Flasheart88
Member
+0|6761|Brisbane
Ooookaaay.... interesting little thread.

Sergeriver gave the best answer.

But I doubt having one PLA - MEC map would have affected sales at all - after all, that principle didn't affect their decision to make maps without the US in the Special Forces expansion. Rather, in all of the vanilla maps, Dice gives a little explanation of what the conflict is about, so I guess they've looked at the possibility of a *realistic* conflict between the two sides, and seeing as a PLA - Arab conflict would most probably occur in the vacinity of the Pakistan/China border (seeing as the PLA is unlikely to be forwardly offensive to the West of China) I assume the driving force behind their decision was that a battle on the mountains of northern Pakistan wouldn't be fun or interesting.

My 2c.
LouisTheLizard
Member
+0|6709
I've never been to the mountains of northern Pakistan, but I bet I could do some killer sniping from up there.
oberst_enzian
Member
+234|6744|melb.au

Flasheart88 wrote:

seeing as a PLA - Arab conflict would most probably occur in the vacinity of the Pakistan/China border (seeing as the PLA is unlikely to be forwardly offensive to the West of China) I assume the driving force behind their decision was that a battle on the mountains of northern Pakistan wouldn't be fun or interesting.
or maybe they just didn't think of it (i know i sure haven't)... the mountains of pakistan would ROCk as map!!
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6759|Argentina

Flasheart88 wrote:

Ooookaaay.... interesting little thread.

Sergeriver gave the best answer.

But I doubt having one PLA - MEC map would have affected sales at all - after all, that principle didn't affect their decision to make maps without the US in the Special Forces expansion. Rather, in all of the vanilla maps, Dice gives a little explanation of what the conflict is about, so I guess they've looked at the possibility of a *realistic* conflict between the two sides, and seeing as a PLA - Arab conflict would most probably occur in the vacinity of the Pakistan/China border (seeing as the PLA is unlikely to be forwardly offensive to the West of China) I assume the driving force behind their decision was that a battle on the mountains of northern Pakistan wouldn't be fun or interesting.

My 2c.
The troubles are more likely to happen between Pakistan and India not China anyway.
oberst_enzian
Member
+234|6744|melb.au
yeah, but it's fictional, so anything goes right? I mean, if we're talking about what's likely/not likely - just how likely do you think a unified, cohesive Middle Eastern Coalition is?
LouisTheLizard
Member
+0|6709
About as likely as crates of purple bunnies.
Ryan_Mercury
"It's Recharging!"
+19|6821
Why does everything in this game have to revert to a political debate. Who gives a shit anyway to be honest. It's a game, get over it. If you have a problem with it, no one is forcing you to play. No one here can really answer the question anyway unless they were the ones behind the game.

While they may be 99% correct, it'll always be speculation until some hardcore evidence is presented, thus, this topic is pointless and I only forsee what is to come: A debate (flamewar?) over whos country is the 'best'.
Flasheart88
Member
+0|6761|Brisbane

sergeriver wrote:

The troubles are more likely to happen between Pakistan and India not China anyway.
Actually there's been A LOT of fighting across the Pakistani/Chinese border over the last few decades, it's just never blown up into a war - skirmish only. So while you're right that Pakistan/India conflict is more likely, India wasn't an option - do they even have special forces? I have no idea. I was just trying to answer the post question.

oberst_enzian wrote:

or maybe they just didn't think of it (i know i sure haven't)... the mountains of pakistan would ROCk as map!!
Mehhh... I dunno. Sure, there'd be lots of sniping, but it would also be a lot of climbing, walking hmmm ... actually, the more I think about it, the more it might work as an ambush map of sorts. But nevertheless, it might be too sniper heavy.

Heh. Considering there aren't really any *sniper* maps, it might be fun.

Ok, my mind's been changed. Let's petition Dice for a pakistani map!
SilentAssassin03
Member
+0|6782|California
Um, who cares why the US are in every map. Just stop complaining about it, PLEASE. Well, I guess you could complain since this is on a complaining thread. If you don't like the US in vanilla BF2 maps then don't play it. Or just don't post anything about it.
SilentAssassin03
Member
+0|6782|California
"Actually there's been A LOT of fighting across the Pakistani/Chinese border over the last few decades, it's just never blown up into a war - skirmish only. So while you're right that Pakistan/India conflict is more likely, India wasn't an option - do they even have special forces? I have no idea. I was just trying to answer the post question."

Do you know that there is fighting? For all I know your talking outta your ass.
ApathyCrusade
Member
+0|6743
Because the USA is god's country. Period.

*dons flame-retardant beekeeper's suit*
SilentAssassin03
Member
+0|6782|California
AMEN!

*Builds a bunker around you and me*
oberst_enzian
Member
+234|6744|melb.au

SilentAssassin03 wrote:

Um, who cares why the US are in every map. Just stop complaining about it, PLEASE. Well, I guess you could complain since this is on a complaining thread. If you don't like the US in vanilla BF2 maps then don't play it. Or just don't post anything about it.
when you become a mod, then you can tell people what to post/what not to post, until then, fuck off.

as for who cares, well, obviously those enagaged with the question in the thread - and if you don't care, why fucking post???

stop wasting everyone's time - IF YOU AREN'T INTERESTED IN THE TOPIC, THEN IGNORE THE THREAD, you TOOLS
Flasheart88
Member
+0|6761|Brisbane

SilentAssassin03 wrote:

"Actually there's been A LOT of fighting across the Pakistani/Chinese border over the last few decades, it's just never blown up into a war - skirmish only. So while you're right that Pakistan/India conflict is more likely, India wasn't an option - do they even have special forces? I have no idea. I was just trying to answer the post question."

Do you know that there is fighting? For all I know your talking outta your ass.
Yup.

Nope.

Chinese have been fighting across almost every border over the years, *on and off*. Mostly under the radar of the world media. Particularly with India and Pakistan, in border skirmishes.

Look at that, SilentAssassin03, you've learnt something! Mazeltov!
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6759|Argentina

ApathyCrusade wrote:

Because the USA is god's country. Period.

*dons flame-retardant beekeeper's suit*
And what s his name, George?
REDTEAM
Banned
+0|6724|Pleasanton,CA
Because everyone HATE'S the US

Last edited by REDTEAM (2005-12-20 19:40:04)

Beatdown Patrol
Member
+1|6740

TehSeraphim wrote:

The USA puts its thumbs in everyones business - the reason there isn't a battle on US soil is because there hasn't been one here since Pearl Harbor.  Also, the US has pissed off China, and the US has pissed off the middle east, but I can't think of one instance where China and the Middle East were at each others throats...
I was about to say the same thing.  The game puts in realistic conflicts based on current global, political, and military conditions.  I have a hard time believing that China has any reason to attack a Muslim nation.  The Muslim world has enough to freat about with American (and to some extent, European) influence in their home region, so why would Muslim nations even remotely be concerned with China?

On a side note, the MEC does not exist in real life as a nation, alliance, or fighting force.  I think they chose to use the term MEC instead of Iraq, Iran, or Syria because:

1)  Americans are getting pretty honked off at the situation in Iraq and EA/Dic didn't want negative publicity.
2)  Some Mid-East factions look for excuses to blow something up.  EA/Dice didn't want their offices bombed for blasphemy, Jihad, or some other such nonsense.

- Beatdown
LouisTheLizard
Member
+0|6709
There appears to be some question on the validity of this topic.  So, maybe a quote from wikipedia will set it straight.

It is described as a collection of middle eastern countries which have banded together in order to form a superpower capable of opposing the armies of China and the United States. Altogether in all the current officially released maps the MEC only fight the United States.
So, based on the definition of the MEC, they should be fighting China.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Eastern_Coalition
Flasheart88
Member
+0|6761|Brisbane
Heh, using Wikipedia to support one's argument is like asking a moron what he thinks about intellectually disabled people.

That being said, I agree in principle.
freebirdpat
Base Rapist
+5|6754
I don't think I would agree with MEC fighting China. If anything China and MEC have similar goals, and that is destroying the US, so they would be more aligned in the fact that the US technically is more advanced technologically then either grouping. The EU is probably the only threat with their combined militaries to the US. China may have more people and more men of soldier age, but if the US has a higher kill ratio it will be like Russia fighting the Germans in WWII.

China and MEC also share similar interests, MEC would want equipment or money for equipment, and China would want oil to power theirs. Now the US would also have these same goals and the like.

When it comes down to it, when as shown by both World Wars, nations or superpowers decide to fight, it is much better to ally yourself to someone then to fight on multiple fronts. MEC and China would be better off allying then fighting each other.

What really bugs me is why the EU isn't a part of this game at all. The EU could probably be fighting MEC in India, Turkey/Hungry, and North Africa.

And the wikipedia articles seems to pull that notion from nowhere. And nowhere in game does do I remember seeing that or anywhere to be correct about it.
1tdiestoday
Member
+2|6753
truthfully, i really only like playing as usmc. it might be that i am american, and in the army. actually thats exactly it. I just dont care for the other armies. Sorry
SilentAssassin03
Member
+0|6782|California
"SilentAssassin03 wrote:
Um, who cares why the US are in every map. Just stop complaining about it, PLEASE. Well, I guess you could complain since this is on a complaining thread. If you don't like the US in vanilla BF2 maps then don't play it. Or just don't post anything about it.

when you become a mod, then you can tell people what to post/what not to post, until then, fuck off.

as for who cares, well, obviously those enagaged with the question in the thread - and if you don't care, why fucking post???

stop wasting everyone's time - IF YOU AREN'T INTERESTED IN THE TOPIC, THEN IGNORE THE THREAD, you TOOLS"

Why waste this websites time you ass. You sound like a bitch complaining about why the US are in every map. Stop wasting people's time with ANOTHER damn thread like this.
Lib-Sl@yer
Member
+32|6714|Wherever the F**k i feel like

TehSeraphim wrote:

The USA puts its thumbs in everyones business - the reason there isn't a battle on US soil is because there hasn't been one here since Pearl Harbor.  Also, the US has pissed off China, and the US has pissed off the middle east, but I can't think of one instance where China and the Middle East were at each others throats...
havent you heard of all the terorist bombings in china? a little while ago  a terrorist suicide bombed a bus in souther tibet
freebirdpat
Base Rapist
+5|6754

1tdiestoday wrote:

truthfully, i really only like playing as usmc. it might be that i am american, and in the army. actually thats exactly it. I just dont care for the other armies. Sorry
TBH, I hate China and MECs weapons, out of all of them the only one on either side that I like is china's sniper rifle. It seems quiet and is deadly accurate.

Back on topic, all the maps also occur in the Middle East or China, except for Wake Island but that was released afterwards. So if anything the US is attacking two entities or was attacked by two entities or some form of that, so it just makes more sense for those two entities who are being invaded to ally with each other, even if it is just the ally of lets not attack each other deal.

Germany attacked Poland, which started WWII, Russia joined the allies to fight against Germany. Because they were being attacked by Germany and when someone invades your land, your only choice is too fight back, and ally with anyone fighting against them
oberst_enzian
Member
+234|6744|melb.au

SilentAssassin03 wrote:

Why waste this websites time you ass. You sound like a bitch complaining about why the US are in every map. Stop wasting people's time with ANOTHER damn thread like this.
Firstly, to (slightly mis)quote Trigger, LEARN HOW TO USE THE FUCKING INTERNET, then post.

Secondly, as you yourself have pointed out, it's a complaints section. This may come as a surprise, but it's put here by the makers of the site for people to COMPLAIN in. If you think it's a waste of time, tell THEM, and then ask yourself, "duh, why do I keep posting in it if it's a waste of time?" *dribble*

Thirdly, how do you waste a website's time?

Lastly, to repeat myself: if you don't like the thread, IGNORE IT YOU IDIOT.

Christ, you're stupid.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard