Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
devilslayersbane

Red Alert lore discussion.

Recommended Posts

Hey guys. Hope no one minds me bumping this. I'm an old player, but haven't played in years, just now back on the forums after all this time. It looks like once previously someone came back in with more to add, so I don't feel like i'm sticking my neck out too far. Also, this is a loooooong post, so please bear with me, and I thank in advance anyone who actually reads all of it.

The backstory and historical timeline of RA is something I've thought about a lot, in part because I once wanted to do a mod for a Paradox game way back when that would have introduced the setting (that got derailed because some people were upset we didn't have the mod finished within 3 days of starting work, but that's another story). Below I'll present my general thoughts on the matter. There are many similarities to what's been said, but I've made a few base premise assumptions that go in radically different directions, which then come back to something pretty close to the other ideas anyway. I'm not suggesting the other theories are more or less valid than mine, but I think this might bring a different perspective to the table.

First Premise:  I do not treat the national borders on the mission select screen as accurate. A radical idea maybe, though some have before mentioned why they are problematic. I am not throwing them out arbitrarily or without a source for replacement, though. I believe that the 'modern day' borders were added to keep things simple/for players that might not know much history, and that alternative borders were planned. There's a bit of evidence for this in one of the cutscenes. I don't have a link to it directly, but helpfully, the map is a background to this posting of one of the music files:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkREUDqb5C0

 

Note 1939-esque Germany, the existence of Poland at 1939 borders (importantly without Soviet claims), but the annexation of the Baltic States (and many other things). This is not a map from our timeline, as Poland was settled before the Soviets took over the Baltics, so it's not as if Westwood just grabbed a random map from right before WW2 broke out either. From this I can only conclude that at the start of the war in RA the borders were not either our timeline's pre-WW2 nor are they the modern borders plus Soviet Union as seen between missions.

Something particularly important to note is Germany's annexation of Czech areas, but an independent Slovakia. This would fit well with how the starting mission select map splits Czechoslovakia between Allied and Soviet. I'll talk more about that later, but I think it might be a tiny bit more evidence for this premise.

Second Premise:  The Pacific War happened. I simply can't disregard the Arizona memorial in RA2. If you choose to do so I think that's a valid choice, but it's just not a choice I feel could ever jive with the timeline as I see it. However, I think I've found a way for it to fit in so it enhances the overall timeline too, so while I might seem hypocritical for insisting on adherence to this point in light of my disregard for the mission select map, there are other merits of the Pacific War's inclusion (though I'll also opine that in the case of conflicting information in that case either is valid. There isn't a case of the Arizona Memorial *not* existing to counter in this case).

From here, I can now lay out the framework for the timeline as I see it. I have two other main points, but they don't affect the creation of the timeline directly. Specifically, I remember an old line from an interview that said Soviet Victory followed by a collapse/retraction after Stalin's death leads to TD, while an Allied victory leads to RA2. That's not the focus of this, however. The second point is that I'm specifically not assuming economic conditions followed the same pattern as they did in real life. Specifically, I'm going to argue that in RA the Great Depression did a double dip. The thing to note is that this isn't something caused directly by human actors in the timeline, but rather something that just happens that helps lead to RA. It's possible, all other things being equal in the timeline, that the economy does not do what I lay out, but in that case we get something other than RA. Possible alternative plausible outcomes, just not the outcome we care about.

-----

So the basic setup is obvious. Einstein kills Hitler, etc. Despite focus being put in later installments on the Aliens being democratic, I think a right-wing autocratic party still comes to power in Germany, but definitely not of the Nazi bent. I think this is something that's often postulated by other people working with RA. For my purposes, the Wiemar structure survives in Germany and eventually a Right-Center Right coalition gains power long enough to reform the system to something a bit more stable. Stability eventually comes, not necessarily through any political action but simply the global economy rebounding.

That is, until about 1938 or so, when the economy takes another massive nose dive. In our timeline there was a recession in 1937. Due to WW2 it's kind of forgotten now, and overall was a small speedbump due to the war, but the way economies worked back then that was basically right about on schedule. In my proposed RA timeline, delay that slightly and make it much worse and you have some good ingredients for a second round of chaos.

In Europe everyone's hard hit, and while some countries like Germany, France, and the Soviet Union perhaps started rattling sabers again, the economic crash puts a damper on such thoughts outside the Soviet Sphere (due to a lack of diplomatic relations and trade, the Soviets were actually somewhat isolated from the global ebb in our timeline). Austria gets desperate and the idea of a unified Germany (which wasn't a new idea by any means) goes through, with France and the UK not wanting to protest too much seeing as they're hardly in good shape at the time. Considering 1938 was the year for that in our time line that shouldn't be too controversial a postulate, but here the driving factor is the economic situation rather than overt German expansion. The German leadership does get emboldened by this, however. The issues with Czechoslovakia go down similar to our timeline as well, except with the less extreme faction in control, appeasement actually kinda works. Over the next few years Germany gets a free hand to reshape Central Europe in return for a repeated assurance that there will be no more claim on Alsace in France and a guarantee that Poland will not be invaded, plus support if the Soviets invade Poland. Both France and Britain are more than happy to be able to focus internally on the economy and on dealing with unrest in the colonies, which is higher than in our timeline, in part due to the economy, and in part due to less international tension giving colonial powers an way to divert attention. With most powers turned inward, Italy never annexes Albania, either. Calls for Indian independence are much louder, and eventually most powers have to start work on agreements that will give eventual independence to their holdings, though not for a decade or two. The whole situation is rather reminiscent of how Irish independence went, at least in some locations, though for a time colonial powers try and promote a "commonwealth doctrine", aiming for outcomes closer to Canada instead.

Overall the level of military build up is lower than in our timeline, save for the Soviet Union. The Soviets still carry out much of what they did in our timeline 1939-1940. The Baltic States are annexed, though a bit slower than happened in real life. The Winter War still happens, with the Soviets getting bogged down more than expected. Without international attention, though, the Soviets go further and install a puppet regime at the war's end, though considering what could have happened some are consoled by the fact that it wasn't full annexation.  The map I referenced shows that Romania got a terrible deal as happened in our timeline, but without imminent war between the big blocs they might have gotten the shaft even harder in the RA timeline. Rather than join Germany against the Soviet Union, they could be left to hang out to dry when the Soviets retook the area that's modern day Moldova, with a puppet government installed in Romania proper after that war for good measure. That would explain Romania and Finland being in the Soviet camp at the start of the game. The other's I'll explain after shifting to the US and the Pacific for a moment.

In this scenario so far, the US is weaker, both economically and militarily, than it was in our timeline. The 1938 Recession likely was a pretty big blow, probably enough to unseat whoever was President at the time in 1940 (not saying it was FDR, but not saying it wasn't. Given FDR's history, too, he might have simply not ran for a third term). America is still feeling very isolationist. There is no war in Europe to look to, and while tension in the Pacific over Japanese expansion (similar to our timeline) are rising, it doesn't get most people as wary as the threat of Germany did in our timeline. The US military of RA's 1941 would probably look a lot closer to our timelines' Great Depression era military than our timeline's 1941. This is what would give Japan enough courage to attack Pearl Harbor still, the fact that they would have a much much greater headstart over the US than in our timeline. I wouldn't mark the attack at Dec 7 still, because that's too big a coincidence, but I'd still aim for 1941.

This is combined with a Molotov-Ribbentrop style deal between the Soviets and Japan (sadly I can't recall who the correct Japanese official would be at this time). In my proposed timeline so far the Soviet gains were not done with German support, but didn't cause enough tension for war, so this would be the equivalent deal to our timeline here. The Japanese goal wasn't directly rule over all of China, so there was room for some deal making. Perhaps a formal agreement over Sakhalin, formal recognition that Mongolia was in the Soviet Sphere, and Soviet (diplomatic) support for Japanese actions in Manchuria and further South in exchange for Japanese support of a Soviet invasion of Western China, obstinately to support the CCP in whatever the eventual 'endgame' was supposed to be for China.

However, the Japanese plan would not come to fruition. Though initially much worse off than historically, the US manages to come back and defeat Japan without the distraction of Germany. It takes awhile to wind up, but the massive war economy from our timeline, while maybe not quite as big, does eventually develop. The Pacific War ends through direct invasion of the Japanese islands. This is important for two reasons. One:  The casualties suffered make the United States VERY hesitant to join in the later European War. They must also deal with governing Japan, though to be fair they'd have to do that through other surrender methods as well. Two: The US military machine now has a maaaaasive surplus of war material. Despite not wanting boots on the ground in Europe, this stuff is just laying around and easily sold to the Allies when World War Two with the Soviets starts. German, French, and British manpower, but a Pacific War surplus gun in every hand and a Pacific War surplus chopper or two guarding every Allied base. That longbow you just ordered might have seen action on Iwo Jima.

The Soviets also likely stepped in at the end to grab Manchuria and maybe North Korea. South Korea is under America jurisdiction IMO, due to RA2 factors, but Stalin definitely took a few more bites from China. This all occurs in early 1945 by my estimation, to give time for the events of WW2 proper to start in 1946. Confident that America is too busy to do anything and with Japan defeated, the Soviets can turn their attention back to Europe, letting the resumed Chinese Civil War play out mostly to its own devices. The CCP likely starts 1946 with a much stronger position than in our timeline, but the level of support for the KMT is an order of magnitude higher, both from the Allies and from an America that may be tired but is also very concerned about Soviet actions. This might catch the Soviets offguard in the end when they realize they failed to give the CCP enough support to actually finish the job.

Therefore, to sum the Asian Theater during WW2, the Chinese Civil War is concurrent with the Soviet invasion of Europe and being used as a proxy, but direct involvement of any power is rare.

Now back to Europe. In my timeline, Allied or Soviet Mission 1 is NOT the start of WW2. Mission 1 takes place around March of 1946. In late 1945 the Soviets start their actual invasion, invading Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia. The Soviet strategy at first is simple. They are going to go for a direct knockout punch by taking out Greater Germany.  However, they were concerned that they wouldn't be able to take on Germany one for one while also having to trample these border countries. Therefore they make use of the very last of suitable fall campaign season and spend the winter fortifying their supply lines. They also hope the attack into Hungary will draw troops away from Germany. It's basically a forceful feint. Then, when spring comes again, they can attack right from these forward staging grounds and take Germany quickly. Soviet Mission 1 takes place during this winter. Poland isn't Soviet aligned, it's Soviet occupied. Stalin probably doesn't need much reason to wipe out that village, but I feel it makes even more sense this way too.

For the Allies part, they're in no way shape or form ready to go toe to toe with the Soviets. They need time to mobilize, time to get their own economies into gear, and time for Lend-Lease to arrive. The winter of 1945-1946 could be considered just like the "Phony War" of our WW2. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoney_War) I like this in the context of Soviet Mission 2, which has an interesting cutscene. I've heard some call it a false flag to give the Soviets a reason to declare war, but in my mind the war was already on and this was the German attempt to either gain the initiative or to slow down the Soviet move they knew was coming.

The real question in this case is what happens to East Prussia. Given the fact the Czechoslovakia is cut in half on the mission select image, and I argue that in this timeline that country does not exist, but is instead split between Germany and a puppet Slovakia, I'd further wager that the Soviets limited their invasion over the winter of 45-46 to outside of Germany's borders, to avoid 'provoking' Germany. This may sound like a weird idea, given that war had already come, but perhaps up until the actual invasion of Germany the domestic support for the war in Allied nations was not high, and the Soviets were hoping to capitalize on that as a slight advantage. Maybe the big Allied nations wouldn't gear up their economy fully, or wouldn't send many troops as long as their invasion was contained in the buffer zone countries. After all, as I said above, appeasement seemed to work with Germany, maybe it'd work with the Soviets as well? Sure, the Soviets wanted to go further, but why not let the Allies dither a bit longer if they were willing.

And that takes us up to Mission 1, which is really as far as I need to go. If you made it this far, thanks for reading! I'd be interested to hear other thoughts. As far as events go I think this works pretty well, but I'll admit to a few holes, including the fact that I don't really explain how technology advanced faster than real life. Perhaps the 38 depression led militaries to go for quality over quantity in the West? Kind of a weak answer, but eh, better than nothing. Thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Wesrwood'. :p. Pretty interesting, but for the point of technological advancements... Most of the 'european' scientists that either were used and split (or chose to leave europe) in our Second Great War are alive and in Europe. 'Working together.' I always thought that this was kind of westwood's explanation for nearly everything technological based upon the emphasis of scientists in the cutscenes of RA1.

Remember the Chronosphere? Protect our Lab! (RA1)

(Member Einstein? Member that russian abombguy? Member Iron Curtain? Member Tesla?)

Let's just assume that most of the scientists were not taken by the west and east and got more funding in these times instead. Germany was bigger and the recession might have provoked the thought that only technological advancements are able to solve this problem. Same with France and England which maybe were able to solve these problems you mentioned in the time until the start of RA's Great War and thus had a vast pool of resources still at hand. (Which could still be lower than the industrial military output in our time and thus had to take everything they got [Lend-Lease])

Edit: Why do they have to mine ore on the battlefield? Because both sides are either short on resources or need these (Allies) for funding (Because the military output is still lower than in our timeline :p) or they're constructing them on spot (Soviet). I thought that may be worth noting^^

I think this would kind of be able to fill this loophole :p. Even though I still need to admit that it's not perfect.

Another Loophole would be that Lt. Eva in RA2 says that the Allied Forces have never done a full naval assault (Can't remember the full sentence^^) which points towards a japanese homeland invasion not happening.

Edited by NoSoldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I did say that was one possibility on tech, specifically with the quality over quantity statement. The thing is, I just feel it's too "handwavy" so to speak. The results are just *too large*, in my opinion, for that to be the only reason things happen. I'll admit, I'm using the 1946-1953 (extended to early 1945 in my timeline) timeframe for the war, but there are some other older sources that have RA start in 1953 instead. The extra time *might* help out a little bit. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of supertech and the development thereof in stories, I just think that if the only thing it stretches the belivability a bit too much. It's not the biggest issue IMO though so I can ignore it. Things like collecting ore on the battlefield, or the fact that we have magic construction yards that can fit in a (large) box on a truck I tend to just gloss over :p

6 hours ago, NoSoldier said:

Another Loophole would be that Lt. Eva in RA2 says that the Allied Forces have never done a full naval assault (Can't remember the full sentence^^) which points towards a japanese homeland invasion not happening.

As for this, I'd argue that in this set up, with the US invading Japan, but not *directly* participating in WW2, then both that statement and the Japanese invasion happening can be technically true (the best kind of true).

RA2 as a whole is kind of problematic, and from a game perspective I like the 'silly' elements added in are fine and fun, from a taking things seriously perspective it makes it hard. It also, along with lots of other things, makes me think the whole development process was a little less thought out and things can slip through. If we wanted to still give that statement weight, though, if we took the timeline further could add in something about major drama and command structure changes when the US formally joined the allies :p heh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HELLO ORANGE! It's good to see another lore-head. I really enjoyed your much more detailed response here and I always enjoy a good thread necro (lol).

 

So, first off, I do want to make my appreciation lore-wise clear as what you have posted filled in some of the holes that my posts fail to fill in. That being said, there are a few problems with your theory one of which NoSoldier pointed out. Before the GWWII, there was the second sino-japanese war. The US got involved due to growing fears of Japan's growing interest in Allied holdings in S.E. Pearl Harbor happens, but sooner in 1941 thus giving the proper provocation to enter the conflict. The Soviet Union also stood to gain from both a Japanese or Communist Chinese victory, so they publicly struck a deal with Japan while secretly aiding the CCP and Nationalist Parties, with the majority of this support going to the CCP. This way, the Soviet Union would come out with a victory no matter what happened. Australia may have been used as a staging point for US troops, as well as offering official support for the British Commonwealth. Ultimately, this would end up with a US invasion of mainland Japan. The US economy most likely recovers about a year into the war.

All of this is a preface to fill in the holes for super-weapons. Because of the growing Soviet threat, Europe was already researching advanced technology with research into photon manipulation and atomic power/weaponry going on well before the start of the war. However, because of the 2nd Sino-Japanese war and some "recruiting" by the much more financially stable USSR, many of these scientists either moved to those countries or began to accept funding from them in exchange for technological advances. That's how the Soviet Union got the footage of the chronosphere in action and how they also developed nuclear weapons. The US's tank technology became far more advanced during this time, with the M24 chaffee (equivalent) becoming the standard due to it's light size and modular turret. It could be either a bunker buster or a flamethrower tank depending on the needs of the mission. The first helicopters were in production well before the war, with surveillance needing a less visible platform to keep an eye on Soviet advancement, with UH-1's becoming standard by the 1940's. However, due to the limited utility of the UH-1 in island hopping (as it has limited passenger/cargo capacity and even more limited use as a gunship during this timeline) the US for-goes the UH-1 for the CH-47 platform for transport and AH-64 platform for gunship roles. The CH-47 was left behind to the Chinese Nationalists for further production and were handed to the USSR post-CCP takeover. Radar guided SAM systems would become commonplace on US destroyers in order to help combat the relatively superior Japanese Air Force and their nimble Zero. This means a dramatic shift in the focus of the US and allied forces air-power as it shifted from dog-fight focused nimble aircraft to short-range CAS and transport aircraft.

Assuming that the Allied victory is Cannon. It was discovered that the M24 platform light-tank was unsuitable for the open-field warfare of Eastern Europe Thus the development of the Leopard and Abrams platform with the Leopard platform ultimately seeing more use towards the end of the war (thus the RA2 Leopard tanks in moscow image during the installation). The Photon manipulation research ended up producing the gap generator and the phase tank. The chronosphere was a continuation of Einstein's research into time travel. And the short-range nuclear missile tech came to be known on both sides. The Iron Curtain was stolen from Nikola Tesla but ended up becoming a rushed technology that was a successful failure. The initial goal was to create a device deployable on each soviet tank that would create an electromagnetic force-field around each tank individually. However, it was soon discovered that the Iron Curtain was too power-hungry for a tank's engine to maintain power to without blowing the engine. To combat this flaw, it became a base or FOB operated device that could lock onto multiple tanks and create a field around them. However, this would quickly drain a base's power reserves so it was given a time duration-based operation time limit and a recharge so as not to compromise the base's security and defense.

 

I also agree with your points on RA2, as it seems like a step backwards for the Soviet union to fore-go the AK platform for the less advanced and more expensive and less powerful PPSH platform for their primary weapon during the GWWIII. But, these issues can also be addressed soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply! I'm not used to the quote system here yet, so forgive me, but I'll kind of respond via bullet points. It might lead to some minor confusion though.

On the Sino-Japanese War:  We're actually mostly in agreement there, but I'll admit, I was being deliberately very vague on that and it might have been misinterpreted. When I say say Pacific War, the Sino-Japanese War is included in that. I know being vague might kind of defeat the purpose of fleshing out the lore, but it also allows for flexibility in an area that we have the most trouble with. I'd be willing to allow some minor fudging of the dates I presented, for instance. My intention was that the early portion of that simply had the USSR's invasion of Western China added in, so that the CCP gets more support than what happened in our timeline. There's a lot of "historical drama" (for lack of me wanting to spend time on thinking of a better word at the moment :p ) About which factions were getting Soviet Support, because of shaky CCP leadership for awhile. This was my way of reversing that trend for the RA setting. Despite this change, I still envision Japan getting bogged down as they advance, the oil embargo, and all that (I actually wrote a pretty decent paper, if I do say so myself, on the oil embargo in undergrad). I'm more than willing to adjust the start/end dates and the length of the theater, though. I'm just hesitant to play around with dates any more than I absolutely *need* to.

On tech: My main problem is just simply how fast it develops. Even with cooperation, getting this stuff out there *that* fast just kind of stretches my belief. There was the one note, like I said, that suggested the war started in 1953, but I reject that. If that was the case, however, the tech wouldn't be so far out there that I'd even bat an eye. For bringing it to the 1945-1946 timeframe, and even the earlier Pacific action, however, that's when I start to raise a few eyebrows. Clearly, though, I don't have a leg to stand on to contradict any of that, so that's why I just choose to ignore it in my writeup. I'll admit, what you've added does go a long way towards rebriding my willing suspension of disbelief, too. 

That said, I think we can conglomerate our ideas quite nicely there. US development is certainly key, especially in the areas you mentioned. The surplus from the Pacific still works in that case, while Europeans focused on some of the stranger tech we see in the RA universe. Perhaps my insertion of the Phoney War into the RA timeline can assist with that. Little in the way of actual fighting between main Allied Powers and the Soviet advance into Poland and such that first winter, but desperate attempts to get those last few technologies viable before the big clashes start in the spring. All in all, since I didn't touch it, just patching in any tech theory pretty much works with my timeline, but this would be a good integration. Don't get me wrong on hating on the idea of super tech in general either. I mean, I'm an avid XCOM fan, which is perhaps the most egregious use of science advancing too fast :p

On RA2: Truth be told, if I could ignore RA2 I would, as I'm a bigger fan of Tiberium as it stands ( :p ), though I do suppose those tech continuations are nice touches. I'd also add, as I don't think I had time to mention it in my first post, is that it always bothered me that in that one Allied mission there was a border checkpoint that had Soviet Flags on one side and German flags on the other, as if Poland didn't exist. Two possibilities could explain this. 1) Soviets directly annexed Poland at this point in that war, or 2) My map theory is correct, and due to an Allied victory in RA1 Germany retains East Prussia butting up against Soviet Lithuania. Not particularly relevant to your response, but I did just want to add that, heh.

Overall:  I think our ideas can mesh well. I think when it gets down to it we'd just be arguing about economic factors, which no one can really ever settle that definitively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the quote system so much, but most of the time if I'm addressing multiple statements/people I just use the @username moniker.

My only real rebuttal this time is on tech. Now, keep in mind that this can be taken with a grain of salt, as with most wiki's, but the CNC wiki states that the GWWII doesn't start until the 1950's (though an exact date isn't given on this page). However, there are a few more points that I would like to point out. The other "unused" superweapon in RA1 is Sarin Gas. In our timeline, NATO and the USSR began using the gas as the "standard issue" chemical warfare weapon. This gas was discovered by 4 German Scientists in 1938. Now we're back on the topic of economics. The economic climate in western countries is a disaster and there are sure to be Soviet spy's waiting for the right information. Due to the disastrous economy, the growing soviet influence, and few if any buffer states to prepare against an attack, Germany (and thus the rest of the Allied nations) begin focusing most of their remaining funds on weapons tech, leaving these 4 scientists out in the cold for funding on most of their efforts and their discovery of the gas went unheard as most of the funding went into more defensive weapons research (gap gen) and time-vortex (chrono) technology. Thus, after being contacted by a Soviet Spy under leadership by Nadia, they begin working for the Soviet Union. However, they discover the less effective triethalymine structure first, leading to Stalin's desire to postpone the production until Gradenko's tests just before the start of RA1.

This combined with the fact that Einstein has very little to do with Nuclear weapon's research in the RA timeline seems to suggest that many of the scientists researching the Manhattan project in our timeline defected to the much more stable soviet union. Leading to a small pre-war arms race. This also can help explain why nuclear weapons aren't nearly as devastating in RA1 and how no one is really concerned with mutually assured distruction.

As far as RA2 is concerned, I actually preferred it over tiberian sun, but I preferred TD and RA1 over both of their sequels. I'm not a huge fan of the 80's B-movie action cutscenes and prefer the more "official" nature of the briefings given to you in the original games. That being said, RA1 (thanks to the multiverse theory) can be the precursor to both games, thanks to westwood's cancelled CNC3. The Tiberium universe is actually really well fleshed out, thought I do have an issue with the use of Mech's in TS, due to their unwieldly nature and Murphy's laws of war (Don't look conspicuous; it draws fire). That being said, before we approach another RA game's lore, we need to finish this one and come to an agreement. Which, we mostly have. It's just economics, tech, and dates. 90% if history in a nutshell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you click on the page for the actual war, though, it lists 1946-1953 as the time frame... http://cnc.wikia.com/wiki/Great_World_War_II

I'll admit, I'm not exactly convinced either way on it. For the longest time I was a proponent of the war starting in 1953. Using either the late timeframe or the early timeframe, 1953 is a pivotal year, seeing as in our timeline it's when Stalin died, so it's valuable for making references/parallels. The point being though, the wiki itself has some contradictory information, and I'd also be very interested to hear where they got their information (being wiki comments, the talk page there has a lot of low-quality stuff to sift through ;) ). It's sadly something neither of us here can solve on our own, though, unless you know who's involved in maintaining those. If the balance swung in favor of the 50s date I'd be more than willing to rebalance my timeline, however, as I've already fully admitted that doing so would fix most of the issues I myself half with the development. The only real change I'd make when moving the start date of the war, aside from having to be less hand-wavy about some of the stuff we've mentioned, is probably letting the resumption of the CCW play out before WW2 actually starts a bit more. I enjoy having it concurrent though.

My favor of Tiberium probably comes because TD was my first video game ever. When I encountered Red Alert it was because some friends parents had RA2/YR, and it was pretty mystifying what was going on/why the graphics was better (they never told me it was a sequel!) I only got around to RA1 much later, so it's always been harder for me to put together Red Alert timeline/storyline as I experienced it all out of order, first. Indeed, the first Red Alert mission I played at all was the Allied mission in Hollywood for YR where you have to stop the civilians from being grinded down. I think we can all admit that that's a bit absurd, and preferring more serious stories, that's what set the tone of Red Alert for me ;) (I also made a new miner for Allies every time I saw it chrono back, because I didn't know what was happening :p )

Setting wise, TS has always been the most interesting, mostly because I think there's a critical vagueness in just how messed up Earth is at that point, and that's always fascinated me. The mechs would make sense if Tiberium had really, really ruined Earth's infastructure, but we never really get a solid answer on just how bad (or not bad) things are at that time. I'm a fan of the "things are really really bad" end of the spectrum, to put it simply ;) but that's just my tastes. I like C&C 3, not as much as the other games, and EA's changes were certainly not the greatest, but at the same time I'm not going to give them a hard time for it. However, I do feel as if the world was made a little better off than TS might have projected. Maybe that's a good thing overall, as I'll admit I do like the world setup in C&C3, but some of the disconnects never sat well with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, how about a poll? This is one of the most active communities of RA1 fans out there, and sometimes a community decision is a good way to settle conflicts.

I'm sorry that your first experience with RA was the hollywood YR mission. I'm much the opposite. Red Alert was my first PC game (well, it was my dad's game, but he never played it) It enamored me very quickly and is one of the reason's that I'm a huge history buff now. The CG was top-notch to me and the cutscene briefings were extremely well done and directed and most of the tech actually existed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one way, though regardless of outcome I'm interested in where both sets of dates came from on the wiki. That's probably an unknowable answer though, heh.

Both date ranges have pros and cons, IMO. The 1946-1953 range has pacing with historical developments, but not tech, and the 7 year time frame might be a bit much for what we see in game.

The 1953+ time frame allows tech better to develop, and since I've not seen a solid end date we could curtail it whenever, maybe make the war two years, but leaves us a lot more area to 'filler' with.  For Europe and the Allies to develop that's good, but for the Asian Theater, not so much, as we'd have a lot more 'dead time' so to speak when things should be happening (as things are always happening) but there's not much content for us to shove in. I have a few ideas, but they're not ideal. On yet another hand, it would allow more development of Africa. My view of Africa is that decolonization is happening due to the economic situation (after all, we end up with independent nations there one way or another), and maybe there are some Soviet funded groups but not enough to warrant a diversion in RA1 basically, and the area isn't important enough to warrant a Soviet invasion when Germany, France, and the UK are much closer targets. The 53+ timeframe allows that to be cemented as the path more, rather than the 46-53 which makes it a bit more wishy-washy.

Also granted on one issue, the length variance might have more to do with Soviet vs Allied victory. They're unlikely to take the same amount of time. Since we've established my preference for RA1-TD, following the Soviet Victory branch as compared to Allied Victory leading to RA2, that's the length I'm more concerned with, and I feel as if that would be 2-3 years or so, but the Allied Victory would take longer. I actually do have some ideas for the in between years for RA1 to TD, but best not to bring that out quite yet.

So for a TL;DR:

1946-1953:  Asia history easier to handle, Europe history solid but rushed. Africa history a bit rushed

Upsides of 1953+:  Tech makes more sense. Africa possibly easier to handle. More wiggle room with Europe history. Asia harder to handle.

Edited by OrangeP47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if we do 1953, then we can let the second Sino-Japanese war last a bit longer especially considering that the U.S. would not have had nuclear weapons to force the Japanese to surrender. That, plus the homeland advantage and the fact that it's an island nation with a very stubborn people could easily make the war last a good 2-4 years past the 1945 date that it ended in our timeline with the right conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as I get my Longbows of Iwo Jima ;)

That said, I also have a few other ideas for bogging down the US, such as South America requiring some attention ala Pancho Villa in WW1, but that has very little in-game to back it up aside from perhaps foreign influence in Mexico via RA2 starting conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as I said, in RA2 Mexico is definitely Soviet aligned. At first I saw that has a homage to Red Dawn (and it still is), but on and off throughout the century, even before the Cold War, there were rumblings of various shades of leftism in Latin America, not all pro-USSR. In the RA timeline it might be that something more, or at least something different came of that.

To the point, however, with a longer timeframe before WW2 breaks out, I don't think merely the issues in China and Japan are enough to keep the US "busy" so to speak. In my view the US needs a reason not to get more involved in Europe than they did, and I quite like the idea that they've just dealt with enough they don't feel like taking any more direct casualties at the moment. A land invasion of Japan would certainly leave quite a mark, but in our timeline right after WW2 that didn't stop most of the world from getting involved in Korea. A good argument could be made that the stronger nations' hands were forced in that case (and we can't really 'test' alternatives as one would do with scientific hypotheses), but I think at the very least we're forced to admit that both sides in the Cold War did bite off bits and pieces of global drama here and there with great frequency.

Therefore, it'd be fitting IMO if not only was the US busy 'digesting' Japan and former Japanese holdings, but they might be involved in a 'Brush War' type scenario somewhere in Latin America. Maybe Venezuela, leverage the oil angle too. Mexico would be a good case, but that might screw up the RA2 setup too much so I'd avoid that. Could also involve beefed up US involvement in the Caribbean ala the Destroyers for Bases deal, and maybe some colonial drama with Allied holdings in the area for good measure. I have a friend working on his IR thesis and he cites the US mediation of the UK colonial border with Venezuela a lot (his analysis is wrong, but that's another issue), but it just occurred to me that Venezuela has even more potential, as that's an issue a revolutionary government might try and revive, even if it was allegedly settled in the 1890s.

The trick is getting the US to stop paying attention before RA2 long enough for Mexico to flip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever happened to the idea that the US stayed isolationist? After all, WWII was the thing that changed that policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from the Arizona monument, probably the Carville cut scenes and the longbows.

To be fair, there is indeed more room to swing the US back that way in these musings. Indeed, a I also like the idea of the US falling "asleep at the wheel" so to speak before RA2 which allows the Soviets to gain strength again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC, the US joined the GWWII late in the allied campaign, just like the actual WWI and WWII. It is likely that after the GWWII, they took off as the major world power (as seen in the RA2 intro where the US was the one to appoint Romanov as the premier of the Soviet union). As for Mexico? Eh. They might not have been all that interested in Mexico, maybe even suffering from a superiority syndrome, putting their faith in their superior economy, diplomatic power and their atomic missile systems.

Fun fact is that the European powers didn't want to join the US in RA2 at first due to the Soviet nuclear threat. Maybe the European powers were still recovering from RA1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll admit I don't have a cite right now, but there's been a lot of people that said the US didn't join WW2 proper *at all*. The expansion expeditionary force is probably a good compromise (and for OOC reasons it was probably for ease of casting :p ) Regardless of US participation or not, the economic factors alone would catapult them up eventually, and with that comes diplomatic power (That thesis work I referenced earlier is looking at signs of the UK yielding to US decision making as early as the 1890s, through diplomatic channels alone) The reason I bring up Mexico is because right before entry into WW1 the US *did* go into Mexico after Pancho Villa, which sets up a pretty strong precedent even without more direct interventionism.

As for RA2, I've always considered Europe not joining in right away to be one of those mixed things that would have probably been best worked out differently. Certainly being afraid of the nuclear threat is a valid reason, but at the same time, the US and Allies both are the Allies faction mechanically. It can be handwaved as a simplification, but it just doesn't sit well with me. Clearly there was already existing massive cooperation, and Europe basically chickened out. Again, they had a good reason, but it just doesn't feel as solid as some of the other postulations.

Edited by OrangeP47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and this warrants a double post (sorry!). Originally I was going to say to tie in with the Pacific War it'd be interesting if Mexico had Japanese influence, but I couldn't think of any realistic reason for that to happen so I didn't say anything. Japan invests in the American side of the Pacific Rim today, but I didn't know if they did back then to any large degree. I was just looking up why Pancho Villa thought it'd be a good idea to attack Columbus NM which is what promoted American intervention in 1916, and apparently the best guess we have is from someone who was close to him at the time saying he wanted "German and Japanese intervention". German makes sense, the Zimmerman telegram and such, but apparently Japan was involved enough that Japanese involvement was a remote possibility...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...