| Welcome to NATO | |
|---|---|
|
COUNCIL ORDERS: Surrender Terms :: NATO Tracker :: Aid, Tech, Trade, and War EFFECTIVE AT MIDNIGHT ON OCTOBER 16TH, 2008 | |
| sup? You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you can't do much. If you register, you'll be able to do lots more. Registration is simple, fast and free. Register here! Once you are done registering, log in and post in the masking thread (just ignore the message that says an admin has to approve before you can post). |
| Bloc building and you. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 10 2008, 12:05:41 PM (437 Views) | |
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 12:05:41 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
Bloc building and you: A retrospective look at the creation and lifespan of massive blocs. I probably have more experience here with the creation of giant blocs than anyone else in the game. I’ve created the two most powerful blocs the game has ever seen, in that of the Initiative and The Continuum. The two had very different purposes and were created in very different ways. The purpose of this article is to look at the differences between the two, and note the major evolution that occurred between the Initiative and the Continuum, and to look at what makes the good foundations for a proper bloc. Looking around Planet Bob, there are many small blocs that litter the landscape. I use the term litter very literally, for the sheer fact that most of them don’t stick together under fire. This does not take into account the color blocs, as those are mainly designed for other purposes, and while they might have a defense initiative involved in them, are special cases. Most blocs form for the sake of “convenience” and trying to lend relevance to the alliances involved. For the most part, they stick around for a long time, and don’t actually do much. When it comes time to actually activate the treaty, most of the times partners pull out, and the whole thing comes apart. Sometimes this is due to one of the partners making a major mistake, and the others aren’t trying to get their alliance blacklisted forever. This tends to put them in a poor position, because they cancelled their treaty when their partner needed it. Other times, one of the partners tells the rest to “not get involved”, thereby cheapening the whole bloc experience. While it might prevent their allies from getting smashed, it does not foster good relations overall. The membership of the original alliance usually will have a hard time forgiving the other alliances for not coming to their aid, regardless of what the leadership stated. Failing under fire is one of the worst things that can happen for a bloc, and the reason as to why it occurs is usually very simple. The treaty partners did not really know each other that well before signing, which is not necessarily a bad thing. However, the part that leads to failure is a lack of analysis on the actions of those alliances in the past. The best way to predict the future of an alliance is to look at its past. Has an alliance been under surrender terms in the past? If so, did they follow the terms? Have they had repeated enemies in the past? Have they learned from their mistakes, or just paid lip service and not actually done anything? Questions like these are very important to analyze if you have not been a long term ally with a partner before signing a bloc with them. A recent example of this is the failure of the UPS 2.0 bloc. When looking at the people initially involved, it was quite easy to tell how it would fall apart, and when push came to shove it did so. Another way a bloc can fail is it just withers away. This can be either good or bad. Sometimes alliances just drift apart, and it’s better not to be tied to them anymore. One of the key ways to prevent this is keeping a constant stream of communication back and forth between treaty partners. I, for example, cannot be everywhere. As such, I’ve designated people whom can speak with my voice to reach out to all our allies, bloc or not, and be a permanent liaison from me. You have to be very particular in whom you choose. They need to be long term, trusted members that you can trust not to mess up, or misinterpret things. I’ve drawn from my diplomatic leadership. While it might put more time pressure on them, I’ve stressed the importance of the job, and it seems to be working. Another way a bloc can wither away is if it no longer has a purpose. This is one of the rarest forms of a breakup, and is either very quiet, or very bloody. An example of this would be the Initiative, which I will go into shortly. |
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 12:06:09 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Now, it’s time to go into my personal experiences with building a bloc. I’m going to start off with the Initiative. The initiative was created in a very different time, with very distinct sides. It started off with a discussion between NPO, NpO, and GOONs about adding FAN to the Axis of Awesome. From there, Dizzay and I discussed on inviting other people, until the idea of the initiative was formed. As a bloc, while it had a purpose, it probably was the most co-ordinated bloc that ever existed in the game. As much as I hate to say it, I doubt there will ever be another bloc that can emulate that co-ordination. Now, let’s look at its creation in depth. 1. The people chosen. At the time, most of the established alliances were firmly in the pocket of LUE and GATO, and were not fans of the Order. As such, we had to be creative. When trying to figure out whom to invite, we picked allies that we were very close to, and had no ties to the other side, with the exception of the GGA. However, GGA was much closer to us, due to us getting to know them quite well in Astro Empires, and then helping coup Prodigal Chieftain. The following selection has helped shape NPO foreign policy for a long time. One of the main goals of the Initiative was to bring together a group of people that while not in the “established” category yet had active leadership, active membership, and would be considered rising powers. A great example of this would be TOP, whom the Order had been allied to. Very few new much about them, however, by getting to know them well, it helped shape the type of allies we wanted. The established powers, for the most part, felt secure in what they had, and didn’t see a reason to pick up most of the up and comers, and in some cases actually ostracized them. This led directly to our advantage. The one member alliance I was not pleased about was CIS, but I’ll go into that on point 2. 2. Compromises. In order to get GGA and VE, both groups required CIS to join with them. CIS, was for the lack of a better term, a GATO puppet disguised as an allied partner. This changed over time, however, CIS started as a GATO breakaway group, and Kas Mage had an annoying tendency of bringing up all his experiences at GATO, and how it made GATO a superior alliance to everything else, and that is was the end all/be all of everything. Furthermore, he was under the belief that GAT O would still want to be friends with them after the signing of the Initiative. They learned fast that GATO didn’t want anything to do with them at that point. CIS was the weakest link in the Initiative, and remained that way for its entire time in. This was later compounded when they turned over their foreign affairs to ODN, which was, again for the lack of a better term, stupid. However, while we were treatied with them, we would have fought to the death to protect them, regardless of how much stupidity they caused. The entire Initiative was put together in under a week, mainly due to either compromises, the want of alliances for a bigger part on the international system, or just for plain fun. It was a very interesting time. 3. Drive. The great thing about the initiative, and one of the later downfalls of it, was each alliances individual drive for the most part. In the early days, the Initiative had one purpose, in that of a counter to the League. It kept everyone focused, there was a clear enemy, and it kept any personality conflicts out of things. This same drive to be the best led to the internal plotting that led to the death of the Initiative, as there was no longer an enemy. Those three things were the important factors in the early days of the Initiative. |
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 12:06:28 PM Post #3 |
![]()
|
The Collapse of the Initiative: Peacetime did to WUT what no war could do, in that in bringing destruction. The FAN bargain in GWIII was merely a prelude to the beginning of the end. Once complete destruction was wrought on the enemy, there really was no goal let for the Initiative. We had achieved complete hegemony, and that led to people thinking they should be number one. We actually wouldn’t have had an issue with it, except for the way it was done. FAN plotted against us. A little known fact is that GOONs did the same, and was one of the reasons that the NPO did not remain in WUT in the Unjust Path war. There was no point defending the side that would have killed us immediately afterwards, as the rest of our allies would have been dead. GOONs and FAN met with NADC around a week into the FAN war. NADC did not stay, as they thought it was a trap. GOONs convinced FAN we were entirely behind FAN being kicked out, which wasn’t true. We’d been pissed off the week before, but decided to let things cool down. It was GOONs that actually called the vote to remove them, after FAN hit their nations. As much as I hate to say it, GOONs played the entire thing masterfully. It ended up with us taking all of FAN’s nukes, and the promised aid from GOONs never came, and allowed them to pass us. They were unaware that we had found out about the meeting, and as such ended up bringing about their downfall. Further issues that helped cause the collapse of the Initiative were the pullout of VE and CIS, and their subsequent death. While I don’t think anyone was particularly sad to see CIS hit, VE was a different story. VE’s failing was that they decided to completely cut off contact with everyone in the Initiative and their allies, and Egore had stated previously that he wanted to start the opposition to the Initiative to keep things from getting boring. As such, everyone went along with GGA. While not everyone was happy about it, we were treatied to GGA, and not to VE. Should the same exact circumstance come up again, I do think the same thing would have happened, just due to that reason. VE decided they no longer wanted to be friends. GGA was still with us. However, many have chosen not to fly the badge they earned in that war. Another failing of the Initiative was that peace time brought out the personality conflicts, and the overarching crazy. I love Egore to pieces, but he was crazy. There were points when I was getting called at 3 in the morning to get online, and calm him down. This was in the pre-GW III period, along with the post period. These conflicts usually came over courses of action that would hurt the Initiative as a whole. In particular, the pre-GWIII case was that Egore wanted to hit /b/. While this might not seem as a bad idea now, at the time /b/ was a neutral alliance, and hadn’t done anything wrong. There were some allegations of spying, although the evidence was not nearly enough to warrant hitting a neutral alliance, and would have given the group that later formed Aegis major propaganda points on their pleas to GPA, Legion and ODN. Other such cases occurred early, for example Starfox. Starfox had egged on someone to nuke Philosopher, and he was removed from >_<, and ZIed. The final straw was Polaris and GGA leaving the Initiative, along with the Ivan coup. These three things occurred at around the same time, and led to hardships for everyone involved. Polaris and GGA became really antagonistic towards the rest of WUT, in particular people can remember the ES logs. With the disorganization that occurred in the Order at that point, WUT dissolved at a much faster rate than people had expected it to. Those stuck in the middle were in a very hard point, as I believe Bodvar can confirm. These were the major aspects that caused the collapse of the Initiative, and should be taken as warning signals. While there were other smaller cases, those were the overarching parts that broke down. I simplified it a bit, because otherwise I’d be here all day. |
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 12:06:59 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
Now, we must look at the creation of the Continuum. It was a very distinct change from the way that the Initiative was created, and took more time. It was also a very different style bloc, in that its creation occurred in peace time, and had very different people involved. In this case, the Continuum was focused not just around Pacifica, but also around Paradoxia. The two main “poles” for lack of a better term that anchor The Continuum are the NPO and TOP, as can be seen by the people listed. Now for a more indepth look. 1. Selection of people: This took far longer than the creation of the Initiative. We’d been brainstorming with TOP for quite some time, and there were quite a couple people on our list that were cut and didn’t make the final cut due to issues one of us had with them. Furthermore, only alliances that had shown the ability to “play nice” in blocs were chosen. GGA and Polaris were not even brought up, due to their previous inability to play nice in a large bloc. GGA had been spoken to a while previously on it, and stated that they were cool with it, and agreed that they would not have joined a new bloc. The alliances chosen were all long term partners of either the NPO or TOP, and had worked together in the past. While we were not treaty partner with everyone at the time prior, we did analyze the membership and leadership of people we were not allied to, as I’m sure TOP did as well. By speaking to them, we were able to establish a great working relationship even prior to the creation of the Continuum. 2. Creation in Peace Time: The lack of an overall goal aside from security is something that has helped stability. While the Continuum is not nearly as co-ordinated as the Initiative was, it also lacks the need for an enemy at all times. By being founded in peace time, with Hegemony already in place, it is able to merely exist, and help foster the relationships of those involved. Furthermore, it gives everyone to get used to everyone. The Continuum is made up of multiple different types of alliances, and it does take some time getting used to. This has been made to good use so far, and there are some interesting ideas that have been shaped for how to handle co-ordination in a large scale war should it be needed. 3. Differing goals for member alliances: Not everyone in Continuum is going for the same goal. Some just want to be left alone with security, while others want to take a bigger role in the world. However, everyone is bonded together by the common goal of security. The difference between the Initiative and the Continuum is the lack of every alliance wanting to be the leader. The Continuum has worked as more of a fluid organization than one with alliances at its head. Most announcements from the Continuum have come from different alliances, rather than just one, allowing much more equality than what occurred in the Initiative. The public face is everyone overall, instead of individual alliances. Internally, while debates are fierce, they don’t resort to name calling. In fact, the worst argument that the bloc had was during its creation, with the name selection. Myself, with others, ended up getting fed up and pushed through the name that made it to the top. My preferred choice of Megazord was turned down, however. 4. IRC versus Forum use: The Initiative tended to use more IRC than forums for decisions, and this led to people feeling left out. One of the things that have taken place recently in the Continuum has been the greater use of the forums. This is something that allows more ideas to get heard, and more things happen deliberately, then occurring half cocked. It’s very important to balance the two. One without the other is useless. These are a couple of the aspects that led to the way that the Continuum works now. |
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 12:07:16 PM Post #5 |
![]()
|
And now, Bloc building and you: The previous examples all should lead a point of what works, and what doesn’t, so this will be a brief section with important points for the creation of a bloc. 1. Communication is key. 2.Either know the alliances you are signing with very well, or do enough analysis to make a good prediction on what they will do in the future. 3.Balance IRC and forums 4.Leave flexibility in the charter. This is something that wasn’t mentioned but is very important. Getting tied up in e-lawyering is just a poor choice. 5.Fix things that don’t work. 6.Again, Communications is key. 7.Be prepared to make compromises. 8.Treat allies equally, especially when resolving disputes between the two. 9.Make sure that you are all compatible, and won’t run into conflicts down the road. 10.Only sign if you mean it. 11.Choose very carefully whom you want in a bloc, and make sure they can work together. 12.Communication. With that, I open the floor for questions and comments. I hope you enjoyed reading this, and it was informative. |
![]() |
|
| Hakim | Jun 10 2008, 12:31:02 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Former NATO
![]()
|
epic post and awesome read...thank you |
![]() |
|
| bigwoody | Jun 10 2008, 12:33:11 PM Post #7 |
![]() ![]()
|
Do you think communication is important in a bloc? I'd like to see if you could clarify that particular item. |
![]() |
|
| Golden Boy | Jun 10 2008, 12:51:05 PM Post #8 |
![]() ![]()
|
Well I must say I found that very long, but worth it to read. I was around for all the TI shenanigans, but didn't know that much in depth. Since I have started a bloc, and had that bloc fail, I took a lot from this. I had already pointed out some of those keys for a successful one but there are other points that I will keep in mind. I have a few questions for you though: First, on the topic of balancing IRC and Forums, did either or both TI and tC have their own forums? And their own IRC channels? If you do have separate forums for the bloc, how do you manage them? Is it just leaders that go or is it open to all members of the bloc? Does each alliance have its own news section or? |
![]() |
|
| sam | Jun 10 2008, 12:51:47 PM Post #9 |
![]()
|
I completely agree. Both blocs are abselutely different. Speaking for the MCXA, we came very close to alliances we barely had contact with before, e.g. Old Guard. The atmosphere within the bloc is pretty awesome, it is a good mix made out of unity and friendship. |
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 12:57:03 PM Post #10 |
![]()
|
I hate you, and hope you die in a fire.
|
![]() |
|
| Pollexter | Jun 10 2008, 12:57:20 PM Post #11 |
|
Former SoI
![]()
|
Fascinating stuff here, thank you. Our diplomats don't share this kind of insight. They just tell us who we're allowed to attack and when...
|
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 01:06:04 PM Post #12 |
![]()
|
Both TI and tC had/have their own forums. The tC one is used much more, especially by leadership. Both of them had their own channels as well, subsetted by security levels. The one most used is easily by leadership yet again. In regards to the forums, tC is managed by a small team of admins, with leadership being seperate to the admins to make sure that everyone has an equal number of reps. Anyone can go to them, but they are managed by security level, with the reps using an automated system to decide who gets what access. Each alliance can post up topics in the low level security section, and things get discussed in upper level. |
![]() |
|
| Golden Boy | Jun 10 2008, 01:12:54 PM Post #13 |
![]() ![]()
|
Thank you for those quick answers. So basically, it is run like a normal alliance forum is run, with members bringing up things for the government to discuss, just the "government" on tC forums is actually a group of the individual alliance leaders in tC? Definitely sounds like the communication is needed for the different levels of security ![]() |
![]() |
|
| Anu Drake | Jun 10 2008, 01:16:14 PM Post #14 |
![]()
I am That One
![]()
|
And you should be damn grateful for the opportunity. poll
|
![]() |
|
| The Pansy | Jun 10 2008, 01:23:01 PM Post #15 |
|
Eternal Annoyance
![]()
|
nah Woody likes skateboarding The Pansy ducks |
![]() |
|
| Anu Drake | Jun 10 2008, 01:25:52 PM Post #16 |
![]()
I am That One
![]()
|
Dilber, how would you characterize NATO's involvement in tC? Have we been good partners? Do you have anything you'd like to see us improve on? |
![]() |
|
| bigwoody | Jun 10 2008, 01:28:31 PM Post #17 |
![]() ![]()
|
Get out. |
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 10 2008, 01:32:05 PM Post #18 |
![]()
|
I love NATO. You guys have been really involved on both the forums and on IRC. You are always easy to contact, and you were one of the first to post treaty upgrades on the boards. My one complaint is that you need more Anu on IRC.
|
![]() |
|
| Pollexter | Jun 10 2008, 01:32:52 PM Post #19 |
|
Former SoI
![]()
|
Right, right we're just your pawns. My bad. |
![]() |
|
| The Pansy | Jun 10 2008, 01:48:44 PM Post #20 |
|
Eternal Annoyance
![]()
|
Any Anu would be good...... In fact that is the only complaint I have with NATO as a ally |
![]() |
|
| Bud | Jun 10 2008, 01:59:12 PM Post #21 |
![]()
|
great read im still taking notes. |
![]() |
|
| Ardus Cadogan | Jun 10 2008, 02:14:33 PM Post #22 |
![]()
|
Ooooh the Green Civil War. That whole affair was just a shit-sandwich for everybody. |
![]() |
|
| Hakim | Jun 10 2008, 02:15:58 PM Post #23 |
![]()
Former NATO
![]()
|
explain the green civil war for those of us not in the know? please |
![]() |
|
| Ardus Cadogan | Jun 10 2008, 02:22:39 PM Post #24 |
![]()
|
My angle on it? On the WUT end, GGA didn't like us anymore and treaties played out as they had to, due in large part to the total cancellation of treaties for some damn romantic attraction for being an "independent" alliance. On my end, it was just a horrific culmination of RL and IC events into a perfect storm that nearly broke me. I'll try to provide a more detailed explanation of events when I return from voting in the local gov't primary elections. |
![]() |
|
| Duncan King | Jun 10 2008, 04:34:29 PM Post #25 |
![]() ![]()
|
Excellent read, Dilber. I especially enjoyed reading about the era of The Initiative. I was working in the League during that time and actually did a lot of recruiting of alliances for it, including BTA. What was your opinion of the League and later Aegis and why do you think both blocs fell so badly? |
![]() |
|
| Dilber | Jun 11 2008, 08:02:35 AM Post #26 |
![]()
|
The League was unable to do what was necessary. Their only chance was to go nuclear, and that would have completely lost them the support of ODN and Legion, and IRON probably would have come in on our side. Their major mistake was to assume they had all the support they needed, and neglected the diplomatic side. Furthermore, they figured their swarm tactics would work like they did in the GPW. They were wrong on both ends. We actually had the bandwagon advantage in GWII, although the league had more NS. They also failed to prepare their armies correctly as well. Both sides knew the war was coming. We just were better prepared. That was actually the worst fought NPO war. We did fine because we were tanking, but our offensive capabilities were not great in that war, a vast difference to GW III. The League's battleplan involved hoping ODN and Legion would come in, and that just wasn't enough. Aegis hoped GPA would come in, and that was their mistake. Furthermore, counting on Legion as the great hope was a poor choice as well. Everyone on our end knew they were a paper tiger. They'd never fought a major war on their own, and they'd never stayed in a war longer then 2 days. Furthermore their last time fighting a war was almost a year prior. They still ignored diplomacy for the most part, and only had a couple of the outsiders join them, like /b/. They yet again tried swarming, and that proved again to not work. Their inflexibility and inability to adapt killed them. |
![]() |
|
| Tamurin | Jun 11 2008, 09:04:59 AM Post #27 |
![]()
|
Very interesting read, especially the historic part. Many-many-many thanks for taking the time to write this down. Historical information are still difficult to get in CN. |
![]() |
|
| Bodvar Jarl | Jun 14 2008, 03:28:27 PM Post #28 |
![]()
|
Generation shift in government coupled by the biggest FA-issue for us in history....I remember cycling back home from uni a few hours early at one point to get people to see things from the right perspective, eventually Saber and I managed to pull hard enough to get us safely through. Learned a few hard lessons there, IMO we should have ditched WUT with NpO and GGA as it was dead by that time, but when we started to consider that idea, things had already begun to blow up. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · CN Leadership Conference · Next Topic » |














poll

9:31 AM Jul 11