Join the new world

Introduction

”The Ontopsychological school, availing itself of new research criteria and of a new telematic epistemology, maintains that social modes do not spring from dialectics of territory or of class, or of consumer goods, or of means of power, but rather from dynamic latencies capillarized in millions of individuals in system functions which, once they have reached the event maturation, burst forth in catastrophic phenomenology engaging a suitable stereotype protagonist or duty marionette (general, president, political party, etc.) to consummate the act of social schizophrenia in mass genocide.”


I think that paragraph describes the mood and sociological changes in eRepublik pretty accurately during times of peace and acute boredom. Let's face it: The New World isn't what it used to be. I come from a time when the war module was taken offline, and there were no wars in eRepublik. People before me remember when there was no war module at all. During the first days and months of V1, when the new war module was brought up, wars were few and sparse. People weren't used to wars, and the gaming experience wasn't centered solely on wars like nowadays. Politics, economy and social interaction were the only things that kept the spirit up, but as time flied, wars became more common and common.

Brief History of Time

The French Toast was the first major engagement in V1 one year ago, and after that was over, an era of peace ensued. Then, resistance wars and minor skirmishes started taking place, but there was still the feeling of peace in the air. War was an abruption to peace, and nations mostly engaged in limited warfare via small mobile units, or engaged in direct war via non-original territories.

When the Romania-Indonesia war started in Spring 2009, this was about to change. Countries began engaging in total war against each other across the globe, and the effects of war to economy were realised. When the Romania-Indonesia war halted in May and ATLANTIS collapsed, there was no more a feeling of security in people's minds. The world-wide ”peace” was more like an era of cold war with political take overs, preparation and alliance signings. People had used to being able fight a war, and training wars were set up. PEACE began preparing for their North American invasion, EDEN formed as a response to the feeling of insecurity and gap left by the fall of ATLANTIS. Then, in July 2009, hell broke loose. France attacked Canada, and Russia attacked the USA. Time of total war, encompassing the entire world had begun. Almost every country in the world was able to fight on either side in the war between PEACE, EDEN and Fortis, and people became accustomed to it.

War with its effects became a commonplace, and after the war was over in North America, the sudden disappearance of battles people could fight in created a huge outrage in nations everywhere. Leaders of the world were demanded war, and the pressure to set up training wars or launch a counter-attack mounted up. People had become addicted to warfare, without war there was no interest to play the game.


War brings its casualties. The biggest casualty happens when you become accustomed to it.

Sociological setup in eRepublik

This is the psychological outset I place my argument on. War is the dominant motive for people playing eRepublik, and if there is no war, a pressure starts to build up in people's collective thoughts. The game is no longer, if it ever was, about the social interaction, trade, economy or diplomacy. It is about war. In eRepublik, several sociological theories about people's behavioural motives materialize so clearly that I believe this would be an ideal research platform for many sociologists.

The motive for warfare is very accurately described by the conflict theory, by which the ability to dominate others, or resisting such domination, is the dominant motive for people and their gameplay. Other such motives that appear are the critical theory (aiming to change and critique the society instead of just understanding and documenting it) and functionalism (focusing on how elements of society need to work together to have a fully functioning whole). I'm not a sociologist, nor do I study any such field, so I won't go any deeper in explaining the concepts above. However, I believe that some effects seen in the media, people's demanding for an attack on enemy soil, are explained by these sociological theories.

After the North American invasion was over, wars in Europe were largely over. People in Scandinavia, Poland, Spain, Croatia and Greece had no longer wars other than the Czech-Slovakia training war, which was soon ended by Hungary. PEACE continued their Baltic training war, and Sol continued their training war in Malaysia. This had an impact on general population. Training wars are no substitute for real wars, and people yelled for revenge in several countries. Russian attacks on Finnish soil going unpunished stirred the population, as did the Hungarian, Serbian and Slovenian attacks on Croatia.


People yelled for war.

Full tilt and foolishness versus playing a strategy game

I'm not trying to conclude here that wars are not for good. War is the general meter for countries' potential and ability, in war almost every branch of the society is tested if they can handle the pressure and function under abnormal circumstances. Wars stimulate economy and invigorate minds, they're generally for the good of everyone. But, like in every strategy game, wars should be planned. In any other strategy game, everyone agrees that attacking a numerically superior enemy without a larger plan is stupid. No one does a suicide rush with every unit one is able to muster unless one is planning to lose and end the game.

But here in eRepublik, that's exactly what the populace is demanding. Launch a counter-attack, trigger every MPP in the known world and be done with it. Greece attacked Turkey in their wake, thinking it's a just war after Turkey invaded Greece so many times. The misconception of wars being between individual countries continues to persist in people's minds, while in reality the wars are between MPP countries and alliances. See this sort of pictures in the eRepublik main page:



That's what every citizen sees if their ally is under attack. When Greece attacked Turkey, the battle that commenced was not between Turkey and Greece, it was between the countries Turkey and Greece had allies with. Now, Greece is screwed. They triggered MPPs against the most powerful countries in the world without having an exit strategy. It was a suicide rush in every sense of the word, and soon they will realize it themselves. Poland invaded Germany to release the pressure, but they were sensible and halted when a further engagement would have triggered MPPs against them. The other stage where the same fatal mistake of making a suicide rush could happen is in Croatia, where people are demanding a counter-attack. If that happens, I expect Croatia to be wiped out in less than a week after maybe one victory. Finland could attack Russia in their wake just as foolishly, claiming it's their right, but it'd end up Finland being conquered within a week. The same goes for Greece: after they lose initiative, things can go only downhill.

Like in every strategy game, or in poker, the one who keeps a clear mind, plays rationally and does not frustrate, usually wins. This is especially true in eRepublik. The war in Asia should have been a number one priority for all EDEN countries, but apparently the pressure from the people was too much, and everyone began driving their own agendas. At least things can still be salvaged, if people don't continue to act foolishly.

So, if you read what I wrote, and understood my point, you should also understand this:

FFS don't trigger any more MPPs!