Wardogs: Studio Head Admits the Endgame Is Bad and Is Watching the Mortar Spam Closely

It's rare for a studio to say out loud what its community has been repeating on the forums for weeks. As reported by PC Gamer, the head of Wardogs sat down to talk about balance, progression and XP, and dropped a line that needs no diplomatic translation: the game's endgame, right now, is bad. He didn't soften it, and there was a swear word involved. He also confirmed that Bulkhead, the studio behind the shooter, is aware of what players are already calling the mortar spam meta, a meta built around spamming mortars.

Why does it matter? Because in a competitive shooter, endgame and balance aren't cosmetic details. They're what decide whether a player keeps logging in every night or uninstalls after a few weeks. Having the project's leadership acknowledge this publicly is a good sign of honesty, but it's also an admission that the game, in its current state, isn't where it should be to keep serious players around.

What You Need to Know

• The head of Wardogs spoke with PC Gamer about balance, the XP system and progression.
• He openly admitted that the current endgame isn't working, in considerably harsher terms than that.
• Bulkhead acknowledges that there is a meta dominated by mortar spam.
• The interview suggests the studio has identified the problems, although acknowledging them isn't the same as having fixed them yet.

Context: When the Studio Agrees with the Community

The information available from the source is brief, so there's no point in embellishing it: what's confirmed is the admission that the endgame is failing, the conversation about XP and balance, and the studio's awareness of the mortar problem. Based on what PC Gamer reports, there's no timeline for changes and no concrete figures we can share, and we're not going to make them up.

What we can analyze is the pattern. A mortar spam meta usually emerges when an indirect-fire tool is too effective relative to the risk taken by whoever uses it. The result is familiar in any tactical shooter: matches where much of the damage comes from safe positions, fewer direct engagements and a sense of frustration for anyone trying to play the objective. For casual players it's annoying; for competitive players it flattens the skill ceiling outright.

XP and Endgame: Two Sides of the Same Problem

It makes sense that the studio head would talk about XP and endgame in the same conversation. Progression is the thread that keeps people hooked once they've seen every map and tried every weapon. If that thread breaks, or if what awaits at the end doesn't reward the time invested, experienced players run out of reasons to stick around. And those are precisely the players who sustain the scene, organize matches, fill servers and create content.

Our Take

Here in the Underworld Lordz newsroom, we value candor. We're used to corporate statements that talk about "listening to the community" without ever admitting that something is broken. A studio head saying without any filter that their endgame isn't up to par is refreshing and, above all, useful: it sets an honest starting point. But honesty has an expiration date. If visible changes don't arrive in the coming weeks, that same line will come back to haunt them in every Reddit thread and every clip of mortars raining down nonstop.

From a competitive standpoint, mortar spam is the priority. A weak endgame can be tolerated for a while if matches are fun and demanding; a meta that rewards risk-free indirect fire erodes exactly what makes a shooter interesting for organized teams: communication, positioning and direct duels. If Bulkhead wants Wardogs to have a competitive scene, balance has to come first, with progression right behind it.

For content creators, this is an interesting moment. A game in the middle of a transition generates discussion, meta guides and reaction videos, but it's also risky to go all in on a title whose final state we don't know yet. Our recommendation: keep a close eye on it, try it out with the team and wait for the first major balance patch before committing hours of production.

What Do You Think?

Have you already suffered through the mortar meta in Wardogs, or do you think the complaints are overblown? Do you think admitting the endgame is failing is a bold move or just a way to buy time? Let us know in the team chat or drop by our Discord: would you give Wardogs another chance if they fix balance before progression?