Slitherine

Quick question: Does the game have a Skirmish-mode for you to fight battles outside of the campaign? I can't download the demo or anything... the computer is currently using is too crappy for any game to be properly played on it, you see.

Not really, you can however fight multiplayer battles against all your buddies...

That sucks. Boo.

Phil and Iain had alot of stuff they wanted to add in, but just didn't have time to add it more to the pity. Maybe there'll be a patch with skirmishing in later down the line, who knows

inferiorbeing wrote:Quick question: Does the game have a Skirmish-mode for you to fight battles outside of the campaign? I can't download the demo or anything... the computer is currently using is too crappy for any game to be properly played on it, you see.

Hi...good to see you here. Once you get a better computer, you should really try the demo. You won't regret it.

Really?! That's pure crap. And "There is no Skirmish but you can play MP with all your buddies" Just isn't valid. Reason: My buddies won't necesserally be around all the time, do they? That means that there are two ways for me to play the game. Whenever people aren't available for playing, (Most of the time.), I'll be playing the campaign.

(In other words, the mode where you can't play the battles you want to, the size of the armies, the battlefields or anything. You'll have to sit by and play what battles the designers decides to feel like allowing you to play, usually complete with lots of little annoyances to distract from the core gameplay. What the hell, people?! Once you've played it once, it's over. Dead. There really isn't any particular reason why you should play the game anymore.).

Now, if you don't feel like being tied to a sort of a plotline I for once really don't give a damn about, (When I saw the screenshots of huge battles involving hundreds of little people at once, the first thing that came to mind certainly wasn't "Wow! I get to play a game about some Carthaginian bloke, and play that old, dusty story I'm probably gonna get shoved up my ass by some understimulated old teacher at scool someday soon anyway!". Nope, I thought "Wow, I like huge battles! Hope nothing is in the way for me to play the game down to its bare essentials!" And guess what! There WAS something in the way. A little something called "Plotline". Am I saying that having a plot is bad? No, not at all, as long as you don't have to play it only to play! But get to play outside of it in a Skirmish or Custom-Battle mode or whatever.

"But hold on, you flaming, whining annoyance!", You cry. "There IS a distraction from the uninteresting campaign! It's called "Multiplayer", and playing against real people is better than playing with the AI anyway!"

Wrong again. Multiplayer on IP makes me unable to play it whenever I want, as my friends have their own lives, and don't sit around on the computer all day just in case I feel like playing a game. And on the internet, (And against real people in general.), the game is a lot more competetive. When I play an RTS, is like to breeze around, zooming in, enjoying the spectacle. In real time games against people, I'll hve to constantly be on my toes. What the hell is the point of making a reasonably good 3D engine with above average animations and carnage when the general Multiplayer-player is stuck in a top-down view most of the time anyway? Next to none, I'd say.

Oh! And on the internet you are treated too shrill cries of "OMG STFU U GAY N00B H4XXOR LOL!!!!1111", which is probably the first reason I don't hate myself enough just yet to expose myself of multiplayer and the people playing it. Plus, the game will eventually grow old and people will stop playing it online and all that is left is the crappy campaign. Sorry, but the cursed campaign alone and the slight "Who knows?"-kind of chance we MIGHT get a patch who MIGHT have a skirmish mode some time in the future is not enough for me to hang onto. I won't buy this game UNTIL then. As it is not worth my money UNTIL then.

The campaigns are very well done and very long...beating them on hard will take you a looong time.
I am not a fanatic MP player either so for me the SP aspect is very important and it's well done here imho. Further more, this game may evolve...with constructive criticism, they may well include a skirmish mode later on. Slitherine does have a very good patching policy.

Also note that one of the fun parts is that you custom your men and your army. You may well try a campaign with an army of horsemen or one with only Heavy infantery....it changes everything.

Also note that this engine will be used in their next game (strategy title) and you will be able to decide when and with which army you'll fight.

Of course you're free not to buy the game but you might as well try the demo if you get the chance to. I'd recommend also you try the demo to Spartan to see where this may lead in the next game.

I really don't care whether they are well done, or long. They're still campaigns, and still force you to play their way. Yeah, from horsemen to heavy footsloggers will probably lead to a significant change, but you'll STILL be fighting THAT enemy on exactly THAT battlefield. Black & White II didn't have a Skirmish, and I didn't buy it. The campaign was certainly interesting, but still, "You'll play the way WE want you to!!". Spellforce was an interesting game, it united RPG and RTS in a truly unique way, but no Skirmish, only the good old crappy campaign, and I steered well away from it. Warrior Kings was advanced enough for its time and the battles was huge but all it had was that shitty campaign, and... well, I bought it. But only because I confused it with its expansion who had one. Anyway, you can probably guess whether or not I played the game from that on.

See a pattern forming here? The one thing that pisses me off more than games where the developers didn't have the mental capacity to include a skirmish option, are games that are really GOOD but without a skirmish option, so you're missing out on more. I tried downloading the demo on my mum's crappy computer as mine doesn't currently have internet, but "Legion Arena EXE has faild to initiallize. If you were working on something that information will be lost.". (I reckon it's because her machine is simply too sucky for it.), so I don't yet know which one of the above this is.

Hi Inferiorbeing

Thanks for your feedback, its always a tough call for us to make, just what to include and what to leave out.

The fact is that without a decent storyline or plot the game losses a lot. There is no progression, and our experience has told us that players rate progression as one of their must haves.

MP is where the game comes into its own in skirmish or head to head. You can cusomize your army and select from the various units and enhancements. You can even do this off line. The beta testers developed some awesome armies. Some less historic than others

Through gamespy you can find an opponent at anytime of the day or night, and you will soon weed out the sort of player whom you dont enjoy meeting.

I still have mates that I met from the original C&C so they are not all bad.

Its good to hear your views and we certainly take notice so keep letting us know.

Best Regards
JDM

I understand what you mean.

Thing is that Legion Arena has become much more than what it was planned...and it still has a lot of potential. At the beginning there wasn't MP either...

So i suggest you come back from time to time as i believe that the chances are great that a skirmish mode may be added.

I guess you're going to have to wait for Legion II. That should have everything you're crying for, plus the proverbial bag of chips, all in one neat package. Of course, that won't do you any good either, until you get a computer that can run the average modern application. The minimum requirements for this program really aren't that high. Meanwhile, I'm sure someone here can recommend a number of good DOS-based games.

This game has changed in focus from the original concept, and I'm not certain how much of that was due to the programmers' intentions and what was due to pressure from the publisher. Don't go beating on the design team unless you are sure that it was an intentional snub, designed strictly to piss you off personally. Besides, here you can actually talk to the design team and get a reply. In most cases, you can actually get someone to DO something about the problem, unless it is a bigger issue than can be dealt with by the limited handful of people involved, in the limited amount of time they can spend dealing with each problem.

Pointing out the need for a skirmish mode was a good thing, getting cranky and nasty about it is not. I am relatively certain that the design team has noted the lack, and will take that into consideration on either a patch, an expansion, or at the very least on the next game release.

Finally, as an avid historical gamer, I can appreciate the campaign game, since few battles were fought as isolated events. Most were part of a larger war or series of raids, battles, or incidents. The generals usually fought with what they had, when they had to, either where they were forced to or were able to force the enemy to. Victory was important, but the survival of the army was also critical. Deciding who lives and dies in one battle can determine the course of the rest of the war. In the typical skirmish game, victory is the ONLY goal, and there is no penalty for having your best troops slaughtered, as long as you win. I wouldn't mind seeing a skirmish mode, but would probably ignore it after a couple of single battles. If you feel differently, you are free to express your opinion by not buying the game. I intend to express mine by buying it.

Look, I'm sure plotline and progression is a beautiful thing in many eyes, and feel free to add as many campaigns as you like, but don't RESTRICT ME TO IT!

Oh, and see! "You can cusomize your army and select from the various units and enhancements". That's just what I need skirmish mode for! It's great to hear that I can do this off line. Hmmm... what more is desired then? Oh yes, the abillity to PLAY WITH THEM offline! Oh, and about "Meating players day or night etc.". And "Weeding out the players you don't care to meet.". Sounds like a poor man's solution. Screw other people. I don't bloody WANT to meet them! No matter if they can be "Weeded out", it shouldn't be neccessary. Even if I met a normal person, (Around 40% Chance for that.), I still couldn't play the game in my pace. see? Wasted potensial. On the one hand: A nasty, scripted mess that violently grabs your hand and forces you through the game. On the other hand, a hectic, tiring mess complete with leetspeaking and laming. Shame.

On another note, this house has two computers. Mine is for gaming as well as everything else and can play all RTS' currently out with maximum graphics, or in some cases like Dawn of War and R:TW who have super-graphics, leave such things as shadows out. However, that computer does not have an internet connection until we've fixed the router. My mother's computer upstairs sucks in every way, but does have internet but blows too hard to play any games on it. Bottom line: I WILL get internet back on my own machine and such I WILL at some point download the demo. When I downloaded the demo on my mother's machine, iy stopped working right after the introduction. And as such I do not know anything about the demo save that the title-screen voice actor is pretty good. And such, my principles still remain the same.

Now, Honvedseg, I'm sure the campaign makes you feel like you're fighting for a purpsoe etc. But you cannot hide the fact that you can't just sit down before the computer and think "I'm gonna fight a great dirty big battle today!", when loading up singleplayer. "But oh! The programmers forces me to play the battles THEY want me to! Right now I'm stuck at the battle of Hfdbjafbn??lq, where general Anus Maximus was ambushed by some forgettable Barbarian/Carthaginian/Whatever guy. The battle was fought with a Roman force of 100 men and the enemy had 110 men. There are plenty of huge battles later in the game but I have to suffer my way through tiny little brawls like these first! Just because whoever made the game says so! And even when I eventually get to one of the biggies, still can't decide who, when and where and with what troops. Well, skip this sorry mess, then. I want a big fight! The kind the engine was made for! Oh, well I'll just go online, then."

*Starts an online match.*

"OMGOMG U R A HAXXING GAY N00B"

"What...?"

"U SUCK U R A N00B & UR GAY LOL WTF!!!1"

"Oh dear... well, I don't mind him. I'll concentrate on my strategy. Too bad I can't zoom in and enjoy the show anymore though. I'm actually gonna get MORE tired after playing this!"

"WTF LOL!11"

"Hey! His men suddenly became immortal and started flying! This may be a hack or a cheat or something..."

"InferiorBeing is defeated."

"Nooo! I can't beleive I spent money on this!!"

If you want to play a big battle, just load up a saved game from before one of your favorite slugfests from the day before, assuming you saved every now and then.

Meanwhile, I'm not going to reply again, since you appear to be more interested in starting that Multiplayer battle you don't want, right here in the forum, than in making any additional constructive comments. So much for that 40% chance, since I don't seem to have had the good fortune myself. While you're busy ranting and raving, I'll be busy enjoying the demo.

Okay, if I loaded up my "Favourite slugfest", there would still be one pretty significant problem. It would still be that same old battle! The repetetiveness is one of my main gripes about the campaign after all! Oh, and you want an additional constructive comment? Well: "Make a Skirmish-mode!!". That should sum the whole thing up. Oh, and if it comes with an expansion, better make it a stand-alone. As I won't even touch the game with a stick until In can play the game free of boundaries anyway, I won't buy the game until then. And I'm not gonna first pay for the expansion itself and THEN have to pay ADDITIONALLY for the original whom I would probably never buy in a sober state anyway.

There, not even did I tell what I thought was wrong with the game, I also suggested how to fix it! Make a skirmish-mode! Don't make me pay for it in itself! Yeah! You don't have to thank me.

Until now, there hasn't been that kind of player here. All people i've met here have been very decent and there haven't been any kiddies. This may change if the game becomes very popular but by then, if you do buy the game in the coming months, you should be among the good players.

PS: there are more than 100 battles!!!

PS2: if they make a patch for it, it's going to be free, i am sure

Aah. More than 100 battles. Just the longer it would take me to get to the last and biggest ones. Yay... Oh, and there haven't been too many lamer players out there... yet! My, how assuring! And who said anything about a patch? For all I know it may be in an expansion instead! That is, unless the publishers decided it would take too much time yet again...

inferiorbeing wrote:Aah. More than 100 battles. Just the longer it would take me to get to the last and biggest ones. Yay... Oh, and there haven't been too many lamer players out there... yet! My, how assuring! And who said anything about a patch? For all I know it may be in an expansion instead! That is, unless the publishers decided it would take too much time yet again...

Hmm

Judging by your attitude I can understand why you might have problems finding "friends" on line.

If you don't like the game concept and features, don't buy it and go find another that is more to your liking. It's as easy as that.

Ray (alias Lava)

Just a gentle reminder - let's try and keep all posts calm and polite. We're proud of the lack of "cry more n00b"-ness on our forums.

Cheers

Pip

I'm afraid that's what I'll be doing. I allready think I've made that clear. Shame, really. So unneccesary. Oh, and yeah. I'm sure my attitude is what brings all sorts of smack-talkers, exploiters, stats-whores and leetspeakers to the internet. Oh, and before I get "There's no pleasing someone" Thrown at me or something, well, just think about it. There isn't any skirmish mode and it ought to be one. It's so common these days. And the reason I'm afraid the eventual Skirmish-mode will likely end up in an expansion rather than a patch is that, well, There has been an expansion or two that added a skirmish due to popular request, but no patch that I've heard of. Repeat: That I've heard of anyway.

EDIT: I really do not think I said "Cry more, n00b!" To anyone. I merely defended my statements and no matter how angry and whiny I sounded, I didn't mean to offend anyone personally! There's a difference between whining and flaming, isn't it?!

Hi Inferior..

You are of course entitled to your view, but if you can manage to get a copy of the demo you might even enjoy it. At least you could then tell us exactly what improvements we should make from first hand knowledge.

The one thing you can be sure of is that we take note, and believe me if we think that there is a trick that will make the game more popular, within reason and development costs, then we will certainly consider it. Although I have to say that this week everyone has just collapsed in a heap. The run up to release is an awesome thing

Regards
JDM