ICBM: Escalation

92%
Game Brain Score Based on 423 reviews
  • gameplay
  • optimization
  • story
ICBM: Escalation Game Cover
Starting at $29.99Buy now
Get on Steam

In "ICBM: Escalation," players command a faction and build a military force to engage in both conventional and nuclear warfare. Construct a nuclear stockpile, research advanced technology, and deploy various military units, with the goal of crippling adversaries or invading enemy territory for a conventional victory. The game offers new victory conditions, adding depth to the global warfare experience.

  • PC
  • Windows
Genres & TagsPlay Modes

Reviews

92%
Audience ScoreBased on 423 reviews
gameplay12 positive mentions
optimization4 negative mentions
  • Significant improvement over the original game with expanded features and depth.
  • Engaging gameplay that combines conventional warfare with nuclear strategy, offering various tactical options.
  • Responsive developer support and ongoing updates to address bugs and enhance the gaming experience.
  • Frequent crashes and performance issues, especially in multiplayer mode, detracting from the overall experience.
  • AI behavior can be overly simplistic and passive, making it easy to dominate in single-player scenarios.
  • The tutorial is poorly designed, leading to confusion and frustration for new players trying to learn the game.
  • gameplay27 mentions

    Overall, the gameplay is praised for its depth and complexity, offering a satisfying experience with diverse mechanics and strategic options. However, some players express frustration with certain design choices, such as cumbersome UI elements and multiplayer balance issues, which can detract from the enjoyment. Despite these criticisms, many appreciate the game's evolution from its predecessor, highlighting its potential for emergent gameplay and rewarding loops.

    • “The mechanics are fresh and balanced, good AI, and has diversity of play styles.”
    • “Great game, long and rewarding gameplay loop.”
    • “Adding conventional ground warfare into the mix has added so much depth to this game, and the conquering mechanic has de-incentivized complete armageddon so now more strategic options are available.”
    • “Simple, simple, simple mechanics that apparently are not in the game.”
    • “- Easily abusable mechanics in player votes make multiplayer unplayable. Often you'll find prearranged teams come in and ally up at the start, giving instant tech to each other as they go. They will then proceed to vote for world peace, ban techs, etc., if the odds fall out of their favor.”
    • “On the other hand, the UI is still pretty bad, and some gameplay decisions are very strange. For example, why do I need to select the air transport plane that I just sent to tell it to drop the army division instead of it doing so by default? This adds unnecessary micro-management.”
  • optimization17 mentions

    Overall, the game's optimization has received mixed reviews, with some players noting significant improvements since the beta phase, while others continue to experience performance issues, including stuttering and high resource usage. Many users recommend the game despite its optimization challenges, highlighting the need for further updates to address bugs and enhance performance. Customer service has been praised for quickly addressing specific performance-related bugs, but the consensus is that the game still requires additional optimization to reach its full potential.

    • “Within several days they fixed the bug that caused any performance issues, great customer service in this regard!”
    • “They've really optimized the game since beta since I didn't have any issues with performance!”
    • “More units, better AI, and much improved performance.”
    • “I am disappointed, as I would have thought the game at full release would be better optimized and more playable.”
    • “It's got good content and mechanics so far, but I have barely been able to try it since the game is poorly optimized.”
    • “So far the game looks very fun but I've played for a solid hour or two now and it's ground itself to an almost unplayable state with constant stuttering, randomly flinging me around the map, eating up like 89% of my available RAM, and then crashing halfway into a war with Mexico.”
  • story13 mentions

    The game's story features a fun and engaging campaign with over 10 hours of missions, including challenging spec ops scenarios and a notable war on terror mission. While some players found the tutorial slow and certain missions frustratingly difficult, many appreciated the sense of accomplishment that came from overcoming these challenges and enjoyed the strategic depth of the gameplay. Overall, the campaign is seen as a significant improvement over its predecessor, offering a compelling narrative experience.

    • “Fun campaign with 10+ hours of missions to do and master.”
    • “At first I was kind of frustrated with the first campaign mission, but after I restarted the mission and revised my strategy, I finally finished it and it felt like a real accomplishment.”
    • “The tutorial was a bit slow, but once I started getting into the missions, I was hooked.”
    • “Spec ops missions such as 1991 are absurdly difficult for the wrong reasons.”
    • “The tutorial requires you to do exactly the same thing at exactly the same time—I had to replay two tutorial missions because I got stuck.”
    • “The final 'plan and execute 3 plans at once' mission hits like a sack of bricks out of nowhere; the UI for those plans is poor unless you know the sprite for every unit type already.”
  • graphics11 mentions

    The graphics of the game are generally well-received, praised for their aesthetic appeal and realism, particularly in relation to the game's theme. However, some users note that the optimization is lacking, leading to performance issues even on older hardware, despite the graphics being relatively basic. Overall, while the visuals enhance the gameplay experience, there are concerns about the lack of graphical settings and optimization.

    • “It is enjoyable to look at and has an aesthetic look reminiscent of wargames.”
    • “The graphics are better and there are many quality of life upgrades, some of which are more subtle yet still create an objectively better play experience.”
    • “Graphics are well made for such a game and the UI is easy to use in my opinion.”
    • “This game is incredibly poorly optimized, especially considering its minimal graphics.”
    • “Although the graphics are relatively basic, the presentation is really good.”
    • “- no graphical settings at all except for the resolution.”
  • replayability6 mentions

    Overall, the game's replayability is mixed; while changing the starting nation offers varied strategies, the similarity in ground combat can diminish the experience across different nations. Additionally, some players note that poor AI limits offline replayability, though others find the gameplay solid enough to warrant multiple playthroughs.

    • “Replayability is high, as changing the starting nation changes the strategy required.”
    • “It's definitely a step forward; AI still needs some behavior work, but the gameplay is solid, with a lot of replayability.”
    • “Bad AI limits offline replayability.”
    • “This reduces the replayability from nation to nation because all ground combat feels the same.”
    • “I am disappointed, as I would have thought the game at full release would be better optimized and more playable.”
  • music3 mentions

    The in-game music is highly praised for being enjoyable and fitting, particularly enhancing the experience during intense moments, such as launching nukes, where it dynamically ramps up to match the action.

    • “The in-game music is super enjoyable while I'm getting nuked by everything.”
    • “The music ramps up whenever you launch your nukes.”
    • “The soundtrack is incredibly fitting.”
  • stability2 mentions

    Overall, users find the game enjoyable and worth the investment, though they report experiencing significant bugs, particularly on Linux systems.

    • “Great game and really fun with friends, but it's buggy as hell and could use some stability improvements.”
    • “Exquisite game, but it's a little buggy; I'm running it on Linux with no ProtonDB reports available.”
  • atmosphere1 mentions

    The atmosphere in the game is marked by a sense of foreboding and tension, highlighted by the rare appearance of the ominous red ugc beanie worn by a game-master, which evokes memories of a catastrophic event that once ignited the earth's atmosphere. This creates a unique and intense environment that enhances the overall gaming experience.

    • “The atmosphere in this game is incredibly immersive, drawing you into a world that feels both alive and haunting.”
    • “Every sound and visual element contributes to a sense of tension and wonder, making exploration a truly captivating experience.”
    • “The game's atmosphere is rich and layered, creating an emotional depth that enhances the overall storytelling.”
    • “The dreaded red UGC beanie has been donned by an Eschaton game master only once before, and that was over three years ago, when human input error on end stat tallies of aggregate suffdir during a three-way sacpop free-for-all yielded an apparent ignition of the earth’s atmosphere.”
  • emotional1 mentions

    Reviews indicate that while the game's technology is commendable, there is a desire for more heartwarming and uplifting elements to enhance the emotional experience.

  • grinding1 mentions

    Players express a desire for an option to disable divisions or ground war, as these elements can slow down gameplay and contribute to a tedious grinding experience.

    • “There should be an option to disable divisions/ground war, as these often make the game slow and tedious.”
Positive mentions (%)Positive
Neutral mentions (%)Neutral
Negative mentions (%)Negative

Buy ICBM: Escalation

Play time

16hMedian play time
12hAverage play time
2-21hSpent by most gamers
*Based on 2 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

Similar Games

Game News