The reason why the US doesn't appear in Battlefield 2142...
Possibilities:- The US did the same thing the EU and PAC did - invade other countries to gain more habitable land. However, while the EU and PAC are roughly equal, the US was facing Latin America. So the US has plenty of land in South America, and neither the EU nor PAC have a desire to cross the Atlantic or Pacific to attack them, as this would involve dodging both icebergs and the US Navy.
- My guess is that North America got completely covered by ice, crippling it-if you see in the opening cutscene, a lot of the land is covered up in ice. Perhaps the reason that the EU and PAC are staying out of the Americas is because theres no one there anymore.
- I've got a theory about this one. The new ice age was caused after a largescale nuclear war between the PAC and the US, which not only decimated PAC population, but forced the PAC to divert a lot of it's military resources. This explains why the EU can even pretend to fight the PAC, which not only seems to be more technologically advanced (hovertanks, for example), but should have a massive population advantage (a couple billion in Asia currently to maybe 800 hundred million in Europe) as well. Depending on a few variables, the US is either fighting the PAC in the Pacific for control of southeast Asia, or fighting the PAC in South America. I also suppose it's possible that hte US is fighting against a united South America (probably lead by Brazil), but that seems a bit less likely; the population difference with Asia would hit the US just as hard as the EU, so unless America massively upped it's population (not impossible; the US DOES have pretty low population density) it probably would have needed to annex South America to remain competitive prior to the start of the war. Also, while the US doesn't make an appearance, it does get at least one reference. If I recall, it helped to develop the initial EU assault rifle, which means that America is was still around, at least in some capacity, until very recently at least.
- One thing about the US vs PAC-the map Wake Island 2142, which would be in the middle of the Pacific. However, it's the EU fighting the PAC, rather than the US
- My guess is that North America got completely covered by ice, crippling it-if you see in the opening cutscene, a lot of the land is covered up in ice. Perhaps the reason that the EU and PAC are staying out of the Americas is because theres no one there anymore.
How could the EU muster enough strength to retake Europe in the Northern Strike expansion?
- It was made pretty clear in the backstory and through the course of the war that the PAC greatly outnumbered the EU, in addition to possessing superior technology. It is implied that the EU population was decimated both by war and lack of resources, and was on the verge of being defeated in North Africa (when one of your major battles (Sidi Power Plant) is fought over a location that produces 40% of your total population's energy consumption.. things are probably pretty grim). Then, suddenly, we are back in Europe, where PAC gets beaten back into Russia. So not only did the EU have to win the North African campaign, but they also reconquered their lost European territories. How could they do that? My guess is that, the last battles fought in Africa (Suez Canal, Sidi Power Plant and Shuhia Taiba) were fought in quick succession, and while the result of the later two is left ambiguous, it is implied that the Suez (and thus, the bottleneck into Egypt) was held. Therefore, after holding the line and severely depleting PAC forces, I would guess that the Union of African States, which I recall being mentioned somewhere as allies of the EU, finally makes good on their alliance and bolsters the depleted EU forces. That would also be a good way to explain why a lot of EU soldier's faces ingame are obviously of African descent.
Why did the EU choose to not fight over the Iberian Peninsula?
- In a war fought over such basic resources as food, where they are willing to spend dozens of titans to capture a major agricultural production center, why did the EU not attempt to hold the Iberian Peninsula, which is not only a pretty large, fertile territory, but judging by the opening cinematic, also untouched by the advancing ice and snow? Cerbere Landing in southern France is mentioned as being the last EU stronghold in mainland Europe, but, if we understand the PAC invasion as going from East to West, that still leaves the whole Iberia unmentioned. My theory is that, if the Maginot Line was indeed the last major fortification, then, facing tremendous defeats and the loss of pretty much the rest of Europe already, the EU simply decided to say "screw this" and evacuated everything they could to Africa, where they would prepare to make their stand. This would allow the PAC to quickly take over the remaining European land, with Cerbere serving as the last holdout point to evacuate any remaining EU civilians or forces trapped behind the now unopposed enemy armies.
What happened to the EU's population in Europe proper?
- Although it is implied that the EU had been evacuating a lot of its population and facilities to their new territory in North Africa for a while before the war started, there certainly would not have been enough time to evacuate everyone. Consider the fact that the EU 'premiere units' were still in Europe when the PAC invaded, this implies that there was still a lot of valuable stuff in the mainland. The PAC curbstomped the European defences, overwhelming their three major lines of fortifications, with the EU forces mentioned being on constant retreat, there simply must not have been enough time. The fact that refugee centers such as Camp Gibraltar were still in function when the PAC started invading Africa, gives support to the theory that there were a lot of people still trapped behind enemy lines. But consider this. It was a war of annihilation, over control of the most basic resources and territory. Would the PAC really attempt to integrate or keep the captured EU population, when they could barely feed their own? And sending them to Africa would seem like an idiotic choice since they would only be giving their enemies much needed manpower. My guess is that they simply exterminated the civilians or, at least, left them to fend for themselves, which would imply mass famine, since Europe by the time of the war was becoming a frozen wasteland. Then, consider that 3 years later, the EU manages to actually achieve victory and expel PAC back to their frozen wastelands in Asia, thus rendering them unable to support their populations, which was their whole motive for invading the EU in the first place. All this, plus the nature of the war itself, makes the implied genocides and extremely high casualties of war quite real, undoubtedly making this the darkest battlefield to date.
