Do you want Japan as a faction?

[Pieman13]

Well I though RUSE would be different than other WW2 RTS's because it would have Japan as a faction. But in this article:http://www.gamespot.com/pc/str...l?sid=6206612&page=2 (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/ruse/news.html?sid=6206612&page=2)

It says:


There are six factions in the game--USA, UK, Italy, France, Germany, and the USSR--and each has its advantages

Now I wanted to see what units Japan would feature. I also wanted as a playable faction in both single and muliplayer. So, do you guys want Japan as a faction?

[Firemantle]

I voted no but my vote isnt showing up o.0

No because if they put japan in it would be a whole new theatre, that would take alot of extra time and rexscources. Everything from art design and research to actual map and model design + campaign design ect. They are prob holding it for an expansion.

Anyway no for now unless its a full campaign with China, Brit, ANZAC, Japan and USA.

[Benjamin385]

YES!

[Pieman13]

Originally posted by Firemantle:
I voted no but my vote isnt showing up o.0

No because if they put japan in it would be a whole new theatre, that would take alot of extra time and rexscources. Everything from art design and research to actual map and model design + campaign design ect. They are prob holding it for an expansion.

Anyway no for now unless its a full campaign with China, Brit, ANZAC, Japan and USA.

whats ANZAC http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif

[Firemantle]

ANZAC = Australia NewZealand Army Corps

[Benjamin385]

Why didn't you just say that?

[Gypsy816]

Hmmm I don't think it's a bad idea. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[KZarr]

No, we don't need zerging

[RawKryptonite]

I think they'd be a little out of place in Europe.
You've got them in Battlestations to get your fix.

[Firemantle]

Because Anzac is a common term and its easier to type.
Why didn you just search it up on google?

[Pieman13]

cause i'm lazy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

[Mig-29]

Originally posted by Firemantle:
I voted no but my vote isnt showing up o.0

No because if they put japan in it would be a whole new theatre, that would take alot of extra time and rexscources. Everything from art design and research to actual map and model design + campaign design ect. They are prob holding it for an expansion.

Anyway no for now unless its a full campaign with China, Brit, ANZAC, Japan and USA.
This summarizes my opinion quite well.

[Firemantle]

Thanks mig http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Pieman - Slackers unite!

[Mig-29]

Originally posted by Firemantle:
Thanks mig http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Pieman - Slackers unite!
Laziness makes perfect.

[J_2_Me]

I think the idea of adding armies such as, China, and the ANZAC's is an amazing idea. I've never seen a game use them in a world war 2 sense, even though they fought in the real war.

I really hope the developers consider this.

[joker562008]

yes if thats what it takes for a free for all multiplayer mode

[Firemantle]

Well the chinese were a rebel guerilla army - they were outnumberd and outgunned in there own land! There was also the communist and the capitalist chinese armies (they later got booted out and they founded Taiwan but to be honest they were a bunch of drug dealers and imoral crooks who were organsing crime).
Anyway the ANZACS were basically british in many ways accept with there own fighting styles and techniques, I have never seen them done before in a game and have no idea about how they fought differently but I would imagine it wouldnt be like US because Australia + New Zealands army was much smaller. They held the Japanse army off at Kokoda in New guinea for months though outnumberd like 4:1 and in a rainforest (Japs are used to fighting in the jungle and auzies are not).
They werent a big player other then defending areas of South east asia though, but later they contributed alot of the technicle staff to the US army for intelligence reasons and stuff. Like on my dads side - (little story here >.&lthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif his father was a radio operator and established radio towers to intercept japanese communications, he landed on the beaches with the first wave of americans as the auz units were attatched to american ones to assits. They could be special RUSE units >.<

[ImperialDane]

I'd say we should work on first getting ruse out in the first place :P Then working in, other more closer fronts, like North Africa or the Eastern front.

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

[flamingbbq]

If it does not come when RUSE is released then Id expect it to come out with an expansion pack or a update. Japanese were a prime force in WW2 so maybe they will release a Pacific Expansion pack or new game

[RawKryptonite]

Leave something for the sequel folks. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[yama_raion]

Originally posted by Firemantle:
I voted no but my vote isnt showing up o.0

No because if they put japan in it would be a whole new theatre, that would take alot of extra time and rexscources. Everything from art design and research to actual map and model design + campaign design ect. They are prob holding it for an expansion.

Anyway no for now unless its a full campaign with China, Brit, ANZAC, Japan and USA.

I Would REALLY love to play as my own country - so YES, but on the other hand I would like to see this game released sometime soon...so I kinda agree with Firemantle here - I'll take the game as is so that the time devoted to the game is spent on perfecting the existing gameplay, but I want either DLC or a sequal were the Japanese are a playable faction with their own campain!

[KZarr]

It might be fun to see how zerg works out in this game.

It was devastating in CoH with rifle and pioneer spam.

[Pieman13]

Can someone tell me what zerg is http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif

[KZarr]

The phrase "zerging" has entered video gaming jargon to describe using many low-cost and weak units to overwhelm an enemy. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zerg#Zerg)

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

[MrRandom004]

I voted yes but as long as they have the capacity for it, after all the first game in a new franchise with new gameplay elements need not get to ambitious

[obliviondoll]

Not having "yes for an expansion" or "save it for the sequel" options, I went for yes, as a simple alternative.

I like the idea of including ANZACs though. That would be nice.

[dragonfire61968]

But Japan would be verry difficult because in lack of Medium and Heavy Tanks.

And as far as i could see it from some videos the Japanese Army would be flamed away by some Crocodile Tanks wich have an insane range in this game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

[Pieman13]

START POSTING http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

[N3V30]

Originally posted by dragonfire61968:
But Japan would be verry difficult because in lack of Medium and Heavy Tanks.

And as far as i could see it from some videos the Japanese Army would be flamed away by some Crocodile Tanks wich have an insane range in this game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

No. An insane range would be shooting half way across the map. IN THE VIDEO IT WAS ZOOMED IN AND WITH THE SIZE OF THE MAP THE RANGE WOULD STILL BE VERY SMALL.


If you want to complain about ridiculous ranges go to the Endwar forums.

[Pieman13]

you have a point there N3V30 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

[bruce57]

ya endwars ranges were off a bit

[Account_Deleted]

main forces i'd see is.
ANZAC, US, JAP/Asia, EF
ef = italy or germany
asia=china or jap
Anzac= pacifc( Australia ,NZ, papa new geny (sp?)
US= no need to explain..

so i'd say yes to jap, it'll be nice to see that.

and about zerging.
aha just like spamng ODST's in halowars
or helic/airstrike in endwar..

[bruce57]

http://www.bloodysushi.com/macro/zerg%20rush.jpg

[Wizeacre621]

I kinda dunno,But yeah it would be an entire new theatre...BANZAI!!

[bruce57]

naval battles would be tough, especially carrier battles.

[Pieman13]

i'd love to do Iwo Jima http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

[bruce57]

hell yeah, but having all those naval units would be hard

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

[xxxthatcherxxx]

i want the zulus as a playable faction.
'the spear is mightier than the .30cal gpmg

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Originally posted by bruce57:
hell yeah, but having all those naval units would be hard
You could start with all the units landing on the beach... like the normandy landing, which is in the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

[Pieman13]

Wake Island Battle would be good but there would be no way to win (all the troops surrendered on Wake Island) In the Dieppe raid you can at least evacuate your troops.

[bruce57]

yeah, but if u played Dieppe online as the canadians, if u won what would that mean?

[Pieman13]

what do you mean by Online http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

[xxxthatcherxxx]

opposite of offline

like a pie in an oven rather than the firdge

[bruce57]

pretttty much

[Account_Deleted]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/49/136992199_79291861ff.jpg

new type of zerging if adding jap as a playable faction
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
and no i'm not rasicites, i'm asian myself

[Pieman13]

Originally posted by bruce57:
yeah, but if u played Dieppe online as the canadians, if u won what would that mean?

Online as in coop or something http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

[bruce57]

no! online as in using xbox live! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

honestly, pieman.....

[Pieman13]

Well are you talking about playing an actual Dieppe raid mission or just a skirmish on that map http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Actually doing the mission with somebody else=co-op
Just doing a skirmish with not many objectives=Online Battle

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[bruce57]

i guess both. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif

[Wizeacre621]

Originally posted by xxxthatcherxxx:
i want the zulus as a playable faction.
'the spear is mightier than the .30cal gpmg

No the Taxi is mightier than both here!

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

[bruce57]

Originally posted by Scorch621:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xxxthatcherxxx:
i want the zulus as a playable faction.
'the spear is mightier than the .30cal gpmg

No the Taxi is mightier than both here! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
ah yes i always for get that the RSA was zulu territory.
scorch, do u hear a lot about the Boer Wars where u live?

[Pieman13]

It be cool to see how an Invasion of Japan would work out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

[bruce57]

yeah but no chance of it in RUSE #1, japan is out as a faction remember? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Pieman13]

Thats why the poll is here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[bruce57]

yes most people WANT it, but its been confirmed that its NOT in the game. so this thread is useless! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

[Pieman13]

So developers should ignore all suggestions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

[Gypsy816]

Originally posted by bruce57:
yes most people WANT it, but its been confirmed that its NOT in the game. so this thread is useless! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Nothing you post here is useless ya know. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Pieman13]

http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee205/baka-emily/OWNED-1.jpg

[N3V30]

Originally posted by Pieman13:
So developers should ignore all suggestions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

They shouldn't....But they do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

[rcui88]

If Japan is involved, China must be involved as well, and if Japan is involved, a Great Navy War is involved, it's sounds great!

[bruce57]

i could see the chinese as an unplayable faction.

[iAnDyx]

i wish it was a fraction but really doubth it will be.if it was it would be my 2nd my most favourite fraction to play, but Germans always come first http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif even though im irish i always took a liking to Germany in the war for some reason and no im not a Nazi :L

[bruce57]

i think germany deserves a lot more respect than theyre given. they had some of the finest operational commanders the world has ever seen, some of the best war machines ever seen, and created the basis for all war strategies to follow it, the Blitzkrieg. just because their leader was so fanatical doesnt mean the whole country was screwed up. give Rundstedt, Von Manstein, Bock, Rommel, von Leeb, and Kesselring some credit!

[iAnDyx]

i hope that wasnt pointed out at me ? cause i certainly agree with you, Germans were the overall powerfull army, only if they didnt make the stupid mistake and be very greedy to try take RUSSIA as well as france and england, hell there only real allies were japan and they were already F in the A'd by the americans http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Pieman13]

Germany during WW2 is always looked upon as pure evil http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif Units in the Waffen SS didn't directly take part in the holocaust and neither did the Wehrmacht.

[iAnDyx]

actually not all off Germany was evil thats why German officers attempted to assassinate hitler so they could end the war them selfs, the SS were the main power of berlin they basicly controlled everything, including the concentration camps,The German army were only following there orders the reason the German army didnt stop half way through because they gave an oath to hitler that they would never betray him,thus the long lasting ever war that was WW2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif other then that i think Germany should of surrended by 1942

[Pieman13]

Originally posted by iAnDyx:
the SS were the main power of berlin they basicly controlled everything, including the concentration camps

most crimes were committed by individual and units of the SS not the SS as a whole

[iAnDyx]

yes i know not the whole SS if that happened then a civil war would of broke out in Germany then they would of bein really F in the A'd for WW2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
If infantry are able to melee attack then the Japanese should get the banzai attack http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

[bruce57]

THE JAPANESE ARE NOT IN THE GAME!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[MrRandom004]

Originally posted by bruce57:
THE JAPANESE ARE NOT IN THE GAME!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

http://demotivationalz.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/capslock.jpg

[bruce57]

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

[Pieman13]

Originally posted by bruce57:
THE JAPANESE ARE NOT IN THE GAME!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
THATS WHAT THE POLL IS FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[N3V30]

Originally posted by Pieman13:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bruce57:
THE JAPANESE ARE NOT IN THE GAME!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
THATS WHAT THE POLL IS FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/6377/fail01ix9.jpg

[bruce57]

how is the poll gonna affect whether japan is in the game or not? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[Pieman13]

what you don't want a game influenced by the fans??

Codemasters recently changed the camo on their soldiers in OFP: DR because people spoke up and said they were using the wrong camo on their soldiers. The same could be done here if we speak up.

Don't give me the excuse that this is UBI. UBI is only the publisher while Eugen Systems is the developer. You say developers don't look at the forums? Well its like Gypsy said they don't ignore every single thing on the forums. I can trust her well enough that it is true.

[bruce57]

yes i know that the game can be influenced by the posts here, but only on LITTLE things! Eugen is not going to be able to add a whole other faction! Camo is small, easy to change. A whole new faction and whole new units would take a loooong time to complete!

[Pieman13]

In men of War the fans spoke up and replaced The Japanese faction with a North African Campaign

[MrRandom004]

Can you explain the circumstances by how this was achieved

How long had it been since it was announced?
How large was support for this?
How long was it until the release date?
etc.

[Pieman13]

i don't know but i think it was in the MoW beta but go taken out.

Japan is coming in a patch soon though. How about Japan come in a multiplayer patch for RUSE then a Japanese campaign as DLC? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

[bruce57]

good idea, pieman! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[N3V30]

Originally posted by Pieman13:
i don't know but i think it was in the MoW beta but go taken out.

Japan is coming in a patch soon though. How about Japan come in a multiplayer patch for RUSE then a Japanese campaign as DLC? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

More likely an expansion, but I like your optimism http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

[bruce57]

expansions are generally PC only http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif so what about Japan on the 360?

[OnlyMeNoMas]

Bruciepoo you forgot us playstation tree usars

[bruce57]

1. dont call me bruciepoo http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif although it made me laugh http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

2. *groan* fine, the ps3 users too. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

[DarkIvory]

I really do'nt see any need for them to be included, sure the did play a large part in the war but there are more than enough games that have the included as a faction ..

[Pieman13]

There are http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

[N3V30]

Originally posted by bruce57:
expansions are generally PC only http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif so what about Japan on the 360?

If they bring out an expansion they can add more than a faction, a campaign and a few maps. They could add the entire pacific theatre and more units for each faction, maybe even ships.

[bruce57]

ships would be cool, but since they are not controllable units in the atlantic theatre, i doubt they'll be in the pacific, even with a DLC/expansion pack.

[Mencor]

I think ship battles were more crucial to the pacific campagn then the atlantic. Thus not making ships controllable in the pacific (should it be implemented) would be a misstake.

Are you certain that ships wont be controllable? I know they aren't in the Monte Casino demonstration but we are told that later all well be under our control, shouldn't that include the ships?

[bruce57]

there was an interview where it was mentioned.

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Originally posted by Pieman13:
what you don't want a game influenced by the fans??

Codemasters recently changed the camo on their soldiers in OFP: DR because people spoke up and said they were using the wrong camo on their soldiers. The same could be done here if we speak up.

Don't give me the excuse that this is UBI. UBI is only the publisher while Eugen Systems is the developer. You say developers don't look at the forums? Well its like Gypsy said they don't ignore every single thing on the forums. I can trust her well enough that it is true.

Im going to quote Ubi Razz here from A Thread in the GD forum (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4811054957/m/9001049477/p/1) :


How many people out there buy a video game? If it's a top seller like the Prince of Persia, Halo, Gears of War, whatever, then millions are sold but lets say a million. How many are on a forum? Let's say ten thousand (a huge overestimation as I'm sure you'll agree). Are these ten thousand voices the majority? Clearly not.

This is why we do research in many, many different places and in many, many different ways. We do listen to the voices in the forums, and they're heard in Ubisoft, but if the few (well, ten thousand in my example) say one thing and the other nine hundred and ninety thousand say something else, who do we listen to?

Having said that, what if the forums say X and a lot of our other research say the same thing? Then of course we'll follow that and see what we can do about it. You can't blind yourself to the fact that people who post on forums are not as numerous as the numbers of people who buy and play games. One of the biggest reasons people post on here is to make their voices heard and the most vocal people are the unhappiest people. It's entirely possible that most people out there are very happy with a game/feature produced but only the unhappy people go on the forum to vent (which is often the case) and then is it wise to listen to these few?

Edit: my point is that we can't solely listen to people on forums as they're simply not enough of the gamers/fans on there. If there were more we could give it bigger weight but we have to throw your lot in with everyone else, who also have an opinion which is equal in importance to yours. So although you and everyone on your forum might say one thing, that doesn't mean it's the majority or the right thing to do for the game/brand. We always have to try to do the right thing for our customers and believe it or not, we actually have to justify ourselves with research into proving we're doing the right thing to upper management before we're even allowed to do it.

So unless a ton of other people are not liking something/ wanting something to be implemented that are not only on this forum. Chances are its not going to happen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Pieman13]

did you not see the whole conversation we just had http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

[bruce57]

http://loyalkng.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/i_heard_you_like_boxxy.jpg

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Originally posted by Pieman13:
did you not see the whole conversation we just had http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Ya i did... i just thought it was important to throw that out their. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Pieman13]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

[bruce57]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

[Todda468]

they could work, like their faction would never rout (since they fight to the death) but they have **** tanks.

[GK_]

Oh, zombie thread back to live! Hurray.

Japan is a tiny island nation, almost no role in history. No need them.

But Eugen, please:
- Add mounted units
- Add Mongols
- Add Aztecs
- Add Teuronic Knights
- Add Holy Roman Empire
- Add Summeria

And don't forget about Poland.

[AverageSoldier]

No adding Australia? How dare you http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Also if they are going to add many things again they should buff USA how it should be so it isn't so bad ingame....

[GK_]

Originally posted by AverageSoldier:
No adding Australia? How dare you http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Also if they are going to add many things again they should buff USA how it should be so it isn't so bad ingame....

Ok, but as Aboriginals they're are welcome too. Boomerang anti-tanks and kangaroo-cavalry are good ideas.

[AverageSoldier]

I'm fron Australia and I find that very hilarious.

[Illusive_S]

Originally posted by GK_:
And don't forget about Poland.

Poland > Japan (even Poland > France)

Japan was olny nuked twice. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Poland fought with overhelming power of the Reich, and then was backstabbed by USSR, and then fought all around the world.

[darthviadro501]

Japan is a tiny island nation, almost no role in history.
lol what...

[AverageSoldier]

Japan did bomb Australia, which was the Darwin bombings and attack our ships in the Sydney harbour with tiny submarines (2-3 man sized) They were going to attack WA (Western Australia) Perth I'm quite sure.

Also the fighting in Kokoda.

[Brahmanfire]

Quote: Illusive_S
"In next patch i would like to see:
Mobile AA for French OR cheaper Camels
Willys for 10 $
m 16 for 20$"

I know this isn't a balance thread I simply wanted to endorse these balance changes Illusive has in his Sig. I think each is spot on... and to add to these, I believe Russia's Barracks may be better priced at $15 rather than $10. Currently you can pop up 3-4 barracks to saturate the map with Infantry while your non-Russian opponent fields 1 for the same cost. In terms of Infantry Power which good players know can totally Dominate a game, the scales are tipped a bit too heavily in Russia's favor. Either raise Barracks cost or perhaps increase research cost of Heavy Infantry to $75 or something to this effect. Russian heavy's Pwn all other infantry in head to head battles, which is ok but not when you can field 3-4 barracks all over the map with such a minimal economic cost. It just doesn't feel right as is. Anyone else feel the same?

On Topic: *Of Course I would like to see Japan in this game!!! Good luck trying to make them a competitive faction tho, that would be a very tough job.

[Illusive_S]

Originally posted by Brahmanfire:
Quote: Illusive_S
"In next patch i would like to see:
Mobile AA for French OR cheaper Camels
Willys for 10 $
m 16 for 20$"

I know this isn't a balance thread I simply wanted to endorse these balance changes Illusive has in his Sig. I think each is spot on... and to add to these, I believe Russia's Barracks may be better priced at $15 rather than $10. Currently you can pop up 3-4 barracks to saturate the map with Infantry while your non-Russian opponent fields 1 for the same cost. In terms of Infantry Power which good players know can totally Dominate a game, the scales are tipped a bit too heavily in Russia's favor. Either raise Barracks cost or perhaps increase research cost of Heavy Infantry to $75 or something to this effect. Russian heavy's Pwn all other infantry in head to head battles, which is ok but not when you can field 3-4 barracks all over the map with such a minimal economic cost. It just doesn't feel right as is. Anyone else feel the same?


i have no idea how high resarch cost is but if it have elite weapons sth is wrong...
Ill add this to my sig as soon as i can maybe it have magical powers and will change the game! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



On Topic: *Of Course I would like to see Japan in this game!!! Good luck trying to make them a competitive faction tho, that would be a very tough job.

Can you imagine kamikaze fighters? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
This would be awesome weapon against admins! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

[Brahmanfire]

i have no idea how high resarch cost is but if it have elite weapons sth is wrong..
Well according to the Ruse unit viewer Russian heavy's do 20% more damage than other factions in an Infantry Vs. Infantry engagement, this is excepting the French heavy's which do the same damage but they cost $10 apiece so there's really no comparison. Also Gvardiya's AT capabilities are on par with Rangers... 2nd only to the German heavy's which are Armor DESTROYERS. Although it costs $50 to research Russian HI, this cost is offset by cheap barracks depoloyment(only$10). Whether a 2v2 or even 1v1 for only $80 you can deploy 3 barracks across the map with Heavy infantry and use CamoRuse to hide the building trucks, potentially putting one right next to an opponents HQ if he isn't careful and it's "GG". And if you lose a truck... big deal, only $10 lost. Spamming 3-4 Barracks ensures early map domination of City's/Forests and easily harrassing supply depots. I would sum it up like this: It is such a low-cost risk, with such a High potential Payoff.

On Japan and Kamikaze fighters. HELL YA!!!! That would be awesome!

[Covert-141]

Planes already kill things when they happen to crash into them on the ground... we do not need Japan. (This is like the 5th time I've posted this lol)

[Illusive_S]

Originally posted by Covert-141:
Planes already kill things when they happen to crash into them on the ground... we do not need Japan. (This is like the 5th time I've posted this lol)

Still i think kamikadze yelling TIEEEEE(who watches family guy know what im talking about) would be epic.
Also samurai wariors should be taken under consideration http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

EDIT: As you can see my signature is changed already. Anyone want sth more? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

[angus725]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dikhR9PvEnE

Jpn is going to be in game sooner or later.

[GK_]

Originally posted by darthviadro501:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Japan is a tiny island nation, almost no role in history.
lol what... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Read my whole post about Aztecs and see something called "irony".

Anyway, great idea (for RUSE 2) could be "minor nations". Hrd to play, defienietly weaker than main powers, using mixed units from main nations, much more expensive and longer to produce - but with some strength points.

They could be really cool for scenarios or "pros" who want beat stronger USA in mp http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ah, why there is no modding tool... They just need flags and can use already ready units. Historically, Poland used french tanks, Grecce was using british etc etc

For example -
-Finnland (using some weak tank/air units from other nations, but with expensive, good infantry (legionaires with other name) ) due to Winter War
-Grecce (using UK land units) due to Italy-Grecce war
-Poland (using FRA/UK units) due to start of war and many fights around the world
-AZNAC and Cannada (using UK/USA units)- -defienietly engaged in war
-Hunguary (GER/Italy mix) as Axis ally
-Romania (USSR/GER/Italy mix) as Axis ally

Anyway, Japan with good Type Zero fighter and good but expensive infantry could be interesting, but first of all, there must be navy to add Japs. RUSES are ideal for navy, silience+terror=wolfpack tactics, encryption+spy=encrypting enigma, silience+blitz=pearl harbour etc etc.

Navy is more important than another nation http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[RudyFaasse]

Originally posted by Firemantle:
I voted no but my vote isnt showing up o.0

No because if they put japan in it would be a whole new theatre, that would take alot of extra time and rexscources. Everything from art design and research to actual map and model design + campaign design ect. They are prob holding it for an expansion.

Anyway no for now unless its a full campaign with China, Brit, ANZAC, Japan and USA.

ANZAC? Why them? Holland also fought there. Then you can add them also I guess. It is just as important country as ANZAC

I say YES to Japan http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif More units and a new faction + maps = good http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[AverageSoldier]

Why not the ANZACS? The Aussies are great, I love my country and what the our diggers (soldiers) did for the countries, not as much as other countries but we did do **** in WWII.

[Covert-141]

Thinking of starting a mock nation thread, where we post up units and proposed stats for a (new) nation's theoretical units. Was thinking this for Canada primarily though, you guys should do the same for Japan.

[Stewox]

You'll all be pleased when the dlc comes.

[Covert-141]

What DLC? I don't think EUG/Ubisoft realize that considering how overcrowded this years gaming market is that if its not announced soon it wont be marketable until April. Even then... lack of balance patch (or response to any balance discussion) is already killing this game.

EDIT - forgot to mention connection issues.


Originally posted by Stewox:
You'll all be pleased when the dlc comes.

Yes, I understood this the first time I read it... your implying that Japan will be added as downloadable content. Still... there are bigger fish to fry so to speak :\ doesn't matter if the community has given up on the game by then.

[dagmark]

yes, it only makes sense. including pacific theatre of operation. land battles only with jap bunkers

[gromikval]

yes o more ruse's

[eibelboys]

Well if they are going to make an expansion pack with a Pacific and island hopping campaign then yes,I think Japan should be a faction,but if there isn't going to be one then no.

[talldarkhandsom]

they should make the jap faction and maps of th pacific theater as a expansion pack, it will sell well because R.U.S.E is gaining alot of attention lately

[AverageSoldier]

Originally posted by talldarkhandsom:
they should make the jap faction and maps of th pacific theater as a expansion pack, it will sell well because R.U.S.E is gaining alot of attention lately
Ruse gaining attention?
Be aswesome when they bring out some DLC and it won't matter because of the online issues will ruin the game anyways and everyone would use battleships to bomb the entire map....imagen how much water there would have to be... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

[Alcarin21]

I hope they never add japan.

They need to fix game first not add nations.

[skullhunter990]

http://images.hugi.is/humor/151663.jpg
Alcarin your so right and noone sees it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif its sooo sad.

[AverageSoldier]

He is right. People are to busy wanting the Japs in a game with the European theatre and battleships to care about the online probs. Whats the point of adding anything if people will leave because they cant play http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

[M1GarandGuy]

FIX CONNECTION INSTEAD!!

[mandead]

I'd welcome Japan as an addition, so long as they're balanced to fit alongside the other factions. I don't just want a clone of another faction.

They could get some unit ideas from Men of War : )

[UncleBest]

Japan would be interesting...light tanks, light artillery but BAD A$$ Ships, especially at night.

So for Japan to be balanced one would need island campaigns and night (night and weather please?).

All of these would be good, IMHO.

[Puma-234]

Yes, Japan should be inculded, along with Australia and the UK. Masive naval forces and ruses could make for an interesting game. Submarines could attack supply convoys and DE's could hunt subs. Troops on islands must be supplied somehow. Combind this Pacific theatre with Europe and there could be a major world war.

[kierentod12345]

Originally posted by Puma-234:
Yes, Japan should be inculded, along with Australia and the UK. Masive naval forces and ruses could make for an interesting game. Submarines could attack supply convoys and DE's could hunt subs. Troops on islands must be supplied somehow. Combind this Pacific theatre with Europe and there could be a major world war.

LOL. 1st UK is in the game...... 2nd australia was in the british empire therefor its counted as british forces. Also out of all the countries that contributed why australia??


Anyway japan should not be added, why waste time makign another faction when we have so many glitches and the fact that the games getting boring, we need more: maps, modes, and patches!!!!

[Puma-234]

Originally posted by kierentod12345:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Puma-234:
Yes, Japan should be inculded, along with Australia and the UK. Masive naval forces and ruses could make for an interesting game. Submarines could attack supply convoys and DE's could hunt subs. Troops on islands must be supplied somehow. Combind this Pacific theatre with Europe and there could be a major world war.

LOL. 1st UK is in the game...... 2nd australia was in the british empire therefor its counted as british forces. Also out of all the countries that contributed why australia??


Anyway japan should not be added, why waste time makign another faction when we have so many glitches and the fact that the games getting boring, we need more: maps, modes, and patches!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Assuming the glitches will be corrected...Australia was only under UK's command because its parliment voted it so, but Australia still performed its own actions and created its own war time policies, they pulled out and ordered home 3 Army divisions from Africa much to Churchill's dismay for example. They even declared war on Germany and Japan seperately from the UK. John Curtain was a thorn in Churchill's side, and it was Australia that kept the UK in the Pacific theatre through sea power. Chruchill could only request Australia's aid. I think that adding a naval campaign to RUSE would make for interesting play. This would add more maps too and a different style of play.

[sir_frost]

if japan is being included, it will have to be in a sequel because you cannot mix settings, and have japanese kamakasie in the battle of britain. you would have to make the pasific war compleatly separate and thus cant use the diferent nations in the same context

if the next game is called R.U.S.E pasific then ok but it cannot be implemented in the same mix.

[tangoliber]

Fix connections for the PC people and add Japan for the PS3 people. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Warforger]

Originally posted by sir_frost:
if japan is being included, it will have to be in a sequel because you cannot mix settings, and have japanese kamakasie in the battle of britain. you would have to make the pasific war compleatly separate and thus cant use the diferent nations in the same context

if the next game is called R.U.S.E pasific then ok but it cannot be implemented in the same mix.

It also makes no sense how Russia and Italy would be defending Normandy from the German and French invaders who just landed on the beach.

[DrumR0ll]

Did anyone play C&C generals Zero hour?

I think they should impliment the same 'pick you general' idea as a way to expand the current factions.

'bomber harris' for example. Or general patton for Usa.

And then each general gets their own pros and cons.

What do you think?

[Pastapig]

I think they should add a russian campaign, because that was some brutal stuff but very interesting. Also, if then, then they should add the finnish. But the only problem with adding the japanese is that then there would most likely have to be marine warfare added, i think it's a good idea but also possible it may not happen. Also, it should have specific factions for specific maps, cus being a russian on d-day is weird...

[crazycracker77]

They need to realse a dlc with japan and put in water units

[Warforger]

Originally posted by Pastapig:
I think they should add a russian campaign, because that was some brutal stuff but very interesting. Also, if then, then they should add the finnish. But the only problem with adding the japanese is that then there would most likely have to be marine warfare added, i think it's a good idea but also possible it may not happen.


The Japanese were on land as well, you could then also add in the Chinese if you add in the Finnish (although I doubt there'd be much, the Finnish had few units and mostly won because the Russian army was not prepared for the Finnish land and had low morale), along with Yugoslavia and Romania.


Originally posted by Pastapig:

Also, it should have specific factions for specific maps, cus being a russian on d-day is weird...

So is having Jets on D-Day and every other unit after 1944. Besides its a game, who cares if it feels weird, its not like the US army fought renegade Russian forces with nukes.....

[Deavron]

Just had an idea about Japan.
What if they are fanatical by default ?
Basically, Japanese unit would fight to death by default, and would only retreat if ordered to / have terror cast on them.
Fanaticism on Japanese unit would render them suicidal. They would be become uncontrollable, but move and fire much faster. if they suffer critical damage while under Fanaticism they would rush enemy units with kamikaze intentions.

This is not realistic, but would make the faction very distinct and probably fun to play.

[AverageSoldier]

Originally posted by Deavron:
Just had an idea about Japan.
What if they are fanatical by default ?
Basically, Japanese unit would fight to death by default, and would only retreat if ordered to / have terror cast on them.
Fanaticism on Japanese unit would render them suicidal. They would be become uncontrollable, but move and fire much faster. if they suffer critical damage while under Fanaticism they would rush enemy units with kamikaze intentions.

This is not realistic, but would make the faction very distinct and probably fun to play.
if the japs have fanatic when everyone else needs a ruse that only lasts 1 minute then that would be OP. Also if some uses terror on the japs couldnt the japs just re-fanatic them http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

[maikkelis95]

Originally posted by AverageSoldier:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Deavron:
Just had an idea about Japan.
What if they are fanatical by default ?
Basically, Japanese unit would fight to death by default, and would only retreat if ordered to / have terror cast on them.
Fanaticism on Japanese unit would render them suicidal. They would be become uncontrollable, but move and fire much faster. if they suffer critical damage while under Fanaticism they would rush enemy units with kamikaze intentions.

This is not realistic, but would make the faction very distinct and probably fun to play.
if the japs have fanatic when everyone else needs a ruse that only lasts 1 minute then that would be OP. Also if some uses terror on the japs couldnt the japs just re-fanatic them http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>OP on one thing, remember, Japanese have awful tanks. everything actually(except AF) is awful on them... so it would just be realistic and it would balance it a bit... so dont cry about this thing(too)

[Deavron]

I recall hearing their tanks were so bad that they sometimes survive AT hits because the shell would exit the far side before exploding http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[crazycracker77]

Come on don't you think they should make a big dlc and add water units on some maps and Japan master water and have there units not as good as others but in stead of retreating staying and fighting harder kinda like a fantasism but with more attack and damage. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[KillaJules]

The Japanese had some good ground forces namely infantry and artilery, but their main strength was air power. Their fighters were brilliant and cheap, but fragile and their bombers had incredible accuracy. They also had mobile AA like the M16.

The Japanese would get powerful defences and tanks even weaker than Italy's, but could hide in woods. This would be historical because the Japanese did often use tanks in places where nobody thought possible.

Japan as a faction would also get a few powerful ground units such as the Chi-To advanced tank. Also, the Japanese had the prototype O-I super-heavy tank that weighed nearly as much as the Maus.

[crazycracker77]

It would be cool to have there tanks go in forests but like meduim down and have infantry hide in on trees and recon cant spot them until they are close enough.Air was big for Japan but britain already has that.I think they should put in China just for fun.

[silentswordy]

It would be hard to add japan in the game, new theatre of ops, naval units etc... but if they ould put fanatism on permently for japan would create a challenge.
I think it would be worthwhile but a Russian theatre of ops should take priority

[M1GarandGuy]

Not to mention GREAT aircraft. Like the Zero Shiden, the "Betty" (bomber) and many other types of aircraft

[dan-1993uk]

Originally posted by AverageSoldier:
He is right. People are to busy wanting the Japs in a game with the European theatre and battleships to care about the online probs. Whats the point of adding anything if people will leave because they cant play http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

or we cud just fix balance issues like the SP or the The whole ground part of the UK...

[SmokeyKiller51]

maybe the japan faction could feature more aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif like i dont know kamikazi's zero's are good fighting planes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[fattoler]

Except for the fact that the Zero was pretty slow, so slow that it became cannon fodder by the end of the war.

[elfy09]

Originally posted by dan-1993uk:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AverageSoldier:
He is right. People are to busy wanting the Japs in a game with the European theatre and battleships to care about the online probs. Whats the point of adding anything if people will leave because they cant play http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

or we cud just fix balance issues like the SP or the The whole ground part of the UK... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.japanesenostalgiccar.com/forum/pics/random/facepalm.jpg

[fattoler]

Your point?

[anddy741]

Im SAD that they didn't put the only country that was in every theatre of WW2 yes it is australia
1. stopped the japenese advancement.
2. held toburk for ages against general rommel. TANKs using only rifles Nicknamed the RATS OF Toburk in 1940 something.
3.flew most of the british planes in battle of britain and bombing of berlin.
4.seized most of africa from italy until germany invaded
5.invaded italy that didn't go well
6.Australian troops in Singapore forced to surrender becasue the british general was like theres to many off them(japanese). Australian troops wanted to kept fighting and could of won.
7.fought in the middle east,pacific,italy britain,germany, basicily everywhere
8. And No they were not called british army they were called the AIF(Australian imperial forces)
9.Air force was called RAAF(royal australia air force)
-----------------------------------------------
[And its the internet so i can do any thing]
[like this MLG FoR LiFe CaUsE Im CoOl ]
[ TROLL MOMENT ]
-----------------------------------------------

[AverageSoldier]

Originally posted by anddy741:
Im SAD that they didn't put the only country that was in every theatre of WW2 yes it is australia
1. stopped the japenese advancement.
2. held toburk for ages against general rommel. TANKs using only rifles Nicknamed the RATS OF Toburk in 1940 something.
3.flew most of the british planes in battle of britain and bombing of berlin.
4.seized most of africa from italy until germany invaded
5.invaded italy that didn't go well
6.Australian troops in Singapore forced to surrender becasue the british general was like theres to many off them(japanese). Australian troops wanted to kept fighting and could of won.
7.fought in the middle east,pacific,italy britain,germany, basicily everywhere
8. And No they were not called british army they were called the AIF(Australian imperial forces)
9.Air force was called RAAF(royal australia air force)
-----------------------------------------------
[And its the internet so i can do any thing]
[like this MLG FoR LiFe CaUsE Im CoOl ]
[ TROLL MOMENT ]
-----------------------------------------------
Yea unfortately when it comes to WWII Aussies are Poms

[fattoler]

Sorry old chum but 30 pilots does not count as 'most of the planes in the Battle of Britain'.

[Alcarin21]

Originally posted by anddy741:
Im SAD that they didn't put the only country that was in every theatre of WW2 yes it is australia
1. stopped the japenese advancement.
2. held toburk for ages against general rommel. TANKs using only rifles Nicknamed the RATS OF Toburk in 1940 something.
3.flew most of the british planes in battle of britain and bombing of berlin.
4.seized most of africa from italy until germany invaded
5.invaded italy that didn't go well
6.Australian troops in Singapore forced to surrender becasue the british general was like theres to many off them(japanese). Australian troops wanted to kept fighting and could of won.
7.fought in the middle east,pacific,italy britain,germany, basicily everywhere
8. And No they were not called british army they were called the AIF(Australian imperial forces)
9.Air force was called RAAF(royal australia air force)


Only Australians care though :P

Well i am sure they did alot but we cant have every nation in game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif They cannot balance the current let alone NEW nations

[darthviadro501]

Correct me if im wrong bud didn't Australians' Troops in WWII are called ANZAC?

From wiki:

The Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) was a army corps of the Mediterranean Expeditionary Force.

The name "Anzac" is patented by Australian Goverment and it may not be allowed to use in commercial, with exception of ANZAC biscuit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANZAC_biscuit)

[Masher8559]

Originally posted by anddy741:
Im SAD that they didn't put the only country that was in every theatre of WW2 yes it is australia
1. stopped the japenese advancement.
2. held toburk for ages against general rommel. TANKs using only rifles Nicknamed the RATS OF Toburk in 1940 something.
3.flew most of the british planes in battle of britain and bombing of berlin.
4.seized most of africa from italy until germany invaded
5.invaded italy that didn't go well
6.Australian troops in Singapore forced to surrender becasue the british general was like theres to many off them(japanese). Australian troops wanted to kept fighting and could of won.
7.fought in the middle east,pacific,italy britain,germany, basicily everywhere
8. And No they were not called british army they were called the AIF(Australian imperial forces)
9.Air force was called RAAF(royal australia air force)
-----------------------------------------------
[And its the internet so i can do any thing]
[like this MLG FoR LiFe CaUsE Im CoOl ]
[ TROLL MOMENT ]
-----------------------------------------------


Flew most of the planes during the Battle of Britain? 31 Australian pilots fought in the Battle of Britain.

There were 10 Irish, 13 French, 20 south Africans, 31 Australians, 10 Americans,(although the RAF only recognizes 7?) 29 Belgians, 84 Czechoslovakians, 86 Canadians, 98 new Zealanders, and 139 Poles that fought in the Battle of Britain. Britain its self by 1940 were building 300 fighters a week but could only train 200 pilots in the same period.

Australia was one of the commonwealth nations which were all under British Command so yes while Australia deserves respect they do in fact come under the British and Commonwealth forces so perhaps one day if we get RUSE 2 maybe they will add the Commonwealth its self with a mixture of units.

[RUSE4Life]

I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE JAPAN IN RUSE....... . THEY ARE AWSOME.... I AM NOT FROM JAPAN BUT FROM POLAND

[Warforger]

Originally posted by anddy741:
Im SAD that they didn't put the only country that was in every theatre of WW2 yes it is australia
1. stopped the japenese advancement.
2. held toburk for ages against general rommel. TANKs using only rifles Nicknamed the RATS OF Toburk in 1940 something.
3.flew most of the british planes in battle of britain and bombing of berlin.
4.seized most of africa from italy until germany invaded
5.invaded italy that didn't go well
6.Australian troops in Singapore forced to surrender becasue the british general was like theres to many off them(japanese). Australian troops wanted to kept fighting and could of won.
7.fought in the middle east,pacific,italy britain,germany, basicily everywhere
8. And No they were not called british army they were called the AIF(Australian imperial forces)
9.Air force was called RAAF(royal australia air force)
-----------------------------------------------
[And its the internet so i can do any thing]
[like this MLG FoR LiFe CaUsE Im CoOl ]
[ TROLL MOMENT ]
-----------------------------------------------

Which goes under Commonwealth which goes under British. Commonwealth encompassed the other nations that didn't do much under British command i.e. the Brazillians, the Palestinians etc. as they didn't send that many troops. Not to say they didn't do anything significant the Brazillians got multiple German officers and German Iron Cross general to surrender in Italy.

Also Middle Eastern theatre discounting North Africa just comprises of kicking Persia's *** with an invasion by Russia and Britain, it didn't take long to defeat and no one really mentions it because not much came of it besides the conference at Tehran where the 3 leaders met.

[fattoler]

My advice guys, just play Hearts of Iron, you can play as ANY country in the world (except for the Vatican and other small principalities) from 1936 onwards, and thanks to the modding system you can pretty much do whatever you like to the balance system because there is no forced balance. If you play as Austria, sorry mate but you won't be going too far if you try to fight Anschluss...

Plus you can build Long Range Jet Bombers as Japan and nuke Hawaii or even San Francisco if you are so inclined.

[SirYossi]

Yah areas dealing with Japan and China would be a nice addition!

[FlipmodeSH]

Agree, it would be nice to recognise the Commonwealth countries we owned rather than just calling the faction UK. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The equipment was similar I understand so no need for a separate faction.

As for Japan, would like to see it in a sequel or major expansion in which island & naval warfare could be better presented.

[FlipmodeSH]

Originally posted by Warforger:
Also Middle Eastern theatre discounting North Africa just comprises of kicking Persia's *** with an invasion by Russia and Britain, it didn't take long to defeat and no one really mentions it because not much came of it besides the conference at Tehran where the 3 leaders met.

Think it was before the war, but didn't Chuchill support gassing a group of people in this area?

Can't see them putting that in the game!

[N_J_R_O_T_C]

Dudes and Dudets, postigjapan as a nation and some pacific maps will increase the ammount of players on R.U.S.E that get bored from playing on the same maps and go play MW2 or black ops. Including japan will be a test for ubisoft cuse it will show how interested they are on there cusyumers. PLz , PLz make japan posible-lolz

[N_J_R_O_T_C]

N= NAVY
J= JUNIOR
R= RECRUIT
O= OFFICER
T= TRAINING
C= CORPS
P.S= KEY BORD IS F'D UP

[chrisj6]

Erm hell yeah http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ,
Maybe with some pacific maps where you can have a base that builds landing craft, so you can transport vehicles, troops and buildings from one island to another

[thebeast518]

YES

[N_J_R_O_T_C]

IM STILL WAITING ON UBICOCK TO PRODUCE THOSE FACTIONS AND MAPS. THE THOUGH OF HAVING CARRIERS FRIGIT ETC... IS 2MUCH. UNLESS UBICOCK COMES UP WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS OR NEW THE REST OF THE GAMERS ON RUSE-25% WILL GO PLAY BLACK OPS OR MW2 AS THE OTHER 75% DID FROM OCT.-DEC. UBISOFT DOSENT GIVE A CRAP ABOUT RUSE. THATS MY OPINION AND RUSE HAS BEEN ONE OF THE TOP 10 BEST WAR GAME FROM BROTHERS IN AMRS TO CALL OF DUTY. WHEN WILL UBICOCK RESPOND TO OUR CALLS?
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

[Zarge101]

can't they atleast tell us if it's possible with sea units and island fighting. and why can't they atleast make landing crafts and maybe some smaller ships like hunters. can you tell us why you have all the super powers of WW2 but no't Japan and why can't you make them a nation thats masters the sea. you have allready made ships you have the dessign just make them move and let the player have control. and why did your release trailer consist of an amfibius assult wneh you don't have ships. the players whant's respons

[sheemere]

Un peu qu'on l'attend!
Avec si possible la composante maritime manquant tant à ce RTS des plus prenants, ainsi que la possibilité de donner des ordres durant la pause, du moins lors de la campagne et du mode escarmouche!

Concernant l'équilibre nippon,
il serait intéressant de coller avec la réalité historique, en n'oubliant pas son net avantage aérien jusqu'en juin 1942 (date de la bataille de Midway) puis le gros handicap de ressources après cette date fatidique où la destruction de ses lignes de ravitaillement par la flotte de sous-marins US, l'absence de renouvellement des pilotes chevronnés (ces derniers étant stupidement gaspillés dans des actions inutiles au lieu de former la relève) et la lenteur de modernisation de l'industrie de l'armement nippon, pénalisèrent ce qui fut une des forces de combat des plus combatives, y compris en situations désespérées.

Une autre suggestion, pourrait être de permettre la capture et le retournement des véhicules et fortifications à court de munitions une fois coupés de leurs lignes de ravitaillement, avec un léger bonus coté nippon, ces derniers préférant généralement tenter une action kamikaze plutôt que de se rendre.

D'autre part, sans doute serait-il plus judicieux de corriger les cocardes de l'aviation britannique arborant ici l'union jack au lieu du réglementaire macaron?

[Donnie_Darko_NL]

Originally posted by sheemere:
Un peu qu'on l'attend, avec si possible la composante maritime manquant tant à ce RTS des plus prenants, ainsi que la possibilité de donner des ordres en pause, du moins lors de la campagne et du mode escarmouche!

Concernant l'équilibre nippon,
il serait intéressant de coller avec la réalité historique, en oubliant pas son net avantage aérien jusqu'en juin 1942 (date de la bataille de Midway) puis le gros handicap de ressources après cette date fatidique où la destruction de ses lignes de ravitaillement par la flotte de sous-marins US, l'absence de renouvellement des pilotes chevronnés (ces derniers étant stupidement gaspillés dans des actions inutiles au lieu de former la relève) et la lenteur de modernisation de l'industrie de l'armement nippon, pénalisèrent ce qui fut une des forces de combat des plus combatives, y compris en situations désespérées.

Une autre suggestion, pourrait être de permettre la capture et le retournement des unités à court de munition une fois coupées de leurs lignes de ravitaillement.

Rough translation:
He thinks it would be a good idea to add ships to the game, if not for multiplayer, then at least for the campaign or 'battle' mode.

Concerning Japan,
It would be a great addition considering the history, using planes until 1942 (date of the battle of Midway) and the destruction of the resources of the US submarines, and the lack of good new pilots. Next to that the slow modernization of the Japanese army, which definitely was one of the most fierce armies especially in desperate situations.

Another suggestion is enabling capture enemy soldiers and have them serve the other country, if the supply line is cut and they're out of ammo.

[evizaer]

The existing RUSE factions are not properly balanced and may never be. No need to add more complexity in the form of a misplaced new faction.

RUSE is practically dead as far as the developers seem to be concerned, anyway. I don't see them doing much more than throwing their last bits of content at us in the form of overpriced DLC. Japan is and has always been a bad idea to implement considering the current mechanics of the game.

[Alcarin21]

Originally posted by evizaer:
The existing RUSE factions are not properly balanced and may never be. No need to add more complexity in the form of a misplaced new faction.

RUSE is practically dead as far as the developers seem to be concerned, anyway. I don't see them doing much more than throwing their last bits of content at us in the form of overpriced DLC. Japan is and has always been a bad idea to implement considering the current mechanics of the game.

Quoted for truth.