The Wargamer reports on Spiel 2013 - and OOBP

[Lukas]

Over at The Wargamer, Eddy Sterckx has finished his coverage of the Essen Spieltage 2013. And that includes some Order of Battle: Pacific [;)]

http://www.wargamer.com/article/3465/ev ... ion-report

[Rising-Sun]

Doesnt look too bad, still like to know how things will setup on campaigns. Like to get more screenshots though

[R35]

It looks very good. Sorta like a PG3. I wasn`t very happy with how PG3 implemented its 3d maps gameplay, but I`m definitely in favour of 3d units. I wish you success with this and I`m looking forward to it. [:)]

[R35]

I have a couple of questions based on the shots above:
1. Is the terrain going to be animated? I.e. trees and waves.
2. What is the purpose of the border that appears next to the units in the shot from the first post? My personal guess would be that it implies unit supplies can`t go anywhere as they could in PG. I don`t know if you`re at that level of development where you`d want to go into commentaries about this though.


And, since this is still in - relatively early - development it might be worth making a couple of suggestions/requests too:
1. When it comes to the aircraft at least, please use colour for the units, so to speak. I understand developers feel compelled to create a faction theme for players who otherwise would say that they can`t find their units on the map. But please don`t take this to the level where everything looks like it has been dropped into the same paint bucket. Many historical aircraft have a certain camo that is really emblematic to them. It would be a pity in my opinion to strip those bare in this regard and make them completely brown or blue for example.
2. If you`re going to have the campaign as a succession of scenarios please consider (if you have the resources to put into this) to make a map that shows the overall progression between missions. For example, before the mission you show how the two sides are doing on the map, what territories they controls and what water areas they`re dominating. And after the mission you can show again how things have changed because of the player`s actions and maybe mention (and show) other historical developments that have happened in other areas during that interval. Preferably there should be some sort of animated graphics to show the transition instead of just flipping from one map picture to the other. I think this sort of putting things into the historical perspective would help getting the player more involved since he can see what impact the mission has had.

[Lukas]

1. Is the terrain going to be animated? I.e. trees and waves.

Water yes, trees no (would have a too large impact on performance). Other things like flags and - obviously - units do have animations (aircraft hover a bit, ships rock on the waves, etc).

2. What is the purpose of the border that appears next to the units in the shot from the first post?

It marks player territory. You have to have sufficient supply sources (cities, supply depots, coastal vessels, ...) for all units in a region to have optimal performance. An entire army digging in around a single city is a recipe for disaster.

1. When it comes to the aircraft at least, please use colour for the units, so to speak.

We're trying to find the right balance. We experimented with Japanese vehicle camouflage but this tended to obscure the units' shape and details too much (exactly the point of camouflage I guess [:)]).
Jap naval aircraft are white (can get supply from carriers), army aircraft are green (airfield supply only). US use blue and green for this distinction. So while not following historical colours perfectly, the majority of aircraft have correct colours while also reflecting their function in the gameplay.

2. If you`re going to have the campaign as a succession of scenarios please consider (if you have the resources to put into this) to make a map that shows the overall progression between missions.

There is a special campaign map scene between each mission where you can select the next mission on a map, select new specialisations and review your current forces. It's not as detailed as what you're suggesting at the moment, but that was the initial intended purpose of this map. If not for this title then it's certainly something we're hoping to extend later on.

[R35]

Thank you for the reply! All sounds pretty good. And I really like the part with the separation between naval and army aircraft, that is reflected both functionally and visually. The supply aspect also seems to have potential. From what I`ve seen and read so far I`m enthusiastic about this game. I hope things will go well.

[geozero]

Graphics look awesome. Let me know if and when there is BETA.

[Lukas]

ORIGINAL: R35

2. If you`re going to have the campaign as a succession of scenarios please consider (if you have the resources to put into this) to make a map that shows the overall progression between missions. For example, before the mission you show how the two sides are doing on the map, what territories they controls and what water areas they`re dominating.

Pleased to report that we've looked into this idea again and have added this feature. The campaign map now shades the territories owned by each side throughout the war. This makes it much easier to follow the progress of the war and understand the overal strategy behind the consecutive missions of a campaign, as well as the effects of their outcome.

Screenshots should follow soon.

[R35]

Really?! What`s the catch? I mean everything is going so well you`re turning me into an optimist.
Thank you for the new feature!