Road Map or Upcoming Features?

Every single day.

isn;t that every RTS? Do *insert number of units here* and win? i play Starcraft II some times and there was never a match where the hostile had less units then i did

Just dropped into say that I think a road map would be nice to have. Or at least some kind of indication about what is currently being worked on. Or is there some obvious reason why uber don't tell us?

Okay to like, actually answer the question posed by this thread without posting the soon image, the method by which Uber is designing this game is an iterative process.
This means that rather than mapping out what they're going to do, and then following a strict design schedule they simply try something, find out what works and what doesn't, and changes what doesn't work, there's a lot more to it than that but that's the gist.

The very nature of iterative design makes providing a roadmap nearly impossible, so it's VERY doubtful that we'll get one from Uber.
A priority list would be more likely, but even then I'm not so sure. Uber is open on development, but they're not that open.

A priority list seems like a good idea?

To add to this, as one person I know put it, the commander already "knows" how to build everything; it just lacks the ability to do it, so you spend time and resources to create the logistical support necessary to create certain units and structures.

The problem with roadmaps is it creates unnecessary tension between the developers and the community. Roadmaps change, sometimes drastically, as new design or development problems arise, or when new ideas are injected which take development in a new direction. This is doubly true in an iterative development system.

Look at Planetside 2 for an example, originally, they set out a roadmap goal to have a new continent (new map) released by July... 2013. It just got released a little while ago. The tantrums that ensued when that roadmap goal was bumped back, and then back again, just because implementing the new map proved more difficult than initially imagined.

Marking something down on a roadmap is an implicit promise that said feature will be implemented by that date. Many people will understand that roadmaps are not set in stone, but many others won't. By keeping things under wraps, Uber is able to do two important things:

1) Pitch, test, and change ideas internally, and scrap ideas that aren't working, without each little feature's personal fanbase raising pitchforks over it.

2) It allows Uber to keep and occasionally drop surprises on us. If a feature is openly roadmapped to 1st August, but isn't ready until 20th August, for three weeks, people will be crying about where feature X is. When feature X does finally drop it'll be received with a "uhg, finally, shoulda been in a month ago" by more people. Without the roadmap, Feature X get's dropped, and people are excited about it, more people recieve it as an awesome present, and less people are able to develop a begrudging sentiment of "why wasn't this out sooner?"

Planetside 2 has other problems, chief of which is a lack of priorities and management interference IMO. For instance, at one point everything was dropped for a months-long optimization pass (which has been slowly undone since then). Performance was an issue for that game for a long time, and they just suddenly decided that it's worth looking into. Personally, I think it was probably meddling from above, what with the upcoming launch of the PS4 and all. In general, though, you're right; the roadmap is considered worthless because things seem to be introduced at random. (As a sidenote, it seems like now the devs are finally taking player feature/bugfix requests seriously)

No doubt there is a failure state involved with sharing a roadmap or a plan or whatever, but the catch is that it's by no means a guaranteed failure. There are lots of things that could be done to offset or even completely mitigate but the best option, accompanying actions with explanations isn't something Uber seems intent on doing, as evidenced by no longer working with the Vanguards whose intention was to help with the process of explaining.

Maybe some time post-release when things aren't happening at breakneck speed we can try asking about it again.

Mike

I think you mis understand the term strategy.

Strategy is creating a way to win. Use of different units to best effect, misdirection of your opponent, combined attacks e.g. attacking from multiple sides simultaneously. Controlling the information. Pa and earlier games in this genre have lots of strategy. Tech tree has little to do with it.

Not to mention the fact that building an advanced factory is already analogous to 'research'.

You put 'research' into a game when you want some ability or unit to not be instantly available at the start of a match. 'research' is just a pay wall you abstractly put into the game to lock those features off, once you've earned enough in-game resources, you click that button to unlock your advanced features.

PA's system achieves the same thing, but in a less abstract way. Instead of spending resources to click some abstract pay wall button to unlock units, you spend resources actually building the factory.