Opps, sorry, I wrote that post with the express purpose of outlining the difference between an invasion and a successful invasion, and I managed to completely mess it up.Spartan448 said:And unsuccessful invasion is still an invasion nonetheless. Invasions don't have to be successful, all they have to do is debilitate and demoralize the enemy.Hero in a half shell said:Yes, it was an invasion... an unsuccessful invasion. The UK hasn't been invaded in almost a millenia, I don't care what country you are, that's impressive.Spartan448 said:THEN WHAT THE HELL WAS THE BATTLE OF BRITAIN?!? Sure seemed like a goddamned invasion to me!Daystar Clarion said:Britian hasn't been invaded since 1066.
A successful invasion would be one in which the invading power actually achieves their reason for invading (regime change/territory gain/etc.) and holds onto it. I meant to say "The UK hasn't been successfully invaded in almost a millenia", which is objectively true.
Anyway we're totally getting off point here, the reason America gets invaded so much is because (a) The target demographic for most games is by American companies, for American audiences
(b) An invasion is one of the biggest military threat a country can face, and the easiest way to portray a current superpower as being the underdog in a war.