Anyone tried Legion Arena yet?

[LCJr.]

Playing around with the demo and looks interesting but I see what could be a major flaw. In the demo Roman campaign you always fight the same sequence of battles and the enemies always array and attack the exact same way. Is the full game this linear and scripted?

edit> OK I've played through the demo several times and it shows great promise.

They describe it as an "RPG Strategy" game, guess they're trying to make their genre. I'd call it strategy with RPG elements.

Your units gain levels and each level lets you pick a new perk for them. Pretty basic stuff better hit chance, damage, more hp, defense, easier control, bonus attacking or defending against a certain class(infantry, cav, elephant). Leaders get perks which improve their command abilities as well as the usual ones.

Each battle you win you earn money and fame. Fame is used to buy replacements and money is used to buy reinforcements and upgrade equipment.

Battles are real time with pause and at least the small ones in demo only take a few minutes each. If you've played any of Slitherines other ancients games the combat is almost identical with the exception that now you can issue orders after the battle starts.
Basically you arrange your troops and issue basic orders; advance, charge, hold, outflank or envelop. Once the battle begins you can issue new orders limited by your leaders abilities. Your leader has order points that are used each time you issue a command and regenerate at a set rate. Proximity of your leader to the unit being issued orders seem to reduce cost and improve their reaction time(orders aren't instantly carried out).

As usual in this genre terrain effects how well units fight. Cav and heavy infantry are best in the open. Light infantry and skirmishers operate best in rougher terrain. Kinda of the rock/paper/scissors match-up. Cav beats light infantry in the open but light infantry beat cav in rough terrain and so on.

Graphics are OK. You have a limited color selection for your units so you can make your rookies one color and your elites another making them easier to spot on the battlefield. Sound isn't bad and the music feels right for the era. The army management part is entertaining deciding what perks to pick and whether to spend your denarii on new units or upgrade the ones you have.

Now the bad. Keep in mind this is for the demo only. The short demo campaign is linear. You either win and advance or lose and have to try again. Each battle was based on a historical engagement, maybe too much. The AI always deploys and attacks exactly the same way with the exact same troops. A little variation would go a long way in improving replayability.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

So far I've been enjoying the demo, but that doesn't mean it has a few rough edges. For one thing, it seems to be a linear campaign, no plotting over a world map choosing your own battles. The battles themselves are nice, and I like how in the beginning you can place your troops and set up how they're going to attack (Slow defensive advance, offensive charge etc.), though I didn't really see much of a difference between what I chose because the demo was easy as shit. I just flung my troops at the enemy and they ran off after like 2 minutes of fighting.

 

[chaedwards]

I'm going to do the same as NL and paste my post from strategy codex here.

I picked this up for 6 GB Pounds, and for that it's sweet. It is a linear campaign, but within that there's quite a lot of scope for change, as each unit gains experience with which you can buy skills, and these can lead to two identical starting units being very different after some battles. Additionally, you recruit units yourself as well, meaning that at the end of the 50 battle campaign, the army is likely to be heavily personalised. What I enjoy most is the more 'hands off approach' to fighting a battle, which is a tad more realistic than the Total War complete control approach.

 

[theverybigslayer]

tacticular cancer:
"How are you, Shiteater Patrick?"
"Thanks, very well. Between two shiteating I write a shit review."

 

[Naked_Lunch]

I wrote that shit review, you son of a bitch.

 

[LCJr.]

Grabbed a copy myself and have already beaten it twice as the Romans. Normal difficulty is really Easy and so on. Campaign is linear, 68 Roman missions and 40 Celtic. Wouldn't say it's game of the year material but it is entertaining.

 

[theverybigslayer]

I wrote that shit review, you son of a bitch.

I haven't read your review, I only red your signature about some shiteater patrick

 

[Trash]

I'm having quite a bit of fun with this game. It seems as though spartans and gates of troy are more strategic with these kind of battles put in for a bit of fun carnage. Anyone know if these games are any good?

 

[LCJr.]

I'd say that's a rather subjective question :D Depends on what you like.

The original Legion/Legion Gold I didn't care for at all and I love Romans. Chariots of War is good and Spartan/Gates of Troy even better IMHO. Legion II is in development and I suspect is where the combat engine for Arena originated although it may not be in that game.

In Legion and CoW when you go to battle screen your scouts give you an idea of where the enemy if they can. You then line up your troops, pick formations, issue basic orders and go. Once the battle starts your just a spectator.

Spartan follows a similiar system but you can build Generals and they give you some control over your troops on the field. They also added Autoresolve so you can do the battles in one click if you choose.

 

[Trash]

Thanks, guess I'll have to try a demo. I kinda like the combat and thought it would certainly be cool with a civ kinda gamepart added.