount for those who supported them from the beginning. Never buying any of their games before goty/full version again.
  12. bobobsooadaois
    Jul 9, 2023
    0
    New update stops Mac and linux support and stop you from being able to do multiplayer with windows if your on Mac
    Basically scamming and ending Mac/linux support

Awards & Rankings

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

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
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. CD-Action
    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. PC Gamer UK
    Jun 16, 2014
    80
    The best war sim around. [July 2014, p.86]
  3. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jun 5, 2014
    80
    New units, a little bit of polish and that’s about it. But it stills works like a charm! [Issue#242]
See all critic reviews »