The costs of Brotherhood

Day 1,529, 15:21 • Published in Greece Cyprus • by Louise de Vivepierre

During the last days, EDEN took some important decisions about its war policy. Actually, eItaly was asked, as it happened for other countries in the past, to give up some regions in order to dedicate all our military strength to the destruction of Serbia. We accepted it without hesitation, but in our community more and more players started to ask themselves, if the final objective is worth the cost.

Here is the interview we made to Archoss, who kindly accepted to cooperate with me.

Tomas: Do you think it could be more useful if EDEN’s priorities were oriented towards permitting every member to keep at least an amount of regions, so every EDEN country would have a resources bonus that would allow us to grow more and more? Or do you think that leaving a ONE country without regions still is the best solution?

Archoss: More useful? I don’t think so. EDEN, as an alliance, has to keep in mind the "big picture" an alliance’s top priority is to conduct war against enemy alliances. This sometimes means that territories , or even countries, should be sacrificed in order to support a "bigger" operation. I can understand that this simple fact is very difficult to accept when a country is loosing regions, or even getting erased from the map, but do not forget that every country of the alliance has been sacrificed for the others at least once.


Tomas: Don’t you think that, in the latest months, there has been no trace (or it hasn’t been considered enough) of the amazing strategic skill that always made us different from ONE, and often brought us to important victories?

Archoss: Strategy has been long gone from the game; fighting has become a bidding contest (the one who spends the most gold wins). Now, if you add to the equation the armies of bots and fighting scripts, there is not much room left for strategy.


Tomas: Several players who contributed to create EDEN are proud that EDEN is a brotherhood, not only an alliance made for strong countries. In your opinion, do you think this ideal has been compromised by admins’ choices to completely destroy economic-politic modules and base the game mainly on war?

Archoss: I’m afraid this is a fact. I’m not a big fan of the game "improvements". Some of these changes directly affects both e-patriotism and our e-relations. I will give you a couple of examples:

- Mercenary medal: it is impossible to get it without fighting for several countries of the "enemy" alliance;

- Resources bonus: the way the economy module works, every player who wants to be competitive has to move to a country with as many bonuses as possible. This not only weakens the bond between every player and his country, but also can result in demonstrations of arrogance, like the recent decision of the eChinese government (http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/dos-amp-donts-of-echina-cs-application-1950555/1/20, A/N).

I would like to thank again Archoss and also ktroul for they kindness.


HAIL EDEN!
HAIL GREECE!
HAIL ITALY!

link to italian complete article : http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-esteri-notizie-da-egreece-1955638/1/20