Broken Arrow Review Summary

Gorgeous graphics and solid gameplay with responsive devs, but rampant cheating, weak anti-cheat, missing replays, poor balance, and unstable servers make it hard to recommend in its current state.

Recent patches improved game: Players report that the latest patches and updates have made the game more enjoyable and are moving it in a better direction. Quality-of-life improvements and the July 30 patch are specifically highlighted as positive changes.

Game has great potential: Players consistently note the game's strong foundation and unrealized potential, describing it as fundamentally good with a promising future. The game concept is praised as a good idea with moments of brilliance.

Developers listen to community: Players feel the developers are actively listening to the community and implementing requested changes and innovations. This responsiveness is seen as a positive sign for the game's future.

PTE branch is positive: The Public Test Environment (PTE) is described as a breath of fresh air, with positive changes and improvements that make the game more playable. Players see the PTE as a step in the right direction.

Graphics are gorgeous: The game's visuals are consistently praised as spectacular, excellent, and pleasant. Players highlight the high-quality graphics as a major positive aspect of the game.

Rampant cheating problem: Cheaters are widespread, with many players reporting encountering them in a majority of matches. The issue is severe enough to make the game feel unplayable for some, and it is often linked to ineffective anti-cheat measures.

Missing replay system: Players consistently report the absence of a replay or match history feature, which hinders their ability to review matches, analyze mistakes, and verify suspected cheaters. This is a high-frequency complaint with specific references to both single-player and multiplayer modes.

Game balance is poor: Players report significant balance issues, including faction win rate disparities and broken unit balance. The game is often described as unbalanced, with some factions being overpowered or underpowered, making matches feel unfair.

Ineffective anti-cheat system: The anti-cheat is widely criticized as ineffective, failing to prevent or punish cheaters. Players note that cheaters persist despite active efforts, and the lack of a replay system makes it harder to report or verify cheating incidents.

No mid-mission saving: The campaign and single-player missions lack the ability to save progress mid-mission, which is especially problematic for missions lasting over an hour. Players risk losing all progress if they need to stop or if the game crashes.

Military RTS with deck building: The game is consistently described as a military real-time strategy (RTS) title with modern warfare settings and tactical unit control. It also incorporates deck-building mechanics, making it unique within the genre.

Diverse unit types: Players have access to a wide variety of units, including infantry, tanks, aircraft, artillery, and helicopters. Each unit type has specific roles and costs, contributing to strategic depth.

ELO-based matchmaking system: The game features a ranked multiplayer matchmaking system that uses ELO ratings to pair players. This system is central to the competitive PvP experience.

Multiplayer-focused with 5v5: The game is primarily a multiplayer experience, featuring competitive 5v5 matches. This mode is the main focus, with other modes like PvE and campaign taking a backseat.

US and Russian factions: The game includes two main factions, the United States and Russia, each with distinct units and specializations. This faction-based structure is a core part of the gameplay.

Poor optimization and performance: Many players report low FPS, lag, and performance issues across various hardware configurations, including high-end GPUs like the RTX 4090. The game is resource-intensive and struggles even on low settings, with specific issues like fire effects and memory leaks.

Server instability and disconnects: Server issues are widespread, causing disconnects, match aborts, and inability to reconnect. Players report that server problems have persisted since launch and are not consistently fixed, leading to unplayable sessions.

Frequent crashes and freezes: Players experience crashes and freezes during gameplay, often multiple times per session, leading to frustration and inability to complete matches. Crashes occur during matches, training, and even when starting battles with bots.

Netcode and desync issues: Poor netcode and client-side handling cause synchronization problems, desync, and hit registration issues. This leads to incoherent unit destruction, teleporting units, and gameplay inconsistencies, especially in PVP.

Visual and audio glitches: Players report visual bugs, audio glitches, and freezes that require restarts. These issues detract from the gaming experience and can occur randomly.

Do not buy the game: Many reviewers strongly advise against purchasing the game, citing wasted time, money, and nerves. The game is frequently described as a scam or not worth its current price.

Not recommended in current state: The game is widely considered unplayable or broken at present, with reviewers recommending against buying until major fixes are implemented. Technical issues and instability are common concerns.

Wait for fixes or sale: Reviewers suggest waiting for the game to be fixed or buying it only on sale. Some recommend waiting 1-2 more years based on the roadmap for a playable state.

Positive recommendations exist: A minority of reviewers recommend the game, with some saying it is definitely recommended or recommended now. These positive views are less common.

Not for multiplayer or PvP: The game is not recommended for players seeking good multiplayer or PvP experiences, unless playing with a premade team. Single-player is also not recommended.

Community fair range: $15.00 - $30.00.

Session length: 45.0h.

Broken Arrow has a steep learning curve that initially overwhelms, but once players grasp the mechanics, it becomes deeply satisfying. The fun typically clicks after understanding the game's systems, though technical and balance issues can prevent this for some.

Friction: Steep learning curve; Lack of in-game guidance; Overwhelming number of units and mechanics; No tutorial for key mechanics; High skill requirement.

Unlock drivers: Understanding unit roles and mechanics; Completing campaign/tutorial; Playing with friends; Watching external tutorials; Gaining experience through matches.

Solo Campaign Purist: Plays campaign and skirmish against AI, experiments with unit builds, and expects to save and reload progress. Motivation: To enjoy a complete, self-paced single-player military RTS experience without competitive pressure. Stance: no buy.

Ranked Grinder: Plays ranked 5v5, focuses on meta unit compositions, tactical coordination, and often solo queues or teams up with skilled players. Motivation: To compete in a fair, skill-based multiplayer environment and climb the ranked ladder. Stance: no buy.

Co-op Squad Player: Plays co-op vs AI or team PvP with a group, communicates and coordinates, prefers less stressful matches. Motivation: To have fun with friends in cooperative or team-based battles, sharing tactical experiences. Stance: buy.

Across all hardware tiers, players report significant performance problems including low FPS, crashes, stuttering, and memory leaks, with optimization widely criticized even on high-end systems.

Windows 8-11GB VRAM: negative. Players report frequent crashes, stuttering, memory leaks, and poor optimization, with even recommended reviews citing performance issues.

Windows <8GB VRAM / <16GB RAM: negative. Low-spec users experience severe FPS drops, constant crashes, and system freezes, with optimization described as nearly nonexistent.

Windows <8GB VRAM / 16-31GB RAM: negative. Even mid-range systems struggle with low FPS, crashes, and high VRAM usage, and optimization is widely criticized.

Steam Deck: The game is currently broken on Steam Deck. Users report frequent system-level crashes, anti-cheat failures that block launch or multiplayer, and severe performance issues even on powerful PCs. The game is explicitly flagged as incompatible, and matches cannot be completed without crashing. The anti-cheat (Easy Anti-Cheat) often prevents the game from starting or connecting, and optimization is so poor that even high-end systems struggle. Overall, the Steam Deck experience is far from seamless and requires significant tinkering or is outright unplayable.

Linux and Proton: Linux/Proton support for this game is a mixed bag. The core game can run, and Proton's Vulkan translation even fixes Windows-specific VRAM leaks. However, the Faceit anti-cheat integration is a major blocker, causing bans and breaking the game for Linux players after updates. Performance and stability issues (freezes, rough FPS) are also reported. The game is playable for some, but anti-cheat friction makes it clearly rough.

Monetization: The game is a $50 RTS that has released a paid DLC for the Russian faction, which is widely criticized as pay-to-win. The DLC adds strong units and specializations that create an imbalance, forcing players to buy it to compete. Many reviews also note the lack of free content and the high price of the base game, making the monetization strategy predatory. A minority of players defend the game, but the overwhelming evidence points to a pay-to-win model.

External guides: The user feedback primarily consists of technical issues and general dissatisfaction, with some mention of external knowledge requirements. No explicit complaints about farming, inventory, or learning systems were found, so the Wiki Tax is low.

Paid DLC criticized: Multiple reviews criticize the game for having paid DLC, including a paid Russian faction DLC and a pay-to-win spec, while the US DLC is free. This creates a perception of unfair monetization.

Compared to Wargame series: Reviewers frequently compare the game to World in Conflict, Wargame: Red Dragon, and WARNO, often stating that these games implement similar mechanics better. This suggests the game is seen as inferior to its genre peers.

PTE splits player base: The public test environment (PTE) is criticized for splitting the player base and being inaccessible to the general public. Some reviews note it lasted 2-4 months, which is seen as excessive for a released game.

Price considered too high: Several reviewers feel the game is sold at a full price that is too high for its current state, with some saying it was overpriced. This is a common complaint about value for money.

Player count declining sharply: The game's online population has dropped significantly, with one review noting a 90% decline from peak and another citing only around 500 online players. This indicates a serious retention problem.