Matrix Games Forums

It was on December 7, 1941, that one of the most shocking events in American history occurred: the surprise strike on the United States naval base at Pearl Harbor by the hand of the Japanese Empire.

Designed to discourage any American intervention against the Japanese military action in Southeast Asia, it ended up triggering the American entry into World War II in both the Pacific and European theaters, and ultimately lead to the dropping of the first atomic bombs, the defeat of Japan and the end of the War.
Today, to commemorate the 62nd anniversary of the attack, Slitherine and The Artistocrats (www.the-artistocrats.com) present the first official screenshots of the Order of Battle: Pacific. Check them below:








Order of Battle: Pacific, developed by The Artistocrats (www.the-artistocrats.com), is a turn-based wargame featuring an intuitive UI and great depth, which will allow you to lead both the American and Japanese armies in a dynamic series of campaigns for supremacy.
The game features a rich 3D world with hundreds of Units, 60 Commanders, Army Specializations, gorgeous animations and effects that can be turned off with a special option in order to use a classic boardgame display mode with unit counters. In addition to the multiple scenarios, there is an extensive, user-friendly in-game scenario editor with a what-you-see-is-what-you-get design.

There is 4 player multiplayer capability over PBEM++, and hotseat, supporting last-man-standing, teamplay and cooperative against AI scenarios all packed together to give an impressive game that will satisfy any wargamer.

Get more information about Order of Battle: Pacific on the official product page.

The game look very well. One thing puzzles me though. Why are the aircraft so small compared to the land units? The fighters from the first screen seem smaller than their strength graphic. Is it because the view is switched on land instead of air or is that the actual size of aircraft in the game?

It's related to both zoom level and air/ground view switch. But keep in mind that there is a huge size difference between a Zero fighter and a B29 Super Fortress. Scale isn't 1 on 1 but there has to be a fair scale difference or big bombers will look silly compared to fighters.

There are various unit scale options available though, that allow general increased unit size or dynamic scale based on zoom level.

Right. I wasn`t thinking about zooming. I presume none of the shots was made at max zoom so there should be more details visible in game. As far as scale is concerned I was thinking about how the aircraft as a whole look in relation to land units, but then again, Pacific is also alot about naval battles so there`s the scale between air and naval units to be considered too. The second image btw looks very nice and if I didn`t know the game is turn based I would have thought all the units were moving real time with the aircraft swarming around all at once, attacking the ships and fighting each other; that`s how well the movement impression is being created. And speaking of which, in the second image, top left there`s an American plane next to a Japanese carrier. The gfx in the area is very interesting. It looks like there`re puffs of smoke next to the aircraft as if there`s antiaircraft fire missing it and a plume of water as if a torpedo has splashed there. Or that`s my interpretation based on a still image. Should be interesting to see in game. Anyway, it appears you`re paying alot of attention to the visual aspect of the game, which is great.

It looks like there`re puffs of smoke next to the aircraft as if there`s antiaircraft fire missing it and a plume of water as if a torpedo has splashed there.

That's entirely correct

Also, the visual animations don't freeze the game, actions are played as fast as the player clicks. So you can have several ships and aircraft in combat animations at once. This has no impact on the gameplay of course, but it often looks cool And it means you're not forced to wait until the attack/move animation is finished, but can play the game at your own pace.

ORIGINAL: Lukas

So you can have several ships and aircraft in combat animations at once. This has no impact on the gameplay of course, but it often looks cool

That would be cool indeed, as well as being very practical. If sounds play simultaneous too it would also create the sort of complex atmosphere one wouldn`t expect in a per turn game. I now understand why there are more than two units firing or being lighten in the same picture.

Argghghhgg!

3d units. GAWD I hate those freaking things.

What is it about that style that impresses so many? I don't get it and probably never will.

Will there be a 2D NATO unit symbols display option?

3d units. GAWD I hate those freaking things.

What is it about that style that impresses so many? I don't get it and probably never will.

I guess there are a lot of people who are not just interested in the strategic aspect of war, but also seeing the weapons and vehicles used to fight them. Like how there are so many people who collect/build miniature models. Not sure why that would be so hard to understand?

Will there be a 2D NATO unit symbols display option?

The engine was created to support both a full 3D and "boardgame style" 2D mode from day one. However these visuals still require a lot of extra work - particularly creating the 450+ unit icons in this "drawn" style. It may not be available in the initial release, but then definitely shortly after in a first patch. We are well aware there is a strong fanbase for this [:)]

I guess there are a lot of people who are not just interested in the strategic aspect of war, but also seeing the weapons and vehicles used to fight them. Like how there are so many people who collect/build miniature models. Not sure why that would be so hard to understand?

Because the "miniatures" are rarely good models of what they are meant to represent but mostly because they look like toys. I've been wargaming since 1961 and I guess old habits are hard to break. The only non-PC war game I've ever seen that used "toys" as markers was Axis and Allies and it was so simple it might have well have been a toy. As for PC games the only <cough - gag> wargames that use 3d "miniatures" are the likes of Panzer Korps and its ilk. Wargames for the masses (read dumbed down so Joe Six Pack can understand it).

And what the heck does the "strategic" aspect of war have to do with counters using established military symbology (which goes all the way down to the section/fireteam level by the way).

Oh well - that's the way things seem to be going in the gaming market these days. Seems like motorcycles and guns will be getting more and more of my time as the gaming industry <cough> evolves.

Sheesh, so much hate. Even having a choice between 3d and 2d board game style isn't good enough.

The thing is, computers used to have to choose between being accurate and being pretty. If nice 3d graphics chewed up to much power, some of the under-the-hood calculations were simplified. Computers these days can handle 3D graphics and still perform calculations.

Damn, man, you remind me of those people who whined about Wii "selling out" because, you know, every game has to be tailor-made for the so-called "hard core" gamer - oh noez, 3d units must mean it's a game for the stupid!

I actually like having 3d units for wargames like this - because all of the standard symbology makes my eyes hurt and gives me a headache looking at them on a computer screen. On a boardgame in real life, counters are fine, but on a computer? Why settle for boring counters when we can see a little bit of actual action in these games as well as have some accuracy?

But ... why does everything have a value of 10 in these screens?

pc GAME...[8|] I don`t think I could be condescending towards toys and play games at the same time, but maybe it`s for the fault of not taking games all that seriously. I tend to have fun with them and relax...

The engine was created to support both a full 3D and "boardgame style" 2D mode from day one. However these visuals still require a lot of extra work - particularly creating the 450+ unit icons in this "drawn" style. It may not be available in the initial release, but then definitely shortly after in a first patch. We are well aware there is a strong fanbase for this

I am happy with the choice of 2D or 3D and i am curious about more screenshots with 2D.

Harry

Our focus is currently on the 3D (takes way more work and it's just commercially more interesting) but hopefully focus can shift more to the "2D" mode in a few weeks. We'll release more "official" 2D screenshots once the artwork is completed.

ORIGINAL: Hannable

Sheesh, so much hate. Even having a choice between 3d and 2d board game style isn't good enough.

The thing is, computers used to have to choose between being accurate and being pretty. If nice 3d graphics chewed up to much power, some of the under-the-hood calculations were simplified. Computers these days can handle 3D graphics and still perform calculations.

Damn, man, you remind me of those people who whined about Wii "selling out" because, you know, every game has to be tailor-made for the so-called "hard core" gamer - oh noez, 3d units must mean it's a game for the stupid!

I actually like having 3d units for wargames like this - because all of the standard symbology makes my eyes hurt and gives me a headache looking at them on a computer screen. On a boardgame in real life, counters are fine, but on a computer? Why settle for boring counters when we can see a little bit of actual action in these games as well as have some accuracy?

But ... why does everything have a value of 10 in these screens?

It's really about the amount of effort from the developers that is required for a 3D game that gets sucked away from making a really good and challenging game. Are the two fundamentally impossible, no, but the examples of a very good historical wargame with 3D graphics are so few that it's not really worth discussing.

Making a 2D compatability mode simply available isn't going to change the above paradigm, only make it worse !.

It's really about the amount of effort from the developers that is required for a 3D game that gets sucked away from making a really good and challenging game.

You make a good point of course, but still: Challenge accepted [;)]