PEACE GC's Boogeyman and the Folly of Unipolarity
•
by Collin Roche
Please Note: I am not writing this because I am an American citizen, nor am I writing this to support either side in this war. I'm merely going to try and give an objective perspective to the current geopolitical climate on eRepublik.
Peace GC now controls 13 eUS regions and 10 eCanadian regions. There are plenty of arguments on both sides to justify the invasion and the defense. The real question is: Is wiping out the eUS a good idea for Peace GC?
Since Romania's fall from the top, the eUnited States has been the primary force standing in the way of Peace's global hegemony. Obviously, war was inevitable. The extent to which that war should be executed, on the other hand, has been decided entirely by Peace GC's high command. Now, with major victories across North America, both symbolic and physical, it seems, at least for the moment, that they made the right decision, as activity and population growth have spiked across the board in major Peace countries. The problem for Peace is, how will they sustain that activity and population growth after they wipe out (or even just mortally wound) their biggest enemy?
I've mulled the topic over and the only conclusion that I can reasonably come to is post-invasion in-fighting. Now of course, this does not necessarily mean a coordinated effort by Peace GC's commanders (although it could be if their situation becomes desperate enough) to boost activity, but rather efforts by individual countries that will undermine Peace's overall objectives. This game is based upon war. When wars as short, as they will assuredly be after the largest non-Peace nation falls, they become only minor booster shots to activity. The general populace of the Peace nations will want more prolonged and exciting conflicts, rather than quick, heavy-handed conquests (see North Korea). If the eUS falls completely or is forced to remain heavily crippled, it is only a matter of time before Peace must face these sorts of problems.
Could Peace GC overcome these future possibilities? It's possible. No one can truly predict what the future will hold. Will this scenario be easier to overcome if Peace keeps the boogeyman (the eUS) in the closet? Absolutely. The bulk of this game's players will not be satisfied with a unipolar world. Who knows how long it will be until Peace's high command realizes this?
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Good opening article, voted and subscribed.
Post-invasion infighting is a given-- this is a war-driven game. A number of PEACE members have said that the war is a "good thing" because it's kept people from getting bored and becoming two-clickers.
The alternative is that we start pushing a ton of resistance wars... I guess time will tell.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/stars-and-stripes-journal-191155/1" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/st[..]155/1
As long as eAmerica keeps fighting and starting RW's then things will be fine.
Only if eAmerica actually surrenders will problems occur and that won't happen as they'll always be some group starting RW's or trying to free regions via some form of conflict.
Even with RWs, if Peace GC beats the eUS and holds it under its thumb for too long, the alliance will fray. American RWs aren't going to be enough to motivate Peace's playerbase.
Unlike RW, it's not much to lose in eWars. Peoples don't die, companies are not destroyed, and there is no way to stop someone from working or trading in any country. So, eAmericans can always settle in another country and live on.
If anything, only effect of wars here is getting rid of ineffective leadership, like eUSA, eNK or eCanadian ones.
Good article, but I would disagree that this game is based on war-it has become focused on war due to imperialistic posturing by superalliances, but this game can be about more if only the adolescents went off and played their war games on x-box, and left the adults to actually play the game the way it should be played.