Theatre of War

About

"Theatre of War" is a real-time strategy game set in World War II. It offers precise control over various units, historical accuracy, and a focus on tactical decisions. Players can command different forces across multiple campaigns, engaging in battles that require careful planning and execution.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

56%

Audience ScoreBased on 217 reviews

stability3 positive mentions

story8 negative mentions

The game offers a high level of realism and allows players to command various nations, including Poland and France, during WWII.
It features a significant amount of single-player content with multiple campaigns and a detailed encyclopedia of WWII vehicles.
Players can experience a challenging tactical gameplay that rewards strategic planning and unit management.

The game suffers from poor AI and controls, making it frustrating to manage units effectively during battles.
Many players report technical issues, including crashes and difficulty running the game on modern systems, particularly with NVIDIA graphics cards.
The graphics and overall optimization feel outdated, which detracts from the gameplay experience.

story
44 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
9%
73%
18%
The game's story is set in the European theater of war, featuring historically based missions that allow players to improve their soldiers and carry them through a campaign. However, many users criticize the repetitive mission design, poor AI, and unfair mechanics, which detract from the overall experience. While the game offers a mission editor and user-generated content, the execution of its narrative and gameplay elements leaves much to be desired, leading to comparisons with better-optimized titles in the genre.
- “All of your units carry on from mission to mission in the campaigns, and they gain experience accordingly (they are all named and have semi-independent portraits so you can follow individual soldiers or squads if you are so inclined).”
- “Every nation campaign consists of several historically based missions.”
- “I love the game, easy mission editor and campaigns as well.”
- “Retarded AI and mechanics, coupled with repetitive missions, ruin the entire game.”
- “In campaign, most missions boil down to this: the useless infantry charges ahead, but they can be ignored, because in most cases they can't hurt the tanks.”
- “Most campaign missions are set up in a way that is disadvantageous to the player.”
graphics
38 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
16%
68%
16%
The graphics of the game are widely regarded as outdated, with many users noting that they resemble those from 2007, leading to criticism regarding optimization and visual quality. Despite this, some players argue that the graphics do not detract significantly from the overall gameplay experience, which they find more important. Technical issues, such as the need for specific graphics settings and the game's reliance on an older OpenGL implementation, further complicate the graphical experience for some users.
- “Although the graphics are from 2007, many people criticize them for this, but if you look at them in 2007, games were released with such graphics and this is the norm. In principle, the game looks not bad in 2018, and the gameplay negates all the shortcomings of the graphics.”
- “If you can overlook the dated graphics of this game, then you should get it.”
- “The graphics are dated by today's standards, but the combat game mechanics are more important to me than fancy graphics.”
- “So I'm very upset that I can't even get the game to launch even though my computer is perfectly capable of running the game with its graphics.”
- “Also, the graphics seem to be very poorly optimized for my computer, as even on high settings I'm getting shadow entities and void fissures on my map...”
- “This game uses OpenGL for its graphics, and since the implementation is almost 10 years old, the API used is extremely out of date.”
gameplay
24 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
13%
75%
13%
The gameplay is characterized by its complexity and realism, appealing primarily to hardcore tactical RTS fans, but it suffers from clunky controls, poor AI, and slow pacing that can lead to frustration. While the game mechanics are reminiscent of its predecessors, they lack the optimization found in similar titles, making it feel outdated and cumbersome. Despite its dated graphics, some players appreciate the depth of strategy involved, though many find the overall experience disappointing due to repetitive missions and performance issues.
- “I believe that it is the predecessor of the now Graviteam Tactics franchise because the game mechanics are quite similar, although Graviteam Tactics has brought WWII RTS to a new level.”
- “The graphics are dated by today's standards, but the combat game mechanics are more important to me than fancy graphics.”
- “Definitely not an example of ease of access and intuitive controls, as it feels unwieldy and clunky, but it is a real beast of complexity and a haven for diehard tactical RTS fans of realistic gameplay.”
- “Overall, it feels like the idea was to use arcade RTS mechanics: crucial tools were not compatible and the leftover tools are meaningless in the scheme of things.”
- “However, upon playing the game, I was terribly disappointed in its abysmal performance and terrible AI, and generally extremely slow gameplay.”
- “Realistic in this instance means physically correct and therefore - speaking in layman's terms - mindbogglingly unfair and frustrating mechanics.”
optimization
12 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
17%
50%
33%
The game's optimization has received significant criticism, with players reporting poor graphics performance even on high settings, leading to visual glitches like shadow entities and void fissures. While some users note that performance issues and bugs have improved, many still find the overall gameplay experience to be slow and disappointing compared to better-optimized alternatives.
- “In the tab 'global settings', under preferred graphics processors, change from auto-select to high-performance NVIDIA processor and press 'apply' in the corner.”
- “Seems to me that performance issues and bugs have largely been sorted now.”
- “Also, the graphics seem to be very poorly optimized for my computer, as even on high settings I'm getting shadow entities and void fissures on my map...”
- “Considering that there are games like Wargame and Combat Mission out there that more or less feature the same kind of core gameplay but possess way better optimization, there's really no reason to play this game.”
- “However, upon playing the game, I was terribly disappointed in its abysmal performance and terrible AI, and generally extremely slow gameplay.”
grinding
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game tedious and confusing, particularly in controlling individual soldiers. While the game aims for realism, it often results in a boring experience rather than engaging gameplay, likening it more to a strategic chess game with explosions than a traditional grinding experience.
- “It doesn't help that controlling your individual soldiers is tedious and confusing.”
- “This game wants to be realistic and it is, but is boring and tedious too.”
- “Overall, this is not a grinding, fix your tank, etc. game; you have chess with explosions.”
stability
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
150%
The game demonstrates excellent stability on Linux when played through Proton, with users consistently reporting smooth performance.
- “The game runs great on Linux via Proton.”
- “The game runs great on Linux via Proton.”
- “The game runs smoothly without any crashes or bugs.”