[CP ENTRY] Privatized Military and Mercenaries
•
by Zanalan
The use of mercenary forces has a long and well-established history in real life. From ancient Egypt to today’s Iraq, private soldiers appear in battles. With this long history, we should not be surprised to find “hired guns” in our eRepublik world. They are available to fight in any battle if the price is right.
That willingness to fight for the highest bidder is one of the challenges when discussing the role of mercenaries. Every nation must be conscience of the possibility that their opponent could offer the mercenaries more money. It is possible, and in some cases likely, that the mercenary will change sides for a counter attack. Perhaps the best (or worst) example of this flip lies with Bong. In the first battle for the Northern Territory he fought for the Australians; then he fought for the Australians and the Indonesians. One can hope the Australians did not pay too much for that shifting loyalty!
Of course, one cannot discuss the use of mercenaries without touching on the expense associated with these soldiers of fortune. To hire a single mercenary, supply 10 Q3 weapons and 10 wellness packs, would cost a minimum of 26.82 Gold ($813.03 CAD). Then add any salary that the mercenary might demand and you can quickly see how expensive they can be.
Despite these worries or concerns about loyalty and expense of hiring mercenaries, it is clear that until all nations agree to stop hiring them, mercenaries will continue to flourish!
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Zanalan is always quick off the blocks. Good article, too.
WD's Laws of eWar:
1. Mercenaries are a toilet. What you spend there you flush forever.
A country, when it is most desperate and in need, can awlays rely on its own army to sacrifice all their own treasure for the country's sake; but mercenaries, seeing the country's desperation, will gouge the country, forcing it to sacrifice the entire treasury for the mercenary's sake. If a war is lost, the mercenary does not need the country because it is poor; however, an army will still gather around the rightful leaders of the country, precisely because it is need of an army.
So an army is in every way useful as a mercenary is useless.
In this game, mercenaries have turned the tide of war many a time.
Judge 1:
The article had no fancy gimmicks or surprising revelations. What it did have was a clear line of thinking backed up with good evidence and data. The paragraphing and sentences were balanced and thoughtfully constructed. The point made was not revelatory about hired guns, though did demonstrate that mercenaries are not the best choice. Except for a couple minor spelling/grammar mistakes, the entry is well polished and smooth.
43/50
Judge 2:
Again, not really an indepth insight into the pros and cons of the said subject. There is more insight than in AB's article though, with the addition of potential costs. He does not explore different scenarios of private military though, just seems to state that both are the same. Very well written, no grammar errors. I would have liked more insight though, instead of a short read.
Score - 36/50
Total 79