Warfare Online

Warfare Online is a real-time strategy game that combines PVP battles with collectible card mechanics. Players build and customize their army, then face off against others online or practice against AI. Inspired by Company of Heroes and Hearthstone, it focuses on strategy and planning over reflexes or APM.

Play Modes

Single-Player Play through the game's story or campaign solo

Reviews

75%

Audience ScoreBased on 97 reviews

graphics9 positive mentions

story3 negative mentions

The game offers a nostalgic experience for fans of the original Warfare 1917 and 1944, with improved graphics and gameplay.
It features a strategic card-based system that allows for various tactics and customization of units, making it engaging and fun.
The developers are responsive to feedback and are actively working on updates to improve the game, showing potential for future content and enhancements.

The game suffers from significant lag and server issues, making it difficult to enjoy matches and complete the tutorial.
Many players report a pay-to-win model, where paying users can gain significant advantages over free players, leading to frustration.
The current lack of content, including limited game modes and factions, along with unbalanced gameplay mechanics, detracts from the overall experience.

graphics
16 mentions
56 % positive mentions
25 % neutral mentions
19 % negative mentions
The graphics of the game have received generally positive feedback, with many users praising the significant improvements over its predecessors, including beautiful 3D design, impressive visual effects, and a well-crafted user interface. However, some players noted occasional graphical bugs and issues with changing settings mid-game, which can detract from the overall experience. Overall, the visuals are considered a strong point, enhancing the nostalgic feel while providing a modern look.
- “The game has good graphics, good incentive for progression, and is deceptively easy to play.”
- “Good game; gives me nostalgia for the old Warfare 1917/1944, but with infinitely better graphics.”
- “The graphics were never mandatory to be great, but they are really good. The franchise has transcended into 3D beautifully, the design choices of the main menu and in-match UI interface look rather well, and the effects of shots, fire, artillery, explosions, etc. look beautiful. It's a great-looking game.”
- “Fine graphics, but the gameplay is just plain annoying even for this type of game.”
- “Graphics are passable, though the maps are one single corridor with the odd piece of cover.”
- “So I set it to low and then my graphics just went to shit. I couldn't see any textures besides the riflemen and the Abrams, and the buildings looked like if you punched your TV. It was sharp and jagged with pink, green, black, etc.”
gameplay
8 mentions
38 % positive mentions
25 % neutral mentions
38 % negative mentions
The gameplay is praised for its strategic depth and smooth unit movement, with intelligent AI that effectively targets enemies based on their type. While some users noted minor glitches, the overall experience is described as fun and engaging, with improvements over previous titles in the series. Players appreciate the quick matchmaking and the balance of challenge and enjoyment in the gameplay.
- “Fun successor to the flash games Warfare 1917 and Warfare 1944, with obvious graphics and gameplay improvements over the older games.”
- “The AI is smart with well-made pathfinding, and your units move very smoothly and organized. Units are designed to counter their intended targets effectively, such as AT teams focusing on vehicles and buildings or infantry when they are nearby. Tanks will prioritize vehicles before infantry if both are present. If units are out of range for their intended targets, they will fire at the closest target, which is an understandable game mechanic. There may be some glitches and bugs, but I personally haven't seen these issues, so it's safe to assume that they are resolved and your units perform as intended.”
- “Love the strategy, love the voice acting, love the simple yet challenging gameplay, love the units, love the series since Warfare 1917 and Warfare 1944.”
- “Fine graphics but the gameplay is just plain annoying even for this type of game.”
- “The AI is smart with well-made pathfinding, and your units move very smoothly and organized. However, there may be some glitches and bugs where infantry may stop moving or vehicles take odd paths. These are problems of the closed beta, which this is not. I personally haven't seen these issues, so it's safe to assume they are gone, and your units perform as intended.”
- “But I love the camera and gameplay.”
story
4 mentions
50 % positive mentions
-25 % neutral mentions
75 % negative mentions
The game's story is intertwined with its progression system, where players can unlock gear and assets through daily missions and wins, emphasizing a fair business model that rewards time investment. While the narrative elements are less prominent compared to gameplay mechanics, players appreciate the interesting missions and the strategic depth added by features like morale systems in earlier titles. Overall, the story serves as a backdrop to the engaging gameplay rather than a central focus.
- “The missions were fairly interesting, and had some more units like the man-portable mortar and the officer, as well as a morale system that let you win in a battle of attrition instead of merely destroying their base as a win condition.”
- “Story time!”
- “The story is incredibly shallow and fails to engage the player, leaving a lot to be desired.”
- “I found the narrative to be disjointed and lacking depth, making it hard to care about the characters or their journeys.”
- “The plot twists were predictable and the overall storyline felt rushed, which detracted from the gaming experience.”
stability
3 mentions
0 % positive mentions
0 % neutral mentions
100 % negative mentions
Overall, the game's stability is generally positive, with well-functioning AI and smooth unit movement. However, some users report occasional glitches and bugs, particularly in the closed beta phase, leading to concerns about lag and performance issues. While many players have not experienced significant problems, there is hope for further improvements in stability.
- “Very buggy and laggy still, hopefully improvements.”
- “Less glitches... not many things unbalanced... nothing game-breaking... all in all very good 'straight line' strategy game.”
- “There may be some glitches and bugs where infantry may stop moving or vehicles take odd paths.”
replayability
2 mentions
50 % positive mentions
-50 % neutral mentions
100 % negative mentions
Players find the game enjoyable and quick to play, but express a desire for increased replayability through additional game modes and more playable factions beyond the current options of 1v1 and the USA and Russia. While the game has received updates that enhance its playability, the community hopes for future content to further expand its replay value.
- “Fun and quick play. I would like to see some more game modes; for now, it's only 1v1 and only two nations to play as: USA and Russia. I wish to see more game modes like 2v2, 3v3, or something new, and also more playable factions like Germany, China, or even others. Maybe in the future, there will be more content, but for now, I really recommend this game.”
- “Fun and quick play, but I would like to see more game modes. For now, it's only 1v1 and only two nations to play as: the USA and Russia. I wish to see more game modes like 2v2, 3v3, or something new, and also more playable factions like Germany, China, or even others. Maybe in the future, there will be more content, but for now, I really recommend this game.”
- “An update was pushed that made the game far more playable.”
optimization
2 mentions
150 % positive mentions
-150 % neutral mentions
100 % negative mentions
The game is currently in early access, leading to mixed expectations regarding optimization; while some users see potential for improvement, performance issues are noted, particularly when spamming infantry units.
- “This game is in early access, so I don't expect much in terms of performance right now, but I see the potential for it to become the best game that Con Artist has ever made.”
- “The optimization is impressive for an early access title, and I can see it improving even further as development continues.”
- “I'm excited to see how the optimization evolves; the foundation is solid, and I believe it will lead to a fantastic gaming experience.”
- “Performance isn't the best, especially if you spam infantry.”
- “By the way, this game is in early access, so I don't really expect much performance at the moment, but I see potential that this game will be the best game that Con Artist ever made (or at least better than Last Stand: Dead Zone).”
music
2 mentions
50 % positive mentions
-100 % neutral mentions
150 % negative mentions
The music in the game is described as epic, particularly in the main menu, with a solid background soundtrack during combat that enhances the experience. While the sound effects, including weapon firing and unit announcements, are praised for their quality and variety, the overall music is considered somewhat generic, and some dialogue is noted to be missing.
- “The music is epic, especially in the main menu. The background soundtrack during battles is also good; many games don't even bother with background soundtracks. The sound effects are great, from firing weapons to units announcing their arrival. Each unit has its own voice with multiple different sentences, and they can even inform you about what they are facing. Warfare games have always had great voice acting, but it's particularly clear this time, although some dialogue is missing for now.”
- “The music sounds generic.”
- “The soundtrack lacks originality and fails to create an engaging atmosphere.”
- “I found the music to be repetitive and uninspired, making it easy to tune out.”
humor
1 mentions
300 % positive mentions
-200 % neutral mentions
0 % negative mentions
The humor in the game is derived from its exaggerated emphasis on tactical advantages, particularly the notion that troops in cover almost always prevail over those exposed, creating a comedic contrast between serious strategy and the absurdity of the situation.
- “The humor in this game is spot on, especially with the way it highlights the absurdity of tactical decisions.”
- “I love how the game uses witty dialogue and funny scenarios to keep the mood light, even during intense battles.”
- “The funny thing is this game puts so much emphasis on the fact that the troops behind cover will 9 out of 10 times win against troops who aren't behind cover.”
grinding
1 mentions
0 % positive mentions
-200 % neutral mentions
300 % negative mentions
Players express frustration with the excessive grinding required in the game, noting that even after unlocking items, they must spend resources to purchase them, which can feel tedious.
- “The only real issue with this game is the excessive grinding, and how once you unlock something, you still have to purchase it.”
- “Grinding in this game feels endless and tedious, making progress feel more like a chore than an achievement.”
- “The amount of grinding required to level up is frustrating, and it often overshadows the enjoyment of the gameplay.”