The Economist ~ The right way or the best way?

Day 1,365, 10:57 • Published in United Kingdom United Kingdom • by Spite313



Dear friends,

Today I want to continue on the theme of cheating and corruption. This in many ways applies to all citizens of all countries.

Basically there are two attitudes towards how you should play this game- the right way and the best way. The right way is basically what we Brits would call the straight and narrow- being honest, being open, not cheating and fighting against people who do these things. The “best” way is not necessarily pro-cheating, but basically means you have no “morals” and will do whatever you can to improve your citizen or your country.

With this distinction it’s actually quite easy to sympathise with both points of view. Arguably it’s possible to be a selfish person and follow the “right” way, or to be selfless and community driven yet pursue the “best” way for the sake of others. The debate becomes even more murky when you consider that the punishment for various actions isn’t fixed- if you buy gold you are less likely to be banned. At most you’ll get strength and rank reduced, so effectively you have to pay erep more to maintain your status. If the game itself doesn’t follow the “right” way, with fixed rules and punishments, arguably the player shouldn’t feel bound to obey the rules either.

Let’s play devil’s advocate for a little while here. A very respected member of the eUK community recently sai😛

“game /gām/ Noun: A form of play or sport, esp. a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.

Violating the rules of the game ultimately devalues the game and renders it meaningless.
Imagine playing chess, except it's fine to just drop extra pieces on the board if you start losing. Suddenly, the actual game goes out the window and it's all determined by who has the biggest lorry-full of queens.”- Draaglom



Now this is an excellent explanation of how a game works. You both play on equal footing, and the person who has the most skill wins. However Draaglom has in a way shot himself in the foot here- because the nature of erep is that someone can turn up to the game with a “lorry full of queens” by using RL money to buy victory. In almost any situation- from war to politics- it is possible to “buy a win” (insofar as you CAN win in erep) with RL money. Thus it follows that either erep is an unfair game, or a game with legal “cheating”.

In an environment where cheating is endorsed in the form of buying gold to give yourself an advantage, it is arguable that stealing from erep to gain a similar advantage (whilst bad in the real life sense you’re taking money) is ingame no different in practice. Multi accounting to give yourself damage to win a war isn’t that much different to buying loads of gold and tanking. The only difference in practice is that the admins themselves will ban you for doing the former, and prevent you from being banned for doing the latter.



Faced with this reality, the player following the “right” path has two choices. Firstly to accept the reality above, and just claim that playing within the rules is the right thing to do, and that’s what distinguishes them from the others- no matter how bad the rules are. Alternatively they can re-establish exactly what the game is, what winning means, and therefore change the whole nature of the debate.

To an extent that is what I have done in my time in erep. Faced with rampant cheating, then gold buying, I looked at what it was to win.

Eight months ago, Poland was kicked from France by the forces of Phoenix. Now, many of the soldiers who fought for their freedom, fight for their oppression. The game is cyclical, and no victory is final. Even the absolute dominance of ONE in recent times is wearing out, as EDEN and Terra adapt and respond to the new way of playing. Using a combination of tactics, spirit and a willingness to sacrifice, EDEN members are freeing themselves and their allies.

Why do I bring this up? Simply because no “win” is final. When you win a game of football, and the whistle blows, the score is final. They may beat you at some future time, but this game will always be yours or theirs depending on the result. eRepublik is not like that- it is a game played continuously in the present. Who in Poland remembers or cares that they got beaten a year ago? Who in Canada remembers or cares they got beaten a few months ago? This game is continuously set in the NOW. NOW we are winning. NOW we are losing. It’s from this focus on the NOW that the urge to tank comes from. Tanks (especially infrequent tankers) hit huge damage in battles which will only affect the game NOW. In a day, week or month they will lose and it will be back to it was before. The long term benefits don’t ever match the short term costs.



Faced with that, what conclusions can we draw? Firstly that the map, your citizen and your achievements are not accurate measures of success. Whether you are President of a country that owns half the map, or a lowly citizen in a small country struggling through their first week, victory is measured by the happiness and enjoyment you manage to get by playing. From the triumphal victory of your first battle hero medal, to the conquest of a hated enemy on the battlefield, victory IS measured in the bonds we share with each other, with other players. Not in achieving, but in recognition of achievement.

This is where my argument comes in. When you go ahead and get that BH, it is an achievement because it was hard and you got it. When others recognise it, that is the reward. If someone else got the BH by cheating, you would feel it cheapens the victory you had. It doesn’t get the same recognition. That’s why when super-tanks get BHs people don’t crowd round patting them on the back, because people recognise that for them, it isn’t much of an achievement. Mutual recognition is what makes you keep playing, and it is what makes cheating not worth it.

When you buy votes, cheat, sell citizenships, make multi-rings or otherwise act unsportingly, you lose the positive recognition of your friends. You lose their respect. Your temporary victories are worthless if nobody likes you, nobody congratulates you, and nobody appreciates what you’ve done. Winning dishonestly is worse than losing, because at least losing you can go back to your mates and countrymen and they’ll pat you on the back and commiserate. JUST missing out on that battlehero is bitter, but it’s also coupled with the promise of future success.

In erep, it’s always better to take the “right” path, because despite all the problems with the game, what matters is the community.

Thanks for reading,

Iain


Obligatory kittens