WARNO

This review is for the casual players, such as myself. I've been playing Warno on and off since it released, whether it be on my own or with friends. 90% of the time I or we are fighting the games AI which always results in shutting the game off and playing something else. The AI in this game is horribly programmed, they always have perfect counter play to whatever strats or units you are using, always seem to know exactly where your units are, and blatantly cheat resources at times. The dev's put 0 thought into how AI commanders should behave in the slightest. Not even a hint of trying to script a degree of human error. This just leads to frustrating games where every time you want to try something new like a deck or strategy, you're forced into the dirt for even attempting to use your brain to play this game or have fun casually. I love the cold war and this style of RTS but I truthfully cannot recommend this game for a casual audience. Quick games before or after work will just result in hour long slugfests of attrition that piss you off more than anything. I've played on every AI difficulty with the only difference being how much the AI cheat, no change in doctrine or strategy at all. TLDR: if you are looking to play this game casually vs AI, don't. The dev's clearly don't give a rats ass about anyone who isn't hyper fixated on the PVP hyper competitive aspect of the game.

一个在简介打着“真实”与“Eugen Systems的终极“第三次世界大战”模拟器”标签的自称是战略游戏的游戏，其所有的更新却都在逼着玩家进行大量的微操。 最早从红龙接触到该厂商，哪怕在当时其傲慢的偏见与商业兽性就可见一斑。入坑本作本奔着创意工坊内容并打算和朋友一起COOP将军模式，却“有幸”体验到如此明目张胆的逼迫玩家的设计。这次火炮与DLC更新的问题大部分别的差评中都已经说明，但我只想接着这些差评再强调一点；欧根完全可以通过给火炮添加新的如“设置一次发射的炮弹次数”的群组智慧指令，至少使得这次的更新变得能被玩家接受，但如此微小的解决办法到现在都没被添加进游戏。这个厂商从钢铁之师就开始引入的智慧群组到现在为止，这个哪怕在游戏小贴士中都会提醒你用于减轻操作负担的功能，反而毫无长进。 至此，既然态度恶劣到这种程度，简介中“真实”等等标签对于这种厂商的游戏而言，就好比一个主打“真实感”体验网红景点。目的只是为了满足普通游客和被商业环境调教好的，或追求这种虚假感觉的人，维持一种”不明觉厉“的设计语言，满足并借着这部分受众其单纯的好奇，预期与兴趣，收割他们或使其其中少数乐于成为运营者商业花招下的奴隶。我可去你妈的吧。

This game lacks the quality of the original wargames and comes short where realism is important. It would be better to "revive" and improve Wargame Red Dragon with the few tools they added here. For example, the IFV autocannons do almost no damage to helos and whenever I check out the game again, nothing has changed. Infantry units can tank damage when running over open ground and expensive tanks panic immediately and miss every shot after they lose 1 hp. Or the fact that good infantry is more expensive and struggles more than in W:RD to destroy tanks. This is usually answered with the "if infantry could kill tanks easily then economically, they would be way too efficient, so they have to be balanced." This is stupid balancing over realism. Yes, infantry is cheaper, that's the point. Also in real life tanks have a very limited vertical fire arc, which also makes it hard for them to fight in urban combat. In W:RD you had an infantry unit for 15 and a tank for 175: The infantry would win at short range and that was great. Combine that with clearly AI generated loading screens and stuff, arcadish ugly UI (that will never change) and campaigns that are boring and aren't even worth the time. The original wargames had depth and you could command many different units in the campaign, for example drop airborne divisions. Where are all the campaign features? You finished Steel Division 2 previously and you didn't bother to add entrenchment here or any interesting features? You could stun regiments in SD 2 with artillery, but in this age with better artillery it's of course impossible. The AI was really bad and annoying in the previous wargames, because it knew exactly what you had on the field and played counter units before spotting anything. Now, instead of making a good AI here in this game, it appears that was also not on the list. Yes, "better AI" is in the description and the only thing I see is that the AI is capable of human wave tactics and broken helo attacks, because again helos are extremely well balanced in this game and they sure as hell would dodge that many missiles and tank their damage in real life. Then in the campaign you can drive through the enemy backline and cut them from all supplies. This is already too much to handle for the AI and you can win on the hardest difficulty in record time. It feels to me like an overpriced beta/alpha, except that the game is finished for them and so they roll out DLCs.

Not interested in Multiplayer as games like this too often fall into RTS cheese. I was really enjoying the single player content, but every few weeks they update the game and it runs the risk of corrupting your save file for Army General campaigns which, if you're like me and might be able to play only once or twice a week for a few hours, means you're always running the risk of losing your progress. You can "rollback" but this doesn't always work, especially if you have mods, and even mods that don't explicitly affect single player (like maps). This has honestly been a pretty upsetting let down, as the game is otherwise solid, but I just cannot recommend it until saves are 100% update proofed.

I leveled an entire city block and still lost. Watched the replay and saw I didn't hit any units, nor were there any units there to begin with. For this transgression against my unquestionable tactical genius I am going to bomb the next city twice as hard as payback. 10/10 would learn nothing from my mistakes again

Game uses AI generated portraits and some AI generated loading screens. Possibly more, because, as you might notice, the studio does not disclose or aknowledge their generative AI usage anywhere.

I got WARNO all the way back in early access because I love Wargame: Red Dragon and I felt like it was kind of bland and stale and decided to give it some time in the oven. Imagine my surprise when I gave it another try four years later and it still feels just as bad.

Add China to this game, pls. This campaign and battle is more interesting than Red dragon. You can earn more money from Chinese market.

Recent changes to artillery are good and add gameplay depth and counterplay to a previously brainless unit type. Ignore the whingers

玩完钢铁之师2的将军模式非常爽于是顺手又来玩WARNO的将军模式，但是没想到体验差这么多。 除非是我对冷战后期常规战争的理解有误，否则我认为WARNO的将军模式是相当失败的。 首先，可选增援机制非常不合理。以NATO方为例，在富尔达缺口可以选10VP换超级大炮。问题在于，一个点才值5VP，难道一个超级大炮能让你拿两个点吗？又比如在左勾拳，可以10VP换4个总计7/15的猎兵营，7/15看起来高，平分到4个营才多少，而且一座城也就20VP，更何况这关还是进攻关，还是兵都用不完狠狠爆杀的那种。总结一句话：可选增援都是假的，实则只有唯一选项。 其次，补给机制与AI逻辑非常不合理。由于本作一回合是4小时，一局也就跨那么几天，所以被断补的部队不受任何影响是很正确的设定，但问题是，既然部队完全不用在乎被断补，为什么被断补的AI部队会傻乎乎的往有补给的地方跑，然后什么仗都不打呢？AI不会收缩防御（这点比钢铁之师2也要差）可以理解，但是我把整张图的补给都断了，然后AI就不知所措了，直接跳过回合，请问这跟gg有什么区别？说句难听点的，比起给我个100/100的高达营，我更宁愿要10个0/0的侦查营直接访问AI的补给线。 此外，整个将军模式对技术兵种的逻辑设计极其不合理。钢铁之师2战斗机可以封锁，轰炸机和火炮可以轰炸，后者因为一回合也就4小时，加之部队基本机械化的原因没有就算了，请问前者没有是几个意思？我第一次玩到NATO和WTO在战役层级上打正面居然抢不下制空的指挥游戏。拿空优机舔地真的太智商了。 最后，整个将军模式的剧本极度不平衡。钢铁之师2中间也有一些不平衡的剧本，但是WARNO中剧本的不平衡令人发指。富尔达缺口太偏向苏联，左勾拳太偏向NATO等等。虽然这些剧本都是架空的，但是架空剧本至少也应当保证最基本的可玩性，如果设计可以像这样极度不平衡，为什么不给玩家增援核弹呢？ 除此之外还有很多细节地方是令我不满意的，比如地形设定极其奇怪导致绝大多数时候都不得不用鼠标确定（一个格子上一堆建筑物判定为平地），比如可选增援时无法查看地图（可选增援没得选此时反而是优势了，讽刺）等等。 总而言之，我真的有些后悔为了将军模式买WARNO了（机枪左移5cm模式还是很值得的）。我原本是想着买WARNO可以玩5个剧本，平摊下来要比买钢铁之师2的DLC中间的剧本要便宜的，结果体验确实相当令人失望。