My Reply to johnpauljones' Queries
Day 698, 04:10
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by Mohan Kumar
In response to johnpauljones' queries on my campaign manifestoMeet the Congressional Election Candidate - Oregon:
I would like to say firstly, that I am NOT an expert on E-Rep War game mechanics, I never professed to be one. Secondly, as John rightly pointed out, I don't think these issues come under the purview of the congressman's powers and duties. The purpose of Congress is to debate issues, primarily related to taxation, new citizens, donations and support to govt funded social schemes etc. But I will endeavor to reply with my personal opinion.
What is your position on tanking vs. weapons distribution?
From my own personal experience in the Iran -India Resistance wars, I found that a bunch of Indian tanks, led by legendary David Forde numbering probably 30, assisted by a few EDEN tanks managed to decimate 8000 regular Iranian fighters, to free the North India province. This is an example of the extent of damage tanks can cause in battle, but at what cost? I feel that there should be a proper mixture of sorts. I feel that weapons distribution for lower ranking officers and Tanking with High ranking and strong soldiers, is necessary. Please fight here:DoD orders
What is your opinion on the Fortress State Strategy?
When I came to the e-US, it was down to just one "Fortress State",ie.Florida. Using this Fortress state as a base, e-americans managed to retake almost the whole of the continental US. This itself is a tribute to the effectiveness of Fortress states, but I feel that these will be only one end of the spectrum. The achievement of equitable distribution of population to enable a new e-citizen to join in the state of his RL residence (which is what he's most likely to do) and to continue to prosper there, would be ideal. It would attract new citizens and interest in the game. I therefore support high quality health care systems in ALL states. But this has to be done in phases.
While we are at war, NOTHING can be done. That money is better spent fighting PEACE.
But once we have true peace, then we must focus on economically important states, as that makes economic and practical sense. The Goal however should be Q5 hospitals for every region.
John Kelly's article on the practicality and cost benefit ratio of hospitals makes for an interesting read with plenty of food for thought.In Defence of Q2/3/4 Hospitals
[img]http://wiki.erepublik.com/images/4/4c/IMG_0573_resize.JPG[/img]
What is your position on Q1 vs Q5 weapons?
From my own experience, when I wanted to fight in militias against PEACE, no one would take me initially when my training strength wasn't so good. It doesn't make economic sense for either militias or armies to equip their weakest soldiers with the best weapons or their strongest soldiers with the worst weapons. There needs to be a correct mixture. We should equip generals and above with Q5 and lower ranks with Q1. More "bang for the buck" so to speak!
Can you tell me the strategy of chain reaction triggers?
[img]http://wiki.erepublik.com/images/f/fe/Ben_Franklin.JPG[/img]
Now, I don't think that I as a congressman would need to be bothered with this concept when it isn't in my power to control the events that constitute a chain reaction. When we border an ally of a country we've just declared war on, we automatically are at war with our neighbor. How does a congressman's actions fit into the picture other than to advise the President of the possible fall out of the declaration of war? If the president doesn't know that, then I don't think the intelligent people of the e-US would elect such a President, do you?
😉
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
PERTAMAXXX
voted
Voted & Subbed. Nice article.
Well said and a good read. We need more "Ben Franklins"!
V&S.
Given that it is within the purview of the eCongress to declare war, my feeling is that *all* congressmen should be conversant with its effects, both positive and negative. As such, it may behoove you to study the war module in a bit more depth if you are desiring to attain the office.
Furthermore, it is MY feeling that even without a war, if a state has no natural high resources nor is it company rich or in a strategic location, it doesn't deserve a hospital. That money would be better spent moving its citizens to the states with Q5 hospitals. Purchasing anything less is a waste.
I'm flattered that I got an article my thoughts:
The first two questions (tanking vs weapons dist. and q1 vs q5) you chickened out on. The point is to see which long-term strategies you subscribe to, instead you said I think we should use both. We can't afford to focus on both we need to focus on one.
So you are against the fortress state strategy even though it saved our country from annihilation - good to know. Purchasing anything less than a q5 hospital is a waste. Once a region has s q2 or w/e they will immediately begin crying for a q5 making us buy two hospitals instead of one. Our active population lives in CA and FL. Only the inactive, dead, and dying citizens live in other states. There is no point in building hospitals for people who will never use them. eRep 😕= RL there is no reason for someone to live in X state. So ditch the "let's put a hospital in every state so everyone can live in their RL state" crap. Most states are not worth the investment. If you read the US forums you would already know this.
As a possible congressman you should be extremely well-versed in the game itself. If you don't understand how the game works you shouldn't run for office. imo you do not possess the understanding of the game necessary to be a good congressman this term. Spend this next month learning about the game and asking questions. You could easily learn enough in the next month to be a knowledgeable member of the 24th Congress
Okay, John Paul Jones:
It IS possible to understand the game mechanics and disagree about what we SHOULD do. The rules only tell us what we CAN do, not what we SHOULD do.
Even President Gaius has indicated he'd be willing to rethink our old hospital strategy. I don't think the fact that we were nearly wiped off the map proves that the fortress strategy "works". I can imagine several scenarios that would have gone far worse for us. For example, if a PEACE power more competent than Russia had been the main force in North America, and merely starved us out. Our economy was crippled by the time PEACE got to our fortresses.
Not to mention: by the time we were holed up in Florida there was a pretty good case for LETTING Russia take our fortress, and not even defending it, in order to cancel MPPS. If that was what we were planning for all along we could have done it without the fortress mentality.
Finally: if you are more interested in criticizing (often on dubious grounds) people who show an active interest in the game than you are in bringing them in, I am afraid YOU are the one who doesn't get it:
"Our active population lives in CA and FL. Only the inactive, dead, and dying citizens live in other states." This arrogant assumption has always been the problem with the fortress strategy. PEOPLE ARE ALIENATED FROM THE GAME by this sort of rhetoric. I know how the last war went down, and I understand the math on hospital quality vs. cost. I still think a decentralized defense strategy might work better, when you take human psychology and American political culture into account.
I've got a surprise for the cpu programming generation: sometimes the mechanics are NOT all that matters.
Voted and subbed.
In this game, Mechanics trumps all. I am one of the players that is urging more senior members to write an open letter to the admins to remove most of our regions and rename the remaining ones. eUSA and eCanada are two of the very few countries that were given our r/l regional borders. It is a curse, not a blessing, that we have 51 original regions, and 30 are worthless as far as this simulation is concerned.
As, I said in my comment in the last article,
you honourable gentlemen (viz.johnpauljones & liquidoxygen) have offered your constructive criticism and it is well accepted by me, but you do not have the right to "WEED ME OUT".
That is for the people of e-Oregon to decide. I Believe that of the candidates running in this state, I have the credentials, sufficient knowledge and more importantly, the SPIRIT to serve and the HUNGER for learning to succeed as a good senator in the e-US congress. Let the people of e-Oregon decide who they want to weed out!
Contrary to what you may have been led to believe, I'm not trying to weed you out, but if our points have had an impact on you to the point where you believe you can better yourself and your nation by continuing to run with that understanding, then our work is done here. 😉
This is the most epic comment thread I have ever read in a congressional platform.
"therefore support high quality health care systems in ALL states. But this has to be done in phases."
You realize we'd not only waste so much gold getting those Q5's, but also, we'd be conquered within a week because everybody's spread out?
"This is the most epic comment thread I have ever read in a congressional platform."
x2
If we just drop q5s everywhere so people can live in their RL states, we can be assured that the next time PEACE decides to invade us, they will do so cheaply and easily.
We will then have to buy two tickets for each lost citizen so they can move back into the country. They will move to another indefensible state, and we will need to buy two MORE tickets to get them back in the US, so on and so forth. Once we waste all that gold moving citizens around we will have little to actually defend ourselves with.
He didn't answer the questions to my satisfaction, and I suggested he take a month to learn more about the game and try again.
Dave, I'll make you a bet. You PM all the citizens in every state but FL and CA, I will PM those in just CA, and we shall see who gets more replies.
Better yet, PM the citizens of Washington and mobilize them to take back their own state. It will be the perfect opportunity to prove me wrong and show me how the psychology of Washingtonians can win the day - throw in all standing congressmen and your "bear cavalry" for good measure.
"This is the most epic comment thread I have ever read in a congressional platform."
x3
Please recall what happened to that great "Fortress" State of NJ: ka-boom.
johnpauljones is correct that the Fortress State strategy has strengths, but it also has weaknesses.
comandantedavid is correct that PEACE could have "starved us out" of Florida. "Our economy was crippled by the time PEACE got to our fortresses" because we did not pursue a Fortress State strategy with regard to our industrial capacity as well. When we can move companies, we can revisit that issue but until then it is worth remembering that one company (Fort Harlot) employed 1/7th of the US population in Florida. (see "A message from Terrorists" http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-message-from-terrorists-905247/1/20)" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-me[..]1/20) That weapons company was losing 0.02g PER EMPLOYEE just to keep everyone employed. There were 3909 surplus workers and it would have cost ~2000g to create enough companies to reach any sane kind of efficiency.
Thank you for this discourse gentlemen. It continues to be enlightening. Please continue.
Voted & Subscribed to Comments.
Is that Astrakat standing next to Ben Franklin?
Hey all,
I'm pleased to see how much discussion this has spawned! My primary complaint about mechanicism is that it is often taken to be a preemptor of debate.
Yes, Liquid Oxygen and JohnPaulJones are right - my own views are biased against mechanicism and have probably gone too extreme in reaction - as Hobbes would say, the "passions" undermine calm reason. A good example of why I'd rather put my faith in the dialogical processes of participatory democracy than in any one player's ability to figure things out!
For that reason, I especially appreciate Max McFarland's reply, which attempts to move the dialogue forward. Max is a good example of the power of imagination and creative motivation to do things that a simple game mechanics ideology could not produce.
PhoenixQuinn's article is also well worth a look.
Look: game mechanics matter. Obviously. Like the laws of physics and biology in RL, they both constrain and enable us.
But mechanicism is like trying to take gravity and inertia as a set of guidelines for daily life. Sure, they are relevant. But in human interactions, they are not sufficient. Mechanicism attempts not only to ignore the human dimension of this game, but to suppress it. (There goes my partisan hyperbole again - can't be helped, I suppose).
I am NOT proposing a Q5 in every state. I haven't seen very many opponents of the fortress strategy who do. A decentralized defense only means that we ENABLE the two-clickers and the Roleplayers to contribute meaningfully. Some people aren't ever going to tank. We have kids, jobs, dissertations to write... Some people would rather quit than play this game like a 16-year old gamer. You can either try to browbeat the rest of us into playing your way, or you can engage in that critical political art: compromise.
P.S. I have to apologize for not offering point by point responses to every comment. I DO feel a duty to respond, but my RL duties impose certain time limits. Thanks to all.
Hey. You got a mention from Zoli. 😃
what your country needs, and i believe ours (canada) does too, is what system0101 is pushing for. Your states to be mashed together into "regions". this will once and for all kill all of this silly RL state loyalty (irl i live in british columbia and i think alberta is a rotting cest pool of backward thinking and stinky polluting oil but i still live there IG because thats where the hospital is and this is entertainment not life)
not only that i find it rather pointless to have a bunch of states with no resources at all simply because you have so many states and the admins didnt think it fair to fill them all. (even though being big is part of why your a world super power IRL lol)