Giga Alliances - The Endless Loops of Lies
Day 1,697, 12:51
•
Published in Norway 
•
by
•
by Stakerauo
When you look at the eRepublik World Map, what do you see? I see two alliances endlessly staggering eachother, head first like goats, and I find that quite boring. Below you will be able to read my ranted thoughts and opinons on giga alliances, and how I believe we can change this.
The Everyday-Lie:
An alliance consists of a group of countries which all share believes or like eachother so much they devote their trust, money and soldiers to help protect these fellow nations. A nation will then call it's friendship-country an "ally". As I see it today; the terminological meaning of ally has changed completly, and every single day, countries are forced to call their neutrals and enemies; allies. This makes me think about the Bulgaria-Turkey affair in another way than I did before. I always considered Bulgaria a bit nationalistic, but I now think that they were completely right to dump EDEN when foreced to call their enemy an ally. -But this article goes deeper. As a mater of fact I know that for example Norway and Turkey aren't "besties", and that neither is the correct use of the term "ally".
Taking it down a notch:
Based on the previous topic, I believe that the only way to avoid this is by terminating those who are not your allies from your alliance. So creating smaller alliances will be the must. An example of a good alliance is the Nordic Alliance which has been in discussion for a very long time now amogst the Nordic eCountries; Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark. My guess is that the idea of this alliance first started when Sweden had to take continual crap from their ally Poland, and the rumour is still going that Sweden wants to get out of ONE, but has too much honour and selfrespect to come crawling back to EDEN. So in this situation we have four more or less friendly nations which wants to bond together instead of having to "lie" every day. -And the Nordics aren't the only possiblity. Every country can do this, the problem is just taking actual actions.
Perks:
With the ONE vs. T/EDEN war gone, and replaced by small alliances, more people will get the possiblity to be leaders, and with the MPP as a more valuble and fragile pact, strategy will finaly be brought back in to eRepublik. Also if alliances aren't in any wars themselves or is in T/EDEN or ONE, surrounded by allies, they can in smaller alliances just choose to make a war, or give their military support to another small alliance without having to worry about allied countries, or helping anyone they don't want to help.
Thanks for reading and please leave your opinions, arguments and thoughts about this matter in the commentsection!
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Good thoughts.
Nordic Alliance! o/
Voted
Small alliances could work in the start, but certain people always wants to be the strongest, so they will be looking for that little edge to be stronger than their neighbor.. Then their neighboring country will look for another MPP to be strongest again.. Then the first neighbor will sign another one, and so forth..
VOILA, and we are back to giga alliances..
Maybe if no one took in the I-want-to-be-stronger-than-my-neighbor-countries?
It would be a dream - - for a while. Things would still spiral back to 2 smaller alliances uniting against 1 another and so on until there would be only two sides left. It's only natural.
But hell, having a more fragmented world map would be fun while it lasts.
Atleast I want to feel like I'm fighting against a meaningful enemy with people I feel I should have by my side, instead of just throwing tanks into an endless, nameless war.
Nordic You say?
Voted
Agreed
Very interesting article. Even if the game sort of steers us towards two big alliances, if these are formed by many smaller ones then it will be easier for these fractions to break up and reform.
Thus making the scene change much faster. With the US out of Terra, perhaps they will stay that way, perhaps form pacts with these small alliances without joining one, certainly an option for big countries.
One can dream!😉
Would probly take a mechanic change.
Sure would be nice though.
Oh ya, V+S
v+s
GIGA FLARE
EDEN will still exist (but will lost ang gain members), the other alliances will fall.
V+S
Good Article!!
This guy gets what I personally have been saying for a while.
Bulgarian translation and presentation of this article here
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-1-2081088/1/20
good article. in fact, there has already been such a regional alliance around for a while: ABC (alliance of baltic countries: estonia, latvia, lithuania). they do have an MPP set with ONE though, to protect them from (mainly) russian aggression.
Actually I've been saying for over a year that this is where we will get eventually, however someone had to take the risk to go forth first and take all the beep along the way for the ball to start rolling.
I know the trolls will be on me for talking about Bulgaria again, but it was Bulgaria that first decided to risk it and go for it.
The argument that the natural state of things is a bipolar model is absolutely incorrect and RL history has demonstrated it through the ages flawlessly.
For a bipolar model to exist, there is a need for a very strong ideological war to exist, only then other countries can be recruited and forced to choose sides.
In erep this ideological war is on the EDEN vs ONE, however in reality it is between the blocks of a few top and old powers.
EDEN exists on the bases of indoctrination and on the basis that if it doesn't there is no one that can stop the evil ONE which will enslave all forever.
ONE exists on the indoctrination that EDEN are master-cards who ruin the game and they have to be stopped. Both are ideologies which are serving the "core" powers of both alliances, hence the reason why these ideologies are defended vehemently as was the case with USA ambush by EDEN last couple of weeks.
Take away the ideology and the world is naturally multipolar and so it will become in erep as has become in RL.
EDEN without knowing it is the one alliance that will ensure this, as with their agressive ideology campaigns will eventually create large enough rifts between enough countries that it will splinter power basses in enough different points to destroy permanently the current bipolar model.
Bulgaria has already taken out it's participation into the current bipolar model, Brazil and USA might be on the way if they're willing to risk it, which seems they're not yet ready to do but that will change in time.
Especially Brazil which now has big enough rifts with two countries one each of the core of the two main blocks.
Chile will eventually become a top power in the game and it too will be out of the two main power blocks, after that it will be only a matter of time.
I think it would come back to the regular bipolar world anyway.
@eDarkAngel
Right now it seems to be a struggle between nations, where it is very hard for half the eWorlds nations to be friends and on the other side where the game mechanics make it very hard for most nations to survive without MPPs with either TEDEN or ONE .
We see this very clearly with your example of Bulgaria, when they broke off they signed ONE MPPs, so their influence goes mostly there. Some nations also bypass the mechanics by moving to other nations in order to fight, or...
...fighting in RWs, but it is very hard for this influence to compare to the total damage a nation is able to produce.
Good read and interesting comments.
@edymionis
Well I have a slightly different interpretation. When Bulgaria left EDEN it kept some of the MPPs with TEDEN countries, it does have the one with Russia to this day. It also did not sign MPPS with quite a few countries in the "opposite" side.
This was a clear threat to EDEN as the bipolar model was braking down and EDEN stood to loose more from it. Thus EDEN focused all it's might on "punishing' Bulgaria thus forcing it and others to brake off MPPS and to sign the rest.
This doesn't make Bulgaria ONE country it, of course EDEN marks everyone who is not subordinate to it, as ONE or PRO-ONE, the same is true of ONE, though in the last 1 year it is definitely less then EDEN in that respect.
There is no doubt that CoT is growing around Bulgaria right now, however with Chile getting a BB and as the power base of both main alliances brakes down it will become fully what it is intended to be.
In short what I'm saying is that while cooperation with some countries is very much voluntary, general cooperation with ONE is the result of EDEN agression, while for other countries who have stated implied neutrality cooperation with one or other side is entirely voluntary. This is a very important distinction, because when it is voluntary even if formally not part of an alliance there isn't a real change as of yet. Still it is the first step.
V
I've been thinking about this... There are LOTS of ways to implement this in Israel, for example. Smaller alliances can also exist alongside giga alliances.
Stake, great article and absolutely true. The voices of the members should speak louder than the members of HQ... which has not been the case for a long time.
Voted and subscribed
Voted!
@ eDarkAngel
It will be very interesting to see how CoT develops over time, I do not see Bulgaria as directly pro-ONE.
but in terms of MPPs it certainly leans that way, perhaps it is as you say, but I still think game mechanics played a big role there.
The way things are now almost every country has 30 MPPs, There are a few exceptions, like the Bulgaria/Russia MPP, but most are either pro-TEDEN or pro-ONE.
This makes it very difficult for any nation to wage war without support from one of
And who are you, Stakerauo, to talk about Bulgaria and Turkey?
Do I have to remind you? Really?
You are the one that showed the Norwegian "gratitude" to us. We sacrificed much while we were trying to help your country against the Serbian PTO-ters. Meanwhile Croatians, Romanians and Ukrainians preferred to buy Chinese citizenship and farm.
And what eNorway did in return? WHAT YOU EXACTLY did in return? YOU VOTE AGAINST US. And what was your excuse? -you claimed that you were...
Theoretically it is possible to stay neutral by signing a shitload of MPPs with nations from "both sides."
Though countries will have little benefit of those MPPs since they get little damage in return and if one of the "allies" goes to war with the other they loose the MPP and might even meet the "neutral" country on the battlefield.
...that you were not familiar with the situation so you did not care very much about the vote. It was you, Stakerauo, that broke the relationship between BG and Norway. Now you talk about new unions and sh*t. In order for an union to exists there must be friendship and trust - something you personally showed that you are not capable of.
@bloodone
Well, that's not exactly why I voted against Bulgaria back in the days. The main reason was that we were given 30 seconds to think and vote, and the aggresive stance Bulgaria took against Turkey quickly made them look like the bad guys. Something I regret thinking, and I wish I could have looked at it another way. Excluding Bulgaria on a 30 second vote was an amature move by EDEN, and it was an amature move for me and the other members to accept it.
Take a look at this:
http://prikachi.com/images/912/5015912R.jpg
There you claim that Turkey can't just come in EDEN and throw Bulgaria out. However, it was you who actually had the real contribution for trowing Bulgaria out since you voted, not the Turks.
You also claim you wanted to stay neural and you actually prefer Bulgaria, yet you did not stayed neutral and you voted against us.
It does not really matter if the vote was 30 seconds or 30 hours and timing can not be an excuse...
@bloodone
This article isn't meant to discuss Bulgaria-Turkey, but if you really need an explanation, we weren't given the option to abstain, and if you read the logs the Bulgarian CP leaked, you'd have seen me stating my neutral/sligtly pro-Bulgarian stance... and yes, the time matters. Now could you please try to say something about the topic of this article? If you really need to continue this discussion, could you please do it through inbox?
But I am commenting on the topic ---> "The Endless Loops of Lies" -you claimed that you prefer Bulgaria but you voted against it.
And no, the time does not matter really - 70% of the negotiation process is in the preparation process. You did not prepared at all - you did not thought at the consequences of what you do and you based your actions not on the actual facts but mainly on the impressions you received at that meeting.
@bloodone
Inbox!
@endymionis
Yes, right now everyone has too signe MPPS with one side or the other, for lack of an alternative. Once you have enough countries who don't care about the perpetual threats (be pro this or pro that or ONE will delete you, or EDEN will delete you), then both alliances will loose their power over the majority of the countries, because more then half the countries who are aligned or members of the alliances are such because of a lack of alternative.
The portion of these type of countries is growing all the time, hence the perpetual need for heavy indoctrination, so that the threat is visible and to combat the lack of belonging.
Simply put (EDEN is doing this much more now), there is a sect type of chanting about valour for us and evil for them and you have to choose your side.
While not necessarily on purpose there is a sort of involuntary collusion between the two hegemons as it serves them both to keep all other countries....
...fighting for one or the other, keeping their status of top dog. Periodically someone has enough and the beep hits the fan, then we have damage control.
If that fails, begins the process of vilification so that all the other fateful do not stray from the path.
On the other side when there is a need to add another piece from the formerly vilified, then the begins the process of cleansing and second chances and holy humanistic values. All the time keeping the right to be the moral judges.