Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Hamish Grayson]

Disclaimer:  This could end up being very long winded, have many tangents and be completely irrelevant in TonyG’s Eve.

However, irrelevant as it might be, I’m going to touch on a pet theory of mine regarding Caldari society.    My theory is that surviving the Caldari-Gallente war necessitated  that the Caldari adopt a Maneuver warfare doctrine.   In fact I believe that the tenets of maneuver warfare actually became the foundation of the  Caldari State’s society.  You see Maneuver warfare isn’t about tactics or techniques – it’s really creating an organizational climate that excels at conflict and applies to all forms of conflict including corporate competition. 

Before I continue I will concede two points here; It is highly unlikely that anyone at CCP ever gave the Caldari PF this much thought, and I think the new guard at CCP have decided that the Jovians gave the Caldari the pod during the war after all, and it’s the sole reason for their survival.   I disagree with that decision since it makes the conflict less interesting and two out the only three related pieces of PF we had for years stated that the Pod was given to the Caldari after the war was over. 

Then again, while it’s unlikely that CCP ever put this much thought into the back ground I do think they pulled heavily from the Finnish and Japanese cultures and histories.   The Finnish in particular.

From the CAIN forums:

 

  I'm not knowledgeable in the history of the Finnish though, so someone who has better knowledge of them could add their 0.02 isk to the theory.

Funny you should mention that. There was a relatively little-known (in U.S. at least) so-called "Winter War" between Finland and Soviet Union in Winter of 1939-1940 (twenty years after Finland declared independence from Russia) which has interesting parallels with Caldari-Gallente war. While heavily outnumbered by Russians, Finns managed to inflict very heavy casualties on the attacking forces (largely due to individual markmanship of Finnish soldiers) and seceded only a small parcel of land as a result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
Finland went along to develop a rather successful economy (Nokia is but one example). Both recent Finnish and Japanese histories is rather similar in terms of being attacked by a much bigger opponent, and then developing succesful technology-based economy (based on local cultural specifics), eventually rivaling its former foe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuver_warfare

The Finnish army used maneuver warfare concepts successfully in the Winter War part of the Second World War, in particular at the battle of Suomussalmi where Finnish ski-based troops used superior maneuverability to encircle Soviet infantry and tanks based troops who were forced to use only roads in the thick snow. The Finnish army defeated Soviet opponents more than twice their size and far outgunned, using rapid maneuver to their advantage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War#Suomussalmi.E2.80.93Raate_double_operation

The Suomussalmi–Raate was a double operation, which would later be used by military academics as a classic example of what well-led troops and innovative tactics can do against a much larger adversary…. The battle of Raate road, which occurred during the month-long battle of Suomussalmi, resulted in one of the largest losses in the Winter War

It is an interesting co-incidence that there are such similarities between the Winter War and the Gallente-Caldari war, and the name of the town in which the most important battle of that war, Raate, is very similar to the name of the society from which the Caldari descended; the Raata.

It is by no means proof that this incident in the Finns history inspired the original CCP authors when they created the Caldari, but I personally think it did.

TO BE CONTINUED

[Hamish Grayson]

I’m stuck at work until tomorrow evening, so I don’t have access to my library right now.  There are some insights into maneuver warfare, it’s history, and how it’s been used in corporate competition in my books that I’d like to share with you guys – but it will have to wait.  Until then I will try to provide relevant information to my point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuver_warfare

Methods of war stand on a continuum between maneuver warfare and attrition warfare… Maneuver warfare concepts have historically been stressed by militaries which are smaller, more cohesive, better trained, or more technically able than attrition warfare counterparts.  "Tactical Maneuver" is used by maneuver warfare theorists to refer to movement by forces to gain "advantageous position relative to the enemy as opposed to its use in the phrase "maneuver warfare".

Military orthodoxy believes that with some exceptions, most battles between established armies have historically been fought based on an attrition warfare strategy. Closer examination however reveals this view is not universally held, and many military doctrines and cultures are based on replete historical examples of maneuver warfare.

The attritionalists' view of warfare involves moving masses of men and material against enemy strongpoints, with the emphasis on the destruction of the enemy's physical assets - success as measured by enemy troops killed, equipment and infrastructure destroyed, and territory taken and/or occupied. Attrition warfare tends to utilize rigidly centralized command structures that require little or no creativity or initiative from lower-level leadership (also called top-down or "command push" tactics).

Since tempo and initiative are so critical to the success of maneuver warfare, command structures tend to be more decentralized, with more tactical freedom given to lower-level unit leaders. This decentralized command structure allows "on the ground" unit leaders, while still working within the guidelines of commander's overall vision, to exploit enemy weaknesses as they become evident (also called "recon-pull" tactics or directive control).

The point I'd like you to take from this is that if you take a look at any conflict throughout human history were a smaller, less resource rich, and/or less technologically advanced (weaponry) force defeated a larger, richer and/or more advanced force then they you can bet they leaned more heavily toward the maneuver warfare end of the spectrum than their opponent.  

During the Caldari-Gallente war the Caldari had a smaller military, a significantly smaller population, a less developed infrastructure, and at that point in time still lagged behind the Gallenteans in technology.  Even still, they managed to keep up with the Federals. 

[Hamish Grayson]

Taken from the CAIN internal forums circa 2007:

by: Thuul''Khalat on 30/07/2007 08:42:37
A Bloodbath?? Please don't make me laugh.

YES, we bombed Caldari Prime back to the stone-age, after ALL civilians had already been evacuated from the planet. The only ones left were a few military troops. Hardly a massacre, especially compared to your peoples vile attacks on Nouvelle Rouvenor, where hundreds of thousands of innocent Gallente civilians perished, and Admiral Tovil-Toba who crashed a carrier into Gallente Prime, killing thousands upon thousands more innocent Gallente civilians.

Is there any proof one way or the other in prime fiction?  I remember reading somewhere about how there used to be more bloodlines than just Civire and Deties, but they were mostly whipped out in the bombing and the survivors intermingled with the two main blood lines until they didn’t exist anymore.

I don't know, but what I do remember is reading that the Gallenteans wiped out 3 Billion people on Caldari Prime, and besides there wouldn't have been a lengthy evacuation campaign to liberate the people on Caldari Prime if it had just been "a few paramilitaries"

Why would they bombard an empty planet, anyways?

The easy answer to why they would bomb an empty planet is to destroy assets – the easy retort to that is why not take them for themselves, but I ‘m pretty sure that isn’t what happened anyway.  Can you link to the source were you got the 3 billion from?

No, Thuul''Khalat is incorrect. From "Caldari-Gallente Wars: The Early Days":

The turning point came when Caldari partisans sabotaged the glass dome of the Gallente-inhabited underwater city Nouvelle Rouvenor. [...]  the Federation retaliated at once by sending an invasion force down to Caldari Prime and began a systematic orbital bombardment of the planet. Soon, the Caldari population had been driven to the mountains and the forests

Then, from "Caldari-Gallente Wars: The Breakout":

...the Gallente ships orbiting Caldari Prime were large and cumbersome, little more than shooting platforms ideal for orbital bombardment....

few paragraphs later:

Two weeks passed. More than half the Caldari population was still on the planet.

then:

Finally, the Caldari admiral Yakiya Tovil-Toba took matters into his own hands. He led the few dozen ships he commanded and jumped to Gallente Prime. ... Admiral Tovil-Toba and his crew sacrificed themselves in order for millions more Caldari to escape.

Only after that:

The week bought by Tovil-Toba and the ensuing confusion following in the wake of the new government gave the Caldari enough time to finish the evacuation of Caldari Prime. Only a small fighting force remained, acting as a guerilla force.

From a plain, straightforward reading of the PF, it is quite clear that Gallente began orbital bombardment first, which drove Caldari into wilderness and then triggered an exodus. Nobody knows how many perished in the initial bombardment, but I would assume the casualty rate would have been quite dramatic.

I am not sure about the bloodlines other than Civire and Deteis, this does not exist in any PF that I am aware of.

From http://www.eve-online.com/background/potw/dec01-01.asp

Runia didn’t know much about the history of the Caldari; she knew that Caldari Prime - the old home of the Caldari - had several continents and that the different Caldari bloodlines came from different continents.

Back in the days when the Caldari still occupied Caldari Prime the difference between the bloodlines was profound, not only in physical appearance, but also culturally. Runia suspected that the beliefs that the Caldari bloodlines were very different from each other stemmed from these facts. But when the Caldari had to leave their home planet and the long and arduous war with the Gallente Federation erupted the Caldari race as a whole was uprooted and thrown into a melting pot were fighting for their survival was all that mattered.

The frantic decades that followed altered the Caldari psyche forever. Traits such as discipline and loyalty came to the forefront and shaped - and continue to shape - Caldari society into something completely new. The corporate state came into being, an all-engulfing machine that both nurtured and dominated its citizens. All the different bloodlines, Deteis and Civire the two largest, were affected by these deep-rooted changes and molded to the norm.

The bolded part is the closest I could come to finding what I was looking for but I’m sure I read something else too.   On a side note I believe for Caldari RPers, that paragraph is the jewel of our crown.  Combined with information gleaned from other sources it can be concluded that it was Gallente influence that made the Caldari capitalistic.  It also implies that during the war, survival was the goal and most people were in the military if not actually active combatants (though I suspect a large majority were) then there were support.    

I also suspect that this is were the social contract comes from.  It is very much like the way the worlds most elite military group operates and since they survived against the Federation when they were out numbered, and were using (at that time) a more primitive technology, then they had to have been a very elite military.  

 That way of life had to have been ingrained into every living Caldari other wise they would have lost.  The problem with that system though, is that it requires a strong bond with your fellows, a sense of “were are in this together” and it tends to not work so well in very large organizations, because basically more people means more greed and stupidity.  With the population explosion that old life style is fading and some facets of Caldari society are becoming oppressive  - while the Patriots are concerned with bring back that old social contract which may not be possible.

There is a big difference between lone extremists from Caldari taking it upon themselves to wreak havoc on some Gallenteans, and the Federation government itself sanctioning an official assault on the very Caldari civilization. The Caldari people cannot be held collectively responsible for Nouvelle Rouvenor, whereas the Federation can be held collectively responsible for Caldari Prime.

From Prime Fiction:

Finally, the Caldari admiral Yakiya Tovil-Toba took matters into his own hands. He led the few dozen ships he commanded and jumped to Gallente Prime

If I read this correctly, Tovil-Toba took this initiative by himself, while the rest of Caldari Navy was jockeying for position with Gallente ships and Gallente Senate debating what to do. I would fully expect that Tovil-Toba is portrayed in Gallente schoolbooks as a fanatical rogue war criminal.

Also, from another PF quote:

The turmoil in the Federation created by the Hueromont Incident, as the Gallenteans knew it, toppled the government and a new one took over, this one more willing to listen to those wishing for peace.

So, if I read it correctly, Tovil-Toba's sacrifice essentially toppled the fascist government on Gallente Prime, delaying the second, ultimate orbital bombardment that otherwise would wipe out millions of Caldari lives.

Perhaps if you main character is Gallente, you get different version of PF related to Caldari-Gallente war?  :wink: 

One man's rogue war criminal is another man's hero.  I'm guessing when the Caldari government at the time did not condemn the actions of the Admiral [tovil] it became an 'official' act.  I'm not sure if the war was going on at the time but if it was then the same would hold true for the 'lone extremists' but to a lesser degree.

I don’t think there was a government during the evacuation.   There must have been some kind of democratic/ representative government in place before because they were part of the Federation. 

During the evacuation, however, the Navy would have been pretty much the only “Government” left, and it seems like the “colonies” were owned by mega-corporations rather than the government.  After all it was the mega corps that had paid for their discovery, and then they paid for the building of the infrastructure.   

Imagine a refugee who has just lost every material possession he ever had.  He has nothing.  He’s stuck inside a cramped ship for weeks or months until he arrives at one of the colonized were everything is owned by a corporation – but this corporation gives him a job, a house and a purpose; a chance to fight back and a chance to survive. 

Now imagine one of the executives at the colony;  he isn’t a politician he’s doesn’t know how to start up a new government, but he does know how to run a company and he can run that company so that everyone has a place, is safe, is fed, and producing war machines.  Besides there isn’t time to build a government from the ground up, the federation will be here tomorrow, and if not then the next day.  He has to make sure the people who’ve just come under his care survive, and he has to do it in the most efficient way possible because he has so little to work with and no time.
I doubt very seriously that anyone was going to blame the Admiral.

[Seriphyn]

The siege of Caldari Prime remains one of the most oft-talked about RP points between Gallente and Caldari but still one of the most vague.

It's really not clear what the objective of Gallente bombardment was. We know that a fascist government grabbed the power reins or whatever. If the objective was genocide, then that seems a little extreme from what we know of the compassionate Gallente public, though it is possible that this fascist regime did not have the support of the public necessarily.

"Caldari Prime burns, those left behind are choking on the dust and ash that fills the air, and you demand our surrender? Is this a joke? You have only hardened our resolve. Every drop of blood you have taken from us will be repaid -- with interest."

- CEP response to Federation demands for unconditional surrender after initial bombardment of Caldari Prime. CE 23155.1.18

From here, we learn that the Federation demanded a surrender after the bombardment. So perhaps we must break the old sci-fi trope.

Orbital bombardment =/= Genocide

Orbital bombardment = Carpet bombing

That's the issue, I think. There's a natural tendency to associate orbital bombardment with trying to destroy a planet or wipe out a race. We know the Gallente sent in "troops to take control of the planet" in tandem with the bombardment, so it sounds like it as merely something like the firebombing of Leipzig or Dresden or whatever it was, or the dropping of the nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; an extremely aggressive and violent campaign to force surrender/capitulation and impose subjugation, not genocide. I'm not sure what the Federation would benefit from that, or why the population would endorse such a thing.

As for the bloodlines thing, I really find that one of the more interesting lines of Caldari PF; it only really ended up being Civire and Deteis because the game limited 2 bloodlines to each race. I thought that was sorta funny, really. "In the future, each and every nation will have 2 ethnic groups", but of course there was groups in the background. From this, we know that every race had multiple ethnicities on their homeworld. Minmatar had 7, Amarr had 3 and Caldari have an undisclosed amount. The Gallenteans likely did have multiple, but probably now are a bunch of mongrels; if they're all cooperative and libertarian, and not putting much stock in ethnic group, they probably bred amongst themselves.

Makes you wonder why Achur wasn't tacked on as the 3rd bloodline as a bizarre bunch of hanger-ons, when we could have had another Caldari Prime bloodline instead. Even today, I wonder why the Civire/Deteis haven't mingled over the generations?

[Hamish Grayson]

I apologize for that huge quote pyramid but I feel that this old conversation hits on some key points to my theory.  Mainly the size of the Caldari population and the level of infrastructure the State had at its birth.

- The Caldari were able to evacuate at the very vague rate of “millions” in the third week and this is twice the rate of the first two weeks.    Does “millions” mean less or more than ten million?  It seems to me that if the authors intended the population of the Caldari State at its foundation to be more than a hundred million, then they would have used ‘hundreds of millions’ or “tens of millions vice ‘millions.’

- Since only ‘millions’ were left alive after three weeks, either  the Caldari population was very small to start with or most of the population of Caldari prime died during the bombardment.    The New Horizons chronicle mentions that there were other blood lines native to Caldari prime but so few are left alive today, if any, that we don’t get to play them, they aren’t mentioned in missions or item descriptions.    

- The Corporate-state came into being only after the Caldari survivors had evacuated Caldari prime.     The Government that existed before hand was destroyed by Gallenteans,  accept of course what was left of the Navy.  This means that the only surviving entities capable of organizing resistance were the remants of the Navy and the Megas.  Though at that point they probably weren’t big enough to actually be considered a Megacorp.

[Hamish Grayson]

Even today, I wonder why the Civire/Deteis haven't mingled over the generations?

The tube child ancestry option is only available to the Deteis.     It is possible that the majority of the Survivors were Civire and that the Deteis required the tube program to bring their number s up to match the Civire.    

Unlike some others I do not think that tube child program involves genetic engineering or even cloning.   I think the process involves collecting all of a woman’s eggs, fertilizing them and bring them to term in artificial wombs.     I also think that even a eugenics program would have been unwise for the purpose of repopulation.   I think that the tube program’s managers would have tried to get as much of what was left of the gene-pool into the next generation as possible.  

If the purpose of the Tube program was to save the Deties blood line it would explain there isn’t a lot of mingling.  

Of course, the New Horizion chron does say that they just don’t find each other attractive.   It could be that straying outside your blood line is a cultural taboo.

[Seriphyn]

Of course, the New Horizion chron does say that they just don’t find each other attractive.   It could be that straying outside your blood line is a cultural taboo.

If people go with the Japanese thing, that's very likely. Also, if Civire inhabit the worker and lower rungs of Caldari society, and Deteis are the leaders (so managers and executives) than it's likely that they don't mix at all, and the opportunity for marriages and sexual relations is thus significantly reduced because of this.

As for millions being evacuated, if we're talking about a full-scale orbital bombardment, then I wouldn't be surprised if millions died, as it's the whole planet that's being struck. That said, if the Caldari were under the heel of the Gallente, and were Industrial era when they were initially found, I wouldn't put it against the Gallente if they stunted any sort of population explosion. It does make the Gallente seem like a softer version of Amarr though, and my own emotivist opinion is that's a little boring.

[Senn Typhos]

The siege of Caldari Prime remains one of the most oft-talked about RP points between Gallente and Caldari but still one of the most vague.

It's really not clear what the objective of Gallente bombardment was.

Well, I see one of two objectives:

1). It was the same tactic the US used on Japan. End the war by showing the enemy just how much power you're willing to throw at them, and how disastrous it would be to continue, at the expense of civilian lives. Of course, the difference is, it went in reverse and ended up bolstering the enemy it was meant to demoralize, much like Xerxes' idea to keep King Leonidas' head on a pike.

2). Crush the Caldari at their core by depleting their race's numbers, essentially a controlled genocide, which would assure they wouldn't break from Federation law again once the war was over.

Hard to defend either one, really.

[Hamish Grayson]

Of course, the New Horizion chron does say that they just don’t find each other attractive.   It could be that straying outside your blood line is a cultural taboo.

If people go with the Japanese thing, that's very likely. Also, if Civire inhabit the worker and lower rungs of Caldari society, and Deteis are the leaders (so managers and executives) than it's likely that they don't mix at all, and the opportunity for marriages and sexual relations is thus significantly reduced because of this.

I am more and more inclined towards the Finnish influence, who also aren't known to be overly accepting of outsiders.

It does make the Gallente seem like a softer version of Amarr though, and my own emotivist opinion is that's a little boring.

I disagree.  One of the early draws for me was that at first glance the Gallenteans appeared to be the Galactic good guys while the Caldari seemed like evil corpratist.  Yet a deeper look revealed that the average State citzen probably has a better standard of living than the average Federation citizen and that the Federation Megacorps are larger, older, and more corrupt than State ones.  Then there is the fact that Federation is just as much a corprate run state as the State is.  

[Hamish Grayson]

Now back to my grand theory.  One of the tenets of Maneuver War far is the social contract between the organization's leaders and the rank and file.  I'll go more into that later when I can get to my books, but for now I'll share some more post from the CAIN forums that touch on it.  Please remember that all of this was written before FW and TEA.

It’s hard to explain without creating an essay so long no one will read, but to survive the war the Caldari HAD to develop a system of maximum efficiency.  They were very outnumbered – so much that everyone was “in” the military.  If they weren’t an actual fighter jock then they were a fighter tech, worked at a fighter assembly line, a food production facility that fed the troops or fed the people feeding the troops.  When you woke up in the morning all your energy went to the war effort and you gladly sacrificed because you knew that the people making the decisions were working to protect you.  You trusted their motivations and their competence.  If someone was incompetent or couldn’t be trusted then they were removed because without the trust of the people the Federation bombers would be in orbit the next day.

After the war the social system stuck (which is why the Caldari are such a militaristic society) but thanks to tube children the population exploded and without the threat of extinction to provide direction and focus the social contract isn’t so strong any more.  If the people don’t give their all, then death won’t rain from above – if someone is incompetent or untrustworthy it’s harder to notice in a bigger population.  Also with the big population boom all the mores of the previous generation might not get passed down as well.

This is where the Patriots come in.  They want to preserve Caldari culture and strengthen the social contract.  They want the leaders to be motivated by the good of their employees (and customers), and to understand that if the companies goals are to protect their employees and provide a better product for the customer then a side effect will be a higher profit margin for the share holders.  The employees will work harder and the customer will buy your product over the competition.  That is the ultimate corporate model, one used today by the big guys, Toyota first among them and Apple to a point.

A few quotes from PF that I think are relevant here:

http://www.eve-online.com/races/Caldari.asp:

Although this gives the corporations dictatorial powers, they are just as bound by Caldari customs and laws as the individual, and the fierce, continual competition between the corporations ensures a healthy, consumer-based social environment, which benefits everyone.

I think this gives good evidence that Caldari workers, or at least a significant fraction of them, have significant disposable income.  After all, somebody has to buy all these consumer goods and services produced by the megacorps, and I seem to recall reading that the State has a trade deficit, so it stands to reason that they're bought internally.  Also, the Caldari obsession with gambling and bloodsports also implies a significant number of them have money to burn.

The passage about corporations being bound by Caldari customs is also interesting, because it establishes that the elite do not always operate according to different rules than Caldari society as a whole.  In fact, I believe that paragraph refers specifically to the Caldari ideal of putting the good of the whole over the good of the individual (more below).

The Caldari State offers its citizens the best and the worst in living conditions. As long as you keep in line, do your job, uphold the laws and so forth, life can be fairly pleasant and productive. But for those who are not cut out for this strict, disciplined regime life quickly becomes intolerable. They lose their respect, family, status, everything, and the only options left to them are suicide or exile.

It's been quoted before, but I think it's important to restate.  Life in the State is not described as cruel or harsh for the average worker who does what's expected of him.  Sure, there are plenty of cases of the State sacrificing individual welfare (and even lives) for what it perceives to be the greater good (see The Jovian Wetgrave, for example), but the State does claim to work for the good of the people as a whole, at least ostensibly (ironically, see The Jovian Wetgrave again, which establishes "All for the Good of Many" as the motto of the Caldari Navy).

I think making the assumption that the megacorps are in it only for themselves or for the bottom line is unwarranted.  Sure, they're highly competitive, but, like others have pointed out, that competition is the means by which they create economic efficiency in the State.  Now, I agree with Abel about the monopoly on violence, and that the difference between a steward and a tyrant is not fundamental but only a matter of how they choose to exercise their power, but at the same time I think it's clear that the "nobility" of the Caldari State do not exercise their power solely for their own personal good.

Edit: Of course, all this may be moot if CCP and AURORA are determined to take the State in a different direction.  The recent news items about the neglected orphans and callous disregard for workers' lives and safety are, in my opinion, simply not compatible with the way the State was originally presented.

[Hamish Grayson]

http://www.eve-chatsubo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=4122&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=45

Yoshito Sanders came to similar conclusions about a social contract completely independently of me.

The Megacorps are supposed to work for the betterment of the State. They're supposed to make the Caldari economy grow. They're supposed to make the living conditions for all Caldari people better. They're supposed to make it so everyone who is productive is able to do their part to making the State flourish.

Workers promised to be loyal, to do their work diligently, to not question their leaders, to not disobey their commands, to give up themselves for the good of the State. CEOs promised to use their skill to advance the State, to put the good of the State above their own good, to be loyal to their workers, to be honest and honorable in their dealings with everyone, to step aside when they are no longer worthy of running the State.

Throughout history, the system worked. During the Caldari-Gallente War, the CEOs killed during the teamaker ceremony realized their ideals weren't for the best of the State. Rather than abandon their ideals, they honorably took their own lives.

It's an interesting and complex system. And it makes plenty internal sense to me, and this only sheds further light on what's going on.

 

[GoGo Yubari]

Obviously (being Finnish) I know quite a bit about the Winter War (it is the formative conflict of modern Finland and the cornerstone of Finnish identity for my generation), but I usually tend to want to avoid discussing RL matters in relation to Eve, so lessee..

What I just said, though, is interesting in relation to the Caldari. No doubt the war with the Gallente is THE formative conflict of the State and the key essence of their identity. It seems a bit obvious, but perhaps bears repeating. I don't think if CCP decided that the Caldari should have a similar against the odds victory over the Gallente that the Finns achieved in the Winter War, but the parallel is certainly interesting even if it was not entirely intended.

I've a question for you, though. Are you American and basing your theory on the Marine Corps' adoption of Manuever Warfare? Some might think this question is irrelevant and flame bait, but I disagree vehemently. In discussing setting information, I think it is crucial to understand one's background. For example, to understand my opinions on the Caldari, it is crucial to understand that I am indeed Finnish and will view things through this lens.

And just so I make it clear, I don't ask this to dis the US or the Marine Corps. As much as I may disagree with American policy around the world, I have immense respect for the MC's manuever warfare doctrine. Now with that out of the way, I would say that the Finns didn't really use manuever warfare as understood in modern times and as demonstrated by the current US Marine Corps, for example.

Yes, encirclement was the basis for Russian defeats in their failed invasion, but as often as it was a case of active manuever it was also often a case of uneven Finnish withdrawal in terrain which the Russians did not understand or know well. I don't think this translates very well into space fight mechanics or into Eve game mechanics.

Interestingly btw, I think the tv series "Kill Generation" illustrates some key points of applied manuever warfare on a few different levels : upper officer decisions and their effect on rank and file. Perhaps relevant to your discussion of social contract.

Anyway, just wanted to get those thoughts out of the way! Interesting discussion opener there.

[orange]

Two quick comments:

1) From my understanding the "Caldari Navy" at the outbreak of the Caldari-Gallente War was not in fact a Navy, but a collection of mercenary organizations.

2) Modern Maneuver Warfare (as practiced by the USMC and US Military) is based upon theory established in the 1970s by John Boyd (as Hamish is well aware).  This does not mean that previous militaries did not practice it, quite the opposite.  Boyd codified methods that successful organizations utilized in the past to great effect.

[GoGo Yubari]

Two quick comments:

1) From my understanding the "Caldari Navy" at the outbreak of the Caldari-Gallente War was not in fact a Navy, but a collection of mercenary organizations.

2) Modern Maneuver Warfare (as practiced by the USMC and US Military) is based upon theory established in the 1970s by John Boyd (as Hamish is well aware).  This does not mean that previous militaries did not practice it, quite the opposite.  Boyd codified methods that successful organizations utilized in the past to great effect.

Your first point makes sense, but not sure of explicit PF proof. On the second... I'm all over Boyd's ideas. Those very ideas were a total game changer for how I viewed conflict in almost all areas of life.

[Hamish Grayson]

It's nice to have somebody in addition to Dex to talk about Eve and Maneuver warfare.

I've a question for you, though. Are you American and basing your theory on the Marine Corps' adoption of Manuever Warfare? Some might think this question is irrelevant and flame bait, but I disagree vehemently. In discussing setting information, I think it is crucial to understand one's background. For example, to understand my opinions on the Caldari, it is crucial to understand that I am indeed Finnish and will view things through this lens.

Yes, I am an American – but I’m not basing my theory on what the Marine Corps calls Manuever Warfare.    I found my way to Maneuver Warfare theory while reading about Japanese business practices, which lead to a few articles on the Deming cycle.   One of the articles on Deming cycles mentioned OODA loops, and popping ‘OODA loops’ into the Google machine brought me to an article on Colonel John Boyd.     It wasn’t until after devouring everything he had ever written, plus B. H. Liddell Hart’s ‘Strategy’, all of Chet Richards essays  many other works that I came across William Lind and his campaign to get the USMC to adopt Maneuver warfare.  I think that Mr. Lind himself has an excellent grasp of the theory, and while that the USMC is a superb warfighting organization…that the Crops still doesn’t quite get it.    

Yes, encirclement was the basis for Russian defeats in their failed invasion, but as often as it was a case of active manuever it was also often a case of uneven Finnish withdrawal in terrain which the Russians did not understand or know well. I don't think this translates very well into space fight mechanics or into Eve game mechanics.

Bait drakes, encirclement, Fix and flank, Pincer, Flanking, Cheng and Ch’I, Surfaces and Gaps – whatever you want to call it still the same concept.   Convincing the enemy FC to keep the bait megathron/scorpion/falcon/Drake etc as primary while you pop his recons, damage dealers or shiny ships is the same thing as encirclement.    MW isn’t about physical movements or positions, it’s about making decisions faster than the enemy, anticipating what decisions he is going to make, and keeping his efforts focused on attacking your strong points while you attack his weak points.   'Uneven withdraws' sound like it could be what George Washington often did; use small agile force to make the British stop and engage it while the bulk of his troops either run away from the British blob or move into a better position.      The smaller force is the pinning force and the larger force is the flanking force even if they are running away and not actually flanking.       Using gate aggression timers or interdictors to flee a larger gang is similar.  Or did I misunderstand?

Your first point makes sense, but not sure of explicit PF proof. On the second... I'm all over Boyd's ideas. Those very ideas were a total game changer for how I viewed conflict in almost all areas of life.

Indeed…Patterns of Conflict and Discourse are life changing reads.   Have you ever watched the live footage of Boyd on youtube?  He was such an inarticulate red neck until he put pen to paper!