HOME | DD
CommanderA9 — Kane's Speech In Vienna
Published: 2012-08-19 04:43:09 +0000 UTC; Views: 1129; Favourites: 12; Downloads: 20
Redirect to original
Description
Before Nod committed major offensive actions against NATO, GDI, and world superpowers, Kane worked to win support for the cause.This is a speech during which Kane addresses the academia of Vienna, Austria concerning the nature of alliances and their impact on the modern day. The timeframe for this is Spring 1996.
In game terms, a trade center in Vienna was the site of an urban bombing, the 17th in 4 weeks before the First Tiberium War.
As a political science major, I had fun researching the nature of alliance, NATO, and the condition of the Soviet Union throughout the 1980s and 1990s in order to craft this speech.
I did my best to have Kane speaking in the general sense that the rest of the world isn't as politically inclined as he is, although his audience includes political and military officials who have a grasp of politics.
Related content
Comments: 14
Very well written, I've had a lot of fun reading through this. Very insightful and thought-provoking.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks! 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wasn't the Vienna bombing one of the things in the original C&C 's intro?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's correct! The trade center in Vienna was the 17th urban bombing in the four weeks prior to the outbreak of the first war.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I figured. That bombing sounded familiar
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Of course, this speech and the entire pre-war backstory prior to the Estonian amphibious assault that I've been working on for months never occurred in the official C&C release, but realistically, I think this sort of seminar is applicable to Kane gathering support for his cause.
Can't win a war or fight a revolution without support from the people (and weapons developers).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Indeed. In fact, just last year I was going to make an FPS like renegade or reborn to allow the player to play a first-hand role in key battles of the Second Tiberium War (Tiberian Sun, if you are familiar). There would be two different campaigns: GDI, playing as several different classes, with upgrades/perks for each one as you progress; and Nod where you play as a soldier in Slavik's forces. I was planning on even adding an expansion where you fight in the Tiberium Crisis, when Cabal attempts world domination. Not to mention a bonus CABAL campaign playing as that faction. For each faction, the units/vehicles would be the ones from the RTS, plus some additions. Oh, and before I forget, you would also be able to build a base: from the conyard, you would purchase a building, and a construction vehicle would be spawned outside. When entered, a translucient grid would appear showing the required space. If the grid was red, you could not build there. once in position, press q and you would automatically exit and construction would begin. Time depended on the structure, whilst the creation of vehicle is a few seconds for all of them. War factory is a whole different story.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That really sounds awesome! I remember when Reborn was under the control of its own studio before it went to Bluhell, they were considering some of these very ideas.
I think they ended up coming up with a beta version of structure construction. You'd walk up to a terminal on the ground and activate it, and the building would rebuild as long as the Construction Yard was still intact.
What engine/original did you want to use?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, if i knew anything about programming, I would start with the renegade engine, and make it so it can run blender files. then use blender to make models and maps, and incorporate them into the software. This involves re-writing the renegade code, so I would end up with a new engine software, which I would name NGE (NEXUS Game Engine). There is no relation between my C&C username and the program made by Google.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Understood.
I know some teams have moved onto the Unreal engine, and even the Crysis engine, but they seem too intense for my system to use.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I did think about the Unreal engine, but decided that I would only use the Unreal Editor as a component. Of course, I would have to change the code to run blender files, but the editor has a style that I think would be easy to work with. So I think your computer might have been able to run the game with little trouble.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
A lovely piece of NOD-friendly rhetoric here!
btw, dA can display PDFs nowadays. or at least i can..
and one thing i've been meaning to ask; it seems the 'exit strategy' is a relatively new invention of military doctrine, more or less non-existent a few hundred years ago and something the history of which i know little. what can you tell me about when and why the term (and the concept behind it as currently understood) came about? few mentions of such doctrines are available on medieval through Napoleonic conflicts, that much i know...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, the term as far as I'm aware came about around the same time that the United States thought it'd be a brilliant idea to use their military not just for warfare, but for state-building, sometime around 2001, upon the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.
Simply, an exit strategy is a plan for the withdrawal of military forces from a given area of conflict.
The problem is, said exit strategies become more complicated as military forces are used less as soldiers and more as police and domestic engineers. When your soldiers are turned into local cops and social service workers (i.e., deployed to restore power, rebuild schools, patrol streets, set up health facilities, restore economies, and even restoring political engines), your soldiers lose their ability to focus on the mission of eliminating enemy forces, and achieving the main objective becomes elusive or forgotten entirely. They get stretched thin, they're repurposed for operations which they were never trained for, and because they're now handling jobs that civilians and engineers and even the United Nations are supposed to handle, their time of occupation grows longer and longer. This is when an exit strategy comes into play.
So, an "exit strategy" is a plan for military forces to leave a conflict area. The concept has been around for years, but the term I suppose hasn't been common knowledge. How it used to be done (such as in Kosovo in 1998-1999) was that the U.S. would go in with international support, defeat the enemy, then immediately call the United Nations who would deploy peacekeepers and engineers to help rebuild destroyed facilities and infrastructure and restore political engines. But, when you have only one seriously committed major force dictating policy in a conflict zone (i.e., the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistan), your exit strategy can be maligned as much as your objective. Instead of "We'll leave once we defeat the opposing force and government," it becomes "We'll leave after we defeat the opposing force and government, but we need to secure a democratic government, so we have to root out every trace of any threat to what government is left, and we have to restore the government to a democratic system, and protect the government, and infrastructure, and go secure and win the support of local towns to support the government." Long story short, use the latter, and you're never coming home, because you've got no concrete plan and no support to back it up.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0