African Union: real v.s. PR version

[Bob of Mage]

The real life African Union seems a bit differnet from what the PR faction will be. In real life the AU includes all but one state (Morocco), making it a very broad group. It seems odd that such a large group would ever fight BLUFOR nations as a whole. So I'm just wondering how something like an African UN could get into these types of wars. I'm worried that PR is moving too far from real life (IDF v.s. FF is another example).

AU v.s. ARF on the other hand seem to fit with real life.

[ToonS]

Well, honestly, what is the MEC? Yes, IDF v. FF does not seem that realistic, but neither does IDF v. Russians or Brits v. Russian Militia.

My impression of PR is its combination of what is realistic now and what could possibly be realistic in the near future in regards to political/conflict situations.

[dtacs]

It does seem to be a bit too much of a stretch to actually have two factions, and he does make a good point about the actual 'AU' title but I don't think the players will look into that enough to realize its a bit unrealistic.

[Hauteclocque]

Hum, Bob of Mage, are you going to point everything you think is not realistic in PR ?

The PR AU is a fictional faction like the MEC. Period.

Just don't confuse it with the real AU faction and you'll be fine. (If it was the case, you would annoy us again with ROE :mrgreen

BTW, I like the way you bring another debate already debated elsewhere in another thread (FF vs IDF). We have given you a possible background that could explain this "Skirmish" on Operation Marlin. Believe it or not, it isn't my problem. I just don't want you to pollute other threads with this.

[dtacs]

Its fine so long as there is a basic reason, something like the US v UK is a bit silly though.

[PR.Rob.McLoughlin]

Bob of mage is right. Lets have it how it really happens. Insurgency will not have any firefights, server rules will have it so that insurgents only get killed, and use IED's and that they only have one magazine between them

UN come in, and break everything up.

Everyone is taken to court over actions in war.

PLA get taken out of PR, since in the real world they do nothing.

MEC fight each other.

Everyone will have SO MUCH FUN

[CallousDisregard]

Its fine so long as there is a basic reason, something like the US v UK is a bit silly though.

I don't know, maybe set in the near distant future and an insurgent v. insurgent style battle over the Caribbean islands ?
Lots of boats, a couple of harriers and a lot of sun-drenched beaches.

[Bob of Mage]

I know that you can't have everything 100% like real life but you have to draw a line. The Russian v.s. IDF was a bit of a stretch but it could work. The context would have to be a wide war where the Russians are allied with the MEC and come to their aid (like the early Cold War but with out the theart of NATO nukes to stop them). The issue with the AU faction as it stands is that it take a real world group and makes them much different. To be honest all this could be solved with a name change if you don't feel the faction should change.

The reason why the AU faction (as it stands) and the IDF v.s. FF map upset me is because as someone who studies in politacal sicence these two seem very impossible. It would be like having a UN faction with it's own tanks, fighter bombers and all sorts of heavy weapons v.s. NATO as a OPFOR faction. Who care if 3 out of 5 veto powers are in NATO if we're having fun! It's at this point that I question if a game is set in the real world.

[Ninjam3rc]

I don't know, maybe set in the near distant future and an insurgent v. insurgent style battle over the Caribbean islands ?
Lots of boats, a couple of harriers and a lot of sun-drenched beaches.

And it becomes a drinking competition in cabanas on the beach complete with native girls... I like your thinking.

[Arc_Shielder]

Honestly I see AU as a global representation of an organized african army, whether is commanded by a dictatorship or democratic doctrine.

[Bob of Mage]

It doesn't really matter what you think it is, because it's a real world group. The AU is very much like the UN and the EU, both of which won't be factions in PR anytime soon (getting them sent troops any where is like herding cats at best). The only way I can see the AU at war with NATO is if NATO tries to take over the continent. Such a war would only happen if all of NATO (or the AU) was lead by James Bond style super villains. Unlike the MEC, China, and Ruissia, there are just no red button issues between NATO and the AU as a whole.

The best way to fix this issue is to rename the faction to something that isn't real.

[Sgt_Doctor]

The name is not going to change one more time. The AU will just be an OpFor like the MEC, which can offer us, a certain liberty.

So, end of the discussion.