Bias
AltmerVampire
The word bias is thrown about a lot these days. Since I’m publishing this in EDEN/Brolliance countries many of you will believe I am referring to how PEACE countries are treated (according to Avec’s article) incredibly favourably.
But lets look at it from the other side of the argument, shall we? And that is the purpose of this article, so I’m assuming this is where many of you will drop off. PEACE propaganda and all that… So anyway, lets continue with this article!
Now, admittedly I agree with most of Avec’s article, until he reaches the section entitled “712th Day of the New Worl
😛Hungary attacks Croatia, Russia attacks USA and Finland”
In this section of the article Avec tells us how it was in fact, not a coincidence that the admins announced that alliances now need to be constantly renewed to be useful in war situations or they would just disappear. He points out how the admins just seemed to decide on this change as soon as Hungary and Russia has just activated a tonne of MPPs. So clearly the admins are biased and madly in love with PEACE, yeah?
Now, lets look at it from another perspective. Lets look at the USA’s military stats page… Ok, from the looks of it this slight change in the MPP rules would massively benefit the US, saying as it due to their enemies activated MPPs that they were invaded and nearly crushed in the first place. But yet, we seem to be ignoring the fact this would hugely benefit the US and several other EDEN countries, solely because it would also benefit PEACE countries.
The admins announced new MPP costs a little while ago, how is it weird that they announce further updates in the same vein a few days after they do this?
Both alliances are hugely paranoid the other alliance is being treated much more favourably than themselves. I remember the outrage in PEACE nations about the new MPP costs and how they believed the admins were taking the side of EDEN/Brolliance in the matter; they believed that since EDEN/Brolliance would profit from it (supposedly more than PEACE) then the admins were blatantly biased.
Were the admins biased in this case? Maybe, maybe not. I can’t honestly say but the fact people jumped to conclusions shows this ridiculous paranoia and fear found in both sides.
Neither alliance is good. Neither alliance is evil. Both sides believed they were trying to save Belgium, sending ATO teams that the other viewed as a PTO team. And to be honest they probably both were (to an outside perspective) a PTO team.
Both alliances try to do the best for the nations and to destroy the other alliance. Does this make either side evil? Does this make either side heroes?
No.
This is a game. Play it without hatred and with an open mind.
Toodles,
AV
Comments
Im going to subscribe! The most equal and informative piece of news I've seen in my short eRep time! I vote for!
You didnt took the either alliance, nor the admins side. But which one is more paranoid? EDEN? PEACE? The Administrators?
Voted
This is a game. Play it without hatred and with an open mind.
I so wish this could happen
Boated.
Boated - You cant really be evil on this game. Although attacking a much weaker country is a bit cold hearted.
Actually I wrote that section about admin bias badly. I mostly think PEACE had inside info on MPP updates, so they made that multi-pronged attack knowing it won't come back haunting them in the future.
Your example on the update helping USA/EDEN is actually exactly the opposite - without the cost rising and MPPs expiring, the same ruleset that allowed Hungary, Russia and France attack Northern America, would have now turned against them, but as soon as that was about to happen, rules got changed. That's what I argue against - changing rules in the midst of gameplay, doing quick patches and leaking that information to players who use it as demonstrated by attacks on Croatia, Finland, Greece and USA.
Why make this sort of update when there's a new war module and economic module coming within the next months, that I don't understand. The timing is bad, making these updates could have easily been postponed and made with all the coming new updates to rules, game mechanics etc. so their effect is the same for all.
Otherwise a good article 🙂
As avec says, none of countries wouldnt launch so many MPP's in a day that Hungary, Latvia, Serbia and Russia did, if they wouldnt be sure that those MPP's wont get their arses kicked.
So admin dont have to be on other side when they made this change, but it looks like they had a leak about future changes. You dont have to be paranoid to agree it.
Anyway this new ruleset came out from nowhere. They should have updated it with new warmodule. Also in football game where other side of the field is wet and muddy and other side is in good shape. Would it be a fair to change rules of game in 2nd half when team that played on muddy side of the field has their chance to use advantage of better side. No I didnt think so either.
Also that PEACE avatar makes your arguments smell a bit like PEACE propaganda.
Then ignore the avatar and stop being paranoid 😛
Paranoia in this game is hilarious.
If i had a pound for every paranoid bastard on here.. seriously.
"This is a game. Play it without hatred and with an open mind."
Then it wouldn't be the same game anymore, but something even more boring. Let us have our hatred and incredibly narrow vision!
Voted!
Good article, a fair and even look at the situation. There IS way too much paranoia and grudge holding in what people seem to forget is a game. We all want to win and have fun, but how that happens is up to us to decide, and to me that seems to be increasingly at the expense of others, not just “good natured” trolling.
But ignore me and my opinions because of my avatar. *facepalm*