Why Alliances Just Don't Work! [EPIC]
Day 467, 06:52
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by BogdanFV
There IS a Reason...
Does it come as a surprise that when we have two mega-alliances in eRepublik (ATLANTIS and PEACE) that include most of the free nations in the eWorld, they do not work properly in practice?
Thing is, the current alliance systems of two "power blocs" just complicate the game and are more prone (more likely) to fail.
The first issue of the alliances?
They are too DAMN big. What the hell do you expect to achieve with 15 or so nations, from different geographic locations, different cultural player bases, different strengths and weaknesses, economic potentials, and languages, etc? The "mega power bloc" alliances are a failure as there are too many voices not being heard, too many arguments, too many discretions.
Its also a problem when a nation cannot list off its allies without thinking. These are your best friends in the game. If you have 17 other allies, do you actually expect to have good relations with all of them? No.
So is it now a surprise, that after, what, 6 or more months of ATLANTIS and PEACE most countries do not agree with the other? Does Iran do what Japan suggests? Does Romania remain accountable to Canada?
Nope. Alliances are strong nations drawing weaker nations in just so that the smaller nations don't go to the other side and sit idle there.
It all looks good on paper.
Aside from the fact that the ridiculous amount of members in the alliance prevent most to have their voice heard and decisions to be reached without a huge argument or disagreement, its also impossibly to get MPPs with all members. Unfortunately, the nations that actually need to have MPPs never receive them due to it being too expensive and the stronger alliance nations wanting it with stronger counterparts.
So what's the other problem?
There is no accountability.
Please, someone tell me, what the hell is the point of a charter?
The contracts, treaties, charters in the game are NOT enforced by admins, despite what people say. Most PEACE and ATLANTIS nations can attack without 24-hour notice (Spain AND Romania on...several occasions!), can attack members within their alliance (Pakistan-Iran just one out of, what, 100 examples?) and generally disregard any written protocol, its worthless.
This mirrors the "UN" in real life as the stronger nations are held unaccountable in the alliance and the smaller nations are left without any voice.
Therefore, I suggest the disbanding of the alliances of PEACE and ATLANTIS, the furthest the alliances go is a military assistance system which can be done in smaller alliances or unofficially, all you need is great relations and an understanding.
What do you guys think? Are we just so scared of playing the game that we each hide before 10-20 nations in our alliance?
Vote and Subscribe!
*300 More Subscribes Until Media Mogul for Canada*
Does it come as a surprise that when we have two mega-alliances in eRepublik (ATLANTIS and PEACE) that include most of the free nations in the eWorld, they do not work properly in practice?
Thing is, the current alliance systems of two "power blocs" just complicate the game and are more prone (more likely) to fail.
The first issue of the alliances?
They are too DAMN big. What the hell do you expect to achieve with 15 or so nations, from different geographic locations, different cultural player bases, different strengths and weaknesses, economic potentials, and languages, etc? The "mega power bloc" alliances are a failure as there are too many voices not being heard, too many arguments, too many discretions.
Its also a problem when a nation cannot list off its allies without thinking. These are your best friends in the game. If you have 17 other allies, do you actually expect to have good relations with all of them? No.
So is it now a surprise, that after, what, 6 or more months of ATLANTIS and PEACE most countries do not agree with the other? Does Iran do what Japan suggests? Does Romania remain accountable to Canada?
Nope. Alliances are strong nations drawing weaker nations in just so that the smaller nations don't go to the other side and sit idle there.
It all looks good on paper.
Aside from the fact that the ridiculous amount of members in the alliance prevent most to have their voice heard and decisions to be reached without a huge argument or disagreement, its also impossibly to get MPPs with all members. Unfortunately, the nations that actually need to have MPPs never receive them due to it being too expensive and the stronger alliance nations wanting it with stronger counterparts.
So what's the other problem?
There is no accountability.
Please, someone tell me, what the hell is the point of a charter?
The contracts, treaties, charters in the game are NOT enforced by admins, despite what people say. Most PEACE and ATLANTIS nations can attack without 24-hour notice (Spain AND Romania on...several occasions!), can attack members within their alliance (Pakistan-Iran just one out of, what, 100 examples?) and generally disregard any written protocol, its worthless.
This mirrors the "UN" in real life as the stronger nations are held unaccountable in the alliance and the smaller nations are left without any voice.
Therefore, I suggest the disbanding of the alliances of PEACE and ATLANTIS, the furthest the alliances go is a military assistance system which can be done in smaller alliances or unofficially, all you need is great relations and an understanding.
What do you guys think? Are we just so scared of playing the game that we each hide before 10-20 nations in our alliance?
Vote and Subscribe!
*300 More Subscribes Until Media Mogul for Canada*
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
voted and suscribed
Romania is taking other countries by political means and yes the MMP's don't seem to work.
Very good points, voted and subscribed.
Voted!
When I see articles like this in PEACE country's I'll start to listen.
Leroy Combs sai😛
When I see articles like this in PEACE country's I'll start to listen.
= = = = =
Much of the eWorld doesn't speak English, sou you really don't know what the rest of the world is saying...
But if you can read such articles then:
When you start looking for them you will find them.
When you star reading you will understand simple things as why Turkey left PEACE
But of course, you must give it a try
Reading, I mean...
Truth is: Much of the world is fed up with wars.
Fed up with the idea that war is good for economy.
Absurd, when in so many countries the housing industry is going bankrupt.
The rush for weapons is good for the weapons industry, but competition is such, that iron companies out of high productivity regions are broke.
The defence systems industry is going down the drain in many countries, because with so many wars and attacks the costs are unbearable.
The USA is at war for at least three presidential terms. In the real world, that would mean a 12 year war.
Leaders of the world were "pressed" to press the WAR button, by their public opinions.
Medium sized countries are stuck with their alliances because they are run by fear of being attacked.
And no one, ABSOLUTELLY NO ONE, is capable of stretching a hand and proposing peace to one's neighbour.
This is not the NEW WORLD
This is becoming a virtual version of the MIDDLE AGES.
Hear hear. ATLANTIS is corny and dysfunctional.
The PEACE Charter has been uphold. No member of PEACE defied it during my Leadership. nor has it ever been defied.
ATLANTIS charter on the other hand, is another story