Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

SWR Productions Forum _ Rise of the Reds _ Wiki related questions

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 28 Feb 2013, 7:58

Okay so got some questions about the wiki. Could use some opinions/directions on these,

Should all the Fortification add-ons be on the same page like this or do they look too crowded and some of them need separate pages?
http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Fortification

Does the Troop Crawler page need an overhaul after the last patch or is it too early for it?
http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Troop_Crawler

Is it okay to update pages based on the info in this thread?
http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.php?showtopic=4439

What would be a suitable name for the category of primary resource gatherers like Osprey, secondary gatherers like Hackers or resource gatherers in general?

Posted by: MARS 28 Feb 2013, 8:13

Fortification upgrades should be on the same page as the Fortification itself IMO. Feel free to update the TC page as well. As for the third question, you can do so but make sure that the information is only taken from statements that sound certain and definitive.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 28 Feb 2013, 9:26

Thanks. On a related topic - should the Russian Component Tower add-ons be on the same page as well or should they be on different pages?

Posted by: MARS 28 Feb 2013, 9:43

Yes. Generally speaking, I'd like to see units/structures that only truly become distinct and fully-functional when upgraded on the same page.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 1 Mar 2013, 2:56

I wouldn't put predictions on the wikia... the wikia is kind of like an information portal...
but i guess it might be okay if you make an article about everyone's predictions and named it something like "Rise of the Reds 2.0: fan predictions" or something like that.

For the fortifications... maybe we could make an article that links all the upgrade pages... like maybe
VARIATIONS
_________________________________________

The ECA Fortifications can be upgraded into many variations. These include:
The Medic Outpost (which is a link, that links another article about the medical outpost)
etc

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 1 Mar 2013, 6:39

QUOTE (InsurgentCell @ 1 Mar 2013, 7:56) *
I wouldn't put predictions on the wikia... the wikia is kind of like an information portal...
but i guess it might be okay if you make an article about everyone's predictions and named it something like "Rise of the Reds 2.0: fan predictions" or something like that.

Naturally I was talking about updating based on what MARS and other team members said on that thread, not based on all the amusing predictions made there.

Posted by: Joakim 1 Mar 2013, 17:36

The C&C RA3 Paradox mod has a very well-developed http://wiki.paradoxmod.com/index.php?title=Main_Page. You could probably get inspired by their design. They use a rather clever system to describe the relationships between the factions: the ROTR wiki needs something similar IMHO.

Posted by: MARS 1 Mar 2013, 17:52

Fine with me, although it'd be nowhere near as elaborate as on Paradox:

USA relations:
ECA - Friendly
Russia - Hostile -> At War
China - Allied (The PPA may have failed, but factually, China is the closest thing to America's long-standing military ally, as stated by Thorn)
GLA - Hostile

ECA relations:
USA - Neutral (The Americans may want to normalise their relations with the ECA but the Euros still hold a few grudges)
Russia - At War
China - Friendly (They have to be friendly because they still have to repay their debts)
GLA - Hostile

Russia relations:
USA - Neutral -> At War (Russia didn't really pursue an active rivalry with the United States beyond pragmatic interests in Africa)
ECA - At War
China - Hostile (Ethnic tensions in the Far-East district)
GLA - Hostile

China relations:
USA - Allied
ECA - Neutral (No longer friendly since the ECA asked the PLA to withdraw from Europe. It's noteworthy that China hasn't made any real statements in favour of Europe at any point)
Russia - Hostile (Relationships permanently damaged due to Suvorov's policies)
GLA - Hostile

GLA relations:
USA - Hostile
ECA - Hostile
Russia - Hostile
China - Hostile

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 1 Mar 2013, 20:07

QUOTE (MARS @ 1 Mar 2013, 17:52) *
GLA relations:
USA - Hostile
ECA - Hostile
Russia - Hostile
China - Hostile


Poor GLA; they're like the little kid in school who nobody liked yet were hiding great power.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 1 Mar 2013, 20:26

QUOTE (Joakim @ 1 Mar 2013, 22:36) *
The C&C RA3 Paradox mod has a very well-developed http://wiki.paradoxmod.com/index.php?title=Main_Page. You could probably get inspired by their design. They use a rather clever system to describe the relationships between the factions: the ROTR wiki needs something similar IMHO.

Making something like the Paradox mod wiki would be awesome but right now the ROTR wiki needs to focus on the basics. I've already said this before and to repeat myself but it's all going to a dead end unless some members help out by writing the usage, counters, pros, cons etc of the units. A lot of the pages need these basic stuff added.
QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 2 Mar 2013, 1:07) *
Poor GLA; they're like the little kid in school who nobody liked yet were hiding great power.

More like the kid who was a dick and went around causing everyone trouble and now they all hate him. mindfuck.gif

BTW is it okay to add the Generals pages to the Lore category?

Posted by: InsurgentCell 2 Mar 2013, 4:49

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 1 Mar 2013, 14:26) *
Making something like the Paradox mod wiki would be awesome but right now the ROTR wiki needs to focus on the basics. I've already said this before and to repeat myself but it's all going to a dead end unless some members help out by writing the usage, counters, pros, cons etc of the units. A lot of the pages need these basic stuff added.


Well, I'm not always sure of myself when it comes to tactics and stuff, but I guess I can try.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 6 Mar 2013, 19:18

Anyone knows if this guy is correct or not?

QUOTE
Excuse me, but unitbox says it has 20-mm minigun... Is that a mistake (because this Hind seem to have YakB .50-cal minigun) or that's supposed to be?


http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Mi_24_Hind#comm-2968

Posted by: MARS 6 Mar 2013, 19:24

I'd say change it to a '12.7mm gatling gun'. That's the closest thing the Hind has in RL. Also, as a general rule, avoid the term 'minigun'. That isn't actually a catch-all term, but a very specific model of a US-made gatling cannon that fires 7.62mm rounds. Spell it out as 'gatling' for all non-Chinese weapons of this type and 'Gattling' for the Chinese themselves.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 6 Mar 2013, 20:27

BTW what to do with this page now that the Railgun Kodiak is obsolete according to that thread? Should it be totally deleted?

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/T-80R_Kodiak

Posted by: Karpet 6 Mar 2013, 21:37

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 6 Mar 2013, 21:27) *
BTW what to do with this page now that the Railgun Kodiak is obsolete according to that thread? Should it be totally deleted?

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/T-80R_Kodiak


I don't think it should. In the Generals and ZH wiki, concepts and stuff liek dat weren't deleted.

Posted by: MARS 6 Mar 2013, 21:42

Put it in a new category called 'scrapped content' or something for the sake of continuity.

Posted by: Red Alert 6 Mar 2013, 22:51

This seems outdated http://wiki.falloutstudios.org/wiki/Rise_of_the_Reds

Shockwave has its own http://wiki.falloutstudios.org/wiki/Manual:ShockWave and that's been very helpful.

Posted by: Comr4de 7 Mar 2013, 0:52

As stated we no longer support that wikipedia as we have moved away from Fallout Studios eons ago. We will be making our new wiki sometime this year, now dubbed "The Vault". The Vault will provide our fans with an official-run wiki to go to, although we already have a fan-made one that is awesome I8.gif and will do so until we start up our own to create mentioned manuals and so on.

Posted by: Massey 7 Mar 2013, 2:12

So is it still worth making pic's for the Wiki then?

Posted by: MARS 7 Mar 2013, 6:38

QUOTE (Comr4de @ 7 Mar 2013, 0:52) *
As stated we no longer support that wikipedia as we have moved away from Fallout Studios eons ago. We will be making our new wiki sometime this year, now dubbed "The Vault". The Vault will provide our fans with an official-run wiki to go to, although we already have a fan-made one that is awesome I8.gif and will do so until we start up our own to create mentioned manuals and so on.


I've actually discussed this with The_Hunter at some point. Once the fan-wiki is complete and up to quality standards, we'll simply declare it the official one. No point in investing even more precious time on making yet ANOTHER wiki from scratch when we already have dedicated people working on a suitable replacement.

Posted by: n5p29 7 Mar 2013, 16:05

QUOTE (MARS @ 7 Mar 2013, 12:38) *
I've actually discussed this with The_Hunter at some point. Once the fan-wiki is complete and up to quality standards, we'll simply declare it the official one. No point in investing even more precious time on making yet ANOTHER wiki from scratch when we already have dedicated people working on a suitable replacement.

at least can it be moved to our own domain? because wikia sux. D:

Posted by: InsurgentCell 7 Mar 2013, 22:54

I dont know if we should port the wikia... it already has a LOT of articles on it. If someone's willing to do it, no one is stopping them though

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 7 Mar 2013, 23:58

QUOTE
(No longer friendly since the ECA asked the PLA to withdraw from Europe. It's noteworthy that China hasn't made any real statements in favour of Europe at any point)


Didn't the Tsing Shi Tao state that he supports their choice of using neutron weaponry?

Posted by: MARS 8 Mar 2013, 6:22

How does the personal opinion of a retired PLA General equal the official opinion of the Party government?

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 8 Mar 2013, 7:56

I thought that they didn't censor it, which is more or less taciturn agreement.

Could be wrong though.

Posted by: WarWolf_1 13 Mar 2013, 6:13

1.) Is there any objection to removing the units' descriptor term from the titles of unit pages that possess such (i.e. Crusader Tank, Kodiak Tank, Nighthawk Stealth Bomber)?

2.) What are thoughts on what the Unitbox template's "Role" should describe? Should it possess the unit's descriptor term (i.e. "Main Battle Tank", "Helicopter Gunship", "IFV", "Bomber", etc.) or individual functions/ roles (i.e. "Anti-Infantry", "Anti-Air", "Detector", "Transport", etc.)?

My opinion thus far is that it possess individual functions/ roles. The descriptor term can be placed underneath the unit's render [as an in-game quote can reside with the unit's in-game screenshot].

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 13 Mar 2013, 6:48

Personally, I'm against it. The terms help describe them better
and for role, Main Battle Tank, Heavy Tank, Super Heavy Tank, IFV, Reconnaissance Vehicle Strategic/Tactical Bomber Fighter and so on

Posted by: WarWolf_1 13 Mar 2013, 17:01

But does the name not "describe them" specifically enough, while isn't having the term in the title and Unitbox template redundant? [Again, couldn't the descriptor term be captioned under the unit's render?]

It would also seem that using such in the "Role" section might also not do the best job at defining the unit, as to say that a unit is a "Helicopter Gunship" doesn't mean the same for every Gunship [the Comanche compared to the Viper for example, so far the only thing both have in common is anti-personal/ anti-light vehicle capability).

Thus I am for only having unit's name in the title, in my opinion that makes category pages cleaner.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 13 Mar 2013, 18:09

The thing is having the unit's descriptor term in it's name sometimes makes it easier to navigate in some category pages, specially for new people. Like only having names like "Lynx" or "Pandur" in the "ECA" or "Light Vehicles" category page might confuse someone about what that unit is. But if the descriptor term is there he would know what it is without actually having to go to that unit's page to find out what it exactly is.

Again yeah having only the names might help make the category pages cleaner. So I actually don't mind either way.

BTW MARS did once tell to add descriptor terms to some ECA units which initially didn't have descriptor terms in the names of their pages - like Leopard, Lynx etc (feeling to tired to dig that up and quote now but I am pretty sure he did). So they probably should stay.




Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 15 Mar 2013, 9:47

Calling them by "Anti-infantry" or such gets overly pointless.
They're helicopter gunships. it means they shoot missiles and stuff.
We don't need overly pointless terms like Anti-infantry. It already has the info right when we play when it says "Strong against X" and "Weak against Y"

Posted by: Karpet 15 Mar 2013, 19:07

QUOTE (Serialkillerwhale @ 15 Mar 2013, 10:47) *
Calling them by "Anti-infantry" or such gets overly pointless.
They're helicopter gunships. it means they shoot missiles and stuff.
We don't need overly pointless terms like Anti-infantry. It already has the info right when we play when it says "Strong against X" and "Weak against Y"


Agree.

Put description terms such as MBT in, that's what I'm for.

Maybe someone wants to find APCs for a comparison.
Description terms make it easier to find the vehicles you want.

Posted by: WarWolf_1 16 Mar 2013, 4:46

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 13 Mar 2013, 12:09) *
The thing is having the unit's descriptor term in it's name sometimes makes it easier to navigate in some category pages, specially for new people. Like only having names like "Lynx" or "Pandur" in the "ECA" or "Light Vehicles" category page might confuse someone about what that unit is. But if the descriptor term is there he would know what it is without actually having to go to that unit's page to find out what it exactly is.

Again yeah having only the names might help make the category pages cleaner. So I actually don't mind either way.

BTW MARS did once tell to add descriptor terms to some ECA units which initially didn't have descriptor terms in the names of their pages - like Leopard, Lynx etc (feeling to tired to dig that up and quote now but I am pretty sure he did). So they probably should stay.


Well I suppose to keep the names as the same as the unit's in-game one makes the most sense. A derp on my part haha.


QUOTE (Serialkillerwhale @ 15 Mar 2013, 3:47) *
Calling them by "Anti-infantry" or such gets overly pointless.
They're helicopter gunships. it means they shoot missiles and stuff.


Pointless? Referring back to my last post, not every helicopter gunship is the same. Yes, such helicopters may shoot missiles, but anti-air or anti-tank might be something a newer player wants to know.


QUOTE (Serialkillerwhale @ 15 Mar 2013, 3:47) *
We don't need overly pointless terms like Anti-infantry. It already has the info right when we play when it says "Strong against X" and "Weak against Y"


If you're going to make the point of information being present in game, then I'd might as well rest my entire case [as why would there need to be a wikia? All the basic info, excluding lore, is in-game...].


QUOTE (Karpet @ 15 Mar 2013, 13:07) *
Maybe someone wants to find APCs for a comparison.
Description terms make it easier to find the vehicles you want.


There are categories for that.

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 16 Mar 2013, 13:56

Anti-Infantry and such are the absolute worst idea i've ever heard.

Both a pathfinder and a toxin tractor are "Anti Infantry".
Both a Superweapon and a claymore are "Anti-Building".

See?

Posted by: InsurgentCell 19 Mar 2013, 3:43

._. what?
if you don't have anti-infantry then infantry would own everything.

That's like saying we shouldn't have Anti-tanks.
Both missile launchers and anti-tank guns are "anti tank"

Posted by: X1Destroy 19 Mar 2013, 6:17

For things that kill both infantry and tanks, the term anti-surface would be the most accurate.

Superweapon should be in it's own term, not in any anti- thing.


Posted by: SpiralSpectre 20 Mar 2013, 9:53

^As far as I know Superweapons are already classified as "Superweapons". Some people keeps classifying anti-surface units (to be more precise they classify the Shock Trooper) as "siege" for some reason. I keep them "anti-surface" though.

QUOTE (InsurgentCell @ 19 Mar 2013, 8:43) *
._. what?
if you don't have anti-infantry then infantry would own everything.

That's like saying we shouldn't have Anti-tanks.
Both missile launchers and anti-tank guns are "anti tank"

I think he meant classifying units as "anti-infantry" is pointless, not that having anti-infantry units is pointless.

Anyway how about mentioning both the descriptor term and the unit's role in the role section? Like Shock Troopers can be "anti-surface infantry", Pathfinders can be "anti-infantry infantry", you get the point.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 23 Mar 2013, 18:34

Pardon the double post. Someone added "FB-40 "Aurora" Bomber" as Griffon's exclusive unit. Does Aurora still have that designation?

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 23 Mar 2013, 19:35

FB-40?
Makes no sense to me.
FB would indicate Fighter-Bomber.

Good luck dogfighting in a aurora.

Posted by: MARS 23 Mar 2013, 21:58

As far as I'm concerned, we can use that designation, assuming it did actually pop up in an update. As for the reasoning, the update consciously acknowledged that its service history was a total disaster due to inappropriate combat roles. There was a literal political/military scandal about this after the GLA War, so giving it this odd designation as a fighter-bomber was a conscious choice to highlight the oddness. Additional meta-explanation: While the designation 'B-40' would be more appropriate for a pure bomber plane, people would sub-consciously associate that kind of designation with big bombers like the B2, B1 and B52 which are reserved for General Powers. Since this plane is not only buildable but also considerably smaller, we gave it another designation to draw a clearer distinction.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 24 Mar 2013, 4:20

That guy added "FB" before Aurora's name while only added "bomber" after it's name. I got no real idea if that can be done but sounds incorrect to me.

And just to clear some things up,

Will Thorns still require the Firebase upgrade after it becomes unique to him?
Is it safe to add Yusuuf is getting old Scorpion?
Is Patriotism and/or Bunker unique to Chen?
Is it safe to add Zhukov is getting Tor?

Posted by: MARS 24 Mar 2013, 9:14

- Thorn will have exclusive access to the Firebase and the upgrade will most likely remain as well.
- Likely yes.
- Bunkers will be available to all Chinese Generals. Patriotism will be an exclusive upgrade of Chen who starts with Nationalism by default.
- Most likely yes.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 24 Mar 2013, 11:08

Is the Helix a KA-50? Apparently some say it is, some say it isn't.

Posted by: X1Destroy 24 Mar 2013, 11:55

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 24 Mar 2013, 11:08) *
Is the Helix a KA-50? Apparently some say it is, some say it isn't.


That was me.

This is the Helix.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamov_Ka-27

Posted by: X1Destroy 25 Mar 2013, 9:16

Wait? How come Charles is going to get a Centurion Tank? Wasn't it supposed to be a Challenger?

Posted by: MARS 25 Mar 2013, 9:52

Wat?
Charles is getting the Challenger instead of the Leopard. The GLA Scorpion is technically a Centurion though.

Posted by: X1Destroy 25 Mar 2013, 9:56

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Fire_Support_General_Charles

It's from this page.

Who edited it?

BTW, why does the new GLA Scorpion is refered as the Cheetah in the INI?

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 25 Mar 2013, 10:06

Old names.

Just like the basilisk being the T28 in shockwave.

Posted by: MARS 25 Mar 2013, 10:07

Not a mistake. The new Scorpion will actually be renamed into 'Cheetah' once the old Scorpion is re-added for Yusuuf.

Posted by: X1Destroy 25 Mar 2013, 10:13

I see. So the old scorpion will be back with a remade model just like the paladin, isn't it? And this Cheetah will be the vanilla tank for the other 2 GLA generals.

And both the old and new scorpion will have different stats? Or just the look?

QUOTE
Just like the basilisk being the T28 in shockwave.


It didn't suprise me much, as the Basilisk is a bascially a T28, in look.

Posted by: MARS 25 Mar 2013, 10:38

Yusuuf's Scorpion might end up being lighter and even faster than the Cheetah.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 25 Mar 2013, 10:51

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 25 Mar 2013, 14:16) *
Wait? How come Charles is going to get a Centurion Tank? Wasn't it supposed to be a Challenger?

Oh that one. Fixing it now. Though you know you could do that yourself.

Posted by: X1Destroy 25 Mar 2013, 10:55

And I just noticed that I can edit it without a wiki account now laugh.gif

Should have done that earlier.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 25 Mar 2013, 17:57

Anyone got any idea about what to do with this page?

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Component_Tower

Posted by: FalseDead 25 Mar 2013, 18:10

QUOTE (Karpet @ 15 Mar 2013, 13:07) *
Agree.

Put description terms such as MBT in, that's what I'm for.

Maybe someone wants to find APCs for a comparison.
Description terms make it easier to find the vehicles you want.



I like this as well

That said Rather than Main battle tank we maybe should use a more WWII style system such as this

Light tanks: Hopper, Rhino, ?pandur?, Scorpion
Medium Tank: Crusader, Battlemaster, Cheetah, Leopard, ?Kodiak?, ?Marauder?
Heavy Tanks: ?Kodiak? Golem, Paladin, ?Marauder?, ?Overlord?
Super-Heavy Tanks: Sentinel, ?Overlord?, Manticore

Infantry tanks: Tesla, Toxin, Dragon, Microwave
APC: Troop Crawler, Battlebus,, Miska, Lynx
IFV: Bradley, BMP-3, BMD-3
Wheeled Personal Carriers: Humvee, Technical

Posted by: X1Destroy 25 Mar 2013, 18:29

Marauder is more of an SPG rather than a tank.

Golem shouldn't be in the same group with Paladin, since it's much more bulkier and it's usage is very different.

The Paladin is much more like an MBT, the lore even said that it is what the Abrams is in RL.

Mine should be like this:

Light tanks: Hopper, Scorpion, Cheetah.
Medium Tank: Crusader, Battlemaster, Leopard, Rhino.
Heavy Tanks: Kodiak, Paladin.
Super-Heavy Tanks: Sentinel, Overlord, Golem, Manticore.
Tank Destroyers: Marauder, Jagdmamut, Sprut.

Pandur should be in the IFV list. It isn't as tough as a tank.

Miska is a scout unit.

BTW, some question regarding exclusive units for the generals in 2.0.

The KA-52 Aligator will still be the exclusive heli for Orlov which will make the werewolf gone forever, isn't it?

Does Thorn still get the LOSAT humvee?

And wouldn't it be too soon to reveal them in the wiki right now?

Posted by: FalseDead 25 Mar 2013, 19:15

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 25 Mar 2013, 12:29) *
Marauder is more of an SPG rather than a tank.


Figured that as well, However SPG is a rather small section in ROTR

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 25 Mar 2013, 12:29) *
Golem shouldn't be in the same group with Paladin, since it's much more bulkier and it's usage is very different.

I would keep them both as heavies, the Golem is just a shade to light to be Super-Heavy and the Paladin has too much armor and PD to really be treated as anything less

Yes and no. Their usage is very much the same, acting as damage soaks-- though admittedly in different ways-- and both are amazingly resilient.
QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 25 Mar 2013, 12:29) *
The Paladin is much more like an MBT, the lore even said that it is what the Abrams is in RL.

Maybe it is based off the Abrams, I certainly can't recall.
However its armor, Drone repair, and PD laser give it the Resilience of a heavy tank
That said I will agree it has is under-gunned for a heavy tank, doing damage more in line with a Medium tank--though bombardment or Search and Destroy alleviate this somewhat

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 25 Mar 2013, 12:29) *
Mine should be like this:

Light tanks: Hopper, Scorpion, Cheetah.
Medium Tank: Crusader, Battlemaster, Leopard, Rhino.
Heavy Tanks: Kodiak, Paladin.
Super-Heavy Tanks: Sentinel, Overlord, Golem, Manticore.
Tank Destroyers: Marauder, Jagdmamut, Sprut.

I would still push Golem into top tier Heavy, and since the Fully upgraded the Cheetah(currently scorpion) is on par with most medium tanks and even before upgrades is comparable to a Rhino I would still move it up one tier.

I hesitate with the Rhino being a medium, but that probably is right.

Its just that without Reactive Armor it seems much lighter when compared to other Russian tanks....Especially since by the time you grab that power it is probably going against halfway upgraded tanks of other factions

Tank destroyers is causing me the most issues thought since Sprut is very lightly armored and really is lightly armed too( Medium tank gun), whereas Jagdmamut and marauder are very well armed and armored. May be move Sprut into either light tank or ,if it can still carry infantry, into IFV?
QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 25 Mar 2013, 12:29) *
Pandur should be in the IFV list. It isn't as tough as a tank.

I used the Designation IFV for well armed and armored vehicles that could transport. so Pandur really doesn't quite fit tongue.gif

Also use 3-4 Pandurs loaded with either Grenade launchers or Panzerfausts and use them against Hoppers or any of the medium tanks.
Its hard to argue that they don't at least somewhat qualify as Light tank with that loadout

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 25 Mar 2013, 12:29) *
Miska is a scout unit.

Your right. For some reason I thought it transported more than one infantryman

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 26 Mar 2013, 2:00

QUOTE
Marauder is more of an SPG rather than a tank.

Actually, it's a Tank Destroyer.

The Golem fits as a Heavy Rather than Superheavy due to a few things.

It's not a one-tank army that can stomp multiple tanks in short time.
It's durable enough to withstand alot of punishment nontheless.
It's slower than usual.
It's feasable to use en-mass without a major economic blow.

Lets compare this to real life.

Sentinel
Large enough to crush most tanks
Serious threat just by itself
Impractical to use en mass due to cost

Golem
Mobile enough for simpler logistics
Not a pants-crapper by itself
practical to use En Mass

Panzer VIII Maus
Large enough to crush most tanks
Serious threat just by itself
Impractical to use en mass due to cost

Tiger II
Mobile enough for simpler logistics
Can be swarmed fairly easily
Practical to be built in large numbers.

Posted by: X1Destroy 26 Mar 2013, 6:38

It is use to shield your faster Kodiak and BMPs, as well as providing fire support.

It is the only tank that can fight in areas full of Radiation and Toxin. It is the only tank that can soak up Nuke Cannon shell and fight on.

It is alots bigger and heavier than an MBT, so I don't think it should be in the same list.

QUOTE
Medium tank gun


No, Sprut's gun is the same as kodiak's gun.

Posted by: MARS 26 Mar 2013, 7:01

QUOTE (Serialkillerwhale @ 26 Mar 2013, 2:00) *
snip


While your overall gist is correct, you should never ever use terms like 'mobile', 'simpler logistics' and 'large numbers' in regard to the Tiger II AKA Koenigstiger. A more appropriate comparison would be the Panther or, if you're feeling generous, the Tiger I.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 26 Mar 2013, 7:42

Someone literally entirely copied Fallout wiki's content on US and some Russian structures. So what to do with these now?

And is it too early to add LOSAT Humvee in Thorn's unit list? It's mentioned in the ini file though.

Posted by: MARS 26 Mar 2013, 7:49

There won't be a LOSAT Humvee. That's an obsolete leftover in the files.

Also, general rule for everyone: Do NOT -ever- copy-paste FSDB content onto this Wiki. Their information is largely outdated, we are not affiliated and we absolutely WANT ours to be different.

Posted by: X1Destroy 26 Mar 2013, 8:11

QUOTE
There won't be a LOSAT Humvee


Fixed. Didn't know about that.


Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 26 Mar 2013, 9:24

QUOTE
While your overall gist is correct, you should never ever use terms like 'mobile', 'simpler logistics' and 'large numbers' in regard to the Tiger II AKA Koenigstiger. A more appropriate comparison would be the Panther or, if you're feeling generous, the Tiger I.

We're comparing it to the Maus.
The Maus is so godamn hard to build, they were only gonna build 150ish BEFORE the bombing cut the orders.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 26 Mar 2013, 13:13

So how should the roles of the units be classified? By the way they are now (ie Crusader is an MBT) or by this WW2 esque way that got proposed (ie Crusader is a medium tank)?

Posted by: MARS 26 Mar 2013, 14:48

It's all fair and dandy to throw around these technical terms in regards to lore but if we're talking functions/roles, we should keep things simple and comprehensible:

Crusader, Leopard, Kodiak, Battlemaster, Scorpion = Main Battle Tank
Paladin, Golem, Marauder = Heavy Tank
Manticore, Sentinel, Overlord = Super-Heavy Tank
Hopper = Light Tank
Jagdmammut = Tank Destroyer

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 26 Mar 2013, 15:13

Wouldn't the marauder be a Tank Destroyer due to lack of turret?

Posted by: MARS 26 Mar 2013, 15:39

In RL terms yes, but unlike the Jagdmammut, it isn't designed to excel at anti-tank combat in its actual gameplay role. It may have a static turret, but overall, it's really just a mobile gun to bolster your standard GLA attack force.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 26 Mar 2013, 16:45

The way I see it the Marauder probably counts as an assault gun more than anything else. It doesn't have the range of a tank destroyer or turret of real tanks.

Anyway isn't Marauder scheduled for one hell of a makeover in the future? Maybe there is no need to pinpoint the role of a unit that's gonna be changed eventually. smile.gif

Posted by: X1Destroy 26 Mar 2013, 18:20

I think it will have a better model, and nothing more for the sake of original.

GLA is the complete opposite of Russia, for they only use 2 tanks. And only 1 of them is available without the need of a GP.

Funny thing is that it isn't a heavy tank even if it's been classified as 1. Without turret and crappy armor plus weak firepower as start unlike Jagdmamut, it is not good for fighting enemy tanks head on like scorpions with rockets.

To make matter worse, it will be exculsive to Warlord. And that's mean the others only have 1 kind of tank, and it's a light tank.......

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 26 Mar 2013, 19:13

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 26 Mar 2013, 23:20) *
To make matter worse, it will be exculsive to Warlord. And that's mean the others only have 1 kind of tank, and it's a light tank.......

It's way too early to say that mate.

And I am pretty sure it was said that the Marauder will get a significant rework and not only some cosmetic change. Something that makes it worthy of being a gen exclusive unit.

Ofc obviously GLA are the opposite of Russia. One is all about brute force, the other are the sneaky guys.

Posted by: Karpet 26 Mar 2013, 20:30

My list :

Light Tanks : Hoppers, Scorpions
Medium Tanks : Crusaders, ?Battlemaster?
MBTs : Kodiak, ?Battlemaster?, Leopard, Paladin
Heavy Tank : Golem
Super-Heavy Tank : Manticore, Sentinel, Overlord

Jagdmammut seems like an assault gun AND a tank destroyer. Marauder is more like an assault gun.

IFV : Bradley, BMP-3, BMD-3, Pandur
APCs : Lynx, Battlebus, Troop Crawler
Anti-Infantry Tanks : Toxin Tractor, Tesla Tank, Dragon Tank, Microwave Tank, ?Buratino?

Posted by: InsurgentCell 26 Mar 2013, 21:12

IMO the Marauder is neither a Heavy Tank, nor a Tank Destroyer. Its rather light for a heavy tank/ tank destroyer, but it has no turret. therefore, I would classify it as an Assault Gun. Similar to the German Stumgeschutz in World War II

Also, I would classify the Crusader as a light or cavalry tank, and the Paladin as a Main Battle Tank. The Hopper is a Tankette, which is essentially, a minitank.
So my list goes kinda like -

Tankettes - Hopper
Cavalry tanks - Crusader, Scorpion
Assault Guns - Marauder
MBTs - Paladin, Battlemaster, Kodiak, Rhino, Leopard
Heavy Tanks - Golem
Tank Destroyers - Jagdmammutt
Super Heavy Tanks - Sentinel, Overlord, Manticore

But my list might be a bit too technical.

Posted by: Re_Simeone 26 Mar 2013, 21:30

Marauder looks like something that posses more civilian vehicles parts than military ones.
Its fixed turret makes it even more a one improvised combat vehicle,since making rotating turret would
require lot more effort from GLA underground chop-shop "engineers".
And although little bulky by its appearance,it is clearly not a heavy vehicle . . . Maybe medium.
You forgot to include BRDM-1 armed with AT Rockets from Russian GP,and VDVs Sprut-SD in list of Tank Destroyers.

Posted by: X1Destroy 27 Mar 2013, 5:25

The BRDM should be in the same class as rocket buggy, I think.


Posted by: Re_Simeone 27 Mar 2013, 10:42

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 27 Mar 2013, 5:25) *
The BRDM should be in the same class as rocket buggy, I think.

Well version ingame is based after RL Tank Destroyer,AT3 Sagger (9K11) BRDM-1. . .
And as for buggy . . . Well it is siege unit,same as for example . . . Well Mole Minelayer,although Mole is a Multitask unit,
since it can place all kinds of mines,and clear the same,but it is at same time siege unit.

Posted by: X1Destroy 27 Mar 2013, 11:14

QUOTE (Re_Simeone @ 27 Mar 2013, 10:42) *
Well version ingame is based after RL Tank Destroyer,AT3 Sagger (9K11) BRDM-1. . .
And as for buggy . . . Well it is siege unit,same as for example . . . Well Mole Minelayer,although Mole is a Multitask unit,
since it can place all kinds of mines,and clear the same,but it is at same time siege unit.


Except for 1 thing, both rocket buggy and BRDM are hit and run rocket armed vehicles, while the mole is not.

Posted by: Re_Simeone 27 Mar 2013, 12:35

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 27 Mar 2013, 11:14) *
Except for 1 thing, both rocket buggy and BRDM are hit and run rocket armed vehicles, while the mole is not.

I don't know for BRDM-1,but buggy is for sure,but again,Rocket Buggy is improvised combat vehicle,
aka armed civilian vehicle,so because of that it is little bit harder to just classify it with in same group of other factions vehicles.
Almost whole GLA Arms Dealer list is based on that kind of vehicles,off course,except Scorpions and Grad's . . .

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 27 Mar 2013, 14:51

I need a bit of help here - can anyone clarify the difference between "siege" and "artillery" units?

And is Mortar Track gonna be Charles's tier 1 arty?

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 27 Mar 2013, 17:07

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 27 Mar 2013, 10:51) *
I need a bit of help here - can anyone clarify the difference between "siege" and "artillery" units?

And is Mortar Track gonna be Charles's tier 1 arty?


The term "siege" and "artillery" has virtually the same meaning, some call the artillery pieces of "siege artillery", but "artillery" sounds like something more modern to designate a mobile mechanized unit, in the Middle Ages the weapons of artillery were called "siege weapons" because they were mounted and positioned around towns and fortifications in order to break the enemy structures, in the context of today artillery units are much more versatile and can be used to attack varied targets, from infantry until the vehicles in motion with a huge precision, so I would say that "artillery" became a more specific name for modern warfare, although "siege" is still used.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 28 Mar 2013, 2:08

This is how I define them.

a Siege unit, is a unit whos purpose is to destroy defenses and lay siege
an Artillary Unit is a unit that outranges most units and provides fire support

Their roles are simlar though, but a Mole is really only a siege unit, and the ECA Howitzer is only artillary.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 1 Apr 2013, 7:15

Anyone got any cool idea about what should be the background of the wikia?

Posted by: Talonek 1 Apr 2013, 17:15

I've got something in the works, it has RF units on the left and ECA units on the right.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 1 Apr 2013, 23:06

Maybe on top it has the Rise of the Reds Moddb headlinebackgroundthing ?

Posted by: Massey 2 Apr 2013, 8:00

I have a somewhat neg commect to add here. So ill ask if people want to hear it first before stating it. (if u got nothing nice to say.....)

Posted by: MARS 2 Apr 2013, 8:06

Say what you want to say. Beating around the bush ony creates the impression that whatever you have on your mind is much worse than it actually is. Go ahead. "When you've got nothing nice to say, say it anyway because one-sided, universally positive feedback is generally useless"

Posted by: Massey 3 Apr 2013, 4:27

the screenshots of late almost feel like they belone to an US 1930's doc.
EG: The defences,

For the US ones u missed a option of showing off the missle defence shooting over others and the "target-link" thingie. US cannon defence u could of show of the independet shooting of units inside it and the longer range of the cannon.
The China Def, you could of show one shooting a passing plane and the other shooting the ground off screen.

instead it almost feel like those old US doc. "this is the unit, it turns left, it right, it has a gun to shoot"
I would prefer to see unit and others stuff (o.0) doing what it does best or like u would see in todays doc's or doing something better then "Look at billy shooting, isnt bill a good soldier"

anyway thats my 2 cent...

Posted by: WarWolf_1 3 Apr 2013, 8:44

@ MARS
I'm going to use that quote one, no some, no every, no every-other day. Thank you.

@ Massey
You're more than welcome to take the time to screen-grab such images of "better" quality; the ideas you've listed sound good. But at least such current screenshots show what the unit/ structure looks like in-game. It's a start and is something to use until a "better" image comes along. [There's to be a "gallery" section for a reason though, so dare I say "the more the merrier" in this case.]

Edit: Addition of (hopefully well conveyed) something or another [you know, when you are unable to think of the proper word to convey what you intend to mean...].

Posted by: InsurgentCell 4 Apr 2013, 3:26

I'd be more than happy to create some good gameplay for the screenshots via multiplayer and hamachi. If you want, you guys can PM me, and we might be able to arrange a game just for the sake of taking screenshots smile.gif

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 4 Apr 2013, 12:14

I really ain't sure if there is any real point in giving more effort behind getting better screenshots when most pages don't have description, tactics etc sections written.

Anyways naturally it would still be nice to get more feedback on the screenshots.

Posted by: Talonek 4 Apr 2013, 23:17

Spectre is right for the most part. If Massey has done nothing on the Wiki, and the screenshots are something he wants to do, he should do it. It's (hopefully) improving the experience when people visit the wiki, and it can lead to more participation later on.

Also, we are missing a large amount of the content in Rise of the Reds, be it structures, upgrades, or the new gameplay mechanics. It currently seems as though the only things happening are people going back and forth on the units.

Posted by: MARS 5 Apr 2013, 5:51

Descriptive content currently takes priority over cosmetics and lore.

Posted by: Talonek 5 Apr 2013, 20:33

QUOTE (MARS @ 4 Apr 2013, 23:51) *
Descriptive content currently takes priority over cosmetics and lore.


Could you please elaborate on what is Descriptive content? Is it just what the unit does (functions, weapons, abilities)?

Posted by: MARS 5 Apr 2013, 21:08

The in-game aspects of a unit. Who gets it and how, what it is, what it does, how it's supposed to be used, what it's countered by; all that kind of stuff. Right now, we have to set this up as a wiki that contains all the information that are relevant to gameplay so that people can look into it if they need an official manual. Story, fluff and lore can and should be added in later.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 5 Apr 2013, 21:12

The lore usually goes in first, because its the easiest to get ahold of. Tactics and Strategies are harder to write, because people tend to disagree.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 6 Apr 2013, 5:37

If you ask me, right now the wiki has plenty of lore and maybe more than plenty of pics needed for a wiki in it's primary state. But in-game description, tactics etc are almost non-existent. Yeah people may disagree on the tactics but that shouldn't stop a player from putting his own observation of that unit's usage. If it's inaccurate then it can always be fixed later.

I haven't tried it out myself cause I don't think I qualify. I pretty much stopped playing RTS games quite a while ago, recently I more or less stopped on almost all kinds of games. This is something for regular players.

Posted by: melaw 6 Apr 2013, 21:21

Would be really nice to have every unit with a short description what it can do. Weapons, passenger abilities, special features. Possible Upgrades too.


If I occasionally look something up, I only find the lore. The Wiki is nice nevertheless.

Posted by: Talonek 7 Apr 2013, 7:20

I have been doing a little work adding all the upgrades and abilities. It seems as though the upgrades often get put in the abilities portion of the infobox.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 7 Apr 2013, 7:54

Okay since someone has to do it I went ahead and gave writing Kodiak's unit description a shot,

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Kodiak_Tank

So how is it? Any suggestions? Feel free to laugh at it but please mention which parts you're laughing at. 8Ip.png

Posted by: MARS 7 Apr 2013, 8:50

No complaints.
Also, in RL, Russian tanks are generally lighter than their Western counterparts but for the sake of simplicity, we can refer to the in-game Kodiak as a heavy MBT type vehicle.
The only aspect that should occasionally take real world characteristics into account should be the lore. For a technical description, this looks good.

Posted by: X1Destroy 7 Apr 2013, 9:23

Funny thing is.....The Kodiak is still lighter and faster than the Paladin, which is a newer Abrams.

It is considered as heavy because most of it's counter parts are way too light.

Battlemaster is just a Type 59 which is old and doesn't fit the standard of RL MBT, and Crusader is more like a Patton, a medium tank.

Though is true that Leopard 3 is downgraded to a medium tank that is worse than a Russian MBT.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 7 Apr 2013, 10:15

Nothing surprising in Kodiak being the heaviest tank out there. ROTR Russia is based more on RA logic instead of RL logic. In RA games Soviets always got the heavier tanks opposing the fact that they had lighter tanks compared to Western counterparts.

Maybe it was to "anchor" the feelings of RL WW2 in a wacky Cold War gone WW3 scenario by giving the "bad guys" the heavier tanks the same way the "bad guys" in RL WW2 had the heavier tanks. But that's a different topic.

Posted by: X1Destroy 7 Apr 2013, 11:00

Actually not all of that is true, in the post-war crisis and RA 3, the Allies got the best MBT in the game but still only the Soviet can build that which is known as Apocalypse and that isn't related to the MBT topic.

By all means this is RA Russia and not RL Russia, obviously. If it was real life Russia then gameplay wise it would be way too simillar to China and that won't be good.

What I meant is in the lore, the Kodiak isn't the heaviest MBT and that wouldn't be oppossed to RL.

The Paladin is much heavier while the other tanks are either relics of coldwar and WW2 era or have been remade into doing something else other than fighting tanks.

Common? A 90mm cannon for an MBT? The crusader is clearly too light to be treated as a standard western MBT, and it isn't the only tank that represent the western arsenal.

It's clearly mean that the Crusader wasn't made to go toe to toe with modern Russian tanks, but to fight those god damn GLA's WW2 relics.

The Leopard is downgraded to be a medium tank, that's ironic but while it's lack damage and armor it have become a multirole tank and that is very well done.

Maybe the Challenger will be heavier than Kodiak, but that will be for the future.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 7 Apr 2013, 11:57

The Fire Support gen getting the heaviest MBT in the game? *shrugs*

Meh time will tell, Chally ain't coming anytime soon.

Anyway went ahead and gave these two a shot.

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Crusader_Tank#Unit_Description

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Battlemaster_Tank#Unit_Description

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

Posted by: X1Destroy 7 Apr 2013, 12:48

I think that's pretty perfect, at least to me.

Posted by: Karpet 7 Apr 2013, 14:12

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 7 Apr 2013, 11:00) *
Actually not all of that is true, in the post-war crisis and RA 3, the Allies got the best MBT in the game but still only the Soviet can build that which is known as Apocalypse and that isn't related to the MBT topic.

By all means this is RA Russia and not RL Russia, obviously. If it was real life Russia then gameplay wise it would be way too simillar to China and that won't be good.

What I meant is in the lore, the Kodiak isn't the heaviest MBT and that wouldn't be oppossed to RL.

The Paladin is much heavier while the other tanks are either relics of coldwar and WW2 era or have been remade into doing something else other than fighting tanks.

Common? A 90mm cannon for an MBT? The crusader is clearly too light to be treated as a standard western MBT, and it isn't the only tank that represent the western arsenal.

It's clearly mean that the Crusader wasn't made to go toe to toe with modern Russian tanks, but to fight those god damn GLA's WW2 relics.

The Leopard is downgraded to be a medium tank, that's ironic but while it's lack damage and armor it have become a multirole tank and that is very well done.

Maybe the Challenger will be heavier than Kodiak, but that will be for the future.


Well, as a Red Alert 3 player (sometimes) I have to tell you that the Allies have a 90mm cannon on their MBT compared to the Hammer Tank's 85mm cannon. This makes them the strongest in firepower, but Hammer Tank still beats them due to armor.

I don't think Challenger will be heavier than Kodiak anyways.



Posted by: X1Destroy 7 Apr 2013, 14:33

QUOTE
Well, as a Red Alert 3 player (sometimes) I have to tell you that the Allies have a 90mm cannon on their MBT compared to the Hammer Tank's 85mm cannon. This makes them the strongest in firepower, but Hammer Tank still beats them due to armor.


And that advantage is fully nulified by the Guardian Tank's laser target designator. I tried to put 3 Guardian Tanks against 3 Hammer Tanks and The Guardian Tanks effectively won.

The armor of the Hammer Tanks was reduced by half, after all.

Posted by: Karpet 7 Apr 2013, 14:36

QUOTE (X1Destroy @ 7 Apr 2013, 14:33) *
And that advantage is fully nulified by the Guardian Tank's laser target designator. I tried to put 3 Guardian Tanks against 3 Hammer Tanks and The Guardian Tanks effectively won.

The armor of the Hammer Tanks was reduced by half, after all.


You're forgetting the leach beam. 1 tank is almost destroyed, so you get Guardian cannon. Double firepower.

Well, this is getting a little bit off topic though.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 7 Apr 2013, 20:44

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 7 Apr 2013, 12:57) *
The Fire Support gen getting the heaviest MBT in the game? *shrugs*

Meh time will tell, Chally ain't coming anytime soon.

Anyway went ahead and gave these two a shot.

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Crusader_Tank#Unit_Description

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Battlemaster_Tank#Unit_Description

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.


Personally I think that looks brilliant. Maybe add some quotes as well? I like that there's an in-game picture of the unit, the render and the upgrade panel, IMO every unit should have a page like this.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 8 Apr 2013, 0:18

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 7 Apr 2013, 6:57) *
http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Crusader_Tank#Unit_Description

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Battlemaster_Tank#Unit_Description

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.


It looks great! I like the layout of Screenshot first, then render for the stat table, then ingame unit box for upgrades and such. But I think the quotes are a bit messed up though.

Posted by: Karpet 8 Apr 2013, 0:49

Does Battlemaster still have 90mm cannon?

So how does Crusader 75mm cannon win vs Battlemaster?

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 8 Apr 2013, 1:51

Muzzle Velocity and accuracy.

QUOTE
You're forgetting the leach beam. 1 tank is almost destroyed, so you get Guardian cannon. Double firepower.

Well, this is getting a little bit off topic though.


Price advantage, in battles, you'll have more guardians than they have hammers.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 8 Apr 2013, 1:55

QUOTE (Karpet @ 7 Apr 2013, 19:49) *
Does Battlemaster still have 90mm cannon?

So how does Crusader 75mm cannon win vs Battlemaster?


I don't know... I don't know where he got that info. I'm pretty sure it caries a 90 or 105mm gun at least

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 8 Apr 2013, 2:17

It's actually said to be a 75mm smoothbore cannon on the wiki.
Despite this, the original crusader had a 120mm. Either the new model makes no sense or we should change it.

Posted by: MARS 8 Apr 2013, 5:26

These in-universe vehicle specs were written several years ago. I was never particularly happy with them either but I also have a policy of not zig-zagging between technical story details -unless- I can present it as an overhauled model. If we were to update the Crusader or Battlemaster again, I would totally retcon those guns for more reasonable calibres that were installed as part of an in-story upgrade package but that's unlikely to happen.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 8 Apr 2013, 5:58

QUOTE (InsurgentCell @ 8 Apr 2013, 5:18) *
It looks great! I like the layout of Screenshot first, then render for the stat table, then ingame unit box for upgrades and such. But I think the quotes are a bit messed up though.

I didn't include those quotes. And yeah they do look a bit messed up.

Anyways gave Leopard and Scorpion a shot. Dunno what to try next. Tanks are usually my comfort zone.

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 8 Apr 2013, 6:30

Speaking of the Crusader model, you guys mind moving the barrel a bit lower on the turret?
Right now it's too high up to be realistic and such. Kinda looks funny too.

Posted by: melaw 11 Apr 2013, 17:20

Does anyone know who made this page? http://wiki.falloutstudios.org/wiki/Manual:Rise_of_the_Reds

The info there is complete but several releases old.
But they have all the icons and special abilities I still miss on the wikia, so maybe you could get some text passages from there.

Posted by: MARS 11 Apr 2013, 17:29

We do not take text passages from there. These information are obsolete and we are no longer affiliated with their community in any way. Anyone who actually wrote stuff for that wiki in the past is of course free to use any written text that he has the copyrights on but we do -not- wish for any content similarity between our new wiki and this one. Official order from The Hunter, end of story.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 11 Apr 2013, 18:25

QUOTE (MARS @ 11 Apr 2013, 18:29) *
We do not take text passages from there. These information are obsolete and we are no longer affiliated with their community in any way. Anyone who actually wrote stuff for that wiki in the past is of course free to use any written text that he has the copyrights on but we do -not- wish for any content similarity between our new wiki and this one. Official order from The Hunter, end of story.


The Hunter hunts the hunted in the name of the ones hunted by the hunted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No but seriously this new wiki seems very much better than the one for Fallout studios. I hope to read some awesome articles in the future. Unfortunentaly I can't contribute because I am terrible at writing wiki pages.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 11 Apr 2013, 19:40

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 11 Apr 2013, 23:25) *
No but seriously this new wiki seems very much better than the one for Fallout studios. I hope to read some awesome articles in the future. Unfortunentaly I can't contribute because I am terrible at writing wiki pages.

Would be really nice if you give it a shot anyway. Your English sounds pretty good. And every contribution helps.

Posted by: Karpet 12 Apr 2013, 1:49

I'm generally there to tidy up the place (little nicer place for people with OCD already).

And I just realized something - the Nukeneer mortar is probably based on the Davy Crocket recoilless rifle..

Hehehe...

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 25 Apr 2013, 10:05

Need some feedback here, is there a problem if the unitbox contains very detailed info like this page?
http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Red_Guard

Posted by: MARS 25 Apr 2013, 13:20

Looks all right. If you want to be specific about the equipment, you could add in the infobox that their weapon is a Type 56 (Chinese version of the Soviet SKS). Also, we will eventually provide a ROTR-canon explanation for the anachronistic appearance of the Chinese infantry units. I've actually had a rather helpful brainwave the other day, but it's something that'll be explained in a much later update. Given the standards of the setting, it should actually hold up quite brilliantly.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 25 Apr 2013, 15:26

QUOTE (MARS @ 25 Apr 2013, 14:20) *
Looks all right. If you want to be specific about the equipment, you could add in the infobox that their weapon is a Type 56 (Chinese version of the Soviet SKS). Also, we will eventually provide a ROTR-canon explanation for the anachronistic appearance of the Chinese infantry units. I've actually had a rather helpful brainwave the other day, but it's something that'll be explained in a much later update. Given the standards of the setting, it should actually hold up quite brilliantly.


Will you also explain why they still use Type 59 tanks and flamethrowers?

Posted by: MARS 25 Apr 2013, 15:41

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 25 Apr 2013, 16:26) *
Will you also explain why they still use Type 59 tanks and flamethrowers?


Simple; Battlemasters are Type-59s that have been updated yet again because despite all the modernisations that are going on right now, the Type-59 is still the most common tank in the Chinese arsenal.

Posted by: X1Destroy 25 Apr 2013, 15:44

So was there any info about the dragon tanks? Base on what and who developed it?

Posted by: MARS 25 Apr 2013, 15:55

There really isn't much to it. They took a tank chassis and mounted a flamethrower on it. This never struck me as particularly goofy or needy of an explanation.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 25 Apr 2013, 16:33

It is interesting that the Dragon Tank shall be coated with extra layers of ceramic and other materials to withstand the scorching heat of the napalm that it produces, and the crew must use special attires for not fry inside the tank.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 25 Apr 2013, 17:06

QUOTE (__CrUsHeR @ 25 Apr 2013, 17:33) *
It is interesting that the Dragon Tank shall be coated with extra layers of ceramic and other materials to withstand the scorching heat of the napalm that it produces, and the crew must use special attires for not fry inside the tank.


Yeah, but they still think "it's really hot in here" serious.gif What strikes me as particularly 'goofy' in the Chinese arsenal are the Tank Hunters. I mean, are flak cannons carriable and if so, can they even be shoulder-fired?

By the way MARS, your new pic makes me read your comments in a teaching and "hey listen up kids"-way.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 25 Apr 2013, 17:42

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 25 Apr 2013, 13:06) *
Yeah, but they still think "it's really hot in here" serious.gif What strikes me as particularly 'goofy' in the Chinese arsenal are the Tank Hunters. I mean, are flak cannons carriable and if so, can they even be shoulder-fired?


Flak things sound like something handmade distant from the reality of modern warfare, the Tank Hunter weapon probably not is a rocket launcher but instead a grenade launcher (as in RA2) and the effect of the explosion should cause severe damage to infantry due to fragmentation.

FLAK = something simple, cheap and relatively efficient.

BTW: hardly a fragmentation grenade could cause significant damage in an armored vehicle, probably for this reason that Tank Hunters take loads of TNT, would be the only way to neutralize the enemy tanks (analyzing of a point of view somewhat more realistic).

Posted by: Pepo 25 Apr 2013, 17:52

QUOTE (__CrUsHeR @ 25 Apr 2013, 18:42) *
Flak things sound like something handmade distant from the reality of modern warfare, the Tank Hunter weapon probably not is a rocket launcher but instead a grenade launcher (as in RA2) and the effect of the explosion should cause severe damage to infantry due to fragmentation.

FLAK = something simple, cheap and relatively efficient.

BTW: hardly a fragmentation grenade could cause significant damage in an armored vehicle, probably for this reason that Tank Hunters take loads of TNT, would be the only way to neutralize the enemy tanks (analyzing of a point of view somewhat more realistic).

They need to be launching some kind of AT grenade with very good aerodynamics so it can be use againts aircraft
Still the idea of a soldier running with tnt and placing it on a tank so it blow out is great serious.gif (and stupid at the same time rolleyes.gif )

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 25 Apr 2013, 18:10

QUOTE (Pepo @ 25 Apr 2013, 13:52) *
They need to be launching some kind of AT grenade with very good aerodynamics so it can be use againts aircraft
Still the idea of a soldier running with tnt and placing it on a tank so it blow out is great serious.gif (and stupid at the same time rolleyes.gif )


Exactly what I think, but you know... is just a game. tongue.gif

Posted by: InsurgentCell 26 Apr 2013, 1:12

QUOTE (__CrUsHeR @ 25 Apr 2013, 12:42) *
BTW: hardly a fragmentation grenade could cause significant damage in an armored vehicle, probably for this reason that Tank Hunters take loads of TNT, would be the only way to neutralize the enemy tanks (analyzing of a point of view somewhat more realistic).


I think tank hunters would probably carry 2 different types of shells, an airburst flak shell, for Anti-Air, and an armor piercing shell or shaped charge for tanks

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 27 Apr 2013, 15:12

Hey I just attempted to create a page for the Vehicle Assembly Depot, but damn it, I can't upload an image!

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Vehicle_Assembly_Depot

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 27 Apr 2013, 15:44

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 27 Apr 2013, 20:12) *
Hey I just attempted to create a page for the Vehicle Assembly Depot, but damn it, I can't upload an image!

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Vehicle_Assembly_Depot

Did it for ya. smile.gif

Posted by: flyingpancake 27 Apr 2013, 16:07

I always assumed the Chinese tank hunter had recoilless rifles with both flak and shaped rounds.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 27 Apr 2013, 17:12

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 27 Apr 2013, 16:44) *
Did it for ya. smile.gif


Thanks, but, how do you do it? Whenever I try a pop-up window appears saying nothing?

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 27 Apr 2013, 17:30

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 27 Apr 2013, 22:12) *
Thanks, but, how do you do it? Whenever I try a pop-up window appears saying nothing?

I never managed to add images using the pop up window either. I add them through edit (in source mode). Explaining this with words would take ages. Click on the "source" tab of the edit page and you'll see the unitbox, then the rest would be obvious.

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Vehicle_Assembly_Depot?action=edit

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 27 Apr 2013, 17:46

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 27 Apr 2013, 18:30) *
I never managed to add images using the pop up window either. I add them through edit (in source mode). Explaining this with words would take ages. Click on the "source" tab of the edit page and you'll see the unitbox, then the rest would be obvious.

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Vehicle_Assembly_Depot?action=edit


Oh! So you just have to type in the name of the image you have on your computer? Let me try it.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 29 Apr 2013, 12:03

Need a confirmation here - who wins in a 1 on 1 between tesla coil armed Shock Trooper and SEAL?

Posted by: (USA)Bruce 29 Apr 2013, 16:05

^
Shock trooper, The tesla coils can take down any infantry in a single hit

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 29 Apr 2013, 16:11

QUOTE ((USA)Bruce @ 29 Apr 2013, 21:05) *
^
Shock trooper, The tesla coils can take down any infantry in a single hit

That's what I was thinking. Thanks.

And anyone wants to talk on SEAL + Humvee tactics?

Posted by: InsurgentCell 29 Apr 2013, 21:09

If you can sneak a humvee full of seals in the enemy base, they're probably screwed!

Posted by: MARS 2 May 2013, 11:07

Here's something official. I noticed that some of the unit quotes given in the infoboxes are not entirely correct. It'd be nice if someone could update them accordingly. I'm mostly talking about typos/mistaken words here. Aside from these specific cases, I would also appreciate it if someone could have a look at all the quotes and get them in the same formal style i.e. capital letters ONLY where appropriate, punctuation, etc. This also goes for those quotes where the unit name is put in quotation signs for no apparent reason.

Also, there seems to be a double entry for 'Nighthawk' and 'Nighthawk Stealth Bomber' with the former being redundant.

ECA
Excavator: Got a plan for winning this war?
Jaeger: Hauptmann Jaeger, at your service, Kommandant.
Lynx: What's the hold-up?
Mortar Track: Ready to blow shit up.
Pandora: If this doesn't stop them, nothing will.
Pandur: Conversion kits ready.
Panzerfaust: I break tanks for a living / I hope you understand that I'm carrying a heavy weapon. Heavy - literally!
Tiger: This is the Tiger. Where's my prey?

USA
Ranger: What's the mission, Sir?
Tomahawk: Long range ballistics.

China
Inferno Cannon: Fire from the sky.
Red Guard: We stand together!
Volunteer Squad: Volunteers, at the ready!








Posted by: Talonek 2 May 2013, 21:06

These all must be from hearing the quotes wrong, or are from a lack of copy editors. I'm on it, now.

Got thorught all of ECA except the Panzerfaust. Are all the words in quotes capitalized for a reason?

Posted by: InsurgentCell 2 May 2013, 22:46

QUOTE (MARS @ 2 May 2013, 6:07) *
Inferno Cannon: Fire from the sky.


mm I'm pretty sure the Inferno Cannon says "Fiya from sky!", along with its chinese accent

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 4 May 2013, 19:39

Something needs to be cleared, is there any need to mention "x render" (yeah often these lines even include the quotation marks for some reason) in the unitbox of x right under it's render? Maybe it's just me but it seems kinda redundant. I mean like,
http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Mortar_Track
Is there any need to mention "Mortar Track Render." under it's render in the unitbox? At least a in-game quote like "ready to blow shit up!" tweaks more interest.

Posted by: MARS 4 May 2013, 19:42

Yeah, 'X Render' seems very redundant indeed. As far as I'm concerned, that part should be used for iconic quotes across the board.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 7 May 2013, 14:53

Anyone got any opinion about the lore of this page?

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Manned_Machine_Gun

I mean this guy does have a point,

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Manned_Machine_Gun#comm-3269

Posted by: X1Destroy 7 May 2013, 15:12

I think that page is unnecessary.

Nobody said that US or Chinese tanks don't have coaxial and turret mounted MG. It's just ingame that they don't appear for balance reason.

Tanks don't have MGs in every original C&C game, after all. But in official artworks, many of them have.

Infact, if an M1A2 in the past have MG, then an M1A4 should also have. There's just no reason to not equip them with MG when you can do that in the old version.

ECA turret mounted MG is just a piece of game mechanic, not something important in the lore.

Posted by: MARS 7 May 2013, 15:30

I agree. Get rid of that entire page ASAP. We don't need to come up with contrived lore explanations for absolutely everything as it only draws attention to the things that don't make a whole lot of sense. The idea of 21st century militaries somehow forgetting that co-axes/remote weapon stations/pintle mounts exist, only to lose 'top of the line divisions' (anyone care to imagine just how batshit ridiculous this ENTIRE notion is?) and then re-discover a technology that has been around since WW2 cannot be salvaged into anything worthwhile. In fact, it only makes all the involved parties look pants-on-head retarded. If we were to provide pseudo-realistics specs for our tanks, they'd all have some secondary weapon in-lore but in-game, we only have this sort of thing as a unique mechanic for the ECA and a visual detail for Russia due to design reasons.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 7 May 2013, 15:37

An awesome example of what MARS said is this here:



The Apocalypse is a wonderful tank in the game, but never will be so nice as it would in real life.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 7 May 2013, 16:21

QUOTE (MARS @ 7 May 2013, 20:30) *
I agree. Get rid of that entire page ASAP. We don't need to come up with contrived lore explanations for absolutely everything as it only draws attention to the things that don't make a whole lot of sense. The idea of 21st century militaries somehow forgetting that co-axes/remote weapon stations/pintle mounts exist, only to lose 'top of the line divisions' (anyone care to imagine just how batshit ridiculous this ENTIRE notion is?) and then re-discover a technology that has been around since WW2 cannot be salvaged into anything worthwhile. In fact, it only makes all the involved parties look pants-on-head retarded. If we were to provide pseudo-realistics specs for our tanks, they'd all have some secondary weapon in-lore but in-game, we only have this sort of thing as a unique mechanic for the ECA and a visual detail for Russia due to design reasons.

Got rid of the lore related stuff and turned it into a page only detailing how the manned MG works in-game. Is this okay now or should I still get rid of the page?

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Manned_Machine_Gun

Posted by: Talonek 7 May 2013, 20:40

QUOTE (MARS @ 7 May 2013, 9:30) *
I agree. Get rid of that entire page ASAP. We don't need to come up with contrived lore explanations for absolutely everything ...


What can I say, I had the creative itch, then.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 8 May 2013, 2:52

QUOTE (Talonek @ 7 May 2013, 15:40) *
What can I say, I had the creative itch, then.


heh dont worry bout it. Its just that the tank MGs are simply not put into the game for balance reasons.

Posted by: Talonek 15 May 2013, 20:42

Hey, just wanted let you guys know that If there are any issues with the wiki, you can message Odhora or I on the wiki, unless it specifically requires the knowledge of Mars. If you feel there is something to add or to fix, feel free to do so, we appreciate all the help we can get!

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 16 May 2013, 10:01

One question, when 2.0 has been released, can we add pages explaining fan-fiction stories, characters, battles etc. etc...

Posted by: MARS 16 May 2013, 10:53

Of course. I've noticed that there's a page for the Battle of Ramsgate already and anyone willing to write a more in-depth, quasi-historical account can give it a shot; if it fits, I might declare it as canon. The Battle of Kurmuk would deserve such coverage as well, considering the implications it had. The whole thing could be inspired by Wikipedia pages on real battles, infobox and all. Beyond that, I've already said that fan-fiction that fits our idea of the setting can also be declared canon and added to the wiki in the right presentation.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 16 May 2013, 11:20

I love reading about these things, make the game becomes increasingly more immersive for the player.

When these pages are created I would like to participate contributing to expand the lore of ROTR universe.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 16 May 2013, 12:24

QUOTE (MARS @ 16 May 2013, 11:53) *
Of course. I've noticed that there's a page for the Battle of Ramsgate already and anyone willing to write a more in-depth, quasi-historical account can give it a shot; if it fits, I might declare it as canon. The Battle of Kurmuk would deserve such coverage as well, considering the implications it had. The whole thing could be inspired by Wikipedia pages on real battles, infobox and all. Beyond that, I've already said that fan-fiction that fits our idea of the setting can also be declared canon and added to the wiki in the right presentation.


Heh, I added that page, to try and see if I could write about it, but it turned out I am not that good in writing about battles when I do not know the premise and actual course of the battle, since the updates only tell them from a soldier's point of view. I tried to make it a wikipedia-esque article based on the Battle of the Bulge, however the infobox only had unit info, not participants, strengths and so on.

Posted by: MARS 16 May 2013, 12:58

I suppose I could drop you some details to work with. They weren't specifically stated in the story itself but the Wiki can also contain some independent fluff of its own.

Battle of Ramsgate - Part of the Russian invasion of the United Kingdom - Part of the Russo-European War - Part of the Third World War

September 1, 2047

Amphibious landing of Russian forces at the coast of England.
The main landings occured at a narrow front between the towns of Ramsgate and Kingsdown. Elements of the Second and Third Shock Division landed at Ramsgate and Kingsdown.
Regular Russian Army and Russian Navy infantry, supported by amphibious vehicles, landed along the main coastline between the towns. These could also include limited armoured elements of Zhukov's 20th Guards Army.
The ground element was supported by the Russian Airforce - including regular aviation with Berkuts and Frogfoots and Aleksandr's 'special' aviation with PAK-FAs.
A large armada of Il-76s dropped VDV airborne forces and Spetsnaz (presumably with light vehicle support) further in land to drive a wedge between the British coastal defenders and their reinforcements.
The skirmishes in and around Ramsgate occured between 05:12 and 07:25 which also appears to be the timeframe of the operation itself. The landing was a massive failure due to Aleksandr's flawed strategies and the inability of his arrogant Shock Divisions to work effectively alongside the regular Army/Navy. Naval bombardment was limited because Aleksandr believed that his troops would simply plow through. He and his troops also seem to underestimate the tenacity of the enemy, to the point where a bayonet charge legitimately surprised them.
The defence consisted of the British Army, the Royal Airforce and the Royal Navy - led by the HMS Thunderchild battlecruiser - and a Spanish fleet element in the Channel under the command of one Admiral Garcia.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 16 May 2013, 16:34

I guess I have to work with creating battle articles some more, as I am almost no good at writing them. I guess MARS could edit any necesseties on the page.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 16 May 2013, 18:45

I don't know if it was a troll, but someone wrote strange additions to the Mortar Track page (http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Supply_Track) and the WASP hive. I edited the WASP hive so it doesn't look bad anymore (seriously, he had wrote "like black ops 2 but better" in the unit description box). I haven't edited the Mortar Track so you can see.

Posted by: MARS 16 May 2013, 19:38

Just remove anything that looks like garbage. Shouldn't be too hard to tell.
Also, the stuff I wrote for the Ramsgate article was in no way intended to BE the article; it's just a bunch of cliff notes for whoever wants to write a serious account of the events.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 16 May 2013, 19:56

QUOTE (MARS @ 16 May 2013, 20:38) *
Also, the stuff I wrote for the Ramsgate article was in no way intended to BE the article; it's just a bunch of cliff notes for whoever wants to write a serious account of the events.


Oh. Well... I guess I can make something out of it...

Posted by: Talonek 16 May 2013, 21:19

I'll make a battle unitbox to use on pages such as these.

Posted by: Talonek 16 May 2013, 21:26

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 16 May 2013, 12:45) *
I don't know if it was a troll, but someone wrote strange additions to the Mortar Track page (http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Supply_Track) and the WASP hive. I edited the WASP hive so it doesn't look bad anymore (seriously, he had wrote "like black ops 2 but better" in the unit description box). I haven't edited the Mortar Track so you can see.


Looking at some of their other posts, it appears to be trolling. I'll block him if it gets worse or continues.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 17 May 2013, 14:10

Hey MARS, got any lore for the superweapons?

EDIT: I also wondered if on general-specific units such as the Han, should we write "Affiliation: Special Weapons General in 2.0 Only" or just "Special Weapons General Mau" or something like that?

Posted by: MARS 17 May 2013, 14:22

I'll give you a few pointers to work with.

Chinese Nuke: Already has a decent lore portion
Solaris: See update info on Solaris. A thing that might be noteworthy is the fact that Solaris was not initially meant to be used as a weapon. The Russians claimed otherwise and during the war, the ECA proved them right out of necessity.
Particle Cannon: The ground structure actually contains a particle accelerator which fires a beam into space which is redirected onto the target by two satellites. In lore, it acts as a tactical weapon, but also as a US/NAU missile shield and possible defence against asteroids.
Scud Storm: Basically just a fancy name for a bunch of Scud missiles on a launch pad. The missiles are scraped together from various half-maintained stockpiles around the world, including those of Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Syria, Libya, North Korea and Congo, presumably.
Tremor AGAS: Designed as a long range ballistic cannon - basically a super-sized stationary version of the Soviet Pion/Malka or WW2 era railway guns - that is used for massed bombardment in preperation of a ground assault. Lore-wise, the system is capable of firing HE, nuclear and chemical shells but the Russians refrain from using unconventional payloads for political reasons and because they don't want to pollute the land they'll be trying to capture moments after the barrage is over.

As for the other question, the simple version (i.e. option two) should suffice.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 17 May 2013, 14:32

Thanks MARS. I'd also like to hear opinion on the Han Gunship I just edited. Does the tactics, counter-tactics look good?: http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Han_Gunship

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 17 May 2013, 15:57

QUOTE (MARS @ 17 May 2013, 10:22) *
I'll give you a few pointers to work with.

Tremor AGAS: Designed as a long range ballistic cannon - basically a super-sized stationary version of the Soviet Pion/Malka or WW2 era railway guns - that is used for massed bombardment in preperation of a ground assault. Lore-wise, the system is capable of firing HE, nuclear and chemical shells but the Russians refrain from using unconventional payloads for political reasons and because they don't want to pollute the land they'll be trying to capture moments after the barrage is over.


I imagine these shells falling on the Pentagon, and worst of all is that no countermeasure should be effective against it and according to the official lore Russia has several Tremors spread across their territory and use them indiscriminately, the USA should have a great headache with weapons of mass destruction of Russia in ROTR.

Posted by: MARS 17 May 2013, 16:37

Well unlike an ICBM, the Tremor would not have worldwide range cos that'd be impossible with a shell-based weapon but if the Russians had one on, say, Cuba (which they haven't), the US would have a reason to worry.
The Tremor's range could be comparable to that of an SRBM like the Iskander, tops.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 17 May 2013, 16:51

I just noticed that there's a Frozen Front arcticle. Should we add articles on every map, and if so, should it contain strategies and stuff? Maybe some background info on the map?

Posted by: Pepo 17 May 2013, 16:58

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 17 May 2013, 15:32) *
Thanks MARS. I'd also like to hear opinion on the Han Gunship I just edited. Does the tactics, counter-tactics look good?: http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Han_Gunship

Look good for me wink.gif the only thing i would say is fixing the links

One thing about the wiki:could be navigation charts aded to make navigation easier?i mean the charts like:
Eca(link)
Units:etc...
Buildings:etc...
Generals:etc...

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 17 May 2013, 17:37

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 17 May 2013, 21:51) *
I just noticed that there's a Frozen Front arcticle. Should we add articles on every map, and if so, should it contain strategies and stuff? Maybe some background info on the map?

If you ask me that would me really cool. But that's just my personal opinion.

And can anyone update the Russian unit lore sections with info from this post (given it's fine to do so)?

http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.php?showtopic=4752&view=findpost&p=64253

I would do it myself but right now I am kinda too tired to properly string words together. :S

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 17 May 2013, 18:05

QUOTE (MARS @ 17 May 2013, 10:22) *
I'll give you a few pointers to work with.

Particle Cannon: The ground structure actually contains a particle accelerator which fires a beam into space which is redirected onto the target by two satellites. In lore, it acts as a tactical weapon, but also as a US/NAU missile shield and possible defence against asteroids.


If it can be used as a shield and as a defense against asteriodes may well be used as a strategical weapon against satellites which could easily put an end to the ECA Project Solaris, and navigation systems for Europe and Asia. If the constellation of satellites achieve global coverage it would be an interesting and "discrete" option for the American generals in case of war.

Posted by: MARS 17 May 2013, 18:18

It would be the ultimate ASAT weapon, but then again, the US don't have a reason to use it against the ECA. They're certainly not friends anymore but there wasn't really a risk of an open conflict either.
Russia's satellites would obviously become targets but then again, we might once again refer to our constantly forgotten friend Mr. Blackout Node who could probably be mounted on a satellite as well.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 17 May 2013, 18:25

God damn! The Russians are always a step ahead of the USA! tongue.gif

I imagine a true "star wars" in progress...

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 17 May 2013, 18:35

QUOTE (__CrUsHeR @ 17 May 2013, 19:25) *
God damn! The Russians are always a step ahead of the USA! tongue.gif

I imagine a true "star wars" in progress...


Space-based weapons are already in development. Heck, they had it back in the 70's already with the Blackbird.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 17 May 2013, 18:54

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 17 May 2013, 14:35) *
Space-based weapons are already in development. Heck, they had it back in the 70's already with the Blackbird.


Yes, there are some projects of the period of the Cold War on laser guns and space stuff, however due to the exorbitant costs everything was canceled, but in the Generals USA apparently goes through a unprecedented great economic period in its history that allowed it all became in reality, including lasers things of the Gen. Townes in ZH.

Probably after the recession of the USA in the end of the ZH made ​​everything that was abandoned, perhaps in the current timeline of history with the USA recovering economically the Particle Cannon receives more satellites for a efficient global constellation and its use will become more frequent.

Posted by: Talonek 17 May 2013, 19:36

We still need help adding most of the pages for structures.

Should we add pages for the Generals Powers as well?

Posted by: Pepo 17 May 2013, 21:10

I'm going to edit some russian unit article,two questions:
The rhino tank win in a one to one against any mbt with missiles?and witout then?

Posted by: Arcus2611 18 May 2013, 1:45

QUOTE (Pepo @ 18 May 2013, 4:10) *
I'm going to edit some russian unit article,two questions:
The rhino tank win in a one to one against any mbt with missiles?and witout then?


Why would it? The Rhino is a relic from the 1960s. It could probably win in a fight against the Scorpion or Battlemaster, and maybe the Crusader because it's built for speed and amphibious capability rather than armour and firepower, but if you pit the Rhino against a modern, honest to god MBT like the Paladin, Kodiak or Leopard, it's going to lose. If not, that begs the question of why the Russians even retired the damn thing in the first place.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 18 May 2013, 2:11

QUOTE (Arcus2611 @ 17 May 2013, 21:45) *
Why would it? The Rhino is a relic from the 1960s. It could probably win in a fight against the Scorpion or Battlemaster, and maybe the Crusader because it's built for speed and amphibious capability rather than armour and firepower, but if you pit the Rhino against a modern, honest to god MBT like the Paladin, Kodiak or Leopard, it's going to lose. If not, that begs the question of why the Russians even retired the damn thing in the first place.


The Rhino's ROTR received an ATGM system that looks modern and effective against vehicles. Although this tank is outdated technologically it certainly received improvements to continue operating and as a reserve unit may be important for Russia that needs a relatively light tank to be transported by aircraft.

Posted by: Pepo 18 May 2013, 7:47

QUOTE (Arcus2611 @ 18 May 2013, 2:45) *
Why would it? The Rhino is a relic from the 1960s. It could probably win in a fight against the Scorpion or Battlemaster, and maybe the Crusader because it's built for speed and amphibious capability rather than armour and firepower, but if you pit the Rhino against a modern, honest to god MBT like the Paladin, Kodiak or Leopard, it's going to lose. If not, that begs the question of why the Russians even retired the damn thing in the first place.

Well the scorpion is just a british centurion and when amassed it defeats mbt like paladins or kodiaks.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 18 May 2013, 11:09

QUOTE (Talonek @ 18 May 2013, 0:36) *
We still need help adding most of the pages for structures.

Should we add pages for the Generals Powers as well?

Yeah, why not?
QUOTE (Arcus2611 @ 18 May 2013, 6:45) *
Why would it? The Rhino is a relic from the 1960s. It could probably win in a fight against the Scorpion or Battlemaster, and maybe the Crusader because it's built for speed and amphibious capability rather than armour and firepower, but if you pit the Rhino against a modern, honest to god MBT like the Paladin, Kodiak or Leopard, it's going to lose. If not, that begs the question of why the Russians even retired the damn thing in the first place.

Just to make something clear - whether an unit can beat another in one on one combat sometimes has nothing to do with it's lore and background. Like as far as I know the Tunguska beats Gepard in one on one but if you check the lore and looks of the two vehicles the Gepard would be the more modern of the two light AA vehicles.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 21 May 2013, 14:06

I found a really good templata page: http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Page_Template But is everything like land speed, attack range and sight range really necessary? I also wonder, how do you take a picture of the cameo in-game with upgrades around, like this:

Posted by: Talonek 21 May 2013, 15:03

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 21 May 2013, 8:06) *
I found a really good templata page: http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Page_Template But is everything like land speed, attack range and sight range really necessary?


I put "currently unsupported on the wiki" next to it on purpose. While we may not utilize this currently, there could be a need for it in the future.

Posted by: Talonek 21 May 2013, 20:06

I changed the overall appearance of the Wiki, and edited the navigation buttons on the top. The background, however, looks like sh!t, but this is my fault, not the artists. A custom sized one, under 150 Kb, will have to be made.



Changed the background to something less obnoxious. Tiled image was not working for me.

I'll take suggestions for good color schemes.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 22 May 2013, 10:18

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 21 May 2013, 19:06) *
I found a really good templata page: http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Page_Template But is everything like land speed, attack range and sight range really necessary? I also wonder, how do you take a picture of the cameo in-game with upgrades around, like this:

The method I know of - select the unit in-game, take a screenshot with F12, after exiting the game open the screenshot with Paint or any other image processing software, select the unitbox (in-game cameo with upgrades around) part of the screenshot with the Select tool, crop it and you're done.
QUOTE (Talonek @ 22 May 2013, 1:06) *
I changed the overall appearance of the Wiki, and edited the navigation buttons on the top. The background, however, looks like sh!t, but this is my fault, not the artists. A custom sized one, under 150 Kb, will have to be made.



Changed the background to something less obnoxious. Tiled image was not working for me.

I'll take suggestions for good color schemes.

The navigation buttons are awesome. But this grey scheme with white fonts is a bit hard to read.

Posted by: Talonek 22 May 2013, 14:20

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 22 May 2013, 4:18) *
The navigation buttons are awesome. But this grey scheme with white fonts is a bit hard to read.


Like I said, I'm taking suggestions for color schemes.

These items can be colored

Buttons
Links
Header
Background color

Give me these in Hex color codes, And I will test them out.

I also need a background that goes in the very back of the page.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 22 May 2013, 15:37

MARS, if you could, I'd like to see some lore/background of the GLA Tunnel Network, Stinger Site and any GLA unit not specified in a ROTR update. I am just not that good in writing background information.

Posted by: Talonek 22 May 2013, 17:36

As long as we get all the infobox data in, and someone doing tactics, counters, trivia, etc., we'll be good.

But seriously, I need some feedback on the colorscheme.

Posted by: MARS 22 May 2013, 19:32

Lore for the Stinger Site:
Introduced in the early 1980s to replace the aging Redeye anti-air missile, the FIM-92 Stinger became the go-to man-portable air defence system - or MANPADS - for many US allies. However, the Stinger was also supplied to a number of guerilla groups such as the Afghan Mujahideen during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan or the Syrian rebels in the early years of the 21st century, making it not just a mere weapon, but a tool of US and NATO geo-political involvement in local conflicts for better or worse. As a result, it was only a matter of time until the missiles also found their way into the arsenals of the Global Liberation Army where they were turned against their own makers in one of history's many cruel twists of irony.

Lore for the Tunnel Network:
Throughout history, the use of tunnelling tactics has always been a common element of many guerilla wars and asymmetrical conflicts. Like the National Liberation Front of Vietnam or the Mujahideen fighters of Afghanistan, the GLA also employed extensive tunnel networks in order to covertly move its warriors across considerable distances, smuggle supplies and provisions through even the tightest borders and strike swiftly from within the enemy's own territory. Whereas the American response was to destroy the tunnels with deep-penetrating bombs, the Chinese initially doused the underground with incendiaries, then sent their smallest soldiers into the tunnels to gather intel and demolish them. Many of these so-called 'tunnel rats' have told harrowing tales of burned out passageways littered with charred human remains and booby traps and despite the omnipresence of state propaganda, it stands as a tragic fact that many PLA veterans with such severe psychological trauma only receive a token amount of support from the Party government.

As for the visuals of the Wiki, I do like the content template and suggest adapting it for the other pages as well, even though we should -not- go into such minute details as movement speed, armour values and so on. Basically, the infobox should only contain quality information that are directly visible in the game rather than cryptic code-speak. As for the design, I'd be in favour of a dark grey background tone and white text. Blue seems too generic, red is not easy on the eye and the olive green gives me a negative vibe that reminds me of a tacky early 2000s military website. A dark, neutral grey such as the one of the Company Of Heroes Wiki with plain white text seems appropriate. As for the side images, could someone tell me what dimensions an image would need to have in order to fill in both edges of the screen without plastering the same image all over the place?

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 22 May 2013, 19:38

QUOTE (MARS @ 22 May 2013, 20:32) *
MARS' lore.


Thanks, MARS! As you migjht understand I am not so good on writing background stories, and I hope I don't piss you off about it.

Posted by: Knossos 22 May 2013, 19:46

I tried my wiki skills.

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Technical - Lore

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Harrier#Tactics - Tactics


Posted by: Generalcamo 22 May 2013, 20:36

Here are the intended factions of a few USA units, based on available evidence:

Microwave Tank: Armor General
Microwave Humvee: Special Ops
Chaparral: Armor General
Ambulance: Special Ops and Airforce
M113 Medic: Armor
M113 Vulcan: Armor
LOSAT Humvee: Special Ops
Fire Ant Drone: Armor
Decoy Drone: Airforce
Combat Chinook: Airforce
Guardian Defence: Airforce and Armor


A few GLA units as well:
Battlebus: Terror Cell
Bomb Truck: Terror Cell
Demo Track: Terror Cell
Angry Mob: Terror Cell
Terrorist: Terror Cell
Hijacker: Terror Cell
Maruader: Warlord
SCUD Launcher: Bio Command

Not much information available for other factions at the moment.

EDIT: Conform to Word of God MARS.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 22 May 2013, 20:38

QUOTE (Knossos @ 22 May 2013, 20:46) *
I tried my wiki skills.

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Technical - Lore

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Harrier#Tactics - Tactics


You don't have to specify if you did it Knossos, but you could remove the "[ToDo]" from the top.

Posted by: Talonek 22 May 2013, 21:01

MARS

1920 x 1080 p, I'm guessing.
Here's an example I found: http://ansible.wikia.com/wiki/File:Wiki-background

The file needs to be 150kb or below for it to be allowed.

Sorry, I couldn't tell you more at this time.

Posted by: MARS 22 May 2013, 21:03

Obsolete/misleading information will be marked in red. Consider them outdated and do not mention them anywhere.

QUOTE (Generalcamo @ 22 May 2013, 21:36) *
Here are the intended factions of a few USA units, based on available evidence:

Microwave Tank: Armor General
Microwave Humvee: Special Ops
Chaparral: Armor General
Ambulance: Special Ops and Airforce
M113 Medic: Armor
M113 Vulcan: Armor
LOSAT Humvee: Special Ops
Fire Ant Drone: Armor
Decoy Drone: Airforce
Combat Chinook: Airforce
Guardian Defence: Airforce and Armor

A few GLA units as well:
Battlebus: Terror Cell
Bomb Truck: Terror Cell
Demo Track: Terror Cell
Angry Mob: Terror Cell
Terrorist: Terror Cell
Hijacker: Terror Cell
Maruader: Warlord
SCUD Launcher: Bio Command

Not much information available for other factions at the moment.


Posted by: Re_Simeone 22 May 2013, 21:49

Wait wait . . .
Bomb truck for just one GLA general !?!??
I thought 2.0 will not use ZH "Lets cripple one (or two) General(s) to make it (them) "unique"),
Bomb Truck is essential bit of arsenal of faction like GLA,in fact I'll go far to call it game decider
alongside Phantom Angry Mob,why you guys decided for such a radical move ?

Posted by: Generalcamo 22 May 2013, 22:32

Remember, the removal of one unit from one General does not mean the crippling of another. While one may not have a bomb truck per say, they might have another unit fulfilling a similar role (A bomb buggy for example, or Partisans)

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 23 May 2013, 5:32

QUOTE (MARS @ 23 May 2013, 2:03) *
Obsolete/misleading information will be marked in red. Consider them outdated and do not mention them anywhere.

Could we mention which units had their affiliation changed during development in the trivia section? Like mentioning Terrorist was originally planned to be unique to Terror Cell but became a generic GLA unit later?
QUOTE (Re_Simeone @ 23 May 2013, 2:49) *
Wait wait . . .
Bomb truck for just one GLA general !?!??
I thought 2.0 will not use ZH "Lets cripple one (or two) General(s) to make it (them) "unique"),
Bomb Truck is essential bit of arsenal of faction like GLA,in fact I'll go far to call it game decider
alongside Phantom Angry Mob,why you guys decided for such a radical move ?

That has been in the ini for ages... anyway the other two won't get the Bomb Truck but they could be getting completely different unique units instead, units that would fit in their theme. Like Warlord might actually get a completely new, not yet introduced vehicle that represents "overwhelming brutality" instead of suicide rushing Bomb Trucks.

Plus like you said, Bomb Trucks are game deciders. Would you like every single GLA gen to get the same game decider to decide their games? How would that be distinct? Its the same reason I really support making other game deciders like Ovies or Paladins unique as well (naturally provided other gens get something different yet equally awesome to decide their games which common sense suggests they would).

Posted by: Knossos 23 May 2013, 13:59

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 23 May 2013, 3:38) *
You don't have to specify if you did it Knossos, but you could remove the "[ToDo]" from the top.


Oh that, I was afraid of doing that, and it lets you know that you could still edit it.

Posted by: Knossos 23 May 2013, 16:07

Question; I want to build an article about the two ECA prtocols (Manticore and Pandora) Should I build in one article or separately?

Posted by: Arcus2611 23 May 2013, 16:16

Er, the unit pages for the Manticore and Pandora already exist.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 23 May 2013, 16:38

QUOTE (Knossos @ 23 May 2013, 21:07) *
Question; I want to build an article about the two ECA prtocols (Manticore and Pandora) Should I build in one article or separately?

If you're talking about writing an article on the level 5 gen power then I say put them in the same article since its a single gen power.

Posted by: MARS 23 May 2013, 17:31

Right. The unit themselves (Manticore, Pandora, Venom eventually) should all get their own articles but you can make a combined article that deals with the protocols themselves, i.e. why the ECA got pushed to the point of using what is essentially a 21st century version of the infamous Wunderwaffen, the details and implications of each protocol in-lore and in-game etc. This is definitely the stuff that should be rolled into one article.

Posted by: Knossos 24 May 2013, 3:06

QUOTE (MARS @ 24 May 2013, 0:31) *
Right. The unit themselves (Manticore, Pandora, Venom eventually) should all get their own articles but you can make a combined article that deals with the protocols themselves, i.e. why the ECA got pushed to the point of using what is essentially a 21st century version of the infamous Wunderwaffen, the details and implications of each protocol in-lore and in-game etc. This is definitely the stuff that should be rolled into one article.


Right, thanks.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 24 May 2013, 17:02

So, right now the Rise of the Reds-universe has a game, a wiki and a map. Could we expect a timeline in the future?

Posted by: MARS 24 May 2013, 17:19

We have a timeline on the main website and I'll likely be expanded/updated for the Wiki at some point after it's all finished.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 24 May 2013, 17:23

QUOTE (MARS @ 24 May 2013, 18:19) *
We have a timeline on the main website and I'll likely be expanded/updated for the Wiki at some point after it's all finished.


Well I meant some sort of list, like:

- March 30, 2039: GLA sabotages bla bla bla.
- August 14, 2040: A Russian helicopter gets destroyed when etc. etc.

Something like that?

Posted by: MARS 24 May 2013, 17:34

We should only use years and months (if mentioned), not days because that only makes things messy and more difficult to keep track of. Every year in which something important happens should have all the events listed in chronolical order without exact days, exceptions being updates which literally mention full dates because several important events are happening within a short timespan.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 24 May 2013, 18:45

MARS, can you read the small discussion between me and Odhora here and decide which would be better: http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Tunnel_Defender#comm-3396

Posted by: MARS 24 May 2013, 19:21

I'd be in favour of using the newer template from now on because some units don't have abilities or aren't entirely defined by their abilities. I'm also in favour of this because it moves the abiltiies and upgrades further down and lines them up more closely with the tactics which seems appropriate and helps to make the main unit box less full. I admit that it'll be a bit of a hassle to convert all existing pages, but it's still better to decide on a definitive format now than later. Also, I definitely like the dark grey colours on that new template (the one with the Paladin as the example)

Posted by: Talonek 24 May 2013, 20:38

QUOTE (swedishplayer-97 @ 24 May 2013, 12:45) *
MARS, can you read the small discussion between me and Odhora here and decide which would be better: http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Tunnel_Defender#comm-3396


We had already decided to use the new two-unitbox template a few months ago.

Posted by: Talonek 24 May 2013, 20:52

For information on how to edit the wiki, go to the navigation bar and hover over "Wiki Information", then click on Page Template or Formatting & Technical Info. These are constantly being updated by me.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 25 May 2013, 3:12

Then shouldn't "notes" be moved to the second unitbox as well? IMO notes should be close to/come after the "abilities" section as these two are often connected... more like notes lists the "negative abilities" of the units.

And honestly speaking notes should be mentioned at the end of a presentation (ie in the end of the second box), not in the middle of it (ie the end of the first box).

Posted by: Talonek 28 May 2013, 17:59

Notes are for things like "Coming in ROTR Version 1.82", or "Information as of ROTR Version 1.7".

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 29 May 2013, 4:37

Actually note like "Information as of ROTR Version 1.7" is just more reason to add the notes to the second box. Abilities and upgrades are part of the information as well. It looks odd if we put "Information as of ROTR Version 1.7" right in the middle of the information. Pretty sure these stuff can be said before or after the information, not in the middle of it.

And notes are frequently used to add stuff like - x unit can't garrison, explodes upon death, must reload after y shot, build limit of 1, must wait z time before training another one etc. Seems like after 1.82 all the drone power requirements will also go there.

Posted by: InsurgentCell 30 May 2013, 3:40

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 28 May 2013, 23:37) *
And notes are frequently used to add stuff like - x unit can't garrison, explodes upon death, must reload after y shot, build limit of 1, must wait z time before training another one etc. Seems like after 1.82 all the drone power requirements will also go there.
\

Personally, I think stuff like that would fit better in the Unit Description, not the Notes. The notes should be more of an aside thing just to say stuff like "Unit coming out in 1.82, or 2.0, or unit has been renamed blah blah blah (im lookin at you, viper!)

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 30 May 2013, 8:05

QUOTE (InsurgentCell @ 30 May 2013, 8:40) *
\

Personally, I think stuff like that would fit better in the Unit Description, not the Notes. The notes should be more of an aside thing just to say stuff like "Unit coming out in 1.82, or 2.0, or unit has been renamed blah blah blah (im lookin at you, viper!)

As far as I know info about unit being renamed usually gets placed in the Trivia section of wikis.

Regardless the first question still remains. If you put "Information as of ROTR Version 1.7" in the notes then it looks odd if you say that right in the middle of the information, after giving info about the cost, build time etc but before info about upgrades, abilities etc. Ofc if you strictly only put things like "Coming in ROTR Version 1.82" then it probably doesn't matter where the notes get placed.

Again personally I think stuff like "can't garrison" or "explodes upon death" are pretty necessary that should be mentioned somewhere in the unitbox. Not necessarily in the Notes section, but it should be somewhere in there. But it's your call.

Posted by: Talonek 30 May 2013, 17:55

Putting notes between Unitbox and upgrades gives it a high chance to be seen and read.
Trivia is mainly for trivial things not related to the Mod itself, such as the Paladin Example.
Sections can be added to the UnitBox if need be, but a box solely for garrisons or explosions on death seems overkill. Explodes on death could be put in the |useguns section if need be.

Posted by: Talonek 31 May 2013, 13:38

I couldn't do any work to the UnitBoxes last night, due to the power going out, and then staying out for my half of the street, and all of the city East of us.

Posted by: MARS 1 Jun 2013, 9:43

Our next update still takes a while but for those of you who are coming here for the story, here's part 1 of our official canon timeline. I'd say we should also post this on the Wiki at some point:

Part 1: Before Generals/ZH; 1980s-2019
Part 2: Generals and ZH; 2019-2028
Part 3: The interwar period; 2028-2040
Part 4: Rise of the Reds; 2040-

PART I - THE NEW MILLENNIUM

1980
- The US Army introduces the M1 Abrams main battle tank.

1981
- The US Army introduces the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle.

1982
- The later American General Gregory Townes is born.

1983
- The later Russian General Leonid Vasilyevich Zhukov is born in St. Petersburg.
- The later British General Charles Cutting is born in the East End of London.

1985
- The US government allocates a black budget of 455 million Dollars for the Aurora project which is rumored to be the codename of a top-secret hypersonic reconnaissance plane to replace the SR-71 Blackbird.
- The later Russian President Nikolai Abramovich Suvorov is born in Moscow.

1988
- The later German General Wolfgang-Maximilian von Kuerten is born in Ulm.

1989
- The later Chinese General Bao Jin loses his parents in the Beijing student protests and is subsequently raised by a state orphanage.
- The Fall of the Berlin Wall marks the beginning of the end of the German Democratic Republic.
- The later 'Death Merchant' and GLA leader Anwar Sulaymaan is born in Haditha, Iraq.

1990
- Operation Desert Storm. A US-led coalition intervenes in Iraq after the country had invaded its neighbor Kuwait. US Air Force Lieutenant Malcolm Granger destroys four enemy SAM sites in a single afternoon during SEAD operations around Baghdad.
- The US Army introduces the M1097 Avenger anti-air vehicle.
- The later Dutch General Willem van der Meer is born in Bergharen.
- West and East Germany are re-united as the Federal Republic of Germany.

1991
- Communist hardliners launch a failed coup against the provisional government of Russia. The Soviet Union is dissolved and Boris Yeltsin becomes the first President of the Russian Federation.

1992
- The later Russian General Yevgeny Romanovich Orlov is born in Irkutsk.
- The Maastricht Treaty is signed, transforming the European Community into the European Union and setting the goal to create a shared currency.

1999
- Russian President Yelsin resigns on December 31 and is replaced by Vladimir Putin in the following year.

2001
- The September 11 attacks are carried out by a group of Al Qaeda terrorists, resulting in the death of 2.996 people.
- Operation Enduring Freedom. A US-led coalition invades Afghanistan to topple the Taliban regime and hunt down the Al Qaeda leadership.

2002
- The Euro is introduced as the new official currency of several European countries.
- Leonid Zhukov is deployed to Grozny during the Second Chechen War.

2003
- Operation Iraqi Freedom. A US-led coalition of countries invades Iraq after its government was accused of possessing weapons of mass destruction.

2004
- The 15-year-old Anwar Sulaymaan takes part in the fight against American troops during the Battle of Fallujah.

2005
- A shady Jordanian immunologist, only known by his internet pseudonym 'Dr. Thrax' disappears into a terrorist-controlled ghetto in Cairo, Egypt.

2006
- British Army Lieutenant Charles Cutting is deployed to the Afghan province of Helmand.
- The Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is captured by US forces and subsequently trialed and executed.

2007
- The Russian military tests the Father of all Bombs, the most powerful non-nuclear bomb ever detonated.

2008
- For the first time in the history of China, the Olympic Summer Games are hosted in Bejing.
- Leonid Zhukov is deployed to Gori during the South Ossetia War.
- Eugene Griffon enlists for the US Air Force and undergoes training as a drone technician.
- The Great Recession begins, severely damaging the global economy for years to come.

2010
- The European Debt Crisis begins, promting the EU governments to enact a number of controversial policies to save the Euro.
- The Arab Spring. A series of protests and revolutions destabilises several countries in North Africa and the Middle East. The protests in Libya and Syria escalate into all-out civil wars.
- Prince Kassad, the son of a Libyan tribal leader, organises several terrorist attacks against the Gaddafi regime.
- The later soldier and popular European resistance hero Frank Jaeger is born in Duesseldorf, Germany.

2011
- Operation Neptune Spear. Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is killed by a US Navy SEAL team in Pakistan.
- Amidst the Egyptian revolution, the US embassy in Cairo is hit by a package bomb assembled by Rodall Juhziz, a local Al Qaeda sympathizer.
- The 29-year-old US Army Captain Gregory Townes resigns from a guest scholarship at Westpoint and accepts a new position in the DARPA R&D department for laser technologies.
- The Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi is killed during his escape from Sirte. The National Transitional Council assumes control of Libya but the country remains destabilized.
- The North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il dies and is replaced by his son Kim Jong Un.

2012
- The USS Nelson, a littoral combat ship of the US Navy, is bombed and severely damaged by Rodall Juhziz in the Red Sea.

2014
- The Mudanjiang Disaster. A train carrying experimental nuclear shells crashes in north-eastern China. Colonel Tsing Shi Tao takes full responsibility and volunteers to assist in the recovery of the remaining warheads.

2016
- Yevgeny Orlov is part of a Spetsnaz team that stops the Ultranationalist attack on Moscow Domodedovo Airport, putting an end to the brief uprising of extremist forces against the Russian government.

2017
- Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan merge several resorts of their governments and form the state union of Aldastan despite violent opposition. A Kazakh warlord by the name of Mohmar, also known as 'Deathstrike', denounces the move as a blatant concession to foreign imperialists and creates the Global Liberation Army, an initially loose amalgamation of fundamentalists, local nationalists and tribal groups.
- The M1A4 Paladin, an advanced modification of the now standard M1A3 Abrams is adopted by a small number of elite US armoured units for field evaluation.

2018
- Russian President Putin attends the opening ceremony of the new Vostochny Cosmodrome in the Russian Far-East. The aging Soviet-era Baikonour Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan is slowly disassembled over the following years.
- Alexis Alexander serves as a USMC logistical staffer during a three month long skirmish at the Korean DMZ, erroneously popularised as the Second Korean War by the US media. After lackluster success, a cadre of KPA generals quietly removes the Northern dictator Kim Jong Un and sues for peace on under the status quo ante bellum.
- The crisis in Korea frightens the Asian markets, resulting in the partial collapse of the Chinese real estate bubble which sends tremors across the global economic landscape and results in a period of open infighting within the Chinese government.
- The Taiwan Conflict. Amidst the rising tensions, hardline elements in the PRC leadership invade the Republic of China. The operation is quickly carried out by Shin Fai of the PLA Marine Corps before US forces manage to intervene. The hardliners are subsequently impeached but Taiwan is fully annexed into the People's Republic.
- The reformed Chinese leadership under Chairman Zhao Wei enacts the Modern Way programme, introducing new civil liberties to the People's Republic and expanding the cooperation with Mongolia.

2019
- The ZTZ200G Emperor Tank enters service in parts of the Chinese PLA under the supervision of Ta Hun Kwai.
- Abdul bin Yusuuf's Brotherhood of the White Falcon, a fundamentalist terror group that grew out of the former Al Qaeda, pledges allegiance to the Global Liberation Army in hopes of threatening US interests in the region.

Posted by: Re_Simeone 1 Jun 2013, 17:16

Wait . . . Yelsin dies in 1999 here ?

Posted by: MARS 1 Jun 2013, 18:02

QUOTE (Re_Simeone @ 1 Jun 2013, 18:16) *
Wait . . . Yelsin dies in 1999 here ?


Oh, right. Pardon that little error. He obviously resigned in 1999. Kinda slipped me by during proof reading (I've been working on three other parts. Keeping track of all this is bloody hard). No timeline difference intended^^

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 1 Jun 2013, 19:27

Man that's a LOT. So Abrams existed in ROTR timeline after all? Wonder why US split up it's duty between Crusader and Paladin.

edit - Hm... maybe it's fate those two grandpas were born in the same year. Is Jin even older than them?

Posted by: MARS 1 Jun 2013, 19:33

For all we know, Jin might have been just a few months old when he lost his parents and they might either have been involved in the protests or simply caught in the fighting, trampled in a panic or whatever.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 1 Jun 2013, 19:40

That's a real nice timeline. I feel like I am intruding on your story for asking this but, will fan-fiction events be included in the next parts?

Posted by: MARS 1 Jun 2013, 20:13

I don't know whether I'll canon-check bits of the fan fiction now and post them as part of this incarnation of the timeline or later but you can rest assured that I'll eventually work my way through and make clear statements as to which stuff is compatible.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 1 Jun 2013, 22:04

QUOTE (MARS @ 2 Jun 2013, 0:33) *
For all we know, Jin might have been just a few months old when he lost his parents and they might either have been involved in the protests or simply caught in the fighting, trampled in a panic or whatever.

Personally I wanna believe Jin was at least five when he lost his parents. Since then this tragedy would most likely have a significant role in shaping his current mentality. Yeah I have a thing for characters (specially villains) with childhood trauma/tragedies, despite how cliche it seems these days. smile.gif

Will all the generals have their birth year and/or further career details revealed? I am specially curious about how old Bradley is and when he became a general. He was already a general in the war Chen just started his career as cannon fodder.

Posted by: Re_Simeone 2 Jun 2013, 1:50

I know that this I will ask don't have too much with wiki,
but how Serbia in ROTRs timeline became almost what Yugoslavia was ?
I know that in one update is stated that irredentists took over,but that explanation was somehow short . . .

Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 5:13

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 1 Jun 2013, 23:04) *
Will all the generals have their birth year and/or further career details revealed? I am specially curious about how old Bradley is and when he became a general. He was already a general in the war Chen just started his career as cannon fodder.


Bradley's rank during the Gens/ZH period wasn't stated yet from what I remember. He did already have a commanding role but for all we know, he might have been a Colonel or something. Still didn't stop him from engaging in a rivalry with Kwai, who was presumably higher ranked which only adds to his machismo.

QUOTE (Re_Simeone @ 2 Jun 2013, 2:50) *
I know that this I will ask don't have too much with wiki,
but how Serbia in ROTRs timeline became almost what Yugoslavia was ?
I know that in one update is stated that irredentists took over,but that explanation was somehow short . . .


A military cadre assumed control, made a strategic alliance with Russia (a likely choice given that the in-universe EU is collapsing and that irredentists would probably capitalise on the special relationship of Serbia and Russia more) and presumably conquered or bullied most of the neighbours into a restored, Serbian-ruled version of Yugoslavia whereas Slovenia and Croatia remained unaffected because they remained partners (although not members) of the ECA.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 2 Jun 2013, 7:41

Yeah Bradley's rivalry with Kwai (which was inspired by Patton and Montgomery's reputed rivalry of generals if I remember correctly) made me think he was a general during Global War on Terror. It did sound like he was the man in charge of the final operation. And for someone who wasn't a general, he sure got a lot of attention from and caused a lot of headache for the decision makers.

Bradley is a funny character. His personality seems like the stereotypical Patton-esque macho general type. Yet his settings and faction are what makes him very interesting. He wouldn't be half as interesting if he was a Russian gen since we traditionally see such generals on Russia's side in a typical (Western based) WW3 scenario all the time.

Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 7:51

The gung-ho personality that we chose for Bradley was also part of the reason why we decided to give him the USMC background rather than Thorn, who might have been more fitting with regards to his role (elite infantry, lightweight mobility) but comes off as a more calm, methodical planner rather than a swearing macho hardass who hits the beach alongside his men.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 2 Jun 2013, 9:35

Do you have plans for eventually naming the generals who lead the other major battles in ZH? Like the assault on Thrax for example.

And are we going to find out who were the US and Chinese gens in the Battle of Kurmuk? Were they someone we know? Or is it better if they remain unnamed since that's not something they can exactly be proud of?

And I am really curious so I'll ask - how difficult was the decision of giving Bradley the USMC background? I mean we know the reasons behind ultimately giving him that background but did you at some point feel that making the tank gen a Marine would seem somewhat superficial and out of place? Specially since he isn't getting Marines as unique infantry and stuff like that?


Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 9:56

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 2 Jun 2013, 10:35) *
Do you have plans for eventually naming the generals who lead the other major battles in ZH? Like the assault on Thrax for example.

And are we going to find out who were the US and Chinese gens in the Battle of Kurmuk? Were they someone we know? Or is it better if they remain unnamed since that's not something they can exactly be proud of?

And I am really curious so I'll ask - how difficult was the decision of giving Bradley the USMC background? I mean we know the reasons behind ultimately giving him that background but did you at some point feel that making the tank gen a Marine would seem somewhat superficial and out of place? Specially since he isn't getting Marines as unique infantry and stuff like that?


We might eventually come up with a few one-shot character names for various political and military leaders, but that's another one of those things that we should do later, once the community starts adding lore articles and approved fan-fiction to the Wiki.

As for Bradley, I can see why this whole 'USMC represented as Tank General' thing might be irritating to some people, but it does kinda work in the setting. After the isolation period, the US only deploy their most elite and mobile units outside their home continent. This'd include the Navy and Air Force by default, as well as certain Army units (Rangers) and the entirety of the Marine Corps, but -not- the heavy duty armoured units of the Army. That's where Bradley comes in: The USMC is mostly renowned for its infantry, but it does also have its own armour and air wing. In ROTR, the USMC tank units are the most rapidly deployable tank units the US -have- because the bulk of the Army's mechanised units is now reserved for service on the American continent OR places where the US have a permanent presence, which does not apply to Europe anymore. As such, it is also entirely fair to assume that the Paladin is not exclusive to Bradley in the story, it's just that he (and other Marine genrals) are the only ones who get to deploy Paladins across the globe as rapidly. Back home, the Army would probably use more Paladins than Crusaders. It's still not an ideal depiction because game/faction design always takes precedence over story (hence why Bradley is using the Army's Bradley IFV, although we did acknowledge that the vehicle was forced onto the Corps due to doctrine changes), but at the end of the day, we wanted to have -some- gung-ho Marine representation in the mod and this is the best we could do without any major retcons. Plus, the presence of Rangers in Bradley's arsenal may still be odd, but he - like all US Generals - also gets the Vanguards which are explicitely established as being Marines. They also kick a ton of arse.

Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 10:56

Here's part 2. I intentionally included a few semi-notable plot points (GLA possibly receiving covert support by pre-Suvorov Russia) which haven't been officially talked about yet. This might be an interesting hook for fan-fiction which, if compatible, might be elevated to canon.

PART II - THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR

2019
- The first commercial fusion power plant is activated near the Niagara Falls. The energy it produces is fed into the power net of both the United States and Canada, who developed the reactor as a joint project.
- As part of the NATO nuclear sharing program, the United States modernise their stockpiles of B61 thermonuclear bombs in Europe, including those stationed in Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey.
- The GLA detonates a 5 kiloton tactical nuclear weapon during the PRC's 70th anniversary parade in Beijing. The later General Xing Chen is part of a rapid response force that is deployed to the scene. As a response to the GLA threat, the Party government re-institutionalizes the Red Guard as an auxiliary military and police force to complement the People's Liberation Army and inspire nationalist fervor.
- The GLA occupies the Hong Kong Convention Center and takes hundreds of civilian hostages. The fighting spreads throughout the entire Wan Chao district as Chinese forces move in to break the stalemate.
- The GLA launches an attack on the Three Gorges Dam. A Chinese Black Lotus operative issues the controversial order to destroy the dam, citing the swift destruction of the GLA as the more immediate concern. Despite a hasty evacuation attempt, thousands die as cities downriver are flooded by the wave. Chinese state propaganda claims that the dam itself was destroyed by the GLA in order to fan the revanchist fury of the population and prepare for a total mobilisation of all military and industrial resources in the struggle ahead.

2020
- Chinese forces narrowly prevent the GLA from pumping toxic chemicals into the Yangtze River.
- Chinese forces liberate the GLA-controlled city of Balykchy, Aldastan. The US Air Force launches strategic bombing raids to support the ground assault, destroying large parts of the city in the process.
- Chinese special forces led by a Black Lotus operative destroy a major railway bridge in Bishkek, Aldastan, crippling GLA logistics in the region in preparation for a decisive attack on the capital.
- Chinese forces assault Dushanbe, the capital of Aldastan. The GLA's Central Asian branch suffers a heavy blow after General Tsing Shi Tao receives the clearance to deploy tactical nuclear weapons.
- The aftershocks of the ongoing conflict result in a global economic downturn. The European Union is hit hard with France and the Balkan countries, which had only recently joined the Union, at the verge of bankruptcy.
- An American consumer electronics corporation introduces iSaac, a domestic robot with an abstractly humanoid appearance that is capable of performing a variety of household chores.

2021
- GLA forces rally over the destruction of a vital dam in Chinese-controlled Shymkent, Kazakhstan.
- GLA raiders intercept UN aid deliveries near Almaty, Kazakhstan to fund their operations and incite public unrest.
- Violent protests against the Chinese and American operations in Kazakhstan escalate into a city-wide insurrection in Astana.
- The top-secret FB-40 Aurora aircraft is pushed into service by US Air Force as a fast strike bomber and suffers several catastrophic losses against GLA forces.
- With much of Europe destabilised after the economic collapse of Spain, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia and Cyprus in the previous decade, euroskepticism and anti-capitalism are on the rise across the entire continent. Protests and violent clashes become a common reality, with the Paris Riots standing out as the bloodiest example by far. Most prominently, a left-wing extremist by the name of Tahar Ibrahiim becomes the target of a major manhunt after he sent poisened letters to several politicians and financial executives.

2022
- The first commercial vacuum tube train is activated between Miami and Ottawa.
- GLA forces mount a devastating attack against the US Incirlik Air Force Base in Turkey.
- US special forces launch an attack against the GLA-controlled ex-Soviet bio-chemical laboratories on Vozrozhdeniya, Kazakhstan.
- Bao Jin of the Chinese Ministry of State Security manipulates a Kazakh GLA leader to change sides, triggering a brief internal purge among GLA forces.

2023
- The populist Hope and Glory Party wins the British general election by a landslide. The party rejects further concessions to the European Union and enacts a policy of increased cooperation with Ireland and other Commonwealth nations.
- Despite the troubled polical situation and calls for a public referendum, the EU governments sign the Vienna Treaty which turns the European Union into a de jure federation. Civil rights activists express scathing criticism at the lack of fair democratic representation and dismiss the treaty as a last ditch effort at forcing all of Europe under a single authority. Over the following years, many EU regions in Spain, France and Italy break away in violent secession.
- Hundreds of thousands of refugees swarm into Europe due to the ongoing violence across Central Asia and the Middle East. Many of them end up in a socio-economic dead-end and develop pro-GLA sentiments.

2024
- Anwar Sulaymaan gains the respect of Deathstrike by providing the GLA with a steady flow of income and weapons through international arms deals even in times of great hardships. Western intelligence agencies manage to trace some of the materiel back to Russia, whose government denies any involvement.
- Angered by the EU central government, the Free Republic of Bavaria breaks away from the Union Republic of Germany and survives thanks to a military mutiny involving Wolfgang von Kuerten, who refuses to mobilise against his own people.
- The first module of the Pennsylvania Space Station, then still operated by NASA and the Canadian Space Agency, is successfully suspended in orbit.

2025
- After a vicious battle against Chinese and American defenders, GLA forces occupy the Baikonur Cosmodrome and proceed to launch a series of toxin-tipped Soyuz rockets. The first missile hits the Israeli city of Tel Aviv, killing thousands and prompting the Israeli leadership to enact authoritarian policies for the protection of the state. As the country severs all contact with its neighbours, tensions in the Middle East reach an unprecedented peak.
- GLA forces topple the pro-American regime in Baghdad, prompting the US to commence their third attack on Iraq in order to restore strategic control around the Persian Gulf. Iran and Saudi Arabia are heavily involved in the fight via proxies.
- A US-led manhunt for GLA leaders in Al Hanad, Yemen goes awry. American special forces enter the city to rescue three pilots that had been shot down by the GLA.
- General Malcolm 'Ace' Granger provides aerial security for an American casualty evacuation in northern Kazakhstan.
- Jeremiah Bradley takes part in the USMC coastal assault on a GLA training camp at the Caspian Sea coast.
- GLA hardliners ambush and kill the entire UN delegation during a peace summit in Kazakhstan and destroy a nearby dam to cover their retreat.
- Ismail Khan, a Chinese brigadier general from Xinjiang, defects to the GLA out of solidarity for the oppressed Uyghur people and is subsequently eliminated by the US military.
- Chinese General Ta Hun Kwai and Jeremiah Bradley mount a joint offensive on Akmola, the GLA-controlled capitol of Kazakhstan, dealing a heavy blow to the organisation's Middle Eastern branch.

2026
- The US Navy introduces its own jet-powered, carrier-capable gunship, the Spectre II, in order to provide a more immediate fire support solution than the aging AC-130.
- General Gregory 'Pinpoint' Townes presents the M1097 Avenger-L which replaces the aging anti-air missile system of the original vehicle with a state-of-the-art laser turret.
- With Russian forces unable to coordinate the operation in time, the American specialist Colonel Burton links up with a Chinese Black Lotus operative to destroy one of Dr. Thrax' toxin laboratories near Mount Elbrus, Russia. The US government speculates that the Russian government might be secretly aiding the GLA to further Russian interests in the Middle East.
- The GLA launches a Soyuz rocket at a US naval base in Narvik, Norway. After a failed counter-attack on the Baikonour Cosmodrome by the Russian Army, a task force of American and Norwegian forces puts an end to the GLA occupation by dropping a GBU-43/B directly onto the launch pad.
- US forces deliver a decisive blow against a GLA cell in Mogadishu, Somalia, revealing disturbing intel about the elusive Dr. Thrax, who supplies the organisation with advanced bio-chemical weapons, including a modified strain of the Anthrax virus.
- The violent crisis in the Persian Gulf escalates after the United States accuse the Iranian government of collaborating with Dr. Thrax in an attempt to manufacture bio-chemical weapons for use against the West. US and Saudi forces invade Iran which retaliates by launching coordinated attacks against the desalination facilities that supply the Arabian Peninsula with drinkable water. The result is an unprecedented humanitarian disaster which plunges the entire Middle East into total anarchy.
- The US have tracked Dr. Thrax to a still classified location in the Middle East and initiate a kill-or-capture operation which eventually results in the death of the GLA's top-ranking bio-chemical scientist.
- Despite economic troubles and growing civil discontent at the Kremlin's possible backing of the GLA, the Russian military introduces the first production model of the Sentinel tank. The new super-heavy tank will not see combat until the adoption of its second, more refined version a decade later.
- At this year's Eurosatory exposition, the German defense company KMW unveils an entirely new main battle tank, the Leopard 3. Despite its cutting edge technology, the new tank remains a non-seller for several years with even Germany itself being unable to procure large numbers of it due to the desolate financial situation in Europe.

2027
- Deathstrike avoids capture by US forces and rallies his supporters in the aftermath of the GLA's apparent defeat after eight years of fighting.
- GLA loyalists under the command of Anwar Sulaymaan violently persuade Prince Kassad, leader of the break-away Cobra Cell, to renew his allegiance to Deathstrike by decimating his ranks in Egypt.
- GLA operatives hijack an American Particle Cannon Uplink and destroy the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier off the coast of Crete, Greece. Almost 5.000 US Navy crew members die within minutes, dealing a fatal morale blow to the American home front.
- GLA sleeper cells stage a daring raid on the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, recovering confiscated samples of the Anthrax Gamma virus developed by Dr. Thrax.
- The GLA attacks the USEUCOM headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany, prompting the American Paulson administration to cave in to its war-weary and crisis-stricken population and hurriedly withdraw most of the overseas forces back to the American homeland. High-ranking dignitaries and nuclear weapons are hastily evacuated from Europe within days. Even though Canada and Turkey remain diplomatically close to the United States, the European component of NATO is factually abolished, putting a severe strain on the US/EU relations.

2028
- After the US retreat, the GLA expends all manpower and resources to trigger an insurrection in Germany, the economic heart of the troubled European Union. The helpless EU central government calls upon China to intervene.
- In an attempt to deliver a hard blow against the Chinese homeland, GLA forces launch an attack on a new nuclear power plant that was built after the destruction of the Three Gorges Dam but fail to cause any serious damage.
- China deploys large contingents of troops to free several German cities from the brutal but unsustainable grip of the GLA, causing drastic damage to the vital infrastructure through the indiscriminate use of incendiary weapons.
- Tahar Ibrahiim joins the GLA and makes a dramatic entrance by dumping several tons of hazardous chemicals into the Rhine river system, rendering large swathes of western Germany uninhabitable until 2060.
- The 18-year-old Frank Jaeger loses his parents as a result of the GLA chemical attack and forms the 'Wolfsrudel', an urban guerilla group of students who fight against the GLA.
- GLA forces fall back towards their main base of operations in Hamburg, Germany while the Chinese Air Force performs relentless attacks on the retreating enemies, turning the famous Autobahn into a highway of death.
- After half a year of fighting, Chinese forces under General 'Anvil' Shin Fai converge on Hamburg. Prior to his departure, Deathstrike orders Rodall Juhziz' Scorpion Cell to obliterate the city with a 10 megaton strategic nuclear warhead. Both Juhziz and Fai die in the explosion, along with thousands of civilians.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 2 Jun 2013, 14:51

Comes to wonder, MARS, would you grab a rifle and fight the GLA?

Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 15:10

If we're literally talking about an enemy as wretched as the GLA openly ravaging a European country, yes, most certainly.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 2 Jun 2013, 15:19

I would add another important hook in this 'timeline' - a modernization in 2019 of the B-61 nuclear bombs in Europe.

http://www.strategic-culture.org/pview/2013/05/06/kerry-comes-russia-us-tactical-nukes-stay-in-europe.html

And on the subject what to say about hundreds of nuclear bombs on European soil during periods of turbulence and crisis? The USA repatriated their bombs?

Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 15:56

Since those 'shared' NATO bombs are still technically owned by the US, yes, they most likely did their darn best to get them the hell out of Europe as fast as possible.

Going to add that 2019 date as well as a few more references to NATO history.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 2 Jun 2013, 16:05

I think it's important to note that these bombs are today ensure the security of Europe as a deterrent effect against Russia and are guaranteed existence of NATO and the commitment of the USA to Europe. Russia will not invade the continent knowing that these bombs were at the disposal of the ECA. I believe that for this reason the Pandora had to be used as an alternative nuclear, probably the B-61 are no longer in Europe.

Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 16:09

Right. With NATO out of the picture and the US out of Europe, the ECA obviously wouldn't have access to the American bombs but despite all that, France and the UK still have nuclear arsenals of their own which would then be used for the Pandora protocol.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 2 Jun 2013, 16:11

Exactly.

Posted by: DerKrieger 2 Jun 2013, 16:20

One error I noted back in the 2003 OIF reference; Lt. Granger didn't take out enemy SAM sites then, it was during the 1991 Gulf War that he did so.

Posted by: MARS 2 Jun 2013, 16:25

Thanks for clearing that up. Fixed.

Posted by: __CrUsHeR 2 Jun 2013, 18:38

Another important thing to mention in the timeline is when starting the main military projects of drones in the USA - in 1995 RQ-1/MQ-1 Predator UAV and in 2005 through the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) - a consortium between several companies and NASA - being the drones BigDog, 2005 and Petman, 2013 the main projects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1_Predator
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Advanced_Research_Projects_Agency
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/BigDog
http://www.bostondynamics.com/robot_petman.html

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 3 Jun 2013, 17:02

QUOTE (MARS @ 2 Jun 2013, 11:56) *
- The GLA launches a Soyuz rocket at a US naval base in Narvik, Norway. After a failed counter-attack on the Baikonour Cosmodrome by the Russian Army, a task force of American and Norwegian forces puts an end to the GLA occupation by dropping a GBU-43/B directly onto the launch pad.


Wasn't it the Chinese that attacked it but failed?

Posted by: MARS 3 Jun 2013, 17:20

Maybe, but I also decided to throw in an in-lore Russian attack because they are the main users of the Cosmodrome. Plus, if other story events suggest some sort of practical link between the pre-Suvorov Russia and the GLA, an attack on the GLA-controlled Cosmodrome might be a token attempt at making it look like they aren't affiliated after all. I've actually prepared a new story today which is going to cast some light on this connection in the future.

Posted by: (USA)Bruce 3 Jun 2013, 18:01

^
Nice to hear

And btw Generals challenge, I know its an arcade mode for ZH and stuff but how much is true?
The bases, The people,The mutiny of townes....What else?

Posted by: MARS 3 Jun 2013, 18:04

Probably just the bases and the attitudes of the characters. If a base does not match up with the official map location (Granger's snowy mountain base in what is supposedly Texas / Alexander's Greek island base in what is supposed to be Maine) we could simply assume that the base depicted in the mission is actually an overseas base under their command. Still kinda dumb, but we don't need a perfect spot-on explanation for absolutely everything.

Posted by: Talonek 4 Jun 2013, 17:48

Thank you so much for that Timeline!

Posted by: MARS 6 Jun 2013, 9:02

PART III - THE INTER-WAR PERIOD

2028
- With the EU on the brink of total collapse, military cadres and popular revolutionaries seize the opportunity to disempower the scattered central government in an effort to restore the sovereignty of their nations. French protesters assault the Elysée Palace and proclaim the Sixth Republic, the Dutch royal family takes over interim positions after the resignation of the government and the German four-party Europakoalition is arrested by the military.
- The Chinese leadership sees the writing on the wall, sides with the new European coup leaders and creates the Eurasian Unity League (EURA) in order to coordinate the reconstruction of the European economies.
- Captain Willem van der Meer is deployed to Germany for disaster relief, pioneer works and explosives disposal.
- After years of political turmoil and economic decay, Nikolai Suvorov of the Novorossiya Party becomes the new President of the Russian Federation. He openly declares his goals to be the elimination of all infighting and corruption and 'to create a new Eurasian hegemony with Mother Russia at its helm'. Western analysts dismiss the popular leader as an ineffectual, chest-thumping mouthpiece of post-Soviet oligarchy placed in charge of what is essentially a borderline failed state.
- During the inspection of a military research facility, President Suvorov is impressed by the revolutionary directed energy weapons of Nikita Ivanovich Aleksandr, a military engineer stationed at Mt. Yamantau, who is subsequently put in charge of the Advanced Weapons R&D Corps.
- The Europeans use China's low-interest credits to buy fuel and raw materials from Russia, triggering a period of great growth and development which serves to establish Suvorov as a national hero figure.

2029
- After the withdrawal of the US forces, North Korea invades South Korea. Thanks to political and material support from China, the North manages to push the South all the way down to the 35th parallel where the battle degenerates into a vicious tug-of-war that would continue for several years.

2030
- The first components of the Chinese East Star Space Station are brought into orbit.
- The Chinese Party government proposes the creation of a new alliance called the Socialist South Asian Nations (SSAN) in an attempt to soften the impact of the post-war downturn through the economic absorbtion of South-East Asia.
- Despite evidence of the contrary, US intelligence agencies and media pundits decry President Suvorov is an ineffectual mouthpiece of the old elites and erroneously predict the Chinese as America's main future adversaries.
- After an outrageous scandal, the Chinese General Leang is discharged from command of a Special Weapons division in the Himalayas. The young, recently commissioned General Hu Tan Mau takes over thanks to the political connections of his father, the industrialist Xudong Mau, and proceeds to restore the unit to proper standard.
- With the EU central institutions rapidly disintegrating, the government of Serbia is removed by a group of irredentist military officers who form a strategic alliance with Russia and proceed to annex large parts of former Yugoslavia into a new federal state.

2031
- Several high-ranking US Air Force officers, most prominently General Malcolm Granger, take the fall for the terrible performance of the Aurora strike bomber during the war. Eugene Griffon is promoted to General of the Air Combat Command.
- Snubbed by the nations of western Europe, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia merge many resorts of their governments and form the Baltic Commonwealth to represent their interest in front of the resurgent Russian Federation. What starts as an awkward dialogue soon develops into a profitable alliance.
- The Greater Asian Peoples Alliance (GAPA) is formed on behalf of China and includes Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Myanmar. At the same time, Mongolia is peacefully absorbed into the People's Republic after years of mutual cooperation.
- 'The Hammer', a trilogy of PLA-funded war movies detailing the exploits of the propaganda hero Xing Chen, is filmed back-to-back and released, landing a large hit at the Chinese box office while American critics dismiss it as a trite propaganda piece but acknowledge the impressive production values.

2032
- As part of the reorganisation of Europe, the European Broadcasting Union is transformed into the European Communications Agency Network (ECAN) which is a tight-knit collaboration of various telecom companies, news agencies and public broadcasting services.
- With the country isolated and threatened by economic collapse, the US government has to make far-reaching cuts to the overflowing military budget. Several future weapon systems are scrapped and the Navy has to mothball or sell many of its vessels.
- After a Senate hearing regarding his out-of-control R&D budget, General Townes revolts against the closure of his laser projects and briefly locks down his base at Redwood Shores, California, before being arrested by his second in command.
- The M2A4, an ad-hoc upgrade of the aging Bradley IFV, is forced upon the US Marine Corps. Despite initial complaints, the Corps soon develops a hate-love relationship to the vehicle as it proves to be very reliable in combat.
- Much to the chagrin of the other branches, the US Air Force makes it through the budget cuts and doctrine changes largely unscathed thanks to the brokering of General Eugene Griffon.
- Deathstrike dies unceremoniously at the hands of an unknown assassin, throwing the GLA into a power struggle and diminishing its global presence. Anwar Sulaymaan embarks on a quest to re-unite the organisation under his rule.
- Prince Kassad once again betrays the GLA and is subsequently shot dead by Sulaymaan himself. Cobra Cell is disbanded and its surviving members and equipment are absorbed by the rest of the GLA.

2033
- After three ineffectual administrations in less than five years, Kevin O'Connor is elected as the new President of the United States. His economic policies manage to produce a positive turnaround.
- In an attempt to regain economic momentum, the United States propose the foundation of the North American Union (NAU) to Mexico and Canada, a controversial move which helps to stop the economic downturn and restore America's standing in the world.
- Juergen Burkhard, the former head of the European Domestic Security Directorate, is sentenced to life imprisonment by a court in The Hague after issuing the order to employ deadly force against anti-EU protesters in the wake of the insurrection.
- British Prime Minister Susan Adams welcomes the verdict and expresses the support of her government for the creation of a new European community while the last remains of the EU institutions are being wrapped up.
- In order to restore the country's territorial defense capabilities, the German Army begins with the procurement of several Leopard 3A1 tanks, Tiger II attack helicopters and Jagdmammut tank destroyers.
- Japan intervenes on behalf of the South Koreans and manages to turn the tide in their favour, resulting in the defeat of the DPRK and the creation of the United Republic of Korea.

2034
- The Prague Treaty is signed to reconstitute the remains of the European Union into the European Continental Alliance, a firm but strictly limited alliance of eighteen sovereign nation states.
- The Treaty includes the formation of a joint military task force, the European Continental Army. As a result, the Europeans put a predicable end to both the EURA and the Chinese security agreement, promting the PLA to withdraw from Europe.
- In order to provide the ECA with strategic bombing capabilities in times of need, Bomber Command makes a reappearance as a distinct entity within the British Royal Air Force, along with a refurbished model of the Cold War era Vulcan bomber.
- The ECA enacts strict limits and quotas on immigration and secures its land border with a fortified wall, pejoratively dubbed the Concrete Curtain by the Eastern European countries that are now left out. Willem van der Meer is involved in the construction.
- The Russian action movie Red Squadron becomes a summer blockbuster in Russia and a few other countries after Hollywood had to tighten its belt in the wake of the downturn and produced works that reflected the zeitgeist of the post-GWOT era in a more modest and introspective way, often exploring the consequences of economic failure and military adventurism.

2035
- The US Air Force demonstrates its new financial and doctrinal supremacy by introducing the AC-17 Spectre III, the most heavily armed and lethal American gunship ever built, which is armed with a 155mm howitzer, a dual GAU-12 Equalizer cannon and Maverick air-to-ground missiles.
- The provisional military government of the restored Federal Republic of Germany suspends the emergency acts and holds a democratic election, transferring control to the first civilian government after the collapse of the EU.
- Wary of the resurgent power of the United States, the South American Pact (SAP) is founded under the leadership of Brazil to strengthen the position of Latin America on the global market. Violent criminals and political extremists threaten the new alliance.
- As a general trend, 'classical' nuclear power falls increasingly out of favour world-wide except for China, where an entire dozen new reactors are under construction. In an effort to obtain total self-sustainability, the European Space Agency and CERN commence development of the Solaris energy project.

2036
- Due to his declining health, President O'Connor resigns before the end of his first term. Donovan Giordano is elected as the new President and continues the policies of his predecessor.
- Japanese Prime Minister Kazuya Shimada surprises the entire world with his famous genuflection in Seoul, which becomes the symbol of reconciliation and a new bond between Korea and Japan.
- Originally scheduled for 2028 but cancelled due to the crisis, the Olympic Summer Games are hosted in Berlin, Germany, precisely one hundred years after the games of 1936 which happened during the Nazi reign. The humble but dignified opening ceremony places an emphasis on the modernity, but also the newfound self-confidence of the Federal Republic which has finally come to terms with its own national identity.
- On a tragical note, the Games are overshadowed by violent clashes between pro-Western and pro-Russian forces in Ukraine. Persident Suvorov pledges support to the pro-Russian Donetsk Republic that formed in the East of the country and sends General Leonid Zhukov to assist. The battle is quickly decided and the eastern half of Ukraine becomes a republic of the Russian Federation, but Zhukov loses his son in one of the war's last pointless skirmishes.

2037
- Inspired by the events in Ukraine, the troubled Republic of Belarus holds a public referendum and joins the Russian Federation.
- The ECA initiates Operation Nemesis, a massive retaliatory invasion against the North African countries that supported the GLA insurrection. The invasion is followed by the creation of a new Maghreb Union and an elaborate package of infrastructure development, humanitarian aid and modern education in an effort to establish an anti-GLA sentiment in North Africa and ensure ECA control of the Mediterranean Sea.
The Generals Wolfgang von Kuerten and Charles Cutting embark on several joint operations against GLA holdouts in the Sahel region and win some of the ECA's most acclaimed military victories despite their vastly different attitudes and leadership styles.

2038
- After years of free reign across the vital shipping routes in the Gulf of Aden, GLA pirate gangs are forced out of Somalia by a full-scale Chinese military invasion and occupation.
- The light-weight Crusader II is introduced as the new expeditionary tank of the US military. It is met with positive reactions from the Marine Corps for its amphibious features and rapid deployability.
- With North Africa opened to European enterprises, the world witnesses a global rush for the continent's precious resources. America, China and Russia soon follow, dividing Africa among their respective client states.
- In an attempt to improve its international image, China spearheads an international ban on neutron weapons, resulting in the signing of the Budapest Accords. General Tsing Shi Tao resigns from service and goes into retirement.

2039
- Europe's first solar-fusion reactor, powered by the satellite Comas Solà, is activated in Granada, Spain. The facility produces enough energy to supply both Spain and Portugal.
- A few months later, another pair of satellites is activated: Cassini provides energy for France, Belgium and the Netherlands while Kepler is used to power the joint reactor of Germany and Denmark.
- With Europe becoming increasingly independent from foreign energy thanks to its own renewable sources, many long-standing fuel treaties with Russia are cancelled, putting a strain on the Federation's economy and the diplomatic relations between the two powers. The demand for Russian resources decreases over the coming years, signalling the impending end of the country's economic boom. Furthermore, military observers point out that Solaris coult potentially be used as an orbital strike weapon capable of threatening Russia's cities and nuclear stockpiles.

2040
- The former Secretary General Cheung Liu is appointed as the new Party Chairman of the People's Republic of China.
- The third batch of Solaris satellites is activated: Newton provides energy for the United Kingdom and Ireland while Copernicus is linked to the joint reactor of Poland and the Czech Republic.
- Sulaymaan's army occupies large swathes of Central Africa, forcibly disbanding several countries and claiming the land as the first GLA nation, which is treated as terra nullius by the international community.
- With a safe, uncontested foothold in Central Africa, the GLA proceeds to absorb the remnants of local tribal and military forces, gaining access to crude fighter planes and helicopters while building an economy around the production and trade of drugs, diamonds and oil.
- President Giordano wins a narrow victory over his opponent William Bradford, who called for a strategic re-evaluation of the US/China relations and a tougher response to Russia's recent expansionism.
- The discovery of a Russian research base in Chinese-aligned North Sudan prompts a global outcry. In an attempt to appease the hawks in Washington, President Giordano proposes a military pact between China and the US, resulting in the creation of the Pacific Peace Alliance (PPA).
- General Aleksandr organises the defence of his research base and succeeds against seemingly impossible odds thanks to superior weapons and tactics. The PPA breaks apart after a series of political assassinations while Aleksandr's victorious Shock Division is presented to the world for the first time.

Posted by: Warpath 6 Jun 2013, 11:11

Huh, I always though that the GLA territory in Africa was made of puppet states, I didn't think it was a GLA nation... what's Terra Nullius?

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 6 Jun 2013, 11:14

I suppose the final part won't have the events that haven't been in an update yet?

Posted by: MARS 6 Jun 2013, 11:16

Terra nullius is an international law term that refers to territory that does not belong to any recognised sovereign state. Since the GLA is a non-state actor, the international community would not recognise their land as an actual nation state, but since nobody is presently willing to drive them out, the status of the region still had to be defined as something. As for part IV, I will post that in the coming days and add revisions as we go along with our future updates.

Posted by: Comr4de 6 Jun 2013, 17:29

Made an account, there's just a few things that are bugging the hell out of me and must add and or edit X)

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 18 Jun 2013, 15:45

Anyone wants to rename the category "Helicopter" to "Gunship"? Someone brought it up in the wiki.

Posted by: Kalga 18 Jun 2013, 17:14

There are still helicopters that are not gunships...

The Helix (when they add it back in) for example, is still mostly a transport... as is the Hunchback (at least that's the intention, correct me if I'm wrong).

Posted by: X1Destroy 18 Jun 2013, 17:26

Not to mention the Littlebird and Blackhawk.

Keep the Helicopter category, because it covered all type of helicopters. Gunship is kinda confusing, as the Spectre is also a gunship.

Posted by: MARS 18 Jun 2013, 20:34

Keep things simple. We don't have to pigeonhole things to the point of adding such lobsided categories. Put all the helicopters into a Helicopter category and leave it at that.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 19 Jun 2013, 18:06

Perhaps an obsolete question, but should we use pros and cons on units? The template page doesn't, but some pages such as the Golem Tank do.

Posted by: Talonek 22 Jun 2013, 17:53

Could we get this page pinned? It has a lot of good information on it, and I would hate to lose it to the two week posting rule.

Pros and Cons are generally covered in the Tactics and Counters paragraphs.

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 22 Jun 2013, 20:14

What is the two week posting rule? You can't post on topics that hasn't been posted on for over two weeks?

I will try to refurbish (is that a word?) most pros/cons into the tactics/counters section then.

-----------------------------------------------------
On another note is has been awfully quiet the past week here on the forums. Only about five posts a day on average...

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 24 Jun 2013, 12:40

The pros and cons are a practical addition. Many wouldn't want to read through all the text in tactics section and instead would prefer some quick notes that could help with his game. They are nothing vital IMO. Don't add them if you don't want to, but there is no real need to delete them from pages that were decided as standard ages ago. I dunno how many people discussed about what to put in the template page but just for the records the Golem Tank page was discussed by plenty of people. Anyway pros and cons are not hurting anyone right now. Maybe they can be deleted once all pages have rich tactics sections but right now those stuff are barely getting added.


Posted by: MARS 24 Jun 2013, 12:45

I wouldn't mind these pros and cons either, just as long as they are short and concise. The tactics section is there for a reason and if pros/cons get to extensive, the differences blur out. Also, pros and cons should use terms like 'slow' or 'heavily armoured' in relative terms compared to units that are similar in role or faction.

Posted by: Evan 24 Jun 2013, 19:37

Link me please?

Posted by: Talonek 24 Jun 2013, 23:54

Thank you for the pin.

Should the Pros and Cons go in the UnitBox, or on the page itself?

Posted by: Generalcamo 27 Jun 2013, 2:50

MARS: The scandal on Leang has never really been described in detail, except for the aftermath. Will we eventually receive a detailed story?

Posted by: MARS 27 Jun 2013, 5:29

Not entirely sure. The exact nature of the incident was meant to be left unclear as it adds a slightly dubious air of comedy to the proceedings that led to Mau's entry. If you re-read the Under New Management update, you will notice that the whole thing is kinda tongue-in-cheek.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 29 Jun 2013, 15:59

Honestly speaking, that scandal pretty much whispers "insert your own juicy, sexual scandal here". There probably ain't any need to go deeper with an official (and perhaps less comedic) take on the said scandal right now while many of us already have our own versions of it.

Posted by: IPS 2 Jul 2013, 20:39

I've edited some links into the factions and main page, so that you find stuff a bit easier.
Feel free to make it more pretty if you know how^^

also would be nice to have those links updated for the us and chinese once you set up those arsenal pages.

Posted by: Pepo 2 Jul 2013, 22:59

i was thinking,maybe there should be a page where we put links of the official fan fictions and other interesting lore so that we don't lose track of it.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 3 Jul 2013, 8:37

Can someone help with some of Lotus's in-game quotes? She can be a bit hard to understand clearly...

QUOTE (IPS @ 3 Jul 2013, 1:39) *
I've edited some links into the factions and main page, so that you find stuff a bit easier.
Feel free to make it more pretty if you know how^^

also would be nice to have those links updated for the us and chinese once you set up those arsenal pages.

Will do. ^^
QUOTE (Pepo @ 3 Jul 2013, 3:59) *
i was thinking,maybe there should be a page where we put links of the official fan fictions and other interesting lore so that we don't lose track of it.

Sounds really good to me. Would be really nice if someone with most of the links does that. Again I ain't the one who calls the shots.

Posted by: Talonek 6 Jul 2013, 3:30

Spiral, if you want to change or add something, do it. Wikia gives us a lot of tools to change or rollback edits, so go ahead and experiment. It's your page as much as anyone elses.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 16 Jul 2013, 17:06

Gonna confirm something I should've confirmed ages ago - should the Tesla Tank page be named TT-1 Tesla Tank? I ain't sure if that's it's correct designation and even if it is so I ain't sure if the page's name should include that. Like the Paladin's page name is "Paladin Tank", not "M1A4 Paladin Tank".

Posted by: MARS 16 Jul 2013, 17:27

The designation is still valid but yes, it shouldn't be part of the actual page name.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 5 Aug 2013, 12:04

Anyone wants to mention some unit quotes here that they consider iconic? Would be a lot of help. smile.gif

Posted by: MARS 5 Aug 2013, 12:08

Basically, anything more distinct that the generic 'yes sir, affirmative sir, moving out sir, we'll destroy them' type lines will do.

Posted by: X1Destroy 5 Aug 2013, 12:36

The most iconic ones would be those borrowed from red alert...and some quotes used by the ECA. These are the ones I considered iconic.

"We will bury them!" MSTA attacking. The most epic one ever since RA2 time.

"Armageddon is here." Sentinel selected.

"They cannot accept theirs fate." Sentinel selected.

"May our children forgive us." Pandora attacking.

"100 tons of German engineering." Manticore selected.

"Defense the fatherland!" Leopard attacking.

"Any want some minced meat?" Leopard using Shredder round.

"Preserving freedom." Paladin when created.

And more......

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 13 Aug 2013, 8:07

Was trying to add lore to the Red Guard page from the latest update... but does any part of it look unnecessary for this page? Does it look like a too big lore dump for just a simple unit page?

And does the trivia need to be updated?

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Red_Guard

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 13 Aug 2013, 15:30

Seems pretty okay to me, but I guess we could compress it into a shortened version of the story so it doesn't occupy half the page.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 14 Aug 2013, 5:03

Another thing on occupying half the page, it's still an unfinished page like most other pages in the wiki. Maybe it won't seem as large once someone adds tactics, counters and maybe some screenshots... now those are needed more than anything. I haven't played the game in a while and wouldn't be able to get anything right if I tried.

Posted by: Dynamo128 8 Sep 2013, 0:56

I've been working on the wiki in my spare time (not much as of late), and this is my first attempt at a Lore for an unit...

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Pilot

It's a little rough around the edges but I hope I am on the right track. Any ideas on how to improve it, or is it fine as it is?

Also, I think for the unit description there should be a general explanation of what the unit is good at doing, while the tactics and counters sections can be used to describe more specific situations in which the units may come in handy, or specific ways to defeat them in various circumstances when playing as all factions.

I made this as a (dumb) quick example that I hope explains it better smile.gif

http://i.imgur.com/OwvlgDK.jpg

Posted by: Talonek 9 Sep 2013, 23:05

QUOTE (Dynamo128 @ 7 Sep 2013, 18:56) *
I've been working on the wiki in my spare time (not much as of late), and this is my first attempt at a Lore for an unit...

http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Pilot

It's a little rough around the edges but I hope I am on the right track. Any ideas on how to improve it, or is it fine as it is?


I think it's pretty damn good.

Posted by: Talonek 9 Sep 2013, 23:09

QUOTE (Dynamo128 @ 7 Sep 2013, 18:56) *
Also, I think for the unit description there should be a general explanation of what the unit is good at doing, while the tactics and counters sections can be used to describe more specific situations in which the units may come in handy, or specific ways to defeat them in various circumstances when playing as all factions.

I made this as a (dumb) quick example that I hope explains it better smile.gif

http://i.imgur.com/OwvlgDK.jpg


I thought that was the general idea already...

How specific do you want it to be, individual sections for how each faction can counter?

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 10 Sep 2013, 17:45

Personally I would say the Tactics should mention how the unit should be used against each factions and mirror matches in individual sections or at least in individual paras. Similarly Counters should cover how the unit can be countered by each factions and in mirror matches.

But then again right now the primary goal should probably be adding these sections to every page. These kind of fine polishing is probably a secondary necessity right now.

Posted by: Talonek 11 Sep 2013, 19:18

I'll get to work on that todo page again, now that I know how stubs work.

Spiral, could you explain what you mean by mirror matches? I'm lost here.

Posted by: Talonek 11 Sep 2013, 19:32

Added stubs. Go to http://generalsrotr.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Article_stubs to see.

To add a page as a stub, just type {{stub}}.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 14 Sep 2013, 3:25

QUOTE (Talonek @ 12 Sep 2013, 0:18) *
I'll get to work on that todo page again, now that I know how stubs work.

Spiral, could you explain what you mean by mirror matches? I'm lost here.

Oh, you know, matches where both players choose the same faction... or am I getting the term wrong, then don't mind me. tongue.gif

And "article stubs" pretty much means the same thing "articles in need of cleanup" so there ain't no need to add both categories.

edit - could we get a bit more on the current lore of the US Missile Defenders?

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 14 Sep 2013, 10:17

Working on some lore for it, just wondering what launcher they should use. Right now I'm going for a refurbished AT-4 launcher.

Posted by: MARS 14 Sep 2013, 11:02

The AT4 is an unguided rocket launcher which doesn't fit when you consider that the in-game unit has homing missiles. The same may apply to the GLA's Tunnel Defender who uses an ancient RPG-7 but their homing/AA capabilities are purely there to make the unit useful in gameplay terms. The US on the other hand do have a technical justification for having homing missiles. The Missile Defender cameo uses the old M47 Dragon launcher but I always operated under the premise that it's a modernised version of the Javelin which automatically switches between anti-tank missiles and some sort of fictional anti-air missile that can be fired from a Javelin which has replaced the old Stinger in US service.

Posted by: Talonek 16 Sep 2013, 19:16

I call it the FIM-92J Stinger.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 25 Sep 2013, 19:53

Anyone wants to give a shot at the lore behind how Tunnel Defender missiles track air targets? Do they use some kinda home cooked radio guiding system or something?

Posted by: swedishplayer-97 25 Sep 2013, 20:15

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 25 Sep 2013, 20:53) *
Anyone wants to give a shot at the lore behind how Tunnel Defender missiles track air targets? Do they use some kinda home cooked radio guiding system or something?


The RPG Troopers smoke pot and get high, and believe their rockets can magically track the jets. The pilots laugh their asses off when they see a RPG flying underneath them, looses control of the plane and crashes.

No, I got nothing.

Posted by: DerKrieger 25 Sep 2013, 20:58

QUOTE (SpiralSpectre @ 25 Sep 2013, 14:53) *
Anyone wants to give a shot at the lore behind how Tunnel Defender missiles track air targets? Do they use some kinda home cooked radio guiding system or something?


I guess they carry SA-18s/Stingers in addition to their RPG-7s.

Posted by: Knossos 26 Sep 2013, 13:17

Made a general overhaul of some pages.

Question: How to delete redundant pages? We have two pages for the Russian Coal Plant.

Posted by: SpiralSpectre 26 Sep 2013, 20:45

I think you need admin access for that. I can't see the delete button in other wikis either. Anyway getting rid off the Coal Plant page.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)