This creates an obvious imbalance. You need dozens of people online to end a major occupation - and this liberation can be obstructed with dozens of players that don't need to be online.
I've proposed ideas for how the WA Security Council could address piling before but I think I may have one now that has more advantages than past proposals and is easier to explain to new players.
Introducing...
An "Embargo" resolution can be thought of as the opposite of "Liberations." Liberations open regions up, embargoes lock them down.
1. Embargo powers are only applicable to Founderless UCRs. Like with Liberations, they're purely 'symbolic' for GCRs / Founder UCRs.
2. Any nation that had entered the region after the resolution's submission time is instantly relocated to TRR upon the passage of an embargo.
3. Any nation that enters an embargoed region is relocated after a short delay of time (10 seconds, let's say). You click "move," you move into the region, and shortly thereafter you're relocated to TRR and your page refreshes to a nasty little message:
ADDENDUM: After some discussion in this thread, other (I.E., better) possibilities for enforcement were raised. WA-specific enforcement, where only WA member states were removed from the WA or expelled from an embargoed region, have been proposed. In practice, these proposals would affect Military Gameplay in an analogous way. The difference is that if the WA embargo only 'expels' WA member-states from the WA, this enforcement method is more in line with the 'roleplay' expectations of the WA (which typically is regarded as having no jurisdiction over non-WA nations) and a WA embargo would constrict a region's growth less (since it could accumulate new non-WA members.) Non-compliant member-states might for instance recieve a telegram like the following after entering an embargoed region:
4. Obviously, a repeal ends an embargo.
An embargo poses new challenges to both invaders and defenders:
Invaders | Defenders |
|
|
For non-gameplayers, an "Embargo" resolution category raises the possibility of constraining the growth of nefarious regions. In particular, hate and supremacist related regions. We've seen some 'offensive' WA Liberations in the past and I would expect to see some 'offensive' WA Embargoes in the future.
A "WA Embargo" is a relatively intuitive concept, best understood to new players as the counterpart to WA Liberations: a regional lock-down.