Amateurs are people too

There was a country controlled by a handful of amateurs: an architect, an artist, a philosopher, a wine merchant, and a pilot with a couple of warriors. But all of a sudden, under a certain set of circumstances, this “historical misunderstanding” has done so much business that the whole world had to sip “amateur soup”. This event showed us that to neglect the talents that are able to organize completely strangers against someone else is simply dangerous to health. Fortunately, today we have learned (after all, have we learned, right?) To recognize such cases in their very bud, and now we avoid “sharp corners”. 

But with the development of social networks, we again got the opportunity to satisfy our “what if” curiosity of the interaction of a large number of people in ways that are safe for their health. Without realizing it, a handful of moderately crooked programmers from Bucharest created a breeding ground for this. Several times I already wrote superficial reviews of the original game project eRepublik, today, if you don’t mind, after two years of participation, I would like to present a more thorough analysis of the interaction of several hundred thousand people from different cultural backgrounds, people from all over the world with different faiths, nationality, skin color, age and worldview. I hope you will be interested. 

It may look naive on my part, but I would like to immediately warn you - this is not an advertising article. I will describe all the advantages and disadvantages of a particular project to the extent of my “subjective objectivity” as a direct participant for more than two years now.

In order not to inadvertently tease anyone, but also satisfy the curiosity of those who wish, I will not indicate any links until the end of the article . 

The brilliantly simple decision of the creators was the allocation of four key elements necessary for creating artificial communities of the "state" type. Market (resources, money, enterprises, labor, goods, licenses, import, export, taxes, foreign exchange market), war (attack, battle, occupation, surrender of territories, uprisings, weapons, mutual assistance pacts and peace treaties), hierarchy (elections , president, parliament, party) and communication / socialization (citizenship, press, social network). All other elements the anthill created itself. He organized wholesale trading floors not provided for by mechanics, the army with its entire complex structure (the evolution of this organization deserves a separate article), entire international military-political and trade-economic blocs, ministries of defense, foreign affairs, propaganda, state treasuries, 

The main feature and indisputable advantage of this conditional society is that everything in it happens very quickly. In one “real” month, there are as many events as there would be four years in real life. Consequently, one conditional game year there is equal to approximately one week. Shortly all. Monthly leaders, deputies, party leaders, and alliances are elected. Much is riveted to the cycle of one month. For a month, under certain circumstances (a sharp influx of participants), the micro-community of modest Poland turned into one of the superpowers. In a month, three leaders could change in Russia (they were successively reset by new old coups d'etat, which changed faster than delegations from the union states managed to congratulate them). 

As you probably guessed, eMir is a map of the real world with the presence on it of all key states except the central / southern part of the African continent, a number of countries in Asia and Oceania, not counting Albania and a number of micro-states of Europe. All virtual states are divided into regions, each of which borders the neighboring countries by sea or land and has at its disposal one (of about a dozen types of two main groups) resources that provide a certain bonus (to the citizens of a country with a region possessing) in mining / production of some then products. Volumes of production everywhere with demand, taxation and the level of salaries form the price in the domestic market and competitiveness in the external one. Goods can be sold at retail for local currency in this same market (rubles, US dollars, pounds other) or be sold in bulk to a person or organization, bypassing taxation for the same currency or gold (which in turn is regarded as world currency). It is not difficult to guess that the creators prudently implemented the equivalent of the Bretton Woods system, afraid to entrust the “hamsters” with a floating rate. Nevertheless, the so-called “monetary market” is a rather lively and popular place among speculators. 

War, therefore, would have to start on the basis of the desire to maximize the benefits of a single state by occupying resource-rich territories. But, as in real life, electronic civilization is not distinguished by a special rationality of behavior, and often acts more based on emotions, prejudices and other “little joys” than on common sense approaches. The main reason for most conflicts has invariably been purely subjective. 



All states are divided into blocks. A few months ago, there were two such alliances called Phoenix GC (PHX) and EDEN. The course and politics of these were determined by the “world locomotives” - Hungary, Serbia and Brazil in the first, Romania, Poland, USA, respectively, in the second. But quarrels, unmet ambitions, a number of external factors (a sharp upsurge in the “birth rate” in Turkey, Bulgaria, Macedonia), the strengthening of China’s position in Asia, the gradual weakening of Indonesia and a number of other former “local giants” led to the disbandment of the first block, and, in fact, depriving the second of all the strongest participants. About a month there has been a calm. The old wars subsided and continued purely by inertia; no one was in a hurry to renew the existing mutual assistance pacts. Quite suddenly for me (and then I helped the guys from the Russian Foreign Ministry, which was in Phoenix GC) it was announced the creation of a fundamentally new VPB, which conditionally for the first time called NWO (New World Order). The fact is that, as it turned out, all this peacetime, the five strongest world states discussed the creation of a new force, which, with a small number of participants and good coordination, could allow itself to quietly cut the rest of the world. According to the results, it included the same Serbia, Poland, Hungary, Indonesia and Iran. After some time, Macedonia joined them. Later, unable to resist the temptation to be among the “bending ones”, Sweden left the EDEN and also joined the NWO. All this time, Russia, which has traditionally had warm relations with Serbia, was convinced that it would soon also join them (by that time the Russians were still neutral). which conditionally for the first time was called NWO (New World Order). The fact is that, as it turned out, all this peacetime, the five strongest world states discussed the creation of a new force, which, with a small number of participants and good coordination, could allow itself to quietly cut the rest of the world. According to the results, it included the same Serbia, Poland, Hungary, Indonesia and Iran. After some time, Macedonia joined them. Later, unable to resist the temptation to be among the “bending ones”, Sweden left the EDEN and also joined the NWO. All this time, Russia, which has traditionally had warm relations with Serbia, was convinced that it would soon also join them (by that time the Russians were still neutral). which conditionally for the first time was called NWO (New World Order). The fact is that, as it turned out, all this peacetime, the five strongest world states discussed the creation of a new force, which, with a small number of participants and good coordination, could allow itself to quietly cut the rest of the world. According to the results, it included the same Serbia, Poland, Hungary, Indonesia and Iran. After some time, Macedonia joined them. Later, unable to resist the temptation to be among the “bending ones”, Sweden left the EDEN and also joined the NWO. All this time, Russia, which has traditionally had warm relations with Serbia, was convinced that it would soon also join them (by that time the Russians were still neutral). all this peace time, the five strongest world states discussed the creation of a new force, which, with a small number of participants and good coordination, could afford to quietly cut the rest of the world. According to the results, it included the same Serbia, Poland, Hungary, Indonesia and Iran. After some time, Macedonia joined them. Later, unable to resist the temptation to be among the “bending ones”, Sweden left the EDEN and also joined the NWO. All this time, Russia, which has traditionally had warm relations with Serbia, was convinced that it would soon also join them (by that time the Russians were still neutral). all this peace time, the five strongest world states discussed the creation of a new force, which, with a small number of participants and good coordination, could afford to quietly cut the rest of the world. According to the results, it included the same Serbia, Poland, Hungary, Indonesia and Iran. After some time, Macedonia joined them. Later, unable to resist the temptation to be among the “bending ones”, Sweden left the EDEN and also joined the NWO. All this time, Russia, which has traditionally had warm relations with Serbia, was convinced that it would soon also join them (by that time the Russians were still neutral). Hungary, Indonesia and Iran. After some time, Macedonia joined them. Later, unable to resist the temptation to be among the “bending ones”, Sweden left the EDEN and also joined the NWO. All this time, Russia, which has traditionally had warm relations with Serbia, was convinced that it would soon also join them (by that time the Russians were still neutral). Hungary, Indonesia and Iran. After some time, Macedonia joined them. Later, unable to resist the temptation to be among the “bending ones”, Sweden left the EDEN and also joined the NWO. All this time, Russia, which has traditionally had warm relations with Serbia, was convinced that it would soon also join them (by that time the Russians were still neutral).

And then funny patterns surfaced. This, of course, is purely my assumptions, but I believe that the Serbs (being quite a nation without ambitious and squeezed in the "grip of the Balkan worldview") could not bear the burden of opportunities that suddenly fell on them in this project.Burning for the first time in senseless conflicts with Croatia, and having joined the bloc of the strongest states, they, without the slightest doubt, at the very first ultimatum of Poland agreed to completely cease all contacts with Russia. And what is more surprising for me - in a fairly short time, they found many reasons to justify themselves, and to form the image of “impudent and incorrigible” Russia among their fellow citizens. It’s not that the latter had any shortcomings at all, but they paid attention to them only at that moment. As a result, the decisive, final nail in the coffin of the former "fraternal" relations was the rapprochement between Russia and the United States, which finally untied the hands of the Serbian government. As a result, Russia became a member of the new block, which, according to the results, included the USA, Russia itself, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, France, Portugal, Japan and Germany. 

As expected, a fundamentally new situation arose. This is a very instructive fact, which is unlikely to be realized in life - the creation of a multi-vector, non-bipolar world. The states that left the enemy blocs for ideological reasons could not afford to go over to the opponent (at least, this applies to most of them). As a result, this became the reason that next to NWO and EDEN there was a contradictory TERRA. But time has put everything in its place. Alternately destroyed by twice the enemy forces - EDEN and TERRA were soon forced to cooperate. This meant that everything again came down to bipolarity. I dare to suggest that with some degree of probability this applies to our realities. As a result, fragmentation caused a number of lesions, since the old accounts of some states of each side did not allow a complete merger into a single whole. Another problem was defeatism and attempts to maintain friendly relations with isolated representatives of the enemy bloc. One way or another, it could not end with anything good for us.  

It turned out to be extremely important for me that, contrary to popular beliefs and convincing arguments, in every possible way dispelling myths about specific features characteristic of a nation and people, I finally became convinced that we are all completely different. Let me be called a xenophobe, racist or something else - it will be very difficult to convince me of this. Although I would immediately like to emphasize that the features very often did not coincide with general stereotypes, and sometimes even contradicted them. So, for example, it was a great discovery for me that the best and most reliable allies, who incredibly quickly find a common language, are precisely those who are considered enemies in our realities. If we talk about specific features and phenomena, it is enough to take into account the aforementioned alliance of the United States and Russia, which ended for the last entry into the originally Pan-American bloc. Probably, the reason for this was the lack of any complexes of a "small country" among the parties that were not obliged to prove to themselves something, or to assert themselves through splashing aggression. I was not at all ready to see the calls of US citizens to rush to help defending Moscow. What is even more interesting is that such initiatives came equally from the "top" and from the "proletariat". 

Of course, in everyday life, in the era of individualists, collective interests are generally inferior to personal interests. No less curious has this eternal dilemma unfolded in this project, where each state has developed a certain reputation over time. I do not presume to draw parallels with reality, but the most unreliable and unstable were the citizens of Italy (that still a surprise), Britain and (which is much more unusual) Japan. The latter in a short time managed to be in one alliance - to allow enemy American troops to land in Asia, and then (already in alliance with the Americans, who were fighting a desperate battle with the invaders on their territory) - they already allowed the state from NWO to enter Asia. This could be attributed to the old enmity between China and Japan, or just the game "ololo", but with the closest contact I personally made sure 

The relations between Ukraine and Russia can also be called interesting. Traditionally having complex, cool feelings for their neighbors, these governments were in a permanent secret struggle, which at one time ended with the temporary occupation of Ukraine. Russia, being a country of wayward, not devoid of a bit of arrogance and imperial ambitions, tried to impose “brotherly love” either with a carrot, with a whip, or with the support of a pro-Russian wing in the Ukrainian parliament. But time passed, and in the end all right-wing nationalist parties gained all power in Ukraine. The most interesting thing is that at the very moment when Russia reconciled with the existence of the enemy on its western border, relations began to “warm”. Soon, a factor such as the Turkish threat contributed to this. It is relations built on equality and recognition of the right to independence, Awareness of the uselessness and senselessness of imposing friendly relations has led to the fact that today Ukraine, ruled by nationalists, is an ally and friend of Russia. Perhaps this experience is also applicable in real life?

Another conclusion, which I really appreciate, and which I managed to make for myself during this time, is to accept as a fait accompli that both sides in any confrontation, conflict and dispute, both decisions are by definition qualitatively equal and correct from the very beginning. Numerous dilemmas in the spirit of choosing a foreign policy, determining the format of relations between parliament and the president, discussing the appropriateness of transferring the country to the “rails of authoritarianism” or whatever it is — in all these dilemmas, the effectiveness, effectiveness of the final decision depends mainly not directly on the choice, but precisely on the quality of its implementation.There is evidence for this in the form of completely different states of government built in this project, models of the army hierarchy, financing of the army itself and approaches to budgeting. I want to emphasize that we are talking about approaches, rather than specific numbers (for example, this principle is unlikely to work during a discussion of taxation, or other issues, where, ceteris paribus and the availability of enough information, you can choose the only, optimal solution). So, discussing whether it makes sense to send help to a deliberately doomed regime in some distant banana republic, the choice of the strategy itself (help or ignoring the request for support) is not so important, but how consistently and accurately it is brought into action . One can equally successfully sit in silence or cover the heroic emotional impulse in the media, as well as be accused of inaction or self-interest. Obviously, this applies mainly to those situations where the outcome and consequences depend either only on us, or to a greater extent on us and our decisions. I completely do not exclude the possibility that I could be mistaken in this, but every day I am more and more convinced of the senselessness of the search for absolute truth, and if possible I am holding on to an averaged compromise middle ground. Largely due to the many artificial situations that are constantly formulated in this project and pose such dilemmas more often than in practice, thereby being a kind of safe simulator. where the outcome and consequences depend either only on us, or to a greater extent on us and our decisions. I completely do not exclude the possibility that I could be mistaken in this, but every day I am more and more convinced of the senselessness of the search for absolute truth, and if possible I am holding on to an averaged compromise middle ground. Largely due to the many artificial situations that are constantly formulated in this project and pose such dilemmas more often than in practice, thereby being a kind of safe simulator. where the outcome and consequences depend either only on us, or to a greater extent on us and our decisions. I completely do not exclude the possibility that I could be mistaken in this, but every day I am more and more convinced of the senselessness of the search for absolute truth, and if possible I am holding on to an averaged compromise middle ground. Largely due to the many artificial situations that are constantly formulated in this project and pose such dilemmas more often than in practice, thereby being a kind of safe simulator. 

Without a doubt, the most complete way you can penetrate the details not in the game itself, which quickly bored the average person with monotony and monotony, but in the directly social structures artificially created by the players. These are all communities formed in ministries, armies, and other organizations that are often present at the accompanying Skype / IRC conferences, individual forums, and googlodoks. With proper sociability and basic knowledge of the English language, absolutely any participant in a short time occupied any place in any international structure, guided by the purely presence of free time and desire. That's exactly what I did recently, joining the American community. As a result, after several months, I not only improved my knowledge of English, but also without leaving home I learned many interesting features that distinguish our communities. 

Speaking of the peculiarities inherent in countries such as Russia, Ukraine and Belarus - first of all, I would single out the sudden, but all-consuming Russian irreversibility spleen, which is accompanied by such phenomena as “tractorism” (yes, even in the virtual space) and “swamps” (stagnation, boredom and despondency, which end with the outflow of the population), the Ukrainian tendency to eternally search for internal enemies and the Belarusian, always stalemate, shaky position on the conventional political map. And if once Russia was "from Vladivostok and back to Vladivostok across the globe", then, one way or another, now all three states are occupied by Serbia, Turkey, the Baltic states and Poles. "What kind of hints ~"

If we talk about the negative aspects - first of all, we have to remember that, as a game, the e-Republic is absolutely dull. A careless administration with a number of constant “innovations” with “fitts that are in no way bugs” doomed to extinction the consumer category that most often prefers WWII and all kinds of “Rulers”.

The thin layer of players who, despite this, invest money in the project and form a cast of “mastercards” also does not inspire optimism for beginners (although, in fairness, I want to note that the prices for these “bonuses” are incredibly high, as a result of which these players compensate one of the other on different sides of the barricades. I believe that the e-Republic is, first of all, a social project that allows you to teach yourself how to communicate with an international audience, improve your language and just chat “in your free time” with interesting people from others Despite the desperate attempts of some players to “pump in” the numbers symbolizing the parameters of his character - the main and most important “skill” cannot be interpreted in physical units and it is impossible to untwist it for an additional fee. :)

I’ll probably end here, as I can speak for a long time on this subject. In case you weren’t scared by my walls of the text, and I have not yet wondered your interest, you can register either by my referral link (I do not insist, but I will be grateful), or through the standard traditional form . So to speak, to join the formation of the only power worthy of world domination. 

To my shame, I have to admit that I am interested in Symbian (the only area in which I considered myself a “guru”, or at least a “gurik”), I stopped simultaneously with the rolling of hell into the abyss, and I'm a little ashamed of the fact that I can no longer so often and zealously report to the IT community in this area. And my experience and accumulated knowledge in Symbian 6/7/8/9 are already just outdated. Not that I was no longer interested in anything, but I also would not really like to shine with frankly amateurish ideas in something. The only thing I can please you with is my observations, which I have cited for the last two years in the aforementioned project and are trying to add, in some way, to systematize. So if anyone is interested, I can continue to publish them. 

I would be pleased to share with you how an unorganized group of strangers models such complex structures as the army (to protect itself from "competitors") or the diplomatic corps of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (to establish networks of contacts with other "nests"). I could describe many funny situations that in real life (unfortunately / fortunately) are almost impossible to simulate. Therefore, I ask you to express your ideas and wishes in the comments. 

Thank you for your attention. I hope you were at least a little interested.