TLDR Can't recommend this game unless you're 100% very knowledgeable in what you're getting into. Single player experience is VERY poor, and buying for the single player will leave most vastly disappointed. Multiplayer is where the real game is, as well as most of the content, but it is very competitive, and very, very toxic.
Campaign: 1/10: Poorly implemented, designed, and respects none of your time.
Skirmish: 4/10: Fun, but hollow.
Multiplayer: 7/10: Where the real fun is, however is very sweaty and still has flaws.
Long version
Campaign: Best to not even touch. 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. For example, in the first campaign it is explained that you are on a defensive from opposing forces. What it does not bother to explain, is that you are simply unable to advance at all with your southern forces, and cannot move your forces forward in an effort to give the area you're suppose to be defending, some breathing room. The way your supposed to know this, is because the map has red lines on the territories, which are not helpful at all, because they all have the lines. As said before, you have to learn this with trial and error, wasting countless hours of your time each time you run into a wall because you learn something new the game never properly explained and now you have to restart the entire run. If you attempt to retreat from a battle, it limits what spaces can be retreated to, with no explanation given nor any information to find that might hint as to why. I have had fighter jets randomly explode outside of battle without them losing the airport they were assigned to, with no reasoning given or explained. Enemy forces can move multiple tiles a turn, while your forces are unable to, again no explanation given. I could go on about so many other issues, potential bugs, or mystery mechanics regarding the campaign, but to wrap up it goes beyond lacking, and overall is a great thought executed about as poorly as potentially possible. The campaigns are also extremely limiting, only taking place in Eastern Asia (hence the name, Red Dragon) but mostly playable armies are made up of European nations, that are entirely absent from the campaigns almost entirely.
Skirmish:
Skirmish is a possibly fun, but overall feeling like a "tutorial" gamemode for the multiplayer experience, that allows you to fight against an army you've created, controlled by the computer, vs another army you've created, controlled by yourself. Selection of types of battles feel relatively repetitive, but accomplish its main goal. As well as a side note, the AI is also fairly poor. Every unit in the game is hard programmed for the AI to use it in a very specific way, with absolutely zero flexibility. Battles against AI will be very predicable, and repetitive. The AI also does not have a fog of war like you do. The AI follows a specific set of rules to mimic it as best as possible, but there will be times that enemy units will know where your units are through the map and through hard cover, changing their behavior and breaking the 4th wall of the effect. Another issue with the campaigns, is that the rules with the strategic map and units are horribly designed. Needing to destroy every single command unit in a Battalion or Regiment, or capture the entire map, while also being able to win by destroying enough of the opposition to cause them to retreat, means that you will not be able to completely remove them from the territory, and winning faster and more devastatingly is actually punishing you, instead of rewarding you. This is neither good for gameplay, or for that matter realistic. I understand what the devs were going for, but the system is very poorly thought out and must not have been hardly play tested.
Multiplayer:
This is where the core of the game is, and mostly where it shines. The only issue here, is that this has been a relatively niche game for years, and also the release of the studios newest version of the game named "Warno" means the people that are left here, are here because they're either absolute stars of the multiplayer scene, and didn't transfer to Warno for one reason or another, or it's a timmy that bought the game on sale and is trying it for the first time. You're experience is going to be extremely mixed. With the majority of the playerbase as well being seasoned veterans, you'll also encounter them regularly using a lot of "meta strategies" that are vastly complained about in the community, but still regularly used, due to poor (and frankly unrealistic) balance from the devs.
DLC:
The DLC for the game is quite large and impressive, but sadly is exclusive to multiplayer and skirmish. None of the DLC expand the Campaigns. Most DLCs are quality if interested in the multiplayer experience, however avoid the "Italy" pack. It is a very mediocre asset flip that is missing a lot of units and performs rather poorly as well.
The only way I'd recommend this game, is if you're familiar with what it is, have watched content for it in the past, and are already familiar with the idea of playing only multiplayer and how to compete with the players you would be engaging against.
