Quote Originally Posted by ishnar View Post
Err, this is the great western conflict. Not WW5. We don't know how big the world is, but by calling it great western conflict, I doubt more than 1/4 of the world's forces were involved. I actually believe it was even more local than that. My impression is that this alliance, with as many nations as it is, could still only have been a fraction of the world. Rome Total war had a Lot of factions, but the war theatre was only Europe, north africa, and the westernmost lands of asia. I doubt this war was larger in extent than the 30 years war. But because the nations seem to be city-states. It's probably even more local than that. I believe the forces involved are probably no greater than the Trojan war. Lots of "nations" but each nation being a city state means a whole different demographic that it does in modern times.

We don't really know, but I'm inclined to agree with you.

A few dozen formerly-squabling city states, and a few associated non-city-dwelling tribes, and a mercenary forece thrown in to help, all banding together to take out ONE powerfull enemy?

That sounds a lot like the Trojan war.

The various warring states over in China at the time, had *armies* fighting each other, that outnumbered the entire total population of the tiny Greek city states at the time.

So... if our ideas of the relative tiny size of the area being fought over by Stanley at the former-RCC is any guide, then the "seeekriiit FAQ conspiracy" to conquer the entire world is just barely getting started... and they are still the underdogs.

Serious under-dogs.