Unity of Command Forums

Tomislav Uzelac wrote:

HappyDaze wrote:I would very much hope to see this game system or some variant of it used to depict other theaters of the war.

Other theaters will appear in our next game, to be announced sometime after this final DLC. Too many changes to the game system are required for those, so that it can't be fit into just a simple DLC.

Care to favour us with more information or must I unleash the Infosquito?

Tomislav Uzelac wrote:

HappyDaze wrote:I would very much hope to see this game system or some variant of it used to depict other theaters of the war.

Other theaters will appear in our next game, to be announced sometime after this final DLC. Too many changes to the game system are required for those, so that it can't be fit into just a simple DLC.

Okay. I'm sure we'll be glad to embrace improvements and expansions to the existing game system. One thing I would be pleased to see is going from IGOUGO format to WEGO. Can you tell us if that can be looked for down the road?

Happy

Hi guys,

I'm currently working on the low-level mechanics for air, naval, etc. These are absolutely needed for other theaters besides the Eastern Front. In the east, the action was focused on the land component, mostly maneuver and supply. It was all much more "multidimensional" in other theaters, so we need to come up with some sweet mechanics for all of that.

UoC will always be IGOUGO, there are no plans to change that.

As for which theaters/campaigns we will be covering, the decision hasn't been made yet. I like to work my way bottom-up, first make sure things are mechanically sound, then decide on the content. Also, I'm not beneath taking whichever campaign works best with the new mechanics, and making that the centerpiece for the new game. It worked great the last time around

Cheers!

Tomislav Uzelac wrote:UoC will always be IGOUGO, there are no plans to change that.

Okay. I think I can imagine that WEGO represents programming challenges not present in IGOUGO.

Happy

There are also design considerations. Not everyone wants to play this series in WEGO.

Since campaign has been mentioned already I'd like to ask how will their progress be handled - one of a very few downsides of Unity of Command was campaign progress: starting a new campaign resulted in erasing old campaigns and some missions required really tight deadline to meet in order to progress the selected campaign. Do you want to keep it that way or are there some plans to change it? It might be a minor detail (especially that all scenarios are possible to be played outside the campaign mode), but it'd be nice to know what to expect.

Other theaters will appear in our next game, to be announced sometime after this final DLC. Too many changes to the game system are required for those, so that it can't be fit into just a simple DLC.

I'm currently working on the low-level mechanics for air, naval, etc. These are absolutely needed for other theaters besides the Eastern Front. In the east, the action was focused on the land component, mostly maneuver and supply. It was all much more "multidimensional" in other theaters, so we need to come up with some sweet mechanics for all of that.

Just to clear up the confussion - Barbarossa is supposed to be "this final DLC" featuring "low-level mechanics for air, naval, etc." (ie. DLC will expand our capabilities, not just add a few new maps?) and THEN you will think on something that might be called Unity of Command 2? Did I get this right or you're already working on "our next game"? Either way, this will be on my list "to buy".

Barbarossa will be the final DLC. This is just new content (scenarios), no new capabilities.

The next game will add new capabilities that I described (air, naval). And yeah, we'll see if we can make the campaign more interesting.

Thank you for the answer.

I know there are people out of there who don't try out Paradox titles, because they are too complicated for them. There are also people who don't touch some games, because they don't find it funny to enter the click race against another human where most comes down to "superior reaction speed" in most RTS games. In times where poor games get good reviews (from the "professional magazines") only because they are reknown or powerful in the gaming industry I think your product(s) deserve more attention, given how polished and well-done your game is. It's a shame I spotted it on two occasions only completly by accident (one taking place in quite well done national encyclopedia of games, I was looking for an turn-based strategy, the other was on Steam). I hope your next game will get more notoriety in the branch and more players will notice your title, because it truly deserves more attention.

HolyDeath wrote:Thank you for the answer.

I hope your next game will get more notoriety in the branch and more players will notice your title, because it truly deserves more attention.

Absolutely! It has superior design and art to a lot of similar games. Expanded with some new capabilites, it could make a truly perfect strategy game. It should also be considered to port it to more platforms, for example mobile devices.