Normative rules of Cybernations-Why they have become your cage
Entry posted by Icewolf
876 views
Cybernations is a world with many complex dynamics. One of the more interesting things is how players engage in self regulation-they have established a system of rules as to how alliances may conduct themselves. A common standard has been established, which can be referred to as the norms of the world.
Effectively, we reach the point were even if you have no knowledge of the rulers of an alliance, you can assume that they will act in a certain way because they are playing by the same guidelines as you-you need a reason to declare war, treaties will favor defense over offence, alliances have the right to expect to be free from aggression etc etc. More interestingly increasingly these develop to such things as, alliances outside the core political reasons for a war get white peace, alliances will chain into wars because their friends are in them not because they are involved in the reasons, war slots of rogues belong to the defender etc etc.
Some of these make sense. Aggression is considered bad and normally punished. It is considered bad form to attack small alliances, even if you have the military capacity to do so. The community tends to impose limits on behavior. The simple reason for this is that no one wants to live in a world were bad things are done to them, so they make sure that nothing too bad happens to other people.
It is for this reason that reperations are not enforced anymore. People know that the merry go round of politics is such that there may come a time when they are losing a war. In fact it is a very high likely-hood that that time will come. So if you have the norm of reperations, you will have to pay them.
This is quite different to the past when New Pacific Order were at their Zenith. They did not play with the assumption that they would lose. So reperations were a good thing as far as they were concerned a world with reperations as the norm weakened their opponents, increased fear of them, and generally supported their role.
I am sure that to many of you the above is not controversial. Cats hunt mice, mice eat cheese, non-core alliances get white peace after a respectable period of time.
Why am I bringing this up then? Well effectively it has created a world of caged sheep. People have decided to follow a strict set of actions because its the "norm" and do not consider if this is actually to their advantage or not.
I am sure we are all familiar with the modern pattern of war. Wait for the chain to reach you, hope that you are on the winning side, fight just long enough to feel you have done your bit, if you are losing either by turtling like a little !@#$%*, or waiting until you are knocked down far enough to win everything, sue for peace, and claim that as you did not technically "surrender" your military was exonerated. No point in fighting too hard as that just weakens you for next time where for sure you will get to go after your true objectives (read you hope that random luck brings your opponent to a place in the chain were you can hit them).
Why do this? Well its fairly simple. The World turns. One day it may turn on you. One day you may find it advantageous to be in a situations were it is expected that after the "reasonable time" has elapsed you can walk away, and you find it advantageous that people will chain into whatever stupid thing you did this time, when your attempt at being "smart" at politics ended with a firecracker rammed were the sun shineth not. Because then those that chained in for friendship reasons, with whom the enemy does not really want to fight, can be used as chips to lighten your peace negotiations.
The problem with this? Well firstly it guarantees irrelevance. Whilst you and your alliance obey the normative rules they will never really lose, but you can be damn sure they will never win either. If you follow them you are predictable, and if you are predictable you are controllable. Much as dislike them, how much would Doombird be cared about if they obeyed the norms of cybernations? How powerful would NPO have been back in the day had they followed the rules they said applied to others? How many powerhouses existed by following the same basic rules?
So either stick to an OWF praise for chaining in for a friend of a friend and fighting just enough to reach a "respectable" white peace or actually go out and carve a destiny. Your choice.
16 Comments
Recommended Comments