I want an oregon trail game.
You better never go to Vegas 
(btw you better charge your phone)
naaa its an iphone 6 get another day out of that
Would you buy a game about the Oregon trail?
depends on the game itself , i wouldnt buy a game on location alone
Well is several locations over 3,000 miles (around 1,500 kilometers). The game could be a survival like the really old original game but this would be either third or first person. You could fight off wild indians and outlaws it would be a grand game. You would have to make tough choices like if you run out of food would you eat your children? (donner party)
much rather a game set in medieval england where you could form your own band of outlaws robin hood style and build mini towns in the forests etc
2 Likes
Yes that would be a game i would throw my money at. Pretty much an open world game that is hard and fun i would buy. Have you heard of medieval engineers? Its coming out Wensday. Its a build/survival game
http://www.medievalengineers.com/
graphics puts me off there im afraid
Well it is early access.
Been around Since 1985 my friend.
I’m and Oregonian born and raised, we played the DOS version in school.
3 Likes
Yeah i wanted a third or first person game though made to the level of realism of kdc 
no red Indian rights were violated …because we didnt give them any rights to start off with MWHAHAHAHAHAHA
Actually multiple treaties were signed promising them land. Most massacres happend to tribes that were disarmed and placed under U.S protection.
No but the British did give them blankets infected with small pox and gave them guns and provoked them into attacking U.S forces during the war of 1812 which failed miserably. But i should thank the British for that because it removed the most powerful tribes out of the region which made western expansion much easier 
The French were really the nicest out of the western powers to the natives.
killing two birds with one stone haha , get your enemy’s to kill each other making them both weaker and means you have to divert troops to fight them as well , im sure the british government were well aware the us could beat the tribes hands down
Yeah that was in fact the plan. Their chief Tecumseh was actually a really good strategist but his brother attacked a U.S camp without orders and the bulk of their forces were killed. He was eventually killed in battle but he cursed the U.S saying that every 20 years a "great chief " will die in office. Sure enough every 20 years after that a U.S president has died in office the only one breaking that rule was Ronald Reagan but he was shot and almsot died.
this is how the british have always thought ,
long term precise plans rather than a rushed one , easily the biggest difference between the US military and the British military .
the US would rather hold on to a town until the death where as the british are more in favour of giving a little ground to allow us to rebuild and counter attack in a much stronger position
Look into the tactics of America in the revolutionarily war. The reason Washington was never captured and defeated is because the British expected him to surrender when he was hopelessly out matched. He didn’t do what was expected of a British officer at the time though and fled with his army several times this practice was considered dishonorable. He had a live to fight another day type of strategy.
If you are referring to the Alamo by holding a town until death they were surrounded by 4,000 mexican troops and the men in the Alamo were mostly militia.
this is the style of the british army through most cases .
even in todays day and age where as the US army now would rather keep fighting a hopeless battle to save face than simply saying "we cant win this with the present situation , lets fall back rethink this and fight tomorrow "
for example of this in afgan in 2006 british troops were deployed to the northern districts of helmend (i was part of the force in sangin ) .
one of the district centres was Musa Qala . the troops stantioned there were struggling to hold the town and were on the verge of being near enough overrun as were we in sangin but not quite as bad ,
the commander in Musa Qala requested that they be allowed to fall back as it was hopeless fighting on so the generals managed to strike a deal with the taliban and town elders that the british troops would leave the town under the protection of the village elders and also the taliban would leave the town .
this deal went ahead all parties agree and it held for almost 6 months in which time we were able to regroup reorganise and when the taliban eventually broke the deal we had the kit too crush them .
the americans however basically called the british cowards and that the troops there should of stayed put , which would of meant
- many more dead troops
- huge moral boost for taliban
- town still lost for the most part
so often its far better to look at the much larger war fighting picture than just the small battle at hand , sometimes you must lose a battle to win the war