The Rise of Coalitions

Avatar
"Eve is and probably always will be a numbers game."Yet this article references coordination within the organization as the key factor to being successful. Many smaller entities engage much larger forces and absolutely crush them because of organization (and a very good FC.) See RnK
Avatar
To add a thing: Alliances tend to not speak for themselves. Most leaders talk about and / or on behalf those coalitions more than on behalf of their very own entity. The strings and bands between the entities forming a coalition are stronger than ever. That won't stop until it is extrapolated to the extreme imho. EvE develops and so do its entities...
Avatar
The ability for coalitions to exploit their numbers have increased massively in the last couple of years. Between improved IT infrastructure and the improved ability of nodes to not die horribly it is not possible for a coalition to bring over 1k players to any random system.Previously, due to the threat of node death a huge group couldn't fully exploit it's numbers. A group with 2000 players might be able to muster 300 for a major fleet, a coalition might be able to muster many times that, but could only effectively use 4-500 before the node would die. This meant that players never felt the full might of their opposition, wheras now it is much more noticable. Especially due to the timer and single grid focused nature of the sov system.
Avatar
They can win the battles and lose the war.I would be very surprised if RnK (even with their top FC's active in every battle) would be able to take a region from HBC or CFC. in the end, who can bring the numbers (and who can be around in specific timezones) will be able to take more objectives (or hold them).in smaller engagements quality definitely counts though
Avatar
It isn't so much clearly defined coalitions but the extensive NIP/NAP agreements and inherited blue lists that make sov null rather dull and why "gudfights" are sought in Jita and against exhumers in hi sec belts of all places. Don't these facts shout out to you that there is something inherently wrong with sov null currently? Can we expect the same type of diatribe when (I would say if, but we both know that it is a pretty much foregone conclusion) you are on CSM8?
Avatar
If it helps it make sense, add an "if all else is equal" qualifier in there. While there do exist plenty of examples where a much smaller force can dunk on a much larger one, that's almost invariably because all else is not equal. For example, a small force of armor HACs will tend to beat a much larger fleet of "kitchen sink" battleships, because the HACs are focused and well fit, while the BS fleet lacks cohesiveness...and BS often fare poorly against armor HACs unless the fleet has been specifically prepared and possibly fit to fight them.
Avatar
The 6 great Coalitions of 2013:CFCHBCN3SolarNCCProvi BlocCurrently there is a NIP between HBC and N3 but with recent activity with Insidious Empire placing TCU's in Tenerefis after Nexus drops sov is interesting. I wonder what Agenda Insidious has. Especially with PL and N3 working together to remove Solar.CFC is not taking sides in the HBC/N3 vs Solar war currently going on. They either shoot both or none at all.HBC is a wildcard right now. With Insidious taking Sov in Tenerefis, an N3 owned region, is this the HBC looking to spark something with N3?Solar is back peddling deeper into the Dronelands as they are being pushed back between the combined forces of the NCC, N3 and PL.Provi Bloc is doing what they've done for years. Whatever that is.As it goes now, the waters are churning in the south. HBC, N3, NCC, Solar. With the destruction of -A-, HBC no longer has a primary target. Will we see an HBC vs N3 Sov War in 2013? If so, I believe it will be the year of the most supercap deaths to date.
Avatar
First off, to sov directly, the system now sucks. The system before sucked, as well, but it had a greater element of depth to it, in its own way. I've had a few ideas bouncing around regarding adding some of the depth back into it, and it'd have the result of allowing a group to *affect* sov even if they're much smaller. At the end of the day, though, I think TAKING sov should (short of gross negligence by defenders) require a fairly robust force. To use a medieval analogy, a roaming band of raiders can weaken the castle by slaying the peasants and burning the fields to deny it supplies, poisoning the water supply, sabotaging the works, etc, but at the end of the day actually taking that castle means an army with siege equipment.Playing into that is income of all types. You have mining and ratting at the individual level which can be targeted by solo/small gangs, except it's trivially easy for them to avoid death and in any case their actions don't matter. And then you have...POS and POCO, whose HP and timers effectively make them sov-level structures. This is where those "few ideas" come in, but the long and the short of it is usage based sov. Not ENTIRELY usage based as some on the forums have suggested - the basis of the system continues to be based on some kind of structures (which may or may not be the ones of today...some of the aforementioned depth came from how POS mechanics interacted with sov, so while POS themselves sucked, the system had merits) and at the end of the day, shooting them will be necessary. But some of the defensive benefits could be transferred to being reliant on various indices instead, eg perhaps one may only drop jammers if the Military index is appropriately high. Or maybe the cost to maintain the system varies based on some sort of weighted sum of the indices, or...something. It's not a concept I've put a whole lot of thought into yet, but it is one I like.
Avatar
It is somewhat calm in the south at the moment I shall bear my ass off so I am ready for the next big war to break.
Avatar
We'll see how N3 reacts to Insidious taking Sov in Western Tenarafis.
Avatar
"Provi Bloc is doing what they've done in years. Whatever that is."They are like the deep south of eve, fly to far into Provi, and you sure got a purty mouth.
Avatar
In space... they can't hear your screamsBut they can hear the banjos.
Avatar
It's actually pretty nice to always have CVA there for guaranteed solo/small gang engagements. Every time I go into providence it's as a suicide mission and I'm never left disappointed. Of course the idea is that I take some ships with me too, but whatever happens I always know I can go there for a fight.
Avatar
you mean the 2 system thats are complete shit and mean nothign? they will probably let them pay the sov fee's so they dont have to
Avatar
Where you see 'Exploit their numbers', I see more people actually involved in 0.0 warfare.Remember this is all just within the confines of a Space Game. Populations of small cities (and growing) collaborating on such a scale being more-or-less accommodated by the growth of the game itself. While player organisations, be they corporations, alliances or coalitions evolve, I only hope that CCP tries to improve the game to meet the new level of community and organisations formed around it.It's not spaceships that makes Eve interesting it's the people.
Avatar
omfg dude, you just made my day...im throwing that shit in my in-game bio XD
Avatar
we hope see eve online closed.for this we are CFC.The Largest Coalition in the world
Avatar
Boo, go ruin someone else's game...
Avatar
This. We get pipebombed by these fools all the time, but if they decided they wanted to take sov they'd get crushed.
Avatar
HBC and N3 will never turn on each other, not for another 3 months at least. The most likely conclusion is HBC and/or N3 will just remove the alliances that are causing trouble between the two entities... HBC have already started by removing several alliances like Jagged Alliance...
Avatar
"We didn't want that space anyway."
Avatar
It's not really that long of a feature list for the great 0.0 revival, imo. Massive buff to nullsec industry, moongoo depletion and respawning, iterative outposts, fragile strategic resources that require active defense.
Avatar
That's exactly what they want you to think. And it's probably true too.
Avatar
Nope, historical fact. ASCN may have been carebears-extraordinaire but when it came to defending themselves they were undeniably shit.
Avatar
A tad disappointed i must admit. I've enjoyed other articles, as well as commentary posts, by Mynnna more. This feels mostly rhetorical and superficial - pointing out the obvious changes in meta and trend yet not the underlying reasons beyond how certain poorly organized entities have disappeared or assimilated.No mention of the ship balance (L-rig BC, Nano, Supers etc.) that in turn affect affect economy, that affect fleet behaviour, infrastructure and value of numbers?I think people often forget how monumental those changes were to the change of the gameworld. Drakes that would cost the equivalent of +60m and strongly affect the balance between BC and BS, as well as Tech I and Tech II fitting, rigging and insuring or Tech I and Tech II ships. The attribution of value to SRP of today have incredibly much to do with those changes. SRP in turn is what enables the "PvP-PvE culture" Mynnna speaks of, and what has primarily chased players out of belts and into infrastructure and infra-defense gameplay.Nano, not the post-nano era of Vagabonds, but 9km/s Battleships and speed-tanks that not only gave a smaller force staying power on a grid with respective offensive power or the ability to escape killzones (bubble-, drone, tackle or damage ranges) to keep on going, control grids or divide numbers. Was it overpowered? Surely, but it was a great numerical equalizer both in terms of theoretical use (mobility, grid-power) and practical use (more individual piloting demands). Today, similar options only exist in much more onesided, extreme and circumstantial concepts (stealth, mobile sniping, frigates etc.).Of course, the problem isn't that CCP nerfed the nano or differentiated the BC from the BS by giving it cruiser-sized rigs. The problem is that those changes came unanswered without attention to scaling, economy and balance-issues identifiable in trends; and have been left as such right up until today. If you lower the value of individual resources and individual control you undeniably change the playing field in favour of amassing numbers and macromanagement.From that point on i think the article is quite alright. Credit where it's due. The largest organisations today have evolved their corporate structures (teambased) and platforms (IT, coms etc). Though that can probably be more accurately attributed to the lack of unorganized entites than the upspring of a larger of amount of new well-organized actors on the political scene, as there are fewer. It may only have been 5 odd actors the past 5 years in different forms, yielding one or two simultainous conflicts. However, trends prior to that involved much more NIP and sub-regional actors with their own political agenda. Why? In part because of economy (losing fleets mattered more, even a small alliance could dent your warchest and weaken you to be invaded by an equal sized alliance) and the trends it spurred on. The best example i can think of is the Dronelands in 2006-2007 where you had a bunch of smaller semi-indipendent alliances fighting their own regional conflicts inbetween the D2/NC and RSF/Soco of it's time. When the "foreverwar" began and those sides started consolidating against "the great old conservatives of BoB" the Drone regions serve an excelent example of how smaller indipendent entities succumbed to the trends of "against them or us" (with RK [present Brick] getting smashed over the choice, and IRC/ED losing it's political voice); despite all alliances today generally having re-established or maintained footholds in their respective homes - just without voice.I think that is also the primary misconstruction when people claim that "the coalitions are new", while what is different is the amount of independent voices on the political scene (both sov-holding and non-sovholding) and how they can affect the meta, because of the game-mechanical changes made and it's results in economy, infrastructure and numerics.It doesn't matter if it's 2009 or 2013, as few actors as 5 on the political scene, with two such dominant ones makes for a rather uninteresting political play - the gameplay that create content, history and tales of greatness.That's just me though :).
Avatar
CVA is kinda like the training grounds for pvp fleets....if you never done a roam, go on one in Provi...your not going to be blopped and you will probably find a good fight in there. I hope CVA says cause while I like going there and killing them, they do serve a useful purpose...getting newbies to null sec.
Avatar
This is a compliment.
Avatar
I think it is a matter of organization. A lot of the groups that have existed in the past had loose affiliations and alliances of convenience with poor or no central organization beyond a mailing list and in game room. They didn't integrate communications widely across the entire group. I'd refer to many of the other groups in the past as 'casual coalitions' maybe - but coalitions are organizations and have central authority. The NC was a true coalition. The SoCo (-A- etc) was not. They had extremely poor central organization, very loose affiliations, and temporary standings.I think the era of 'casual coalitions' are over. You need a strong central authority, a strong IT integration, and permanent/clear standings.
Avatar
And it was meant entirely as such :)
Avatar
One suggestion for small gangs that doesn't seem to get much air time is for poses, pocos, etc to be hackable using the code breaker mods.Make a small gang able to eg interrupt a moon goo operation or cancel/significantly delay a production line (sabotague a job so it requires more materials?), or divert the tax from a poco to a player or similar.Could even base some of success chance off of indie skills. Maybe make a 'siege' state for the ship so it has to stay put while its happening.Have the effects scale so if it happens too often without being 'fixed' by the owner they become more meaningful (offline a random mod on a pos; disale launches on to pocos).
Avatar
You were on target Mynnna. The first really big war was the 'Great Northern War' nicely documented by Llbring of RONA ca 2004: v=olT05ozGayQ
Avatar
Moongoo depleting is a very dumb idea. Very dumb.Unless you want to see less reason to fight and much higher priced T2 components/ships in EVE, it's bad.Right now the only income null sec entities truly embrace and profit from is moon resources. Removing that will not encourage war, in fact, it'll make it less desirable because the effort in claiming and maintaining that income becomes more work. More work = less fun, especially on a platform that, in my opinion is enough effort to maintain.Anyone claiming that moon minerals need to deplete are people who don't truly understand how broken moon mechanics are, as well as the manufacturing process involved in building the T2 components which require the advanced materials we harvest from the moons.Adding this on your 'short list' of 'easy fixes' very much means that you do not understand what you are talking about and just parroting what you read on EVE-O.
Avatar
I agree If i was CCP i should start on the intel side.* begin by adding a coalition structure ontop of alliances for both chanels and information shareing.* building a intel tool ingame that allow entities to send intel automaticly to the tool - entities are players - radar arrays that can be added to POS could do this in sweeps so once a minute you get the intel from the radar array in the system. - the tool can be configured to send your intel to none/fleet/corp/alliance/coaltition* then once thats in place then make local only show thoes that talk (mutch like incursion chanels)* add a beacon in space that have low hp but can scan out cloaked ships so you actualy have to move around to be safe in a cloked ship in a system. not just sit at a deep safe. the low hp is there so a small gang can take it out (tactical value)* let the moon miners that harvest moon goo spew out 20% of its yeld in a ring around the moon. so that miners can get the most of it. (im for up to 80% but thats just me). this allows ninja mining of moon goo (small scale objective)*Tighter Dust/Eve integration allowing dust mercs to capture stations instead of station grinds. you fly them in and as long as your ships are in space they get reinforcements and as long as the defenders got resources they get reinforcements this could create situations like in the Dust video that we saw long back.* totaly rework POS to make them totaly modular, and combine Stations/POS in to one space entity where we can scale from he smallest one man industrial venture to a Starwars size Deathstar that can kill a planet if needed. also combine the IHUB in to the first station in the system. as a addon. and put the TCU also in this one "Basket" this with the Dust/EVE integration will put "more at risk"this is how in envision a small scale roam on a system.you jump in to the system notice there is a beacon you decided to take it out. after 5minutes its dead and you jump to a nearby pos with a moon miner you have found. you hack it to get it to toss out 100% of its yeald for the next cycle or two in to the ring instead of its cargobay. then before the defender arive you manage to ninja mine some and run away with its loot.mission succes. not only have you robed your opponent of there scanning ability so you can put a cloaked ship in the system but you have stolen moon goo from them and forced them to manualy mine the goo ...large scale attack on a system.you jump in and decide to take out the radar addition before tackleing the station as you can't have the enemy get intel while in station. after a quick kill you move on to the station of the area and start to bash it shields you take losses but nothing major once in 25% shield its reinforced and you leave system before the enemy could muster enough forces to stop you.X h later the reinforcement is over and the defender have reinforced the defence of the station by adding more guns to the station. your attack is now at risk so you decided to do a double attack both in space and in station you get your freindly dust mercs to load up in your assult vessles and you head out to the enemy system your fleet burst through and your new capital interdictor ship you have added to your fleet stay off grid from station locking the system down from using Cynos now your ship pound the armor of the station while the dust mercs fight a heroic battle on the station both with the intention of shuting down the defence so they can "claim" as mutch as posible of the station.dust mercs could "claim" items while the eve capsulers can only destroy structure.the dustmercs fight hard and your about to win when the capital interdictor is tackled and soon killed you warp to him just to see him die in flames and a cyno beeing lit and a huge fleet arive. do you stand and fight and hopefully the dustmerc wiin it for you? or do you leave them for there destiny while you jump away?
Avatar
One of the greatest changes was the removal of Area Of Effect doomsday.It was one of the best anti-blob weapons. Once gone, the numbers bloomed.
Avatar
temporary standings? hmmm, who would ever?
Avatar
The fall of ASCN was really due to failure of leadership, not because of the grunts. When CYVOK ragequit and directors started self destructing hundreds of battleships for insurance Isk it was over.
Avatar
not blobbed in provi ? the one thing provi scrubs are good at is bringing 50 people for a 5 man frigate fleet
Avatar
HBC "removed" The Jagged Alliance a while ago, and it had nothing to do with anything involving N3.
Avatar
Incorrect again history is mostly written by the winning side who remembers that ascn was 1 step from Bobs home system in delve?Who remembers Xetic had pvp corp in them that joined saleene's mc as one of the five?In the end it doesn't matter what is true that ascn had a lot of non pvp'rs in them and was mostly an industrial based alliance formely known as Xetic (5142 members biggest alliance back then) call it carebaring as you like, the nature of those regions back in 2002 i think it was to inform people that never played back then.Imagine being 80 jumps from empire, imagine no pos, no contracts, no jumpdrives, not even npc stations! no player owned stations nowhere to dock! just nothingThe only way was to set up secured containers and fill them up by stuff made in either stain npc stations curse player owned structures that where dropped by ccp or empireIif you wanted to switch from your mining laser to your gun you had to do 20 jumps to either Stain npc stations or Curse player owned stations or be mighty rich that you had 2 battleships and could switch :PIt took 3 months mining back then to even get into a 'mighty' battleship.Missions lol? how? no station remember shooting rats sure 20k bounties and needing 60 million for even a dominix lol yes there wasn't a thing called freighter or cap ship as well.As there was nothing there , no1 was intrested in those regions there was almost no pvp as well due to roaming ops tend to get crushed or atleast occupied in catch between as they stumble on either curse on stain patrols there. (ive only see the jokers once in 2 years there in feyth. the only other way to reach us was feathabolis but you had to go through Stain occupied space and later on Bob to get to us so people didn't even bother.Offcource we where shit in defending or attacking we never had to deal with it before pos was introduced! don't say bob killed xetic/ascn it was simple after pos was introduced that the region was no longer suitable for an alliance like we had.Lateron i joined the goonies in a pubby corp just to get even with bob who was ultimately the one pulling the tricker on us but it could have been CA or stain as well as we had no infrastructure even to defend. i enjoyed learning pvp there and i realy enjoyed the massive fights and camping them in their station i got my revenge and logged off for the last time pvp wasn't still my thing and to do industry in empire ... perhaps i try out w-space somewhere in the future.

A meme I've seen growing in popularity, especially in the past year with the rise of the HBC, is the idea that coalitions and powerblocs are a new thing. "Back in the day," the game was more fragmented, smaller groups had a chance, so on and so forth.

The idea that coalitions are a "new thing" is just plain wrong. EVE's first Great War featured a coalition that included (among others) Reikoku, Black Nova Corporation and Evolution waging war on Phoenix Alliance and its myriad allies. Prior to the destruction of Phoenix Alliance in this war, its leadership dreamed of a "super alliance" of alliances. This idea lived on much later in the form of the many iterations of the Northern Coalition - for newer players, that's not to be confused with "Northern Coalition."

RedSwarm Federation was formed in late 2006, a pact between Goonswarm, Tau Ceti Federation and Red Alliance to make war on the Southern Coalition, comprised primarily of Lotka Volterra, Veritas Immortalis and Knights of the Southerncross. After BoB terminated the rotting heap of garbage known as ASCN, they installed vast swathes of pets/renters/vassal alliances, which was a coalition of sorts and planted the maddeningly wrong idea in people's minds that persists to this day that all coalitions function on a pet/master relationship. In short, examples of coalitions exist throughout EVE's history.

And yet, the meme has some elements of truth. Both the old Northern and Southern Coalitions had membership in excess of ten thousand. Undeniably smaller than either the HBC or the CFC, they would nonetheless be some of the largest groups in the game if they existed today, and at least on paper, would not be tackled lightly. Nevertheless, the forces deployed by the coalitions of today are powerful beyond anything players of that age could have dreamed of.

So what changed? And in particular, what has changed in just the past year or so, recently enough to have given the impression of "newness" to the concept of a coalition?

Most of it, I think, exists in the metagame. For example, while some of us respect it far more than others, both the CFC and the HBC have a tightly integrated IT apparatus, which they encourage coalition members to register for and use. That, in turn, helps to facilitate an extremely high degree of coordination. Combined ops become easier to manage, coalition-wide fleet doctrines become easier to propogate and enforce, et cetera. Perhaps even more importantly, it encourages a higher degree of bonding between corps and alliances. When times are good, that's no big deal, but when adversity strikes, those bonds can be the difference between weathering the storm and sinking like a stone.

Likewise, the composition of modern coalitions has changed. The Northern and Southern Coalition were huge, as was the old mega-alliance ASCN, but they were also bloated with carebears. Pure carebears, that is, the sort that existed only to build things, or mine, who had never shot another player in their lives. Darwinian predadation by more militant groups has almost entirely purged those sorts of entities from nullsec. Self-described industrial corporations or alliances continue to exist, of course, but when push comes to shove, they pick up their guns and fight alongside their allies in "pure PvP" organizations. Consequently, a modern coalition tends to be far more potent than many such older examples, regardless of actual size.

And finally, if there is one factor that has led to the growth of super-coalitions, it would have to be the servers themselves. Many players look back fondly of the good old days, but only through thick rose-tinted glasses. In those days, the servers would start to creak in engagements between even just a few hundred players, and more than one fight for a system was won or lost by who could log back in faster after the node crashed under the weight of a thousand players. I suppose it might have felt like "good fights" were had if you were the one being jumped into... who doesn't enjoy a turkey shoot, nuking players who are locked up and helpless? More often than not, anything CCP tried to make things better failed, even when it "succeeded." Always eager to push things to the limits, players simply threw more pilots into fights.

All that changed a year ago with the deployment of Time Dilation. Overnight, 1200 player battles went from node-crashers to no big deal. Hundreds of goons descending upon Jita and blowing up everything they could during Burn Jita gave an example of what is possible. And as before, when allowed to bring more players, more players are brought, because whether you like or not, EVE is and probably always will be a numbers game.

Seven year veteran & economics guru of EVE Online as well as CSM 8 representative. On the side I play PS2, WOT and Hearthstone.