Editorial: Why do Armies Prolong Their Closure?

KLONDIKE, CP Army Headquarters – Many armies decide to prolong their closure for unknown reasons. Whether determination or reputation, armies tend to hold off their closing events until the last push. In a joint editorial by Pranav and Nathan, we look at both points of view.

Disclaimer: The following content contains only the views of the author(s) and may not represent CP Army Headquarter’s views of the topic.

Armies Prolong Closure Due to Determination – Nathan


As I see it, many armies prolong their closure because they believe they can change directions and start to thrive. This is something that has seemed to pop up a lot recently. Many armies start generations big but slowly begin to die. They begin going from maxes of 40+ to averaging around 20 for most events each week. But, through this, they keep trying to hype their troops up and remain determined.

An example of this is the Army of Club Penguin. They used to be a major army, beating other powerhouses such as the Ice Warriors and Templars. But, when COVID restrictions began to lift, and people started going back to their regular routines, the army suffered losses. But, as it seems, they still have confidence in themselves. They continue to hold events and even challenge other armies as if they are a major army themself. However, in my opinion, this might not always be a smart move. When all the energy drains from your troops and staff, your armies generation will die an ungenteel death. While the Clovers might have had a lot of determination and luck, such a strategy will rarely be fruitful.

Proving Something

Another reason I believe armies prolong their closure, is because those in higher command, (Leader in Trainings/Leaders/HCOM) want to prove something. It may be an Leader in Training trying to prove that they CAN rise to become a good leader. It could also be a leader showing that they have what it takes to be a legend.

Electrumm/Amber is a splendid example of this. She was determined to prove she had what it takes to lead the Silver Empire, which she ended up moving to Major Army classification while solo leading. She took over the army after its three leaders left, and decided not to shut down the Silvers during the community wide switch to CPR. All the hard work she put into the army also got her on the nominations list for S/M army legends.

Armies Extend Closing Due to Reputation – Pranav


From my point of view, an army’s primary goal is to keep up its reputation. Any organization’s goal is to keep a good reputation and a good legacy. If it fails, then there is no underlying reason for that organization to be remembered.

However, if an army closes without trying for as long as possible, it has the chance of being forgotten. Many small/medium and major armies from the original Club Penguin Armies that closed prematurely have the unfortunate loss of the community forgetting them. Not until we read about them through old CP Army Central, SM Army Central, and SM Army Press posts will we remember. It is tragic, yet it makes complete sense.

Staying in the Community

But a reputation and legacy aren’t about anyone remembering them. There will always be someone to remember and remind the community about the army. An army’s reputation also reminds others about their history and the reliability of particular leaders.

Let us take as an example the time when Badboy prematurely merged SWAT into the Doritos of Club Penguin. Multiple SWAT troops regretted the merge, as explained by Sweater’s post after the incident (click here to read). Therefore, Sweater, with the permission of Ganger90, revived the army with three new leaders at the head. However, the merge remains a tarnish on SWAT’s history.

Size, SIZE, SIZE!!!

Prolonging a closure allows the army to survive for a few more days or weeks before a forced shut down, allowing some time to recuperate. More than prematurely closing, however, is the aspect of size. Anyone in any army chat knows that all armies focus on a critical aspect: size. Armies recruit for size, they might ask allies for help to get a bigger size, and they might even ask visitors to help.

The People’s Imperial Confederation’s recent hiatus, as detailed here, is an example of this. If they had closed, their fourth generation would live in infamy, as a generation that closed solely due to a diminishing size. While similar to closure, the hiatus is not an actual closing of the army, though. It simply provides an excuse for not having events while slowly recovering. This way, troops and staff will continue to be active while the leaders make new plans to accommodate everyone.

Recent pic event - Armies Prolong closure

A picture from the People’s Imperial Confederation event pictures, dated February 24.

My Opinion

I believe that prolonging a closure can either be noble or cheating. It would always depend on the situation — had Badboy delayed the merge with the Doritos, SWAT could have recovered from their recent losses. Then, the army would have easily made up for previous weeks. However, while I do not believe the following, one could perceive the People’s Imperial Confederation’s hiatus as an excuse not to close. Even after weeks of hard work, if your size cannot compare to other armies around you, what is the point in staying open? As Nathan pointed out in the previous section, the only answer that would make sense is determination or staying relevant. It will be a significant factor if relevance is not the sole reason.

The decision to close permanently remains up to the army and only the army. But no matter what, it is essential always to remember when something is no longer possible. It is common sense not to argue something that nobody will ever win. Similarly, armies that have continuously diminished, while not impossible, will have the public believing they should shut down. Such situations require a miracle to survive, an unlikely possibility. In doing so, the reputation of the army goes down. Army leaders should remember this because while determination is admirable, so is being realistic. And in this case, a struggling army’s best bet is to close shop and look for better opportunities to revive the army on their terms one day.


Together, Nathan and I conclude that while prolonging an army closure is admirable and sometimes useful, there is also a risk that the army simply dies slowly. But just because we make these claims does not mean it has to be real. Armies have a tendency to do what people don’t believe, and will continue to do so. At the end of the day then, it is not up to us to decide; rather, each army’s leaders must make the best choice. If they don’t, then they will simply lead the army to the brink of closure, making closure inevitable for the next set of leaders. Only fate can truly prove whether a specific army should prolong their closure.

More Information

Filed under: Editorials & Opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

We'll never share your email with anyone else.