Consultation on military & economic power rankings

[Aquinas]

Now that we are 7 days into the consultation, the time has come for us to release a second draft of the advisory document, which has now been renamed to the "Voluntary Economic & Military Role-Play Guide", to try to allay any confusion over whether or not it is compulsory.

In our latest draft, with the military rankings, both Beiteynu and Istalia have been moved from Average to Strong, whilst Dankuk and Rildanor have been moved from Strong to Average.

Please note that the guidance at the beginning of the document has been altered a bit from the original draft, so we urge members to look at that closely.

*

We have been giving special consideration to the issue of nuclear weapons, since we appreciate this has been an area of frustration for those players who have aspirations for the the game to move towards a more realistic military model with fewer nations role-playing themselves as nuclear powers. A reform we would like to propose is that once this process has been concluded, the wording of the nuclear weapons law should be amended. At present, the description of the law reads:

The policy with respect to nuclear weaponry.

We propose changing this to:

The policy with respect to nuclear weaponry. [You may wish to consult our voluntary military role-play guidelines: <LINK TO GUIDELINES>]

Also, one of the law options currently reads:

The nation reserves the right to develop, construct and store nuclear arms.

We propose changing this to:

The nation reserves the right to develop, construct and store nuclear arms. [Please bear in mind reserving the right does not necessarily mean the same as actually having! Players are encouraged (although not required) to take into consideration Particracy's voluntary military role-play guidelines. For more information, see <LINK TO GUIDELINES>]

The purpose of this proposed change is simply to make players more aware that there are non-compulsory guidelines in place which they have the option of taking into account if they wish to do so. We invite your feedback on this.

*

Thank you to everybody who has taken part in the consultation so far. We continue to ask for your feedback on our proposed advisory document, the latest draft of which can be inspected below:

Voluntary Economic & Military Role-Play Guide

This document is designed to provide guidance, on an advisory (ie. non-compulsory) basis, as to the conduct of military and economic role-play in Particracy. It is based around two rankings systems for the nations of Terra, one for economic power and the other for military power. In-game/in-character it is suggested these rankings be known as "the Terran Economic and Military Power Lists produced by the Zardic Institute of International Relations".

The primary criteria and purpose for the rankings system is as follows:

- To recognise, assist and encourage high quality role-play, most especially forum role-play.

- To reflect, so far as reasonably practicable, the consensus of informed opinion amongst players who are actively interested in and participating in role-play, most especially forum role-play.

A few further points to bear in mind:

1) In Particracy, technological progress does not move beyond what we have in the real-world of today, since we are not into futurism/science fiction. Military and economic role-play needs to take account of this. Space-based weapons, for example, are not considered permissible.

2) To prevent in-game developments from proceeding at a hyper-speed pace few can keep up with, Particracy role-play needs to take reasonable account of the fact that, for instance, an in-game year is only 2 real-life days and an in-game decade is only 20 real-life days. The expectation is that shifts in a nation's economic and military power take place slowly over a period of time. For example, it would be unreasonable to assert a nation has experienced an "economic miracle" over 20 years and then expect it to be raised from Weak to Very Strong. It will not be conventional for a nation to move up or down more than one rank at a time.

3) The rankings system tries to take a long-term view and places a premium on active forum role-play, which at times will mean not so much weight is attached to game mechanic variables, such as legislative changes, taxation levels and spending allocations. It is not that these are unimportant or not valued, but good quality forum role-play will tend to be given priority, most particularly when it comes to the Strong and Very Strong rankings. Do not be surprised, for example, if a nation is given a higher military ranking than another even though its military spending seems significantly less. It could be that that nation has been more active in terms of forum role-play, and in particular, has engaged in more military-related forum role-play which helps justify its military ranking.

4) Our advice is that only nations in the Very Strong military category should presume they can have nuclear weapons or aircraft carriers. Nations in the Strong category are urged to be cautious and to at least consider very carefully before assuming they have these things, and nations in the Average or Weak category are in general urged not to assume they have them. We appreciate this guidance may sound restrictive, or indeed unrealistic considering that in the real world even poor countries like North Korea can move towards acquiring nuclear weapons. The reason for this guidance is practical: overall, we believe Particracy role-play will be more realistic and more enjoyable if we avoid the situation we have had in the past where too many nations are role-playing themselves as nuclear powers - and indeed as military superpowers generally. Also, just because a nation has been recognised as a nuclear power in the past, do not presume either that it is entitled to that status permanently, or even that its de-nuclearisation would need to be specifically role-played. If a nation is not being actively role-played, it may find itself lowered a rank in the military pecking order - and players are encouraged to respect that in their role-play.

It is plausible that a nation with a powerful military may gift, loan or sell nuclear weapons or aircraft carriers to a nation with a lower military ranking. Players are urged not to enter into such arrangements lightly, but only when there is substantial, long-term and well-justified role-play involved. In these cases, our guideline is that whilst the receiving nation's military ranking remains lower than Strong, it should be presumed it no longer has the nuclear weapons or aircraft carriers after they have not been mentioned in forum role-play for over 3 real-life months.

5) We understand that many players come from the United States and Europe, and rather naturally prefer to role-play as though their nation is an advanced country. Such players may be unsettled to discover the nation they are playing in does not have a powerful economic and/or military ranking. Some of the advice we would offer to such players would include:

- The economic and military guidance is advisory, not compulsory. You are not required to comply with it, although many players will be appreciative if you do.

- You may want to consider your options in terms of moving to a nation with a stronger ranking.

- If you love role-play, especially forum role-play, you may want to role-play your nation's economic and/or military rise. If you do this in a realistic and convincing way which is respected by the player community, you stand a good chance of successfully petitioning for a rankings increase when an appropriate opportunity to do that arises.

- If you are happy in the nation you are in and do not want to move, but at the same time do not want to modify your role-play to reflect your nation's rankings, you are urged to at least make an effort to play the game sensitively in a way which does not run an undue risk of affronting other players. For example, if you engage in high-profile international role-play on the forum and appear to be making great claims for your nation's economic and military power which are wildly out of kilter with its rankings, then that could potentially be cause for concern amongst other players. On the other hand, if the role-play involving your nation's powerful economic and military position is confined mainly to your nation's bill debates, then that is probably less likely to cause concern.

6) Most of the ranked nations have a roughly equal population, of around 100 million, which means the category titles (eg. "Weak", "Very Strong", etc.) both describe the economic position of the average citizen in the nation, as well as the nation's overall economic power. The exceptions are the former colonial territories, as well as Keymon and Vorona. The former colonial territories have not all yet been assigned population sizes, but it would be a reasonable presumption that they are very poor countries whose citizens scrape by on a very poor standard of living. In the case of Keymon and Vorona, which are both smaller nations, descriptions have been added in brackets, to clarify whether their economic character matches the description for their power ranking.

7) At least for the time being, the Very Weak categories are exclusively reserved for the former colonial territories.


ECONOMIC POWER RANKINGS

VERY WEAK (27)

These are the non-player controlled, ex-colonial nations in the grey part of the map. For years, colonial overlords heavily exploited their economies and manipulated social divisions. The legacy of colonialism, and latterly neo-colonialism, lives on. These nations struggle to provide even the most basic healthcare or education to their people, and are desperate for international aid. They depend heavily on primary sector parts of the economy like agriculture and extraction. Much of the output from these sectors is exported cheaply abroad.

Bianjie
Cifutingan
Dalibor
Degalogesa
Hanzen

Istapali
Kimlien
Kurageri
Liore
Medina

Midway
New Alduria
New Englia
New Verham
North Dovani

Noumonde
Ntoto
Ostland
Rapa Pile
Statrica

Suyu Llaqta
Temania
Tropica
Utari Mosir
Utembo

Vanakalam
Xsampa


WEAK (20)

These nations are also typically centred around the agricultural or extraction sectors, although they do it more efficiently than nations in the previous category. Some manufacturing may also exist, although most of it would be internationally owned, with much of the profits siphoned off abroad. Resentment may be further fuelled by many of the higher-paid, higher-skilled jobs in the new industries going to foreign workers, due to a lack of skilled labour at home. The most basic education and healthcare needs are met, but citizens look longingly at the much more advanced systems in more developed nations. The family unit and the community are likely to be key to everyday life, with less of the social alienation that marks more developed nations. Pollution is largely a result of agricultural and extraction byproducts, and these are mainly water pollutants. These nations are very often net exporters, and are more successful at it than nations in the previous category - but they still feel they are being driven to an unfairly harsh bargain when it comes to getting prices for their products on the international market.

Baltusia
Cildania
Davostan
Dolgaria
Egelion

Gaduridos
Hobrazia
Jakania
Jelbania
Kalopia

Kanjor
Keymon (Smaller nation; AVERAGE in economic character)
Kundrati
Likatonia
Malivia

Mordusia
Talmoria
Tukarali
Valruzia
Vorona (Smaller nation; WEAK in economic character)


AVERAGE (20)

These nations have moved from a more basic economic model to becoming manufacturers - with the associated pollution issues - and may even be developing a more significant service sector. Compared to the richer parts of Terra, citizens in these nations have lower life expectancy, less education and less income, although with less automation, they can generally boast higher employment rates. Social alienation will be setting in with industrialisation and population movements towards the towns and cities, but citizens may still be more generally contented - and also politically involved - than in the more developed countries. Although citizens in these nations will be more prosperous than those in less developed nations, they may also find themselves feeling more insecure, since these economies can be vulnerable to sudden negative swings in the global economy.

Aldegar
Alduria
Aloria
Badara
Barmenia

Beiteynu
Beluzia
Darnussia
Deltaria
Dundorf

Endralon
Hulstria
Kirlawa
Lourenne
Pontesi

Rildanor
Saridan
Selucia
Solentia
Telamon


STRONG (13)

Services and high tech industries have come to the forefront of these economies, with manufacturing, extraction and agriculture subsiding into less significance. Not everyone will be a winner as a result of these changes, and there may be resentment against sectors of the economy losing out to cheaper foreign competition, and perhaps also at immigrants from poorer countries arriving to take jobs at cheaper rates. Technological development and economic change may lead to previously valued skills becoming moribund, creating challenges in terms of re-skilling and re-deploying the labour force. Inequality, social alienation, family breakdown, unemployment, stress, mental health and substance abuse risk becoming serious issues. The most obviously visible/intrusive forms of pollution might not be quite the problem they once were, due to the decline of "dirty industries" and the insistence of a more prosperous and better-educated citizenry on tougher pollution regulations. These countries tend to be very active on international markets, but do not always generate trade surpluses, as many products which were once manufactured at home will now likely be being imported from abroad. Although standards of living will be the envy of much of Terra, governments may be struggling to meet the expectations of their own citizens, especially in terms of healthcare and care provision, where an ageing population and an ever-increasing range of health treatment possibilities mean it is becoming expensive to keep up with demand. As the population becomes better educated, more prosperous and enjoys more leisure times, some citizens will be taking a more philosophical approach to understanding their role in society, meaning more challenging questions will be being asked about the ethics and the fairness of the economic system on which the nation's prosperity is built. Some will be asking why, despite their advantages, they feel unfulfilled and even guilty.

Cobura
Dankuk
Dorvik
Hawu Mumenhes
Istalia

Kafuristan
Kazulia
Lodamun
Luthori
New Endralon

Rutania
Sekowo
Zardugal


VERY STRONG (5)

These countries share the same features as those described in the category above, but to a heightened extent. They are at the cutting edge of technological progress and set the trends that others will follow. Changes within the economies of these nations can end up having a marked impact on Terra as a whole.

Hutori
Indrala
Kalistan
Trigunia
Vanuku


MILITARY POWER RANKINGS


VERY WEAK (27)

The former colonial territories face enough challenges keeping order within their own borders, and are hardly suited to projecting any military influence elsewhere.

Bianjie
Cifutingan
Dalibor
Degalogesa
Hanzen

Istapali
Kimlien
Kurageri
Liore
Medina

Midway
New Alduria
New Englia
New Verham
North Dovani

Noumonde
Ntoto
Ostland
Rapa Pile
Statrica

Suyu Llaqta
Temania
Tropica
Utari Mosir
Utembo

Vanakalam
Xsampa


WEAK (20)

Weak nations have a limited ability to defend themselves and tend to try to bolster their security through alliances with, other, usually more powerful, states. Their defence forces are likely limited, outdated, poorly trained and poorly equipped. It is unlikely they will project much military influence abroad.

Beluzia
Davostan
Dolgaria
Egelion
Endralon

Gaduridos
Hobrazia
Jakania
Jelbania
Kanjor

Keymon
Likatonia
Lourenne
Malivia
Mordusia

Talmoria
Telamon
Tukarali
Valruzia
Vorona


AVERAGE (20)

These nations are more than able to stand on their own and have the ability to defend themselves against other nations and their influences. To a limited degree, they can also project military influence on their neighbours, although usually this will be done in alliance with others, rather than on their own.

Aldegar
Aloria
Alduria
Badara
Baltusia

Barmenia
Cildania
Dankuk
Deltaria
Darnussia

Kalopia
Kirlawa
Kundrati
Pontesi
Rildanor

Rutania
Saridan
Selucia
Solentia
Sekowo


STRONG (13)

These are powerful nations that generally stand tall amongst their immediate neighbours. While they have the capability to project globally, this is limited and their power is usually primarily focused within their own region. Most nations in this category will not have acquired nuclear power status or be in possession of aircraft carriers.

Beiteynu
Cobura
Dundorf
Hawu Mumenhes
Hulstria

Istalia
Kafuristan
Kalistan
Kazulia
Lodamun

Luthori
New Endralon
Zardugal


VERY STRONG (5)

These nations have a great deal of influence, with the ability to project their military power globally in a way reminiscent of the great European empires before World War I. They have the capacity to be nuclear powers or possess aircraft carriers if they choose. Domestic opinion may be a factor in pressuring and constraining the decision-making process in terms of military matters. For example, the public may question the wisdom of spending vast sums of taxpayer money on a powerful military, or of putting the lives of the nation's soldiers at risk in distant conflicts.

Dorvik
Hutori
Indrala
Trigunia
Vanuku

[MarkWill]

I would like to lay out my argument as to why Rildanor should become a strong economy replacing Cobura.

First, domestic and international political RP. Rildanor has had a multiparty system since December 4099. In the past few in-game decades (to at least the early 4100s), we have had a minimum of 6 parties actively proposing, debating, and voting on legislation. In conjunction with this domestic RP, there has been active forum RP in Rildanor's newspaper since last week.

Cobura, on the other hand, has been a single party state since December 3926, with the exceptions of the buon1996 Party (December 4031), the National Patriots League (February 4106), the Black Party (December 4115), and La Populara Elekto (May 4129), all of which contended in only one election before going inactive. Furthermore, the last time Cobura even voted on a law (not a treaty) was in January 4129. In addition, the last time there was a post in Cobura's newspaper was 2 months ago.

Second, corporate RP. Groupe RSA and Delamare S.A. are Rildanorian companies who are active in the business world. The Organisation Internationale des Fabricants d'Automobiles (OIFA) is an organization also based in Rildanor.

Cobura has no such corporate RP to point to.

I understand sustained RP is necessary in order for it to have any significance in these rankings, but I am wholly committed to establishing Rildanor as a strong economy in Terra. At the very least, these are indicators of a trend rather than an anomaly.

[jamescfm]

First, domestic and international political RP. Rildanor has had a multiparty system since December 4099. In the past few in-game decades (to at least the early 4100s), we have had a minimum of 6 parties actively proposing, debating, and voting on legislation. In conjunction with this domestic RP, there has been active forum RP in Rildanor's newspaper since last week.

Cobura, on the other hand, has been a single party state since December 3926, with the exceptions of the buon1996 Party (December 4031), the National Patriots League (February 4106), the Black Party (December 4115), and La Populara Elekto (May 4129), all of which contended in only one election before going inactive. Furthermore, the last time Cobura even voted on a law (not a treaty) was in January 4129.

Can you explain why this is an argument for and not against Rildanor? A multi-party system means it can be difficult to predict who will win an election and, consequently, will generate uncertainty. In a situation where there has been no change to the law in years and one party dominates elections, investors can be reasonably certain of the economic conditions going forward. Presumably, the rankings would not punish multi-party systems, of course, but I fail to see how the existence of one demonstrates a strong economy.

It is also worth noting that two of the five 'Very Strong' economic powers are single-party systems at present.

[MarkWill]

Can you explain why this is an argument for and not against Rildanor? A multi-party system means it can be difficult to predict who will win an election and, consequently, will generate uncertainty. In a situation where there has been no change to the law in years and one party dominates elections, investors can be reasonably certain of the economic conditions going forward. Presumably, the rankings would not punish multi-party systems, of course, but I fail to see how the existence of one demonstrates a strong economy.

It is also worth noting that two of the five 'Very Strong' economic powers are single-party systems at present.

Rildanor's multi-party system exists in tandem with a stable political climate. Formulating budgets and passing laws are essential functions of a government. Perhaps the point I was trying to make was not solely the one-party status of Cobura, but rather the complete lack of government presence in most matters where one would expect it. Business relies as much on a stable and responsive government as people do, which was the point I was trying to make.

I would like to underline the importance of a stable nation. Unpredictability is a major turn-off for business investment since all investment is dependent on future returns. For example, you would expect to see a decline in investment in a nation undergoing radicalism, civil strife, and political assassinations.

I'd also like to point to the rest of my first point and my second point, which is as important, if not more important, than my first. Forum RP through newspapers and corporations provide tangible support for the assumptions made of a nation's economy. Rildanor's 4-page long newspaper is deplorable, yes, but the key is whether there is sustained and active RP, and Cobura has simply not done their due diligence.

[jamescfm]

Rildanor's multi-party system exists in tandem with a stable political climate. Formulating budgets and passing laws are essential functions of a government. Perhaps the point I was trying to make was not solely the one-party status of Cobura, but rather the complete lack of government presence in most matters where one would expect it. Business relies as much on a stable and responsive government as people do, which was the point I was trying to make.

How exactly, within the mechanics of the game, is a single player supposed to demonstrate they are responding to the economic situation- without RPing an economic crisis or something like that?

I'd also like to point to the rest of my first point and my second point, which is as important, if not more important, than my first. Forum RP through newspapers and corporations provide tangible support for the assumptions made of a nation's economy. Rildanor's 4-page long newspaper is deplorable, yes, but the key is whether there is sustained and active RP, and Cobura has simply not done their due diligence.

I wasn't trying to dispute your claim, I just wanted a bit more information about your rationale. You must understand, though, that it is a lot easier for players in a multi-party system to post articles because they have more to comment on, respond to etc.

[MarkWill]

How exactly, within the mechanics of the game, is a single player supposed to demonstrate they are responding to the economic situation- without RPing an economic crisis or something like that?

A nation's economic strength is not solely dependent on economic crises. Social and political events factor in as well. It is simply my belief that a nation--even with only a single player--that actively proposes laws is a much better alternative than a nation where absolutely nothing is done. In this regard, Cobura is more like a nation without any players, and it's hard to justify how such a nation could demonstrate greater economic viability than a nation with an active political scene and frequent RP in both the game and on the forums.

I wasn't trying to dispute your claim, I just wanted a bit more information about your rationale. You must understand, though, that it is a lot easier for players in a multi-party system to post articles because they have more to comment on, respond to etc.

Yes, I do believe its easier for multi-party systems to demonstrate more RP, but as of late, I have been the sole player from Rildanor who has been active on the forums. So it is certainly possible even for single-player nations to RP at least occasionally in order to have something to show for their place in the rankings.

[jamescfm]

A nation's economic strength is not solely dependent on economic crises. Social and political events factor in as well. It is simply my belief that a nation--even with only a single player--that actively proposes laws is a much better alternative than a nation where absolutely nothing is done. In this regard, Cobura is more like a nation without any players, and it's hard to justify how such a nation could demonstrate greater economic viability than a nation with an active political scene and frequent RP in both the game and on the forums.

What laws should they propose? That's what I am asking because if you are the only party in a nation for a prolonged period then there is no opposition to contradict your laws, once you have them in place there is no reason to change them, except perhaps international influence (like the situation in Saridan).

[MarkWill]

What laws should they propose? That's what I am asking because if you are the only party in a nation for a prolonged period then there is no opposition to contradict your laws, once you have them in place there is no reason to change them, except perhaps international influence (like the situation in Saridan).

Even if a nation has been able to reach such a point and figure there is nothing left for them to do, they could always RP in-game without passing any actual laws or they could RP on the forums. In fact, I find this to be an argument against Cobura remaining a strong economy simply because Cobura is not developing context for their ranking. I think it was perfectly acceptable for Rildanor to descend to an average military nation down from a strong military nation due to our complete lack of military RP. The same standard should apply for Cobura and its complete dearth of economic RP.

[jamescfm]

Even if a nation has been able to reach such a point and figure there is nothing left for them to do, they could always RP in-game without passing any actual laws or they could RP on the forums. In fact, I find this to be an argument against Cobura remaining a strong economy simply because Cobura is not developing context for their ranking. I think it was perfectly acceptable for Rildanor to descend to an average military nation down from a strong military nation due to our complete lack of military RP. The same standard should apply for Cobura and its complete dearth of economic RP.

Do you not consider it rather harsh to replace a nation as a result of RP which has been conducted exclusively since the consultation was opened?

[MarkWill]

Do you not consider it rather harsh to replace a nation as a result of RP which has been conducted exclusively since the consultation was opened?

No, but I understand your point.

I will refer to my initial statement:

I understand sustained RP is necessary in order for it to have any significance in these rankings, but I am wholly committed to establishing Rildanor as a strong economy in Terra. At the very least, these are indicators of a trend rather than an anomaly.

I do find it absurd that a ghost nation hasn't passed a law in (IG) years and has no RP to justify its economic ranking in the last 2 months both in-game and on the forums; however, I want to make it clear I'm not on some crusade to topple Cobura. I'd simply like the rankings to be more fluid and to reflect the RP of those who put in the time. I am willing to wait longer if you somehow believe Cobura merits this ranking, but I honestly don't see what evidence exists for Cobura to remain a "strong" economic nation.