Wargame: Red Dragon

About

Wargame: Red Dragon is a single player and multiplayer real-time strategy game with warfare and historical themes. It was developed by Eugen Systems and was released on April 17, 2014. It received positive reviews from players.

Wargame Red Dragon is thrilling in single-player mode with its new dynamic campaign system, and also offers an extensive multiplayer mode where up to 20 players can compete against each other simultaneously.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Skip User Reviews

88%

Audience ScoreBased on 9,825 reviews

gameplay263 positive mentions

stability27 negative mentions

Wargame: Red Dragon offers an incredibly immersive real-time strategy experience with dynamic battles and intricate tactics.
The game features a vast array of authentic units and detailed maps, providing a realistic and engaging gaming experience.
The multiplayer mode is robust, supporting large-scale battles with up to 20 players, creating a competitive and cooperative environment.

The game has a steep learning curve, making it difficult for newcomers to grasp the mechanics and strategies.
The AI is often criticized for being unbalanced and predictable, leading to frustrating gameplay experiences.
The community can be toxic, with a global chat that is filled with offensive language and behavior.

gameplay
819 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
32%
65%
3%
The gameplay of "Wargame: Red Dragon" is characterized by its deep tactical mechanics, steep learning curve, and a vast array of units, making it a complex yet rewarding real-time strategy experience. Players appreciate the strategic flexibility offered by deck building and combined arms warfare, although many criticize the inadequate tutorial and the overwhelming amount of mechanics that can be confusing for newcomers. While the multiplayer aspect is engaging and competitive, the game suffers from balance issues and a toxic community, which can detract from the overall enjoyment.
- “The depth of its tactical gameplay, massive unit variety, and intense multiplayer battles make every match feel unique and rewarding.”
- “Red Dragon offers a deeply satisfying and strategic gameplay experience that will keep you engaged and continuously coming back for more.”
- “The gameplay is fantastic! The game was advertised as incorporating navies for each country and naval combat mechanics.”
- “The mechanics of what I'd call the 'regional conflict,' how it functions, how to utilize it, how it works are absolutely not explained in any way and is entirely trial and error, and the 'tutorial' that it dares even call itself is in no way sufficient for the amount of detail that was half-baked into the mode, as well as the 'important messages' you get during the game will tell you things to know or to handle, and provide you with zero knowledge on how to do what it is loosely implying you to do.”
- “This game practically goes out of its way to keep the game's mechanics murky and nonsensical, and if most RTS games have a joke of a tutorial, this one has a joke-of-a-joke of a tutorial (oh boy, PowerPoint slides that take up only 1/3 of the screen, what a fun and engaging way to learn the game...).”
- “The demands the game imparts on the player to achieve even baseline competence in it are unrealistic - micromanagement, hundreds of hours of gameplay, and knowledge of hidden metas and mathematical statistics are required for any modicum of success, preclude me from recommending this game.”
graphics
431 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
63%
36%
1%
The graphics of "Wargame: Red Dragon" are widely praised for their detailed and realistic art style, which enhances battlefield clarity and immersion, even if they may not be as flashy as more recent titles. Many users appreciate the game's ability to run smoothly on lower-end hardware while still delivering impressive visuals, particularly in terms of unit detail and environmental effects. Despite being released in 2014, the graphics have aged well, contributing to the game's enduring appeal among strategy enthusiasts.
- “Graphically, Red Dragon uses a detailed and realistic art style that focuses on clarity and battlefield readability over flashy effects.”
- “The graphics are stunning, realistic, and bring the battlefield to life, from detailed unit models to lush landscapes, enhancing the overall visual experience.”
- “The graphics are amazing and the gameplay is fun and engaging after you figure out how it all works.”
- “A great wargame, but the age is starting to show when it comes to graphics.”
- “The graphics are just so-so.”
- “The entire campaign system is broken, the graphics just look like crap now, and bugs that were in release have not been squashed yet.”
story
175 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
18%
75%
7%
The game's story aspect is largely criticized for its lack of depth and engagement, with many players feeling that the single-player missions serve more as tutorials than a fully developed narrative experience. While some appreciate the strategic elements and the potential for storytelling through gameplay, the overwhelming difficulty and repetitive nature of missions detract from any meaningful story progression. Overall, the multiplayer experience is where the game truly shines, overshadowing the underwhelming single-player campaigns.
- “The game just feels exactly like reading 'Red Storm Rising', except you are the commander of war and the storyteller of the novel.”
- “In 'European Escalation', the campaign was an actual story-driven fun experience that got you invested and challenged you.”
- “The single-player campaigns are better done than what was in 'Airland Battle' by having a proper story structure and events, but it suffers from repetition as you fight on the same battle maps constantly.”
- “The single-player missions feel more like a tutorial or practice mode rather than a fully fleshed-out experience.”
- “The single-player missions are hard as hell and do not hesitate to show you everything the game has to offer in the first mission by artillery and armor spamming the hell out of anything you have.”
- “The story campaigns are lackluster and honestly not what you're really there for.”
replayability
96 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
47%
3%
The replayability of "Wargame: Red Dragon" is highly praised, with players highlighting the vast array of units, factions, and customizable decks that allow for endless strategic combinations. Despite a steep learning curve, the game's depth and active multiplayer community contribute to its immense replay value, often resulting in hundreds or even thousands of hours of gameplay. However, some players note that the single-player campaigns offer limited replayability compared to the dynamic multiplayer experience.
- “Thanks to the massive number of units and factions, you'll find endless combinations and strategies to keep you coming back.”
- “The dedicated player base this game has nearly a decade after its release is a testament to the depth and replayability.”
- “With a multitude of different factions and hundreds of different vehicles, infantry units, and aircraft, there is a huge amount of replayability available here.”
- “This game is very diverse and replayable again and again.”
- “The single-player campaign lacks replayability though.”
- “While the game itself has its own issues such as brain-dead unit pathfinding in towns, limited single-player content beyond a basic skirmish, and the near total lack of modding support, the real issue could perhaps be considered to be the community.”
humor
70 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
94%
2%
4%
The humor in this game is a standout feature, with players frequently praising the hilarious in-game chat and community interactions, which range from witty banter to outrageous and offensive content. Many reviews highlight the comedic elements of gameplay, including funny voice lines and absurd scenarios, making it a source of entertainment even amidst its competitive nature. However, the humor can be polarizing, as some find the community's toxicity and edgy jokes off-putting, while others embrace the chaos for its comedic value.
- “The chat in this game is really funny and the mechanics are great!”
- “Extremely fun with friends, and super hilarious to see the global chat and see how many people are over 40 that play this.”
- “This game... while complicated it is hilarious, has funny voice acting, and takes basically everything into account.”
- “If you have too much free time and can withstand unfunny and unoriginal edgy alt-right kids in the chat, then go ahead and become the tactician you always wanted to be.”
- “- Modify the AI behavior in sea battles; it's just unfunny to play against something so aggressive.”
- “The game is still virtually restricted to the most unfunny parts.”
optimization
41 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
37%
41%
22%
Overall, the game's optimization is praised for its ability to run smoothly on a variety of hardware, including older systems, while maintaining good graphics and performance. However, some users report significant issues such as stuttering, crashes, and limitations due to VRAM constraints, which can hinder gameplay, especially in larger matches. Despite these drawbacks, many players appreciate the balance and mechanics, indicating that the game is generally well-optimized but still has room for improvement.
- “Very well balanced and optimized.”
- “Great graphics, wonderful optimization, interesting campaign + multiplayer.”
- “The game is extremely well optimized; I was able to run it at a steady 40-60 fps on a laptop that could only use Intel integrated graphics (albeit on medium settings).”
- “4GB VRAM limit makes certain settings impossible at 4K, also heavily limits the number of units on the ground at once and reduces performance artificially when the 4GB VRAM limit is reached.”
- “Oh forgot to add, very buggy and poorly optimized; frame rate drops every game, game crashes about 1 out of 4 games.”
- “Stuttering is commonplace, CTD (crash to desktop) is commonplace.”
stability
35 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
20%
3%
77%
The game's stability is widely criticized, with numerous reports of bugs, glitches, and performance issues, including frequent crashes and frame rate drops. Players have noted that the AI behaves erratically, and many features, such as zone control and skirmish modes, are plagued by inconsistencies. While some users report a relatively bug-free experience, the overall sentiment leans towards frustration with the game's technical shortcomings.
- “Worth a purchase for its continually surviving community and depth, as well as a fairly bug-free experience.”
- “Runs great on all manner of PCs, even lower-end laptops.”
- “It's more or less bug-free and it provides free DLC.”
- “The game is still buggy and crashes often; I feel insulted that I paid nearly full price for this game.”
- “Game freezes for upwards of two minutes randomly when playing 4v4 skirmish games.”
- “It just feels cheesy, buggy, and undeserved when you're losing, until you figure out how to exploit the AI and janky game mechanics, and then it feels cheesy, buggy, and undeserved when you're winning.”
grinding
34 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
9%
17%
74%
Reviews consistently highlight that grinding in the game is excessively tedious, often requiring players to invest significant time and effort to progress. Many players feel that the single-player campaign is particularly burdensome, with repetitive tasks and micromanagement detracting from the overall enjoyment. While some appreciate the strategic depth, the overwhelming grind can make the experience feel more like a chore than a rewarding challenge.
- “I have found, however, that installing the 'sandbox' mod does provide a better gameplay experience on the skirmish side, so you aren't farming for points the entire match only to get a handful of units out to defend.”
- “No base setup, no tedious setup of power stations and resource harvesters, no tech tree to worry about, no real unit cap that you'll ever approach (except in naval battles). There's a counter for everything if you only have the presence of mind to get it out when you need it (and manage to fit it into your deck).”
- “One long, tedious grind.”
- “Each action needs to be thought out and planned deeply, making the game slightly more tedious.”
- “The singleplayer campaign is pretty tedious.”
- “The campaign, in my opinion, is not really enjoyable; you will find yourself grinding out enemy waves of units which are mostly straight-up counters to your regiments.”
music
28 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
29%
60%
11%
The music in the game has received mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the decent background tracks and immersive audio design, while others criticize the limited selection and repetitiveness of the music. Although the sound effects are generally well-executed, many feel that the soundtrack lacks variety and depth, with some noting that earlier titles in the series offer richer musical experiences. Overall, while the audio contributes to the atmosphere, it may not satisfy those seeking a more dynamic and expansive musical landscape.
- “The music is great and the graphics good.”
- “Nice soundtrack.”
- “+excellent music and sound.”
- “Audio design is solid—artillery salvos echo convincingly, jets scream overhead, and sparse radio chatter heightens immersion—yet there’s no sweeping soundtrack to speak of.”
- “The music gets old fast and the selection is limited.”
- “Music is mediocre (some tracks I have heard in other game franchises), and the gunfire seems a little muted but it does provide an acceptable atmosphere.”
emotional
14 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players express a deep emotional connection to the game, feeling a sense of existence and community within its inclusive environment. However, many also report frustration and heartbreak due to the game's shortcomings and lack of updates, leading to a complex relationship where enjoyment is often overshadowed by emotional investment and disappointment. The experience can be psychologically draining, as players form attachments to their in-game units, resulting in genuine feelings of loss during gameplay.
- “Made me feel like I matter and actually exist instead of just being a walking talking entity in this dark gloomy realm!”
- “This game is psychologically draining because I keep gaining emotional attachment to my own men.”
- “I sent 10 strong Mi-24s to their death as I tried to rain fire down on some tanks and infantry in the woods, my team yelled at me, I ran out of command points to call units in, I cried, and we lost.”
atmosphere
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
30%
40%
30%
The atmosphere in the game is described as immersive, particularly through its sound design and the weight of player decisions, though some players feel it falls short of expectations. While elements like radio chatter and weapon effects contribute positively, criticisms include mediocre music and a lack of polish that detracts from the overall experience. Overall, the game attempts to blend various atmospheric influences but struggles with consistency and depth.
- “The sound design, including radio chatter and authentic weapon effects, further immerses players in the Cold War atmosphere.”
- “Whether you're orchestrating combined ground and air assaults or coordinating naval operations, Red Dragon's immersive atmosphere ensures that each move you make carries weight and consequence.”
- “The game felt much more engaging and would submerge you in the action-packed atmosphere far better than Red Dragon does.”
- “The spelling errors, missing bits, incorrect information, bad sentence structures, etc. hurt the otherwise detailed feel and atmosphere.”
- “Music is mediocre (some tracks I have heard in other game franchises), and the gunfire seems a little muted but it does provide an acceptable atmosphere.”
- “But Eugen is trying to fix the 'blob' atmosphere of the naval in a game where blob atmosphere reigns supreme.”
monetization
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
30%
70%
The monetization model of the game has received mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the absence of microtransactions and the provision of free updates, while others criticize the perceived cash grab nature of the DLCs and misleading advertising regarding features like multiplayer campaigns. Overall, the lack of microtransactions is seen as a positive aspect, but concerns about the game's development and monetization strategy persist.
- “All of them are unlocked and ready to go (if you have the nation unlocked, some nations come as DLC). No microtransactions to unlock cards or custom stuff is a refreshing sight.”
- “No DLC or microtransactions nonsense, just free updates with new maps.”
- “No microtransactions = that's a pro, right?”
- “Although South Africa is what the community has wanted for years, I can't help but feel that it's a cash grab since they started development after releasing it on Epic for free.”
- “The ads for this game are completely false.”
- “Particularly as, at the point of both pre-purchase and full publication, the Eugen website was advertising this game as having a multiplayer campaign - either an honest mistake or a strong indication that something went very wrong in development.”