Total War: Arena - An Historic MOBA

| 15 Dec 2014 14:00
arena_screenshot_01_1418402311

Playing through a 10v10 battle in real-time with Total War style can be super-engrossing.

The concept of the Total War series is the balance between moving around armies and agents on the abstract strategic map and the real-time tactical conflicts on realistic battlefields when strategic forces clash. The latter is where the real intriguing action in the game lies, and Creative Assembly decided to bank on that fun by expanding it and optimizing it for online multiplayer play. The 10 v 10 format lends itself to quick, decisive conflicts, and might be a perfect table-setting for publisher Sega to reap free-to-play goodness like other notable games to bear the genre moniker of MOBA - Multiplayer Online Battle Arena.

In each Total War: Arena match, you control a general pulled from history like Leonidas from Sparta or Julius Caesar from Rome. The general has special abilities you can level up and cast on cooldown throughout the match. You also have three units to control in the match, and you select the specific loadout of these units before you begin. Want to run with three weak melee but strong ranged attacking longbowman? Go for it. You can beef up on swordsmen and hoplites to break any cavalry charge, or play as the swift cavalry units and trade off durability for maneuverability on the battlefield. Each of these units can be upgraded and equipped with more expensive armor and weapons like conical bronze helmets.

The battles allow some slow build-up, with a fascinating mid-game and satisfying mopping-up. There were only a few maps on display in this early pre-alpha build, and my favorite involved three lanes: the mid flat battlefield, a low rocky ground and a high mountain pass with plenty of opportunity for ambush. Units' facing and stance make a huge difference in Total War and Arena is no different. Your foot soldiers are generally decimated by cavalry charges on the flank or rear, while archers can only be effective at a distance. With no respawning in this MOBA, you find yourself playing extremely conservatively in Total War: Arena, but the tension is still kept very high.

Coordination is key, as with any multiplayer team game. Right now, there are no social features other than a rudimentary chat system. In the future, I'd love to see Creative Assembly allow more communication between players. There is currently a neat feature that allows you to free draw on you and your allies' screens in order to help communicate tactics on the battlefield. Of course, the first thing I drew was a very masculine pointer - "Attack here!" Expect no different if you play online with randos like me.

There's a bit of cosmetic specialization too. You can sport pink-tinted cloaks like your House Bolton - if you swing that way. In practice though, the color options don't change the look on the field very much. Perhaps that's because even though you can zoom in to a very close view to see individual men in your units trading blows in melee fights, the majority of your play will be in a very zoomed out, nearly top-down, view. That way you can get a feel for the whole battle, but maybe that's just me.

What's going to make or break Total War: Arena is whether players will be OK with its general slow pace. You can spend several minutes setting up your moves and positioning your units before they come into contact with the enemy, and once they are engaged, it is difficult if not impossible to disengage. It's possible to commit your forces early, get stomped by superior numbers, and spend the rest of the match with nothing to control as your routed units run across the battlefield. Most of the maps have a win condition of holding the opponents base for a certain amount of time, but most battles were "won" long before the clock ticked to 0:00. I enjoyed the four or five matches I played but there are a lot of "ifs" involved if Arena is going to find mass appeal like its competitors League of Legends and World of Tanks currently enjoy.

I counted four important currencies to track in Total War: Arena - unit XP, general XP, silver and gold. Your unit XP depends on how well it does in battle, but you can also spend general XP on your units. Silver is the "free" currency while Gold can only be bought with real money. It remains to be seen what impact the premium currency will have on balance. Right now in the pre-alpha state, after playing a few matches, I was able to upgrade and specialize my units very pretty quickly without any real money activated. But there was a big discrepancy in power between tier 1 and tier 2 units. Hopefully, those bumps are smoothed out along in beta.

Speaking of which, the gang at Creative Assembly in London has learned the lesson that iterative testing in front of the community is the only way to go with large-scale MOBAs like they want Arena to perform against. By having a transparent development cycle in beta, Arena will be subject to criticism and commentary of a large number of players. Creative Assembly Project Lead Gabor Beressy said he is committed to responding to the players as they interact with the all of the systems in Arena.

Sign-ups for the closed beta of Total War: Arena are open now. Expect the closed beta period to start in the first few months of 2015.

I'll be checking it out alongside you guys. This is Sparta!

(And as an aside for those of you who are sad that Creative Assembly is spending too much time with multiplayer and mobile games, executives there assured me there is a whole separate team of "old guard" designers still mucking about with single-player titles like Total War: Attila. More on that front soon when embargo lifts.)

(Second Aside: It looks like SEGA and Creative Assembly have opened sign-ups for a closed alpha of Total War: Arena on the official Arena website. Go take a look see when the server traffic allows.)

Post Comment

You must be logged in to post. Log In

Staskala:

Thyunda:
Well, see, I would do that, but not only am I correct in this particular instance, I don't speak Japanese or Chinese.

Sorry, from the way you wrote I thought you actually knew something about scientific publishing. Here's an explanation: Japanese and Chinese also publish in English, as does everyone else (who wants to be read). And trust me on this, their English isn't particularly good, to put it mildly. Therefore using papers as an authority on correct English is rather silly. Other than that, I don't get your condescending tone, since I never argued for either "a" or "an", although I'm afraid you aren't correct here either, because in the case of "historic" both can be written.

Which would make me correct, because I stated that 'an historic' was correct. And I do historic journals, not scientific. Slight difference.

Thyunda:
Well, see, I would do that, but not only am I correct in this particular instance, I don't speak Japanese or Chinese.

Sorry, from the way you wrote I thought you actually knew something about scientific publishing. Here's an explanation: Japanese and Chinese also publish in English, as does everyone else (who wants to be read). And trust me on this, their English isn't particularly good, to put it mildly. Therefore using papers as an authority on correct English is rather silly. Other than that, I don't get your condescending tone, since I never argued for either "a" or "an", although I'm afraid you aren't correct here either, because in the case of "historic" both can be written.

Staskala:

Thyunda:
Uh, no, it's 'an historic.' That's how it's written in academic journals, and they're about as accurate as you can get.

If you think that publications by non-linguists are somehow authoritative on language, I'd recommend reading some Japanese or Chinese papers and rethinking your position. Not that native speakers are inherently correct either, I've seen some wonky stuff in various STEM papers by them too.

Well, see, I would do that, but not only am I correct in this particular instance, I don't speak Japanese or Chinese.

Thyunda:
Uh, no, it's 'an historic.' That's how it's written in academic journals, and they're about as accurate as you can get.

If you think that publications by non-linguists are somehow authoritative on language, I'd recommend reading some Japanese or Chinese papers and rethinking your position. Not that native speakers are inherently correct either, I've seen some wonky stuff in various STEM papers by them too.

Thyunda:

Monsterfurby:

Not Lord Atkin:
Is the H in the word 'historic' silent?
I don't think the H in the word 'historic' is silent. I'm not sure if you're using the correct indefinite article or not.

I'm confused and frightened.

Don't be. It should be 'A historic MOBA'. Or 'an historique MOBA', if we really want to get into butchering languages.

Uh, no, it's 'an historic.' That's how it's written in academic journals, and they're about as accurate as you can get.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/a-historic-event-or-an-historic-event

It appears both are correct.

I find it odd how people are harping on about it being a DOTA clone when, with what little details we've gotten, is pointing at it being nowhere close to how DoTA plays.

most original idea of the year award goes to "drum roll" Total War MOBA!

come on guys lets give them a round of slow clapping....

Monsterfurby:

Not Lord Atkin:
Is the H in the word 'historic' silent?
I don't think the H in the word 'historic' is silent. I'm not sure if you're using the correct indefinite article or not.

I'm confused and frightened.

Don't be. It should be 'A historic MOBA'. Or 'an historique MOBA', if we really want to get into butchering languages.

Uh, no, it's 'an historic.' That's how it's written in academic journals, and they're about as accurate as you can get.

Sounds interesting. Or it would if I cared for DOTA clones. I hope CA does a good job and finds a new and grateful audience. I'll just stay with Paradox titles.

Not Lord Atkin:
Is the H in the word 'historic' silent?
I don't think the H in the word 'historic' is silent. I'm not sure if you're using the correct indefinite article or not.

I'm confused and frightened.

Search it through the good ol' googley. Both are acceptable, although "a historic" is the more common version. That said, I don't know how you have gone through life without hearing someone say "an historic moment". It's quite commonly used.

Vedrenne:
Awesome. Well done, Creative Assembly. Now get cracking on my Warhammer Fantasy RTS.

...you mean one that doesn't suck, right? The last time we asked for a Warhammer RTS we got Warhammer: Mark of Chaos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhammer:_Mark_of_Chaos

Not Lord Atkin:
Is the H in the word 'historic' silent?
I don't think the H in the word 'historic' is silent. I'm not sure if you're using the correct indefinite article or not.

I'm confused and frightened.

Well apparently it was in the 18th and 19th century. So you are correct to be frightened - Greg Tito is a time traveller or a vampire. Note: this is not an exclusive "or".

Avaholic03:
EDIT: also, I would have preferred a different era. My favorite Total War game was Empire, especially the naval combat I felt had a lot of potential (if they could get the pacing right).

Line battle era 10v10 battles would be absolutely brilliant - the kind of game where you actually get the feeling of being part of a greater whole, contributing your part to turning the battle in your faction's favor without being a giant invisible deity, all that fused with the awesomeness of gunpowder-era battles. Basically Scourge of War Gettysburg or the Take Command games, only in multiplayer (and possibly with somewhat faster battles). That would be a dream come true.

Then again, hey - never too late to hope. If this one is successful, I'd be willing to bet that we'll see expansions for the Sengoku Jidai and musket/Napoleonic eras as well. Or at least naval battles. Those have to be in.

Interesting take on the MOBA. Of course balancing will make-or-break this game, so it's still too early to tell if it's worth getting invested. I'm quite weary of the option to pay real money for anything more than cosmetic things, because that almost always leads to pay-to-win models that ruin games like this.

EDIT: also, I would have preferred a different era. My favorite Total War game was Empire, especially the naval combat I felt had a lot of potential (if they could get the pacing right).

Yet another attempt to jump on the MOBA bandwagon that I will wholeheartedly ignore.

Awesome. Well done, Creative Assembly. Now get cracking on my Warhammer Fantasy RTS.

Adam Jensen:
Because that's totally original...

Really? ...Is there anything else like it? It's not that much like other MOBA's.

Because that's totally original and the market is not at all flooded with MOBA's.

I was all ready to vomit, but this actually looks like an interesting idea.

I mean to be fair, at least they didn't cop out and just make it another 3rd person generic 'Hero' game. Having normal Totalwar style units would actually lend a lot of tactics to the game and make for some interesting match ups and strategy.

The only danger I can see would be if one side somehow ends up with a whole mess of archers and the opposition has nothing but cavalry or something along those lines. The rock/paper/scissors nature of the game would make the result a forgone conclusion.

The Totalwar competitive scene has honestly been a joke since probably Medieval 2. This would be a good way to get that big battle fix without the need to micromanage tons of troops so will open it up to new players.

Color me interested. Although with a massive dose of skepticism considering CA's most recent track record of pathetic trash. No doubt they'll find a way to mess it up.

Continue reading 23 comments on the forums.
Recommended Games
Guild Wars 2
categories: 3d, fantasy
Maestia
categories: 3d, fantasy
Metin 2
categories: 3d, fantasy