Hi, welcome to Command & Conquer Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the File:869798-ra3uprising harbinger.jpg page.
Uprising canon?[edit source]
Hello, I am wondering which parts of RA 3: Uprising can be considered canon, and I wanted to ask your opinion.
I've been playing it over the last few months and I am still pretty confused. I suppose Yuriko's tale is canon, since this is one of the main feature in this expansion. The castle mission in Romania should also be canon, since it unlocks the other mini-campaigns.
But from this point on, it's pretty vague. I get the feeling that the endings of the Allies and Empire campaigns contradict each other (in one we beat Tatsu and the uprising, and in the other Tatsu is victorious and the Empire restores much of its former power). And to make matters even more complicated, the Soviet campaign has nothing to do with either side of the Uprising conflict (they just fight against FutureTech).
My current take on it is that Soviet and Yuriko is canon, and then the player can choose the fate of the Empire (crushed uprising or restored power).
What are your thoughts on this?
Ze challenge[edit source]
Yeah, I think I'll be able to help with thos - in fact, I have nearly finished collecting all the briefing texts for these missions, so I can add them too. Some screenshots would be nice too, I'll see if I can add any.
The good thing about these briefings is that they resolve some of the mysteries related to the challenges - for example, why FutureTech's own units (e.g. Harbinger or Future Tank) need to be won by defeating enemy commanders. It turns out FT already has these technologies, but you get them as a "reward" for beating certain missions.
As for when these challenges happen - it's still a mystery. We can assume it's after the events of the campaigns (supposedly Shinzo and his buddies found some way to break free or were granted amnesty).
- Confusing timelines aside, those briefings are pretty funny. They form a storyline of sorts, in which you gradually earn the ire of various enemy commanders, to the point where they put their differences aside and start working together to stop you. Some of them even figure out that FT is secretly collecting technology and try to use this as leverage. The mortar cycle is indeed a very simplistic technology... and you obtain it from a mission where satellites rain from the sky. This must be one of the weirdest scenarios in the entire C&C series. -- Vorknkx (talk) 09:14, February 16, 2016 (UTC)
I'd just like to thank you and commend you for your enthusiastic work on the wiki, it's highly appreciated. Keep it up! You might be even looking at a promotion ;) Sheldonist (yell!) 09:20, March 12, 2016 (UTC)
you have been promoted to the status of administrator! You now have the right to rollback, moderate chat, delete pages and files and edit ones that are protected for administrator use only. You've proven to be productive and active on the Wiki, so I think you deserved the promotion. Drop me a line if you need any help with your new position! Sheldonist (yell!) 18:48, March 30, 2016 (UTC)
<helper /> ☆ 2016年07月25日、07:37:59
How good is your knowledge about the Tiberium Universe?
Hello again, I see there isn't a page for the Goddard Space Shuttle, which supplies the GDSS Philadelphia. It's on atleast two mission's, the Goddard Space Centre mission for Nod, and also in Kanes Wrath, will have to check. It's in the video of the destruction of the GDSS Philidelphia.
Do you know where the models used in the cutscenes for Tiberium Wars are kept? I've heard they are in the .big files but just wondered if you knew which one?
Hi， I am AMX-004P Perfect Qubeley. After receving your message I feel that it would be better to leave a reply. Yes, I am from Shanghai, and it's so nice to meet new friends on this wiki!
Just a small problem,though. I checked the link to the Chinese C&C Wiki and I find that it has nothing to do with Command&Conquer(At least I think)... So.... I think we should delete that link....As far as I know,there is no official C&C Chinese wiki yet.(Sorry for my broken English XD)
Mod Content #2 & Sorry[edit source]
Ok I'm sorry for those impolite words i said, but you need to understand more that I originally planning to add more contents to that page but you deleted it before i do, I mean it's not like what you said I just need more time to get it done but now fine I understand what's done is done I dont think I will become a productive member to this wiki no need to cheer me up or something like that.
Because I found out that every article i read, every page i saw are almost pefect and there's nothing to correct or add more contents even those stub articles I dont know what to add to expand it, how do i become productive like this? I cant do anything but read it you know I wanna help seriously I wanna help, but I dont know how.
Also I'm a student I cant spend all of my time on this wiki i have to study like the others, so yeah basically my point is I wanna help and I'm trying but I just dont know how and I only got limited time to do it i really wonder how the hell do I become productive like this, *sigh* well fine drop me a reply at anytime i will read it, gotta go studying ------- Failure Dog (talk) 13:34, January 24, 2017 (UTC)
Suggestion on Making a Major Editing[edit source]
Hello, I appreciate your hardwork on editing this wiki, still I suggest when you're planning a major editing, including a substantial change of article structure or moving/deleting an article, you should place a discussion post at first place. Many people put hardwork (although may not flawless) to an article, abruptly reorganizing it or removing it would be impolite. --General Wild Dog (talk) 04:26, February 6, 2017 (UTC)
I've recently made an infobox and navigation footer for future articles that would describe official (and most likely unofficial) patches for C&C games. This is inspired by the method used at the Diablo Wiki, where each patch has its own entry, but there is already one article in place for RA3 here: Red Alert 3 (Patch), which lists all changes in one, separated for each version, but rather untidy and leaving little room for adding potential undocumented information. Which method do you think we should pursue? http://vignette2.wiki.nocookie.net/cnc/images/0/04/PW_Signature_Nod_Emblem.png Sheldonist (yell!) 08:50, February 14, 2017 (UTC)
Concerning various Manuals and Guides[edit source]
It seems that these Command and Conquer manuals and guides that I've recently seen on the Insights page are barely noticed at all since they have no links. Yet, even though some of them are just pages with PDF downloads (especially the manuals), they do provide information that looks too well written to be removed from the site. Examples of such guide and manual are the Red Alert Single Player Mission Creation Guide and Tiberian Dawn manual , respectively. I find that their only flaw besides their hidden status is that most of them focuses on technical stuff that only few Command and Conquer fans would be interested since its more on map making, not gameplay itself.
So what are your thoughts on these undiscovered but potentially significant pages? Do we keep them (and give them links and/or expand them) or just delete them completely? Bot Rot (talk) 12:58, April 15, 2017 (UTC)
I say we keep the official ones, like the game manuals (maybe link them to the relevant games), but get rid of all those unofficial ones like the Red Alert Single Player Mission one (seriously, it's 2017, literally NOBODY cares about how to make RA1 missions anymore).
Blocking IPs that have not been used in 4 years isn't quite productive, especially as many ISPs give them dynamically. http://vignette2.wiki.nocookie.net/cnc/images/0/04/PW_Signature_Nod_Emblem.png Sheldonist (yell!) 21:27, June 6, 2017 (UTC)
Yeah... Sorry about that, I was just angry because that guy dumped his lame fanfics on the wiki and I had to sort them all out and replace them with official info one by one. Ssskoopa (talk) 02:27, June 7, 2017 (UTC)
If you could unblock the ip of Sibirsky (or however it's spelled), it's blocked my new account forcing me onto a VPN and yet another new account for editing.NaziModIsNaziMod (talk) 21:49, June 23, 2017 (UTC)
I think we could be more productive and effective if we'd pick a certain topic at a time and concentrate (most of) our efforts to fixing that, e.g. purging the articles of RA3 characters like I recently did with RA2 Tanya, or resolving RA3/Generals 1 units. We could divide some articles between ourselves to hasten things. What do you think? http://vignette2.wiki.nocookie.net/cnc/images/0/04/PW_Signature_Nod_Emblem.png Sheldonist (yell!) 14:46, July 14, 2017 (UTC)
- Generals 1 units it is. How do we divide them up? http://vignette2.wiki.nocookie.net/cnc/images/0/04/PW_Signature_Nod_Emblem.png Sheldonist (yell!) 16:38, July 15, 2017 (UTC)
- Sure. I guess we can split China by half, you take say, units, I take buildings and upgrades? http://vignette2.wiki.nocookie.net/cnc/images/0/04/PW_Signature_Nod_Emblem.png Sheldonist (yell!) 08:34, July 16, 2017 (UTC)
In light of me being inactive due to being spread too thin with my real life and online stuff, and you being generally awesome, you have now officially been promoted to Bureaucrat of the C&C Wiki. This means that your rights over it are the same as mine - meaning total control. I feel you deserve it! http://vignette2.wiki.nocookie.net/cnc/images/0/04/PW_Signature_Nod_Emblem.png Sheldonist (yell!) 19:46, March 23, 2018 (UTC)
Russia was not part of the Asia-Pacific Alliance? If I recall reading the literature of that time not only was all of East Asia and Southeast Asia part of the alliance but also South Asia and Russia. On the page, it says only China, Vietnam, and Korea which would make no sense as it's a coalition that is centered around China and Korea. Vietnam does not make a coalition. Esparza3368 (talk) 23:40, July 20, 2018 (UTC)
So sorry Admin :'([edit source]
Hi Ssskoopa sir,
Sorry I had posted unfounded "lore" on the Spartan Tank.
I just thought I'd expand the info with background, based on what can be observed from the unit's appearance.
I definitely should've asked before I edited something so unverified, but figured that I try putting it in and see how the mods respond the info.
It's not just something I one day went to randomly vandalize, I promise. I have been thinking about it for a few days, and would like to discuss my thought processes if you'd be willing to read it:
- I could place where the Spartan tank crew stayed anywhere on the tank, maybe in the slits on the cannon's shield?
- It clawed at the back of my mind how the design of the Spartan tank seems to demand that the tanks, and their respective pilots die fighting, since the tank was designed to transform on death, to something stationary.
- Then I observed the given quotes for the unit, thankfully writted already on the unit page, and noticed how the quotes seem to be a lot "braver" than the quotes of other tanks in the same tier, despite the Spartan already possessing inferior health to begin with.
E.g: Sheppard Tank (Taking Fire): "Taking some fire" "Keep it together, men" Hunter (Taking Fire): "Hang in there men" "We can't take too much of this"
Spartan Tank (Taking Fire): "We ain't scared" "They *can't hurt* a Spartan"
- And finally I looked closely at the design, and realized what very much appears to be a camera placed around the rear of the cannon, and thought, maybe they're actually like Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs).
I just thought it'd actually make really proper sense, for: 1 - For why the Tank is comparatively flimsy 450hp to nearest: Sheppard 660hp, why it was designed to break down and hold the line 2 - Why the tank's chassis looks significantly less bulky compared to most other tanks 3 - It would feel more in line with GDI that they not sacrifice lives of their pilots, when they can make remote controlled combat vehicles - comparatively flimsy, and turns into a defensive tool when broken, but risks no lives
If it's okay with you, I'd like to petition to put this mere speculation under, a sort of entry for the Spartan tank.
I'll re-extend the Spartan's lore, now devoid of any erroneus and unfounded information - just legitimate entries on its abilities and capabilities, to make up for my vandalism.
But will you allow me to input the "fanfic lore" under a sort of, category for the unit page? Something like, a "Trivia", or "Behind the Scenes"? Thank you.
Again I'm *deeply sorry* for the unfounded, and probably unwanted vandalism, but I thought I'd just help expand unit lores, and make them super interesting. Add even more favor for the Fourth Tiberium War arsenal.
- You're thinking way too deep about this whole thing. Hell, you probably put more time into your theory than EA did making this unit ("Hurr dur, like, a tank with a huge gun that turns into a gun lol."). Not to be rude but this wiki is filled with fanfic bullshit as it is, and the last thing us mods need is more fanfic disguised as official lore. Also, pilot remote control is Nod tech, GDI doesn't have that. Ssskoopa (talk) 05:20, July 27, 2018 (UTC)
- Okay thank you, I'm sorry to have given you problems.
I will forever refrain from adding speculatory information to any unit page without proper backing from source materials. And even then I'll make sure to get clearance from a wiki official first, most likely you, if that's okay!
I just thought I'd expand on lore for some of the "less-popular" units from the fourth game, seeing as the info page is a little short for some of them, I figured, maybe I make stories based on what can be gleaned from the design choices EA made for them. Never was my intention to just make something up just to expand the page.
I'd still like to try things though, such as asking someone at EA questions about the arsenal from CnC4, I know I'm likely to get no answers, but maybe I can find some source material this way!
Either way, thank you so much for taking the time to reply, for doing your duty and honestly for letting me off easy! And once more, I'm really sorry for causing trouble—I'll make sure it doesn't happen again.
- Yeah, there's a reason most of the CNC4 unit pages have very little info. Most of them don't have any lore associated with them, and since the vast majority of CNC fans don't very much care for the game that killed the franchise, it still had tons of missing content even years after the release. Hell, before I added a lot of the images a while ago, most of the unit images were just worldbuilder renders. People didn't even bother entering the game to take screenshots, that's how bad it was.
- Also, don't bother asking EA about anything CNC4, they fired everyone who worked on it after it bombed. Typical.