Join the new world

For the first time in a long time, today I'm writing something not related to the UK government, my country in general, my party, or my MU. I think the last time I wrote an Iain Keers article to offer my reflections on the game itself was at least 5-6 years ago. For those who love the boldness of my usual articles, I'm sorry to disappoint. Today I'm offering my own thoughts and reflections on the game, where it could be better, and offering my opinion on some directions that Plato, or the game developers could delve into.

Personally, I think that there is an inbalance in the game, but it is not the same imbalance that everyone else is complaining about. The imbalance is, and always has been, between the three main routes that the game offers to new players; economic, military and political. In the past, providence was given to the economic side of the game. Gold was limited. Countries would send their troops to fight bare handed because they couldn't afford any weapons. People would only fight if there was a hospital that gave you free energy.

Today, we live in a world where outside of the military module, a player may as well not exist at all. Some of the biggest hitters in the game regularly out damage countries. Some countries out damage whole alliances. But the important thing isn't the spread of damage; it is the amount of time and engagement that can be given. If I fight, I can fight all day if I really want to. If I want to play politics? Shouting on the national feed, writing an article, running for election, proposing laws: they are all limited. If I want to run a company? Again, limited. Whilst the military module has come on leaps and bounds in the engagement it offers for players, the remaining two thirds of the new world we were promised lie discarded and under utilised. eRepublik will not improve now matter how the military modules are changed; its already at a sweet point, minus the delay between switching from ground rounds to air rounds. That doesn't mean to say it's perfect, but when comparing this module with the economic and political activity that the game offers eCitizens, it's clear to say that military rules the roost.



Thus, today I would like to offer some observations. As I've been President of the UK for several months now, and made dealing with new players one of my primary focuses, I've interacted with at least 100 different players who are new to the game. The biggest problem I have? Giving them a reason to come back. Some do, most don't. Their issue is not that they cannot make a difference on the battlefield. Their issue is that their only option is to not make a difference on the battlefield. The other modules offer no exciting rewards, there is no reason for them to engage, and no hope of them being able to engage in a meaningful or profitable way.

For ease of reference, I've split what I would change if I was Plato into the three key areas of the game (at least, the three areas we are promised as a route to fame, glory and success) of economic, political and military. To try to avoid making this article ridon-cu-lous-ly long, I have tried wherever possible to summarise my reasoning, instead of going into too much detail. I have also split this article into three separate pieces.

If anyone is curious about my thought process, please feel free to leave me a comment and I'll do my best to offer my full thought process in reply. This is your final warning, if you have already lost interest in the game, you have one last chance to avoid having to spend 20-30 minutes reading a list of things that you have probably lost interest in already, never cared about in the first place, or are the complete opposite of what you would change and thus anger you to the point of explosion. The rest of this article is not for the faint-erepublik'd!




1. Bring back contracts

When I first started the game, this was the biggest draw for me. Companies were cumbersome, but profitable even with a small amount of startup capital. If you couldn't afford to buy companies, and didn't want to spend money to buy gold, you could sign a contract that was approved by Plato, and borrow money from other citizens. Other citizens did this freely, because could get a guaranteed return, backed by Plato, with a younger player doing all of the hard lifting. However, the benefits weren't just for the older guard, it was a life saver for new players too.
Whenever you start playing a new game, you get 'the bug'. It's new, it's fresh, it's exciting, and you want to achieve something. You'll login and have nothing to do, but you'll still login anyway. Contracts gave new players a reason to stay, because they could easily and quickly get startup capital from outside sources, and it's only by more new players staying, that the community on this game will grow in size and in quality.
The benefits aren't just about making eRepublik bigger though; older players who have thousands and thousands of gold sitting on their accounts can invest this without having to increase their activity, and essentially get extra money for free, without having to do anything except sign a contract.


2. Remove the once-per-day limit on working

In the past, fighting and working were relatively equal; you would work once, and unless you bought gold every day, you would fight once too. These days, the amount of fighting we can do per hour, let alone per day, has risen exponentially. Working remains the same. I would allow extend the 'overtime' to managers, not just workers, based on the quality of a company. The number of overtime usages would be equivalent to the quality of the company; so 'quality 1' companies can be used for a total of two times when using employees or working as a manager. This may seem like a sure fire way to remove the need for people to buy gold, but in actuality, I feel it would have the opposite affect.
People only spend gold on tanking because companies struggle to make a notable return. Articles in the past have calculated this, but you can find out about raw material and finished product companies elsewhere. If we can use these companies multiple times, then we will be giving all of the eCitizens without fantastic strength or rank a reason to play; you cannot fight to victory, but you can produce to victory.
As well as this, it will ensure that energy is equal. A player like me, with a decent amount of strength, and a mav pack, could spend ~300 energy in Division 1, and earn 2 gold. Based on my energy bank and regeneration (before packs or tanking in Epics) of ~1300 and 22 p/h, I could earn 35 gold per day. Unless a player has a lot of companies, or has high quality companies that they can afford to move to new regions to avoid pollution, could they ever hope to make 35 gold per day? Using 'Work as Manager' in ~120 of my Weapons-related companies makes me a profit of roughly 10 gold. However, I can only make 10 gold. If you compare the energy usage, it is similar; 300 energy per 2 gold for fighting vs 10 gold for 1300 energy when working - but the total profit output is severely limited for my companies. Any player can buy a company, but not any player can get a Battle Hero medal for 300 energy - yet the former is limited, and the latter only open to the old generation of players.


3. Remove item qualities

There is zero need for item qualities anymore, in my humble opinion. Whilst in the past it made sense for different levels of companies to produce different qualities of products, we no longer live in a world where people cannot afford to buy the top quality items and do so only for special occasions. For a training war which has no impact on my country, I'll fight with Q7 weapons if I want to. Some players may not be able to afford to use a Q7 weapon for every fight they do, but based on current wages even someone one day old could afford the most expensive weapon the game has to offer. Where is the point in that?
Companies of different quality should produce different amounts of the same item which would be 'Weapon', 'Food', 'House' and 'Air weapon'. The quality of the company would dictate how many of these are produced, and as mentioned in my previous point, how many times you can work in this company. This will mean that younger players with brand new companies can compete with someone like me, who has played the game for almost 10 years.
Sure, I can make more profit with my more expensive companies, but the products I produce are equal in quality; thus, whilst I may make more profit per/weapon, my products don't ensure that a newer player will never make a sale with their cheaper copmanies, as current weapons production does. As well as that, whilst I may be able to make more of a profit, I would never be able to sell them below cost - and the cost of working as a manager, and using employees, would be equal for both me and a new player. All they'd need is the same company as me, and they'd be able to match me on price - despite the fact my company is probably older than most players on the game, and their company is a week old.


4. Pollution (1)

I have two ideas about pollution, both of them probably open to abuse, both of them potentially 'controversial'. My first idea, is to change the name of pollution to 'industry confidence'. Instead of pollution reducing the amount a company produces, 'industry confidence' will increase it. It will work as 'EPIC' battles do in the current warfare; an indicator in a region page will show where a region is on the bear to bull scale, on a rolling 90 minute basis. Once a set amount of produce has been made in a certain industry, that industry is judged to be roaring, and further production will increase.
My reasoning for this is two-fold. Firstly and least importantly for the game, but most importantly for the economic module, it will make company owners just as important as soldiers. If they combine and coordinate, they can create strong industry confidence at the right time, in the right place, to ensure that their production is doubled.
Secondly, and most importantly for the game, but least importantly for the economic module, it will make regions vital again. Should a country dare to invade the economic powerhouse of a country, all of their companies of the defender will be there. They could lose thousands, potentially tens or hundreds of thousands of gold of production, and the majority of their tax income. The return of fortress regions will mean that war is strategic once more - perhaps a country will save all of their damage and energy bars for months, just to steal away the crown jewel of an empire's economy? Perhaps a country fears it's neighbours will invade, and pre-emptively strike? Perhaps, a country will stop fighting and majorly tanking to build up a stockpile of goods, and in the process lose their allies' support for being selfish? The possibilities such a state of affairs brings up are almost endless; but the key point here is that it will add an extra dimension to the game - one that we had in the past, but have long-since lost.

5. Pollution (2)
An alternative to the above, could be to amend the maximum affect that pollution can have on a company's production based on its quality. Essentially, the quality of the company squared will be the maximum amount of production that can be lost to pollution. Thus, the highest quality companies are penalised more for polluting (if you produce more, you pollute more, no?) whilst younger players with smaller companies are given a bit of a leg-up. My thinking here wasn't to make the game interesting, but basically make the game fairer. Companies right now essentially block new players from ever hoping to compete and make a profit in a reasonable amount of time. The fact that Training Grounds are the best investment for a new player is indicative of the state of companies - but with some changes, this need not be the case.
The changes I mentioned above (removing products quality) would do this, but combine this with a cap on pollution for companies based on their quality, and we once again can add an extra dimension to the game.Younger players could work without fear, whilst older players would have to consider the overall profitability of their production - Q7 companies could lose up to half of their production unless they cooperate and coordinate; but at the same time, younger players would never have to fear pollution: they could all work five times a day for the rest of their life and only lose 1% of their production each time. They need not coordinate, but then as new players, they shouldn't be expected to either!




6. Communes

Military Units used to exist outside of the game; they were brought in to make them more effective, and encourage activity. However, their system of supplies remains outside of the game mechanics, and players spend hours every week doing work that would be quick and easy if military units were used to their full potential. If a commune system was included in the game mechanics, then things would be so much easier.
Commanders should be able to nominate companies that become the property of the Military Unit. They can then specify that the Military Unit operates on a commune system, and all troops who join the Military Unit and become a full member will then automatically be employed by the Military Unit for minimum wage. Their production will then be openly accessible to all members when they fight, until the resources of the unit are depleted.
Soldiers and commanders can top up supplies if they wish to, and donate to the cause. Commanders can also use the funds in the Military Unit to buy further supplies to complement the communes inventory. Congress could also begin to donate to Military Units - but only Gold, Weapons or Food. Currently, Presidents still have the option to propose a law to buy things from the market (a legacy from when we could buy Hospitals and Defence Systems) - we can change this so that Presidents can buy Food, Weapons and Houses from the market, and store them in the National Vault. Congress can then vote to move items from the National Vault, or Gold from the National Accounts, to Military Units of their country, or Military Units of an allied company. This will not only see Military Unit Commanders given a lighter workload, but it will also allow competition between Military Units to be directly rewarded by a country. Good coordination, generous supplies, a welcoming environment and a strong community spirit should be rewarded - and because they are rewarded, Military Units will have to work even harder to create them. They spend less time donating weapons, and more time helping their players, growing their damage, and making sure that they're doing everything they can for their country, or their allies.


7. Working should give Prestige Points

Not everyone should be forced to fight. There are some pacifists in the game, but more than anything, it's cruel to force players who have tiny fractions of the strength of others to fight in the battlefield with no hope of ever achieving a medal - this is especially true for newer players, or players who focused on the economic module in the past, and never really paid attention to strength or military rank.
Being able to complete the Weekly Challenge, or at least gain rewards by working in companies will ensure that first and foremost, we give the economic module the same importance as the military one. Secondly, it will also serve to reward those who contribute economically to a country; the vast majority of most countries' tax is income tax; without company owners, this would be impossible to earn.
Without fevered competition between company owners, wages would never rise, Work tax and Income tax would offer meagre returns, and countries would become poor all over again - we should not exclude company owners from the Weekly Challenge, nor should we require them to potentially sacrifice some of their production to gain energy regeneration to enable them to work countless times during the week - we should reward them, encourage them, and ensure that their input to the game, and their respective countries, is treated as equally important as fighting on the battlefield.


8. Create an e-will for players who wish to leave, die, or are banned (other than for multis of course)

Sometimes, people move on in their life. They don't want to continue playing, they become alienated, or they simply lose interest or don't have the time to play anymore. For those who are banned for reasons other than multis, they would obviously have no idea that they would need to liquidate their assets and give them away. But for some players, quitting is something that they do in a spur of the moment thing; they just don't login again.
A player should be able to nominate another player, a military unit, or the government, as the recipient of his assets upon his 'passing'. If no player is nominated, it will be subject to different treatment. This will allow countries (and potentially, military units, parties and other players) to be much more generous with the help they give to new players. Even if these players don't nominate a benevolent player in their will, the help given to them won't go to waste completely.
Thus, more help that is useful to new players will be given, full in the knowledge that even if the player doesn't return these items, they won't be lost forever. As well as this, it will force players to face their mortality; if they are becoming less interested in the game, they'll need to liquidate their holdings and use it, make a will, or risk it all being given to the Government.
To enable this, two new taxes would be set; 'Inheritance Tax' and 'Intestate Tax' (Intestate is the legal term in the UK for a person who does not have a will). These taxes should be linked, with the Intestate Tax being limited to a maximum of five times the Inheritance Tax. Should a country set a low Inheritance Tax, then older less active players may decide to retire there to take advantage of it, and bring economic benefits. However, should a player die without leaving a will, the country could potentially lose out on even more! So again, this adds another dimension to the game for us to consider, and to bring an element of competition between countries, and of course, to reignite the political debate in countries all over the world!


9. Make country resources a commodity that can be bought or sold.

Countries around the world have managed to avert major economic wars for a long time, because of training wars, region swaps, rental deals. It is only in very rare cases, that resources are acquired through occupation. The region wars were designed to try and bring back the need for countries to compete in economic wars. At the beginning, this was successful. These days, few countries dare to fight for economic reasons; the costs are potentially huge.
However, if a country is able to buy a resource, and place it in their home regions, they can increase their economy without needing to worry about the costs of war. This may sound like a path to inactivity and farmville, but hear me out. If all of your resources are guaranteed in your home regions, you become a target. Your enemies have more of a reason to attack you in your own regions, instead of trying to take your colonies. Almost all countries will defend their home regions much more viciously than their colonies, however for those that currently don't, their mindset will change very quickly once they make their home regions valuable.
Ignoring this benefit, the second, and most important benefit, is that we make wars about war again. Conquests should be glorious, they should be difficult, but most importantly, they should be more regular. If a country is constantly worried about their colonies, they are much less likely to be daring. But, if they know that their home regions will always be filled with 100% weapons bonus, they'll be much more likely to be able to fund bigger wars; they'll be much more likely to defend themselves vigorously against attack; but most importantly, they'll have a much more of a stable foundation to be able to fund huge campaigns against their enemies.
However, the most direct line of logic is simple, yet unmentioned above; giving a country the opportunity to buy a resource, is going to be the biggest motivation for war. If you won't sell me your resources, then I'll invade you, and keep invading you, until you do! This could also lead to some of the longest running wars in the world finally coming to an end, if one side surrenders hugely valuable resources to their conqueror; it may be unlikely, but then it may yet happen too! Conversely, it could create new wars of attrition between some of the biggest players in the game. The biggest wars in the world come from these biggest players taking or defending resources. We should give them a reason to do so once again. The most fun I have ever had on this game, is the battle for Liaoning, many many moons ago. I cannot think of a single time outside of that when a country gave its whole treasury to their ally to help them. But a fortress region such as Liaoning, for a country as powerful and important as Serbia was at the time, was invaluable. Would any country today, do what I did that night? Would any country give 6 months of income to an ally, just to secure one battle? Under the current game mechanics, no, but under these new ones; possibly!

10. Allow managers to promote their workers

One of the nicest players I've ever met in this game worked consecutively for 6 years. That's logging in every day of his, for 6 years of his life. If in the real world, a person had not called in sick, not taken leave, and worked every day the office was open for 6 years, they would be given something. A cake? A watch? A new office? Probably all of the above!
Thus, in the game, we should be able to promote a set number of employees. To ensure that the higher quality companies have some additional benefits, and again become more important, I would suggest that 5% of a citizens total number of employees can be promoted. (IE, if in total, you can hire 100 people, then you can promote 5 workers, regardless of how many workers you actually hire.)
Promoted employees will be able to produce more items, but will command a higher salary. As well as this, promoted employees will receive benefits that their lesser qualified peers do not. They could claim extra bonuses for overtime, they could be entitled to holiday pay, and they could request additional perks such as free travel around the world. However, in exchange for all of these additional benefits, they would not be able to resign from their job, unless their salary is reduced from the level that was agreed when they were promoted. Essentially, they would get all of the benefits, so, they should be forced to show their loyalty to their company.
They will be able to gain these additional benefits, but at the risk of losing out should wages rise in the future. Managers will also need to be diplomatic, and careful with their choices; if a player isn't satisfied with their pay, they may refuse to work until they get another rise. Thus, a manager and an employee must be able to communicate effectively, and also ensure that they look out for each other. If your workers are unhappy, they can make a company lose money. But conversely, if a company does all they can to make sure their workers are paid fairly, then, the company should be rewarded for such behaviour.



No, you will not get those 20-30 minutes of your life back. Ever. Sorry, not sorry. Anyway, those are just some of the things that I would implement if I was Plato for a day. I will find time to put the remaining thoughts I have onto paper over the coming days, in relation to the two other modules of the game; Politics and Military. But until then, please feel free to comment or message me with any questions you may have! I will do my best to reply, but as I am currently the Minister of Defence, Country President, and also doing my best to get in touch with all new UK players as well as fight and gain medals, and of course help the UK's glorious allies, I cannot guarantee that I will have a huge amount of time to reply to any comments or questions straight away!
Lots of love,
~jw
PS: I went a whole article without saying peon! Are you proud of me, Mad Pauly?

PPS: Thanks to everyone for their comments, messages, votes, endorsements and reshouts. If you enjoyed this article, or found it interesting, or think that it's the biggest pile of tosh you've ever rea😛 please reshout it! There's already been over 100 votes in just 2 short hours, thanks again!

erepublik.com/en/article/2671071
If I was Plato just for one day: What I would change about the economic module.