These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Coalitions
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-05-26 07:57:29 UTC
I would like to propose a more formal method of Coalitions.

To explain: Players join Corporations, Corporations join Alliances, Alliances form Coalitions.

However, Coalition's are more of an invisible subject (so to speak) and are more figurative than literal. For those of us who follow the political games, it would be a lot more friendly on the eyes to be able to readily identify which Alliances associate with one another.

Discuss Pros and Cons.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2012-05-26 14:20:13 UTC
Where does it stop? Coalitions join what, then those join what?

Why would this be needed anyway?
Daria Meridian Carlile
Necromatic Inc.
#3 - 2012-05-26 14:49:09 UTC
I agree!

From what i can hear, the coalition will have no physical (so to speak) impact on the alliances in it.

It would simply be an indicator of who's on said alliances side, no more "oops, forgot to set blue.. sorry about the Mach"
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#4 - 2012-05-26 16:07:38 UTC
Daria Meridian Carlile wrote:
I agree!

From what i can hear, the coalition will have no physical (so to speak) impact on the alliances in it.

It would simply be an indicator of who's on said alliances side, no more "oops, forgot to set blue.. sorry about the Mach"


Yeah, see, why is less shooting of blues a good thing?
Vricrolatious
HIgh Sec Care Bears
Brothers of Tangra
#5 - 2012-05-26 18:04:56 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Daria Meridian Carlile wrote:
I agree!

From what i can hear, the coalition will have no physical (so to speak) impact on the alliances in it.

It would simply be an indicator of who's on said alliances side, no more "oops, forgot to set blue.. sorry about the Mach"


Yeah, see, why is less shooting of blues a good thing?


I like the idea, but come on... shoot blues every day

WIDot, Best Dot, Even Sans Dot! -Vric
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2012-05-26 18:47:24 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Daria Meridian Carlile wrote:
I agree!

From what i can hear, the coalition will have no physical (so to speak) impact on the alliances in it.

It would simply be an indicator of who's on said alliances side, no more "oops, forgot to set blue.. sorry about the Mach"


Yeah, see, why is less shooting of blues a good thing?

If you really want to shoot blues so bad you should join TEST.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2012-05-26 20:06:19 UTC
I do like this idea, just as an indicator and nothing else. No taxes, no cost, no complicated standing settings. Just 1 alliance who creates the coalition and who is able to invite/accept applications. And possibly the ability for all members in the coalition to vote off another member.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2012-05-26 22:59:01 UTC
It's pretty much assumed that Coalitions wouldn't really tie with one another as otherwise they'd already be in a Coalition together. It's just an easier mechanic to identify spur-of-the-moment changes and readily available information than what is to be concluded in the middle of the battlefield.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2012-05-27 00:58:02 UTC
Nomistrav wrote:
It's pretty much assumed that Coalitions wouldn't really tie with one another as otherwise they'd already be in a Coalition together. It's just an easier mechanic to identify spur-of-the-moment changes and readily available information than what is to be concluded in the middle of the battlefield.


Explain OTEC then? Or those strange occurrences where, say, the clusterfuck will blue up someone like AAA to shoot someone elses titans/CSAAs/whatever? They might not band together permanently, but temp blues happen, and with a formal coalition status, there would be a hell of a lot of smaller groups coming under the umbrella. A couple of WH alliances forming a coalition? Or some lowsec guys? Sure. Now what happens when those two coalitions work together all the time, yet none of them want to roll up their alliance or coalition? They'd want another level. It has to stop somewhere.
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2012-05-27 12:52:09 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Nomistrav wrote:
It's pretty much assumed that Coalitions wouldn't really tie with one another as otherwise they'd already be in a Coalition together. It's just an easier mechanic to identify spur-of-the-moment changes and readily available information than what is to be concluded in the middle of the battlefield.


Explain OTEC then? Or those strange occurrences where, say, the clusterfuck will blue up someone like AAA to shoot someone elses titans/CSAAs/whatever? They might not band together permanently, but temp blues happen, and with a formal coalition status, there would be a hell of a lot of smaller groups coming under the umbrella. A couple of WH alliances forming a coalition? Or some lowsec guys? Sure. Now what happens when those two coalitions work together all the time, yet none of them want to roll up their alliance or coalition? They'd want another level. It has to stop somewhere.


If they decided to blue up it would be a lot easier to say that you blued the -A- Block than saying x, y, and z alliances.. It'd be a lot easier to say that two coalitions are allies and have it be informal than to hear that -A- are working with CFC and than -you- have to go and do the research and find out if that particular alliance is hostile to you or not.

I'm sure your argument could have been used in the same situations Alliances first came into play, what with corporations capable of housing hundreds of people as is.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#11 - 2012-05-29 15:17:50 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Nomistrav wrote:
It's pretty much assumed that Coalitions wouldn't really tie with one another as otherwise they'd already be in a Coalition together. It's just an easier mechanic to identify spur-of-the-moment changes and readily available information than what is to be concluded in the middle of the battlefield.


Explain OTEC then? Or those strange occurrences where, say, the clusterfuck will blue up someone like AAA to shoot someone elses titans/CSAAs/whatever? They might not band together permanently, but temp blues happen, and with a formal coalition status, there would be a hell of a lot of smaller groups coming under the umbrella. A couple of WH alliances forming a coalition? Or some lowsec guys? Sure. Now what happens when those two coalitions work together all the time, yet none of them want to roll up their alliance or coalition? They'd want another level. It has to stop somewhere.

Meh, coalitions like the CFC are a bit more permanent than agreements like OTEC. I kind of agree with your point but having some kind of formalized in-game system that says THESE alliances belong to the CFC, etc. would be... kind of cool I guess? I suppose it wouldn't really change much of anything.

Though it would be great if you could see jump bridges on the map based on standings or coalition, what stations you have access to, etc.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-05-29 15:25:02 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Though it would be great if you could see jump bridges on the map based on standings or coalition, what stations you have access to, etc.


Pretty much this.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama
Aerich e'Kieron
Peace.Keepers
Federation Front Line
#13 - 2012-05-29 15:29:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Aerich e'Kieron
If you're going to be setting them blue anyway; tell them to dissolve their alliance have the corporations join your alliance.
^If that's too much hassle, having to manually set the blue is a small consequence.

There is no end to the ideas you suggest, and alliances is general have too much focus as is.
More importance should be placed on individual corporations. IMO.
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-05-29 16:19:52 UTC
Aerich e'Kieron wrote:
If you're going to be setting them blue anyway; tell them to dissolve their alliance have the corporations join your alliance.
^If that's too much hassle, having to manually set the blue is a small consequence.

There is no end to the ideas you suggest, and alliances is general have too much focus as is.
More importance should be place on individual corporations. IMO.


By comparison in real-life politics and demographics; it's hard to believe that it goes much further than say, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) which comprises of a large portion of North America and Europe. It does have an end point, coalitions were brought on because large alliances wanted to work together with similar ideals, the end point is where technicality and functionality don't intertwine. Hampering that by saying "there's no end point" is saying that there is no end point in a Sandbox, and technically there isn't but the entire point of this forum subsection is to provide ideas that make things easier for the players.

Formalized Coalitions -would- make those things easier, as alliances often share jump-bridges and stations. Coalitions may work together for short periods of time but if they were going to go beyond that they'd simply just be in -one- coalition, where as separate alliances may have separate ideals and aren't compatible with one another. It'd be an easier method than jumbling through a hundred standings and management mechanics when you can simply select: "Allow access to Coalition" and it's over-and-done with.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama