Total Conflict: Resistance

Every market we collect.

Reviews, worldwide (the counter carries no country): 0.86/day in the week to Jul 24 → 2.43/day in the week after.

For scale, across Steam · Top Sellers · Brazil over the last 30 days: the 23 chart moves that followed a price cut of more than 20% went a median of 14 places towards #1, and the 2,515 moves with no price cut behind them went 2 away. One store, one chart, one country — it is the only place we have enough observations to say even that.

Prices outside the United States have been collected since 6 August 2026 and chart positions since 19 July 2026, so a cut older than that has no market to compare and a market that joined later has no history yet. Nothing here is converted between currencies.

Hours played at review time, across 869 reviews with recorded playtime.

positive critical· bar length = how often the theme comes up

A Love Letter to the Devs: Brilliant concept, bare-bones campaign — battles carry it (for now) I played this for 13 hours straight in one day, and that alone should tell you the concept has teeth. I’ve been hounding for a game set in the modern day that still gives me the core “Total War” loop: macro campaign decisions + logistics + big RTS battles. This game scratches so many itches at once, and the foundation is genuinely exciting. But after a long session, my take is simple: The game is still bare bones, and right now the battles are the fun part, while the campaign layer often feels like waiting. The idea is strong — the execution and pacing just aren’t there yet. What I loved (why I kept playing) ✅ The concept is exactly what I wanted Modern setting + strategic map + RTS battles is a rare combo, and this game is one of the few that even attempts it in a way that feels “Total War-ish” in spirit. ✅ Battles are genuinely enjoyable The battles are where the game shines: squad combat is satisfying combined-arms potential is there it’s chaotic in a good way When I’m actually fighting, I’m having fun. What needs improvement (biggest pain points) 1) Campaign pacing = too much waiting, not enough decision-making For me the campaign loop often becomes: wait for equipment → wait for production → wait for replenishment → finally fight It didn’t feel like I was making clever strategic decisions — it felt like I was waiting for the economy to drip-feed my army back to strength. My armies took what felt like centuries to become full strength, so I ended up fighting with 20–30 squads at half strength repeatedly, just to keep the game moving. This isn’t “hard strategy,” it’s just slow pacing. What I want: faster/clearer reinforcement flow, better production pacing, and more meaningful campaign actions while the machine runs. 2) Supply/logistics tools need major optimization and clarity Logistics should be the “brains” of the campaign, but right now it feels like the weakest link. I constantly felt like I was missing basic controls and visibility: where my bottleneck is what exactly is blocking replenishment whether items are physically reaching the right army/location What I want: better supply UI, smarter automation options, clearer bottleneck indicators, and less micromanagement that doesn’t add gameplay value. 3) Equipment assignment feels unreliable (even when I have the gear) This one frustrated me the most. I tried to standardize squads with M416, but in battle they still show up with other rifles. And the important part: I wasn’t short on resources — I had excess rifles, scopes, and parts in storage, yet I still couldn’t consistently get squads to actually use the equipment I intended. In a game where production and logistics are supposed to matter, this breaks the whole loop. What I want: “Strict loadout” vs “allow substitutes” a clear explanation when gear isn’t being assigned (wrong ammo type, wrong storage location, not delivered, missing mags, etc.) templates/priority rules so I can standardize an army without babysitting every squad 4) Vehicles sometimes spawn without ammo This happened to me more than once. If I’m investing resources into vehicles, they shouldn’t spawn into battle effectively useless — and if there’s a reason, the UI needs to warn me before deployment. 5) Strategic layer feels incomplete (naval + air power) No naval combat (at least from what I’ve seen so far). Jets feel very limited, and I can’t use them in campaign mode the way I expected. In a modern warfare “campaign + battles” game, I should be able to use air power to: bomb/soften enemy armies on the strategic layer reduce enemy strength before engaging force counters like AA, dispersal, interception, etc. Right now air power feels disconnected from the macro layer, and that’s a missed opportunity. Extra points I’d add (because they matter long-term) 6) UI/feedback needs to explain “why” A lot of my campaign frustration came from not knowing why something wasn’t happening: Why isn’t this squad equipping the rifles I own? Why isn’t reinforcement filling up when I have stock? Where exactly is the bottleneck? Even a great system becomes annoying if it feels like a black box. 7) Campaign needs more “gameplay,” not just production waiting I want the strategic layer to give me reasons to make decisions beyond “produce more and wait.” Things that would instantly make it more engaging: better map events / operational choices meaningful diplomacy and consequences more ways to shape the battlefield before the battle (air strikes, sabotage, interdiction, etc.) Bottom line I’m still recommending it because the core idea is brilliant, and the battles are fun enough that I lost 13 hours without noticing. But the campaign is currently too bare-bones and too slow, with logistics/equipment systems that don’t reliably translate into what shows up on the battlefield. Recommended if you’re here for modern RTS battles and you can tolerate an early-access/bare-bones campaign. If you’re looking for a deep, polished strategy layer today, I’d wait — but keep an eye on it, because the foundation could become something special.