Military conquest vs diplomatic unification

A military-oriented and sci-fi wargame, set on procedural planets with customizable factions and endless choices.

Moderator: Vic

Post Reply
Maerchen
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 3:05 pm
Location: Germany

Military conquest vs diplomatic unification

Post by Maerchen »

I played for some months now and I won the game by conquest and diplomacy several times.

Military conquest arguments:

+ good against everything. Monsters, slavers, minors, majors, multiplayer
+ uses all the techs
- can stress you and your economy
- stresses your logistics
+ awesome to smash an opponent and make his wife lament
+ killing enemy units gives XP to your units, making them better
- minor units disappear when their city falls

Diplomatic conquest arguments:

+ very good against minor regimes
-doesn't work (anymore) vs minor territories - slavers must be fought
+ works very good against major AI regimes that are susceptible to diplomacy
+ less stress to your economy
+ less overall stress during gameplay
+ unified minors add their full army as militia units to your forces
- unified minor militia forces that are upgrading to your standard (30 turn rule) can totally down your logistics for a long time until you have adequate logistic point supply
-doesn't work vs human players(?) - haven't tried pbEm

Anything I forgot?




The logistics hell this game is IS the fun part! - Maerchen, 2020

The good thing is, we have all the information in the reports. The bad thing is, we have all the information. Maerchen, 2020

Came for SE. Will stay for SE.
User avatar
jimwinsor
Posts: 1077
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:53 pm
Contact:

RE: Military conquest vs diplomatic unification

Post by jimwinsor »

The only thing I would add is that Diplomatic conquest requires logistical preparation. In other words, you can't just go out there establishing protectorates and client states all over the map, willy nilly.

Before you even make a move on a minor, you need to have a plan in place to connect their capital (or, at the very least, their militia) to your SHQ. If you don't, at the moment of annexation, all the minor's militia will be forced to trace to your SHQ, rather than the minor capitol. If the minor is on the other end of the map ... that's gonna be a problem.

You could place a 2nd SHQ in the minor, but that creates other issues down the road. Micro-managing transfers between SHQs is a pain in rear, and as things stand now, you might be stuck with that 2nd SHQ forever: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4928538
Streaming as "Grognerd" at https://www.twitch.tv/grognerd
User avatar
Clux
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 9:00 pm
Location: Mexico

RE: Military conquest vs diplomatic unification

Post by Clux »

Having a mix of both would be the best in my opinion, on a mp game two players were playing the diplo annex game, kinda like EU4, while blocking the advances of another player and I... At the end, both of the diplo annex players got lots of territory, militias and loyal zones really quickly, and we won't be able to catch up with them due not having anywhere else to expand
Amateurs talk about strategy. Professionals talk about logistics!
Post Reply

Return to “Shadow Empire”