[Boh] Want Romper? Nope, gimme Keers

Day 2,163, 01:23 • Published in United Kingdom United Kingdom • by Bohemond4

So, a break from the usual duties of the Prime Minister. As a disclaimer, this article bears no relation to my job, but is a reflection of several months of government service.

The war module has changed drastically, and depending on who you are it is either for the better or the worse. It has changed so much that, perhaps, we are still not ready to realise the full potential of the far reaching consequences this change has. I would like to contend that the old school way of fighting is actually in decline, the days of Tanks and Warlords is over and the era of the Merchant Prince is here. In this, a quartet or articles, I will speak on what our new aspect of war should be and why supra-Military is, or should be, the way forward as well as the issues facing it.

Lets take a look at Poland, perhaps the number 2 nation in the world in terms of weekly damage. Romania and Greece combined do the same amount of damage as this nation. They can dominate any nation in the world by themselves, bar Serbia. Perhaps any two nations, again, bar Serbia. However, this war system relies on one constant: getting 2-clickers and tanks fighting in the right battles. Enough damage, and you win. Easy. You could direct damage through Campaigns of the Day, Daily Orders, the fact that it costs to fight for your enemies via moving costs and IRC supplying. You noticed when a tank came along and tipped the wall, such as Romper or Xanther Zaiban. In the United Kingdom we had SSG for a while, but also Dan Moir or Nohijis who are great when they hit.



Now there has been a fundamental change: Combat Orders. Now, a single figure can influence the entire campaign and war, rather than one round, or even a number of rounds, through purchasing damage. In a way, you could already do that through Mercenary Units, but that was expensive. This can be expensive too but instead of one Military Unit you gain whole nations. Including your enemies. In the latest UK-Ireland conflict, there were orders reaching up to 70 cc per million in Division 3 alone. In Division 4 this reached 130 provided for the Irish by one figure: Sweet Drinker. In comparison the British Government was offering 35 cc in Division 3 and 40-50 depending on the time for Division 4.


Sweet Drinker with his cash

More could have been offered but when this single person is richer than the entire government, it begs the question of whether you can out bid. Shields are all well and good, but when a nation that does less daily damage than you easily wins battles through the purchase of millions of damage, it shows how powerful the potentials of Combat Orders are. Essentially what we are doing is bidding for damage in OUR warzone. Not the other guys, but in OURs. This is something any alliance or nation needs to recognise, and recognise quickly: if a rich individual sets orders against you, either bid higher or call in more damage from those still fighting for alliances or nations above and beyond monetary profit.



Going back to Poland, while they can win these battles based on pure damage, can they continue to win when faced with a nation willing, and able, to outbid them through the wealth of one man? It is well and good to argue you can drain that cash, but remember they still have an income, so that cash will be replenished. Wars will be won, and lost, on the amount spent. TWO might control over 60% of the worlds damage; but do they have the financial resources to maintain that into the future?

The UK was sensible enough to form the Ministry of Defence Military Unit when Combat Orders first dropped, in my first term, for the Prime Minister or his representative to set orders. This has enabled us to take advantage of this system, however, without vaster reserves of CC against a determined individual we will lose the bidding war. I firmly believe it is time for alliances and nations to ensure the richest of their citizens will support their war effort or suffer the consequences.

While I share what is, perhaps, a gloomy assessment of the future of war there are other changes I will discuss that make money more important, yet also reflect the importance, still, of alliances. Daily Orders, and Campaigns of the Day are still vital and control where damage goes. Not everyone checks for where the damage is being bought the most. Most people are still patriotic and serve their nation, and their allies. Yet, the ability to buy large amounts of damage is still a fundamental change. And one which alliances as an entity need to respond to, and learn how to utilise it.

At the end of the day, Romper might win you a round but Keers can buy you a war.

Cheers
Bohemond4
Prime Minister, the Viscount of Cambridge