This log details the facts, decision, and individual opinions of the Regional Administration surrounding a complaint of meta-gaming lodged by a player.
- The facts are as follows.
On 23 September 2022, the Soviet player lodged a complaint of meta-gaming against the Canadian player. The complaint is as follows:
- "Hey @jc @Central Africa I’m having an issue with the Eurasia RP
Canada has been meta gaming- using knowledge OOCly to prepare for an invasion that has not happened ICly
On top of that, he is sending specific military aid that has shown to work in RL
While in RL, aid has been a trial and error thing where they send equipment and then figure out if it had a positive impact or not
In here, he is using knowledge already gained in RL for an invasion that no one even knows ICly that is going to happen. No one OCly knows what the weaknesses of the Russian military are yet they are already sending targeted aid
Even in RL, when an invasion was seeing as imminent, no one sent aid until after it started"
The issue was brought to the Regional Administration and the Canadian player was questioned. This was his response:
"I don't believe I was meta gaming as I made accurate predictions using intelligence such as satellites. The Soviet Union is pursuing policies in the UAN to set up a pretext to invade their neighbor and they have also questioned the sovereignty of their neighbor which is the Eurasian Union.
The Soviet Union has already invaded neighboring countries such as Azerbaijan and has done referendums in Poland. For example in Azerbaijan we have detected the build up of troops in the Soviet Union with our military satellites which is realistic and is a capability that Canada posses along with many other countries. We believe that a invasion in RP of the Eurasian Union is imminent based on the Soviet Union invading Azerbaijan and troop buildup along the Azerbaijan border, also the use of using the UAN to question Eurasian Sovereignty to set up a pretext to invade
All I have done so far is provide training to Eurasian Armed Forces, provide military arms, used my military satellites to spot Soviet troop movement buildup, and vote against the proposals in the UAN that have been brought by the Soviet Union. I fail to see on how that is meta gaming.
Also I know in the past in the UAN Debate originally I brought up Azerbaijan being invaded already, before troop buildup on the Azerbaijan border. That was my bad, and the reasoning behind this is that I looked on the map and saw it in the expansion claim map with the Soviet Union color, and I thought the Soviet Union already invaded and annexed it. I should of looked up RMB posts regarding that.
Hopefully this covers everything, if it doesn't and there is an example that the Soviet Union brings up of meta gaming, send it to me and hopefully I can explain the situation regarding it and my side."
It was later ascertained that the Soviet player had indeed mentioned a military buildup, and had accounted for it: page=rmb/postid=48608948. However, it was limited to the Azeri border and not the Eurasian one.
- The following post is hereby invalidated:
This invalidation is subject to the point below.
Third-party military aid (i.e: offers for training, armed intervention, provision of arms or financial support, etc) destined for either the USSR or Eurasia must receive the authorization of CCCP-.
- Opinion A:
- Claim 1 is that CCCP believed that Canada was 'metagaming' on the grounds that that Canada was using OOC knowledge to predict an invasion of Eurasia by the CCCP.
Claim 2 is that Canada provided military aid to Eurasia designed specifically to exploit weaknesses in the Russian military IRL.
Two posts were provided in support of these claims: page=rmb/postid=49081895, page=rmb/postid=48556580
Claim 1: that the build up of military along the AZ border was common knowledge, that the actions of the CCCP (expansion into Poland, AZ etc.) and their behaviour through the UAN could be reasonably construed as aggressive. Therefore it is not 'meta-gaming' for a third party to believe that there is a risk to Eurasia.
On the specifics; the CCCP even acknowledged the satellite imagery issue here: page=rmb/postid=48608948. With regards to the ‘against a superior force’ wording which Canada used when aiding the arms to Eurasia, it is reasonable to assume that that any invasion would come from a ‘superior force’.
Claim 2. Whilst there is some validity to this, what is being provided to Eurasia IG was also provided to Ukraine IRL by NATO in the early stages of the war; the weaknesses in the Russian military were prior knowledge IRL.
But that this is a moot point given that the CCCP would be in total control of any possible war between Eurasia and the CCCP and it will be possible for them to overcome these weaknesses through competent strategy, training and battle field performance in any case.
- On the Ukraine point, I'd say that actually backs up the argument for Claim 2 since aid wasn't sent until the war actually started...
Regardless of reasons he states there, Canada is doing this to prepare for an invasion he doesn't know about IC based on stuff he does know OOC which again, is a bit dodgy. But fair enough yea, Quzie will get Eurasia either way.
- I disagree with certain aspects of Opinion A.
Opinion A stated: "Whilst there is some validity to this, what is being provided to Eurasia IG was also provided to Ukraine IRL by NATO in the early stages of the war; the weaknesses in the Russian military were prior knowledge IRL." The issue here is that Ukraine is not comparable with Eurasia. The phrase "in the early stages of the war" is what sets these two examples apart. For starters, the Soviet player has not made any overt military actions against Eurasia. There has been no acknowledged military buildup along the Eurasian border, nor a greater militarization targeting Eurasia beyond what is required for the Soviets' Azeri operation. Nor has there been a "war" between the two entities. The "military satellite" reason does not hold water.
There are also differences in context: the Russo-Ukrainian conflict has been brewing since 2014, which, at the date of writing, marks a duration of 8 years. During these 8 years, both sides have fought, scrapped, and skirmished with one another. Meanwhile, the Soviet player has only taken an interest to Eurasia in August 2022, or roughly 1 RP year ago at the time of writing. Suffice to say, tensions have not built up to such a degree in which Claim 1 would hold true. The only risk to Eurasia at this moment seems to be its possible expulsion from the United Assembly of Nations and perhaps diplomatic rejection by Soviet partners, not an outright invasion.
I thusly disagree with Opinion A's take on Claim 1. I think it is meta-gaming for a third party to believe that there is a risk of invasion to Eurasia, because the current trend projects one of diplomacy and peaceful reunification instead of an armed intervention.
Additionally, the "weaknesses in the Russian military" were not "prior knowledge IRL" (Claim 2). The common consensus at the eve of the conflict was that Russian forces would "be relentlessly effective". It was only with hindsight that the world witnessed the various strategic missteps incurred over the course of the conflict, and that only proves how fallacious "prior knowledge" can be. "Prior assessments of Russian military capabilities, NATO–Russia war games, and analysis of the correlation of Russian and Ukrainian forces all clearly missed the mark on some important metrics...": Dalsjö, Jonsson, and Norberg, 'A Brutal Examination: Russian Military Capability in Light of the Ukraine War' (The International Institute for Strategic Studies, 9 Jun 2022).
If we were to apply contemporary views on the situation, then realistically most analysts would predict the same - that the Soviets would be relentlessly effective, and that Eurasia's organized resistance would be token. This may be further exacerbated by the fact that Eurasia's population centers are so far apart that Eurasian fighters would be spread thin. Of course, that may also work against the Soviets by allowing Eurasian fighters the opportunity to engage in asymmetrical forms of warfare. But that will all come later. That comes when the fighting begins and when both sides trade shots - not before. I'm inclined to agree with Opinion B in that respect. The Canadian player is preparing for an invasion that remains unknown IC using exploits that are unknown IC.
I agree with Opinions A and B on the fact that the Soviet player will acquire Eurasia at the end of the day. It matters not what Canada, or any other player for that matter, do. The victory is his and his alone.
- Considering the fact, at least from what I know, the CCCP is preparing their troops on the Azerbaijan border and not on Eurasia’s border I think that is meta gaming. If Canada can see that the CCCP is building a Military presence near Azerbaijan why will they build up Eurasia? Except that if Canada knows OOC that the CCCP will eventually invade Eurasia. Although there is also the fact the the CCCP did just annexed Poland but, they did it diplomatically and with supervision of many nations overseeing the process so I wouldn’t exactly call it warranted for military attention. And on the Ukraine stuff, NATO as far as I knew sent those equipments after the war was declared, and I don’t think any NATO troops were sent to train Ukrainian troops right before the war. So in my opinion, Canada is definitely edging on the meta gaming side
- I'm inclined to agree that in the cause of the Eurasian Union that it is also metagaming...for a lot of reasons that have been listed previously. There's no way that he should be able to know that it is happening other than the fact that he knows OOC. Nothing has been indicated IC that should inform him that this is happening.
Obviously this does not need to be done all the time, but most people also don't do this. Canada has been known to push rules a lot.