Curious Observations | Funkadelia sold Lazarus to... Adytus?

[Cormactopia Prime]

<snip>

I appreciate your perspective, but you didn't actually answer my question: What would you have gameplayers do instead?

No one ever really answers that question when I pose it, and I think it's because there isn't a readily available answer. There wouldn't be much to gameplay without military conflict (coups and invasions). There would be no basis for interregional politics, and while you're correct that internal regional politics could continue, those too would be impacted by the lack of interregional politics. Many of our internal political divisions also come from differing positions on interregional politics, because there really isn't much to meaningfully debate about the internal governance of regions, and certainly nothing interesting enough to form the basis for a meaningful political game. At best, we would be debating minutiae. At worst, our regional governments would lie dormant for lack of anything worthwhile to do. I invite someone who has a meta-level opposition to conflict (coups and invasions) to tell me how I'm wrong here.

[United Provinces of Atlantica]

<snip>

I appreciate your perspective, but you didn't actually answer my question: What would you have gameplayers do instead?

No one ever really answers that question when I pose it, and I think it's because there isn't a readily available answer. There wouldn't be much to gameplay without military conflict (coups and invasions). There would be no basis for interregional politics, and while you're correct that internal regional politics could continue, those too would be impacted by the lack of interregional politics. Many of our internal political divisions also come from differing positions on interregional politics, because there really isn't much to meaningfully debate about the internal governance of regions, and certainly nothing interesting enough to form the basis for a meaningful political game. At best, we would be debating minutiae. At worst, our regional governments would lie dormant for lack of anything worthwhile to do. I invite someone who has a meta-level opposition to conflict (coups and invasions) to tell me how I'm wrong here.

My apologies that I hadn't properly articulated my position. To be clear, I would have political gameplayers who thrive in and enjoy conflict (as you evidently do) join explicitly political regions and whatnot, because any actions in those regions aren't deleteriously impacting those who aren't interested in political conflict, while I would have military gameplayers participate in operations in Warzones, against fascists, in regions created for the purpose of being centers of military conflict (which would be kind of like Warzones in the sense that they're created for military conflict, and would have a function similar to regions that are frequently tagged; but they would be a a separate category from those regions as they would be specifically created for the purpose of being raided/defended by raiders/defenders themselves), in regions whose natives have explicitly said that they are fine with being raided, etc.

I don't think that the end of true military conflict would necessarily lead to the end of other crucial GP concepts, such as ideology, interregional politics, or meaningful political arguments. Ideological stances in GP aren't necessarily dependent on military conflicts (Regionalism vs. Cosmopolitanism is the best example here, IMO), and neither are interregional politics or meaningful political arguments; interregional politics could still exist via cultural exchanges and whatnot, assistance in Delegate transitions, etc. Hell, it could even be possible for big regions to either create colonies and maintain a protectorate-esque relationship with them, or invite small regions to join them as protectorates; or for regions to join an Augustin Alliance-esque federation; or for XKI-style regional economies to develop, interregional trade to be simulated and regions to negotiate trade agreements. The possibilities are really quite endless. As for meaningful internal political arguments, I would say that such meaningful political arguments could take the form of debates between Regionalists and Cosmopolitans, debates over the political direction of a region (for example, a debate over empowering the Gameside, debates over whether or not certain institutions are necessary and whether or not they are elected or appointed, etc.), or debates between International Federalists and National Sovereignists in the GA; again, the possibilities are really quite endless. Gameplay can maintain activity without coups or invasions in a NationStates that would neither seriously harm military or political Gameplayers nor place average GCR citizens or natives in founderless regions under the threat of being couped or invaded, respectively.