Print

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

[Alain Colcer]

Statistically speaking, Gallente characters are more common than any other race.

Having no cohesion actually somewhat fits the Gallente, really.

Does it? They have a reasonably long lasting and vibrant Federation, which has been reasonably successful at what it does. Lasting a few hundred years (I have no idea when the Federation was founded) and a number of wars implies at least some cohesion and ability to mobilise in the same direction, wouldn't you say?

There is cohesion, however there are thousands of views interpreting that cohesion. An alliance is a political body with a flag and in order to be functional must have purpose, identity, goals.....not just cohesion.

The current Fed alliance is the Gallente Militia, period.

Problem every Fed alliance face is the idea to cover all the different views and interpretations of a typical gallente activitist while maintaing a certain degree of homogeneity. You could say that holds true for every other alliance, however none have to deal with the basic concept of "personal liberties" as exacerbated as the gallente have. (ie: if my alliance dont want to fire on that pie, i don't care, i will).

[Julianus Soter]

Acheron federation got twisted up into a cult of personality towards one corp, causing animosity and angst with the other, and failed to follow through on its basic principles of mutual defense. A single wardec toppled it.

In the end, an alliance needs strong, dependenable and durable leadership to be anything more than a text box and diplomat list.

[Kaleigh Doyle]

Are we talking Gallente paramilitary organizations? Cause there are thousands of corporations out there run by Gallenteans.

[BloodBird]

Are we talking Gallente paramilitary organizations? Cause there are thousands of corporations out there run by Gallenteans.

He asked for gallente loyalist alliances. I'll translate that into the far more accurate Federation loyalist alliances - and those need to be populated by corps run by players that identify their corps as pro-Fed and likely RP as such.

Otherwise, any corp with a 'gallente' toon could be seen as 'pro-Fed' - an extremely innacurate remark, unless we want to call the ILF pro-Fed, or CVA as a whole when a gallente was executor. Those are merely two examples.

Far as I can recall off-hand some of the most well-known pro-Fed corps are STRIX, MXD, EL-G, Federal robotics, Moira. and a few others, some of these are dead, some can't be counted as pro-Fed anymore. If an alliance is to be the formed with a primarely positive viewpoint on the Fed, then it will need to be made, led and directed by corporations that agree on the need and use of such an alliance and who/how it should be run. Given how widely the above-mentioned corps think and run themselves the likelyhood that even 3 decently able corps that can agree on the needs of such an alliance is nearly zero, and if there are any less that this the need for an actual alliance goes away - two corporations, even 3, 4 or more could easily simply work together and share +10 standings with one another, possibly intel channels etc.

To be honest reffering to the militia as a pro-fed alliance is false. They are not an alliance - they are the NPC militia, a different thing, and have their opponents in similar groups in the Empire and State, an ally in the Republic. They don't count, but individual corps in the militia could count. Now, the difference between corps who RP as fed-loyalists in the militia and those who simply find themselves in the militia is quite pronounced - EL-G is a small less-than-20 member corp in the FEDEF that RP as pro-fed - Shadows of the Federation, on the other hand, recently returned to the FEDEF from a months long trip into null-sec in all it's forms and even piracy. As a corp, they are about as hard on the 'pro-fed' RP as LDIS is pro-SDII, though individual members might RP as such from the confines of their corporation.

Pro-Federation alliances are unlikely to ever form because to do so will require Pro-Federation corporations that work, and have stable futures - they can't be a flare-of-the-month creation with little planning and no goals or member activety ratings. Once a number of corporations like this have formed that have similar enough goals to work together, but unique enough ideas and methods to remain their own corporations, the prospect of an alliance with a common theme becomes a reality - if a Pro-Fed alliance is born, all the corps in it must agree that it is needed and aim to maintain it, all comming adverseries and issues be damned. If they don't, it won't last a single month simply because the member-corps don't honestly need it and will drop it as soon as any serious issue arrives, no matter what that is. No-one will maintain an alliance worthy of that title just for the hell of it - they must want it and believe that maintaining it is the better option.

[Arkady Sadik]

I was kinda shocked to see IXDS join TEST a while ago. Seems they're in TNT these days. Add CYI to the list of those long-gone alliances.

As alliances do not give a lot of in-game advantages (indeed, the only "real" advantages are shared standings and shared war decs), it is quite possible to have an alliance-lookalike between corporations, so it can be done within the militia, too. (The militia itself is not a coherent entity as entry is not regulated.) EM did that for the 1.5 months we were in the militia. It does work to some extent, but for some reason, we started to drift apart more and more during that time - somehow, the common alliance tag does give a stronger cohesion. It was good to be back in the alliance after that.

[Alain Colcer]

Ah yes Cyrene Initiative, forgot about it......was my first foray into alliance mechanics as a newbie 

[Bataav]

Are we talking Gallente paramilitary organizations? Cause there are thousands of corporations out there run by Gallenteans.

He asked for gallente loyalist alliances. I'll translate that into the far more accurate Federation loyalist alliances - and those need to be populated by corps run by players that identify their corps as pro-Fed and likely RP as such.

Otherwise, any corp with a 'gallente' toon could be seen as 'pro-Fed' - an extremely innacurate remark, unless we want to call the ILF pro-Fed, or CVA as a whole when a gallente was executor. Those are merely two examples.

I read this and it made me smile. The parallels between the OOC sentiments here and my IC participation in the debate in the Gallente thread on IGS are clear to me and reinforce my point there nicely even if I can't really use this conversation as a reference 

[Alain Colcer]

Well yeah, saying gallente = federation has been a very long and mistaken concept for many.

I've always looked at the issue as a reminder of the origin, the gallente were the promoters of the Federation in the beginning, but today is a multicultural endeavour. Saying "gallente federation", is plain wrong, its just the "Federation".

And probably that is the mistake many "gallente alliances" inavertdly make in the first place. They are not "gallente" in the same way other racial-aligned alliances can be, they are aligned with an utopic ideal of equality and liberty. The ILF is an alliance promoting the Intaki culture and economic sphere of influence, but they are as much inclined to promote intaki to leave the Federation altogether as to actually making reforms that make the intaki more prominent. How can you create a politically aligned entity that correctly represents both views for the Federation?.

I agree any "gallente" alliance, by the label alone, could be classified as Pro-Federation. But what is exactly Pro-Federation? that probably was one of the longest running arguments inside Strix. These were the basic points in the discussion:

- Continuation of the goverment mechanic and strengthen citizen representation
- Cultural openness, with dominance in the way it is delivered (therefore the message of another's people culture can be re-interpreted as needed)
- Economic strengh to allow individuals to work towards their goals
- National pride for those citizens working for the Federation (in the case of government figures or employees)
- Integration of others into our fold, not by subjugation but by incorporation their traits and aspects into our own (without subjugating us of course).

Many more were. Cultural dominance by variety, saturation and other means. Differentiation of regions as individually unique (people from Sinq Laison were proud and compared themselves against Solitude for example). Lobbyst groups manipulating all aspects of the grand scheme decisions, often fooling citizens to think its the right path and so on.

Personally i think it is a daunting task to think there is an alliance that can actually call itself "gallente" or "pro-fed" in broad terms. Probably the idea of corporate/politically-aligned ones is more reasonable (much like caldari ironically).

[Kaleigh Doyle]

Are we talking Gallente paramilitary organizations? Cause there are thousands of corporations out there run by Gallenteans.

He asked for gallente loyalist alliances. I'll translate that into the far more accurate Federation loyalist alliances - and those need to be populated by corps run by players that identify their corps as pro-Fed and likely RP as such.

Otherwise, any corp with a 'gallente' toon could be seen as 'pro-Fed' - an extremely innacurate remark, unless we want to call the ILF pro-Fed, or CVA as a whole when a gallente was executor. Those are merely two examples.

That's entirely NOT what I was implying at all. There are a multitude of organizations that espouse Gallentean values without behaving being flag-waving nationalists, which is the crux of my question. Are you looking for a flag-waving hard-line nationalist Gallente Alliance to shoot at and argue over cultural differences, or commercial/industrial/combat focused organizations with a Gallentean mindset? ie. democratic, equal-opportunity, and individualist in design.

As far as I've seen, most of the nationalist alliances have integrated themselves into faction warfare, including the Gallenteans. I think this is a good thing. No, I'm not worried about gallente rp dying, i've been hearing that forever....and i continue to hear it ad nauseum.

[BloodBird]

We have a slight misunderstanding Kaleigh. I know what it is too, but I'm far to sleepy to get it down effectively. I'll be back to reply to this when I've had some sleep and cleared my mind.

[orange]

As for the topic at hand - what benefits is an alliance to a group of Gallente corporations?  any group of corporations?

In general? Critical mass, shared infrastructure and overheads (diplomacy and such), easier war-decs...

Alignment towards shared goals and mutual assistance in achieving them, while retaining individual corporate character and identity.

I am of the opinion any alliance should be formed with the intent to take and hold null-sec space, preferably of a profitable nature (a single system can cost 1B ISK to take if it is undefended and making that all back from sov savings can take weeks to months).  I once made a suggestion on Chatsubo that would have put the Gallente-Caldari RP scene on its side.   I-RED & IPI could pursue it now possibly, but only if they desired to try and take nearby space and decided to conslidate a bit.

The point was to go all ORE/Serpentis/Mordu's and build a truly corporate state, where ethnicity/background did not matter.

[Seriphyn]

The problem is that the core of Gallente is diversity; you have politicians, economists and militarists all in equal measure and in overriding/combining capacities. Militant activists, corporate soldiers, or just pure paramilitary or pure businessman.

An alliance would have to account for the entire range of Gallente pursuits.

[orange]

So, the alliance has to give the Activists, Soldiers, and Businessmen something they are all interested in.

The Activist become the "soul" of the alliance.  They provide its guiding frameworks and principles.   For example a pure Federal alliance might have "protections" for its member pilots to ensure they have a say in the alliances policies, not just the corporation CEOs/Boards of Directors.  (In contrast to the corporate alliance structure I linked.)  The alliance becomes an exercise in practicing democratic, egalitarian ideas with New Eden as a backdrop for it.

The soldiers become the alliances defenders.  Yes, ever pilot must rise to defend the alliance, the rank&file acting more as militia/citizen soldiers than professional soldiers.  The professional soldiers are those who display skill and leadership.  When the alliance finds itself under attack, they become the Officers and NCOs for the alliances military.  They must know how to fly & fit a multitude of ships, how to build synergistic squadrons, wings, & fleets, and how to quickly instruct and train the guy who spends his time ratting/exploring/mining/building/etc in what he needs to do.  Their challenge is to not become the alliances raison d'etre.

The businessmen make the alliance powerful.  They look at the worthless space, they have managed to move into and turn it into a profitable system for all the individuals interested in using it.  In other alliances, these are logistics specialist, but here they are create opportunities for others (the citizens) to make ISK.  They might be Starbase parts builders or Capital Ship manufacturers, but at the end of the day, they are interested in not having to build, find, buy, move, etc all the parts that go into their products.  This creates opportunities for even the most junior member to feed into the larger projects.

At its core, it is becomes about creating opportunities in-game and maybe even learning something about actually creating a democratic, egalitarian society.

[Matariki Rain]

What Dex said about the facets of alliances. I don't think nullsec is necessary, though.

[Lyn Farel]

The problem is that the core of Gallente is diversity; you have politicians, economists and militarists all in equal measure and in overriding/combining capacities. Militant activists, corporate soldiers, or just pure paramilitary or pure businessman.

An alliance would have to account for the entire range of Gallente pursuits.

Yes, harder to set up, but that diversity of backgrounds can also be a strenght.