Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52
  1. #11
    Major Coolness7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ich bin zu rammstein hören
    Posts
    1,350
    Ok so throwing away the "sensible plot" aspect, I think it would be really interesting. Of course the U.S is going to need to go through alot of changes (New American Federation or something - with some different ideologies) but it would definitely be something that hasn't been done before.
    Generals 2? Yeah its about damn time
    http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn192/Veroular23/Command_and_Conquer3-1.gif

  2. #12
    Lieutenant bombspy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by easimon1812 View Post
    if USA isnt part of the main game it may become so later, I read somewhere that DLC may be released in the form of more factions for general 2, but who knows.
    That's what I was trying to implicate by saying the main game could end with some cliff hanger and will be extended in an Addon or DLC which also include the US faction...

  3. #13
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    340
    I have posted an idea about how to implement "advanced warfare" mentioned here.
    Basically USA would be very good at one thing at any given time, but need to switch strategy at their tech building to build the other branches of their tech tree. This means they will require some foresight to play and differentiate them from how EU plays further.

    I like that story I think it's better to have a entire EXP campaign dedicated to it, rather then having it take place alongside other campaigns in the main game.

  4. #14
    Lieutenant Colonel Borreh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Dark of the middle ages.
    Posts
    2,296
    Quote Originally Posted by bombspy View Post
    The US might supported the GLA in the attack, but they won't attack Europe as long as they are in some kind of alliance with China. They would rather let Europe and China fight each other or weaken them by supporting the GLA and attack then.

    Anyway I don't think the USA will be part of the main game. Maybe it will end (after the GLA was already "beaten") with a cliffhanger after China and Europe realized who their real enemy is and are attacked by the USA.
    I think having China at war with Russia or some other powerful country would be enough for US to invade Europe without the fear of immediate retaliation. At least by game logic ("It's not probable, but it doesn't sound completely absurd, therefore it's okay enough to do it, as long as the premise is worth it.")

    And I was thinking about something like a cliffhanger, but why leave out the good stuff for expansion?

    I think that if we could cut the campaign into the three-four acts, then I'd put the classical "terrorists hunt" into act 1, and then the main war into act 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coolness7 View Post
    Ok so throwing away the "sensible plot" aspect, I think it would be really interesting. Of course the U.S is going to need to go through alot of changes (New American Federation or something - with some different ideologies) but it would definitely be something that hasn't been done before.
    I'd preffer just US, and make the whole nationalists against patriots story Tom Clancy-ish, but I understand people may want US changed into something else.

    And yeah, I do realise it hasn't been done before.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerdfish View Post
    I have posted an idea about how to implement "advanced warfare" mentioned here.
    Basically USA would be very good at one thing at any given time, but need to switch strategy at their tech building to build the other branches of their tech tree. This means they will require some foresight to play and differentiate them from how EU plays further.

    I like that story I think it's better to have a entire EXP campaign dedicated to it, rather then having it take place alongside other campaigns in the main game.
    I think having Generals 2 about this would be more interesting than the usual "oh terrorists evil oh". Besides, MW1 also started with a terrorists hunt.. But we got a WWIII by MW2.

    And yeah, I do think US can be made different from EU easier than most people think.

    It may be also a neat plot point - EU are fighting "a war for tomorrow with yesterday's weapons", and, despite having strong armor, get seriously kicked by tech-heavy electronic warfare-based drone-supported US.

    Besides, I'd love US to be a mechanized infantry faction. I love infantry combat and I'd love to see it done well.
    Last edited by Borreh; 12-18-2011 at 07:55 PM.

  5. #15
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    340
    Borreh, there is one hole in your story, what happens to all the ICBMs everyone have lying around ?
    You can't have wars between a nuclear power and a non nuclear power, because the non-nuclear power would just get flattened in about 30 minutes.

  6. #16
    Lieutenant Colonel Borreh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Dark of the middle ages.
    Posts
    2,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerdfish View Post
    Borreh, there is one hole in your story, what happens to all the ICBMs everyone have lying around ?
    You can't have wars between a nuclear power and a non nuclear power, because the non-nuclear power would just get flattened in about 30 minutes.
    Yeah.

    Well, we may have US not wanting to use nukes and just kick European *** the classical way, especialy given that their offensive can go really well. Second, EU and China may have some sort of anti-missle shield that prevents the use of nukes, and so does USA.

    Besides, there is a lot of wars now between nuke armed countries and non-armed, and no one used them so far, mostly because of the social and political backslash that would cause.

    If US want to restore order in the world by putting themselves on top of the food chain again and wish to be applaud, they may not want to use them when not needed.

  7. #17
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    340
    Nothing stops EU / China from nuking GLA, especially since according to bioware, each nation will be lead by generals.

  8. #18
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    340
    BTW, Borreh, have you played shattered union ? I imagine the later half of the US campaign to be something like that.

    Shattered Union
    Last edited by Nerdfish; 12-18-2011 at 08:11 PM.

  9. #19
    Lieutenant Colonel Borreh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Dark of the middle ages.
    Posts
    2,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerdfish View Post
    Nothing stops EU / China from nuking GLA, especially since according to bioware, each nation will be lead by generals.
    I think that the first missions would be about hunting down GLA hideouts inside an otherwise friendly nation, for e.g., having Iraq troops helping you destroy their base. That's the general problem with GLA, they act from within borders of an otherwise friendly/neutral country, and by nuke'ing them, you'd provoke a war.

    Actualy, come to think of it, EU/China nuke'ing a GLA base within a netrual country's borders would be a good pretext for US to attack.

    And I didn't, altough I think it may be a very neat game.. I may do it later.

  10. #20
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    340
    A US civil war campaign make sense if US generals operate drone based army that are largely self-sufficient. You don't need huge cities to support drone based army - you can throw up a robotic assembly line under the middle of a desert with 2 eggheads supervising it, and it would be invisible to air recon with the high tech camo. The protagonist generals can still fight back even if their reputation is ruined by the media.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Victory Games is Electronic Arts' dedicated Strategy Gaming studio. Formed in 2010 under the leadership of Jon Van Caneghem, Victory Games has offices in Los Angeles, CA; Austin, TX; and Shanghai, China and is currently focused on the Command & Conquer franchise.