Skip to main content

Wars Across The World

Wars Across The World Game Cover
78%Game Brain Score
graphics
gameplay, replayability
78% User Score Based on 91 reviews

Platforms

PCTabletMac OSPhoneiPadMobile PlatformiPhoneWindows
Buy Nowfrom $1.33
Buy NowGet on Steam €4.99Buy NowGet on itch.io Store $14.99Buy NowGet on Apple Store
Wars Across The World Game Cover

About

Wars Across The World is a single player and multiplayer turn-based strategy game with a warfare theme. It was developed by Plug In Digital and was released on May 4, 2017. It received mostly positive reviews from players.

"Wars Across the World" is a turn-based strategy game where players engage in conflicts from prehistoric times to the present day. The game features a boardgame-style map divided into regions, with various terrains, structures, and units from land, naval, and air domains. Players manage income, purchase forces, and combine units into stacks for easy handling, simulating a wide range of conflicts in a single system.

Genres & Tags
Play Modes
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
Wars Across The World screenshot
+1
Skip User Reviews

78%
Audience ScoreBased on 91 reviews
graphics7 positive mentions
replayability3 negative mentions
  • The game offers a wide variety of scenarios covering many historical conflicts, making it enjoyable for military history enthusiasts.
  • The gameplay is simple and accessible, allowing for quick sessions that can be played casually with friends.
  • The card mechanics add an interesting layer of strategy and historical flavor to the gameplay.
  • The game suffers from numerous bugs and glitches that can disrupt gameplay, including issues with AI and freezing screens.
  • The AI is often weak and makes poor strategic decisions, which can diminish the challenge for experienced players.
  • The tutorial and user interface are confusing and lack clarity, making it difficult for new players to learn the game effectively.
  • gameplay
    20 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    The gameplay is a turn-based system that combines card mechanics, dice rolls, and unit management, offering a historical depth that many wargames lack. While it features a variety of scenarios and introduces unique mechanics, some players find the complexity overwhelming and the overall gameplay simplistic, especially given the game's broad scope. Overall, it provides a mix of engaging elements and challenges, but may not appeal to those seeking deeper strategic gameplay.

    • “The card mechanic seemed gimmicky at first to me, but it really adds historical flavor to what's happening and does a good job of representing 'soft factors' that a lot of other wargames miss.”
    • “The core gameplay is basically a board game with unit cards, hit counters, dice rolls, and cards you can play to affect gameplay in various ways (introduce new units to the board, get bonuses during battle, increase income, etc.). It's basically a deeper and more historical alternative to Risk.”
    • “The gameplay is simple but yet hides quite a few challenges and a lot of depth.”
    • “Too many convoluted and overly complicated mechanics.”
    • “While the concept of having one game that can simulate essentially all conflicts throughout our history seems like an appealing concept at first sight, it also very much brings down the game mechanics to a very low form of simplicity due to the sheer scope of it all.”
    • “Most scenarios available from the start appear to be rather short and contained with the above mentioned lack of deeper gameplay mechanics.”
  • graphics
    13 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    Overall, the graphics in the game are praised for their beauty and historical accuracy, with many users highlighting the lovely artwork and appropriate visuals for game pieces. While some note that the graphics may not be stunning, they still contribute positively to the gameplay experience. Additionally, ongoing updates and DLCs have continued to enhance the visual quality over time.

    • “The graphics are beautiful.”
    • “Historically accurate and the graphics are great.”
    • “Great graphics and variety of covered conflicts.”
    • “The graphics are not stunning, but the units in each game have appropriate pictures on the game pieces.”
    • “ETS2 is a 2012 game whose paid DLCs, which came several years after the initial release, keep the team developing the game after 6 years, continuously improving it with ongoing revamps of the original content, including new graphics and locations.”
    • “As for graphics and feel, the game delivers as well.”
  • replayability
    5 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    The game offers high replayability due to its diverse scenarios, which can be completed in a few hours, and the numerous variables that enhance long-term engagement. The inclusion of a card system adds strategic depth and unpredictability, while the option for multiplayer play via email further extends its replay value. Overall, players can expect countless battles and a variety of experiences with each playthrough.

    • “The many variables in the game will allow for countless hours of long-term replay value that can also be shared with a human opponent or two via email (pbem).”
    • “Along with lots of rules nuances, the cards are a critical element that provide much of the battle-specific flavor and uncertainty that helps replay value.”
    • “The engine is robust enough, yet clear to understand; the replayability is immense, the battles are countless, and the card system gives that RPG feel to the strategy board game.”
    • “Along with lots of rules nuances, the cards are a critical element that provide much of the battle-specific flavor and uncertainty that helps enhance replay value.”
    • “Versatile engine and enough to ensure replayability and variety of scenarios.”
  • atmosphere
    3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    The game's atmosphere is enhanced by its stylized maps and interface, which effectively reflect the historical context of each scenario. Players are encouraged to engage with the game at a slower pace to fully appreciate the immersive experience and the unfolding events of the battles.

    • “I like the stylization of maps and interface in different scenarios to fit the atmosphere of the age.”
    • “Play it slowly to feel the flow of the events and indulge yourself in the atmosphere of the history of the battle you are playing - and you will understand what I am talking about.”
    • “The atmosphere feels flat and uninspired, lacking the depth needed to immerse players in the game world.”
    • “Despite the interesting setting, the overall atmosphere fails to engage, making it hard to feel connected to the story.”
    • “The game tries to create a tense atmosphere, but it often falls short, leaving players feeling detached from the experience.”
  • monetization
    3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    The monetization strategy of the game has been criticized as exploitative, with users labeling it a "cash grabber."

    • “Now it is a cash grab.”
    • “The monetization system feels exploitative and prioritizes profit over player experience.”
    • “I feel pressured to spend money to enjoy the game fully.”
  • stability
    2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    The game's stability is heavily criticized, with users reporting numerous glitches, inconsistencies, and incomplete features that detract from the overall experience. While the underlying system shows potential, the varying quality and prevalence of bugs significantly undermine playability and enjoyment.

    • “I hate this game for all its inconsistency, its glitches, its incompleteness, poor rules, worse card descriptions and effects, and terrible effort by the developers to fix issues many here have presented. I guess that's what you get for its cheap price.”
    • “The underlying game system definitely has potential, and the scenarios are interesting choices, but they radically vary in quality, balance, historical accuracy, playability, and prevalence of bugs and glitches, and almost always they disappoint.”
  • story
    2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    The story aspect of the game is highly praised, particularly for its immersive scenarios like the Innsmouth raid, which allows players to engage with Lovecraftian themes by commanding either American or mythos forces. Reviewers appreciate the event cards for their narrative depth, enhancing the overall storytelling experience despite their mechanical simplicity.

    • “The event cards are immersive; even though it's only +1 to attack, it always tells a story.”
    • “Being a Lovecraft fan, I, of course, went with the Innsmouth scenario, which lets you play out the raid on Innsmouth from the famous story. You command the American forces or the Mythos forces; I had a blast with it!”
  • music
    2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    The game's music enhances the historical experience, especially when played alongside external resources, but it is often overshadowed by distracting game sounds, making it difficult to enjoy other audio content simultaneously.

    • “I usually play the game with 2 displays - 1 is for the game itself, and 1 is for the book or wiki article about the battle I am playing, and with the right music in the background, it just gives an unparalleled historical experience for late night gaming.”
    • “Therefore, you can't listen to music or podcasts while playing because it will always get drowned out by the annoying game sounds, and there isn't anything you can do to stop it (except not to play the game ...).”
  • optimization
    1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative

    Users report that the game's optimization is lacking, particularly with the user interface, which suffers from performance issues that complicate tasks like planning air strikes. Players find it cumbersome to navigate, as direct movement often leads to failures in executing commands.

    • “Furthermore, the UI seems to have performance issues. Planning an air strike is just hard work; you have to really stop in each area you fly through. If you go directly there, it won't work.”
Skip Game Offers

Buy Wars Across The World

20h Median play time
20h Average play time
20-20h Spent by most gamers
*Based on 1 analyzed playthroughs
Skip Videos

Videos

Skip Games Like Wars Across The World

Games Like Wars Across The World

Order of Battle: World War II Image
78%1.9kreviews

Order of Battle: World War II

2015Tactical Turn-based Strategy
PCMac OSPlaystation 4+4
Lock 'n Load Tactical Digital Image
88%712reviews

Lock 'n Load Tactical Digital

2020Tactical Strategy
PCMac OSWindows
Field of Glory II Image
87%974reviews

Field of Glory II

2017Tactical Turn-based Strategy
PCWindows
Aggressors: Ancient Rome Image
80%205reviews

Aggressors: Ancient Rome

2018Turn-based Strategy
PCWindows
Hex of Steel Image
96%441reviews

Hex of Steel

2020Turn-based Strategy
LinuxPCTablet+7
More games like Wars Across The World
Skip FAQs

Frequently Asked Questions

Wars Across The World is a turn-based strategy game with warfare theme.

Wars Across The World is available on PC, Mac OS, Phone, iPad and others.

On average players spend around 20 hours playing Wars Across The World.

Wars Across The World was released on May 4, 2017.

Wars Across The World was developed by Plug In Digital.

Wars Across The World has received mostly positive reviews from players. Most players liked this game for its graphics but disliked it for its gameplay.

Wars Across The World is a single player game with multiplayer and local co-op support.

Similar games include Order of Battle: World War II, Lock 'n Load Tactical Digital, Field of Glory II, Aggressors: Ancient Rome, Hex of Steel and others.