Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
The difference between WARNO and Red Dragon, visuals, effects, sound effects, far better quality of life improvements to the HUD and on screen information. Both games have a sense of realism, but the sound deign and visual effects in Warno adds a sense of extra realism which to me makes Warno more realistic than Red Dragon.
The core gameplay difference between the two is Red Dragon has a national deck system and Warno uses a Division system. There's also other game mechanics in WARNO that Red Dragon doesn't have, like combined arms, a cohesion system and unit background training. (I do beleive Red Dragon had something similar to a cohesion system, but has been re-worked in Warno to better work with "Unit Background Training" and "Combined Arms". I'll put an explanation to this at the end if you want to keep reading)
The deck system in Red Dragon allows players to put any NATO unit in their Nato deck or Pact unit in their Pact deck regardless of nationality, but each nationality stays relative to NATO or PACT.
While Warno uses a Division system, which is a system where players choose the type of Division and based on that division gives them X amount of units with X amount of nationalities to select from with each Division having it's pros and cons.
(I prefer the Division system over the Deck system because in Red Dragon it allowed players to essentially have all of the most powerful units in each category in their deck with very little compromise (heavy armor, heavy AA, heavy bomber, elite inf. etc) Where in Warno, if you want heavy armor, you have to select a Division that specializes in heavy armor. Heavy armor decks grant players with the most powerful tanks in the game, but often lack heavy AA, elite infantry and heavy units in other categories.)
The Division system IMO by far outweighs the deck system, there's a balance between Divisions and units, reinforces teamplay. Heavy Armor decks often correlate well with players using infantry decks. The deck system felt overwhelming at first, up front gave people literally hundreds of units to select from, but the majority of players just selected the most heaviest units anyway. No diversity in gameplay or reinforcement in teamwork with the deck system.
When I played Red Dragon, everybody's deck was capable of doing everything themselves without having to work with teammates. 4v4 matches were really just glorified 1v1 matches.
(in Warno I often use an 8th NATO deck which is a fairly balanced U.S deck, but the deck doesn't have heavy armor or heavy attack helicopters, but has heavy long range AA units. So I often set up my long range AA throughout the map to assist teammates who don't have long range AA and they'll often send some of their heavier units my way to help. Essentially, the division systems introduces a sense of unit compromise, which I like a lot. No one Division can do it all which increases the need to work with teammates to correlate offenses and setting up defenses.)
Overall, the Division system in Warno is probably the core difference between the two outside of graphics, visuals, effects etc and other introduced game mechanics. This change from a deck to division system has been debated since Warno release, but the Division system is here to stay in Warno. Both games offer a sense of realism, but with great improvements to the sound design, graphics and visual effects, Warno has a more realistic feel and look to it. I would recommend Warno over any of the previous games for those who are looking for a realistic, serious toned RTS game.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cohesion Explanation
Warno has a unit cohesion system, which is a reflection of unit performance in combat and engagements. Each unit in Warno has unique stats: accuracy, re-load time, suppression recovery and more. When a unit's cohesion is impacted, the core stats of that unit are effected. For example, if a medium tank has a 65% chance to hit a target while static with good cohesion, that 65% accuracy will remain relative as long as that unit remains in good unit cohesion status, however, when that unit endures stress which impacts units cohesion, that 65% accuracy along with other stats such as reload time will be reduced.
Unit Background training reflects how fast a unit can recover from being suppressed, how much stress that unit can endure before becoming "routed" and how much stress that unit can take before unit cohesion begins to become effected. Heavy armor units crews are often better trained which overall perform better in engagements vs medium armor.
Same applied with infantry. Elite infantry have higher background training which makes them more deadly against your average infantry squad.
These mechanics are implemented with every unit in the game. Not as overwhelming as it may sound and it's nothing something you need to hyper focus on, but it's important to pay attention to unit performance. Usually better trained and more elite units cost more to deploy and are color coded. Sending in an M1 Abrams in a 1v1 to face off an T-80UD is a death sentence for that M1.
Regardless with if you buy Red Dragon, Warno or Steel Division, these types of strategy games will take some time to get used to and learn. They are defiantly not RTS games that you buy and will fully understand day 1 of playing, but are fun as h*ll once you have a basic understanding of how the game plays. Either way, in any of the games, practice putting together a deck, play against AI and learn the game through trial and error before playing online.
WARNO has active pause.
'nuff said (for me). :-)
None are realistic, they are RTS with modern warfare theme over it, both have ideally a rock, paper, scissors kinda of system.
In terms of gameplay you get barely better AI in WARNO in change of the freedom and diversity of scenarios Wargame offered..
If you liked Wargame Airland Battle more than Wargame Red Dragon, you will like WARNO more than you liked Wargame Red Dragon.
If you hated Airland Battle and think Wargame Red Dragon is the only Wargame that was ever good, you may still like WARNO but there will be some things that annoy you.
Similar settings (1989 Cold War gone hot), similar scale (regiment-level), although a bit more abstracted/less micro-managing).
Single-player only, and made by ONE person (with support from Microprose).
it's from Steel division, in SD2 there are like 80+ divisions and most have a very specific taste.
Warno is going to benefit as more divisions and nations are added, and we get the wide breadth of play styles a limited deck can yield.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1089840/Armored_Brigade/
They tend to send big groups of units down predictable paths. all you have to do is set your units up in good defensive positions. the ai will happily throw all its forces into the killing zone until you either run out of supply or win. kinda makes the singleplayer campaign lame as well because it basically turns into a tower defense game
This game looks like *ss.
I cannot wrap my mind how you look us dead in the optics and said "none are realistic" like these games probably aren't some of the most realistic RTS game on the market.
They are nowhere near being the most realistic on the market.
Warno will be more advanced. Here you still see X large campaign map ( east europe and germany ) but you can instead of there are example 12 zones then now you can move your troops everywhere in a turn based kind of way.. example move 10 steps and then you can select 3 armys that are close to each other and drag them into the fight.
In red dragon it was everyone who was in the zone that you could use, but its different in warno.
Els the difference there are no ships in warno, but there are in red dragon.
The ships and ocean maps are okay but honestly the russian ships are veyr overpowered and you can only as west win if you use your anti ship hellicopters and planes and even then its hard. But nice the game had ships but i can live without them in warno.
Warno do have better graphics and sound and sfx making it cool to hear your planes gatlink guns go crazy or missiles fly and so on. Most people dont think about sound but it means allot more than what people think when a game have great sound and warno do have it making it a better experience.
Red dragon have more units than warno ( i think ) since there are more nations in read dragon than in warno.
Warno also do have some extra features where you can automate things a bit more. Example you can give your units orders to attack and capture and area, or defend.
This work quite well. So you dont have to micro manage as much.
Also i like the new counter artillery fire or firew at will, so your dont have to micro manage your artillery.
I also like you can sell example your transport/fuel vehicles after they are empty
And they can also automatic figure out what units to rearm and then automatic pickup and deliver stuff.. This is very nice but dangerous since they have to drive a very long route sometimes.. So think about that.
All in all warno look very promising and i like the features, sound and graphics and think it play really well though its in early development.
Personaly i look very much forward to the campaign and i think it will mimic how it work in steel division and that is great ;-)
Ofcourse the game have a few bugs and need some tweaking along the way, its kind of hard to tweak a game that are in active development before you have the final product in your hands. Also the tweaking is done based on user statistics and until people have tried and played the game and shared their experience "auomatic" then that will also take some time for the tweak to be implemented. But all in all great game.
My advice get both games there are great ;-)