Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Systemic Empire Management

  1. #1

    Default Systemic Empire Management

    The way most people (including myself) play the campaign part of a Total War game is a bit anarchic. Jump from economics to army management and city building, do a little bit of this, a little bit of that and so on. I know that if I want to play a serious country management simulator I have to look elsewhere, but still, is there a guide that analyzes the campaign gameplay in order to manage your empire systematically (with a top-down approach for example) and introduces levels of abstraction? Or am I asking too much?
    ...ὣς οἵ γ᾽ ἀμφίεπον τάφον Ἕκτορος ἱπποδάμοιο.

  2. #2
    M2TWRocks's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    2,058

    Default Re: Systemic Empire Management

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrasymachus View Post
    The way most people (including myself) play the campaign part of a Total War game is a bit anarchic. Jump from economics to army management and city building, do a little bit of this, a little bit of that and so on. I know that if I want to play a serious country management simulator I have to look elsewhere, but still, is there a guide that analyzes the campaign gameplay in order to manage your empire systematically (with a top-down approach for example) and introduces levels of abstraction? Or am I asking too much?
    Judging by the lack of responses, I'd say it possible you are asking too much. I am an accountant and always approach games like this from an analytical/ financial point of view. Everything is based on cost-benefit analysis and my primary purpose is always to run a financially sound empire who can sustain indefinitely against any odds. That being said, I'm usually defeated in campaigns more by lack of interest than anything else.

    I understand your interest in a more long term strategic plan. I've tried to implement this in campaigns in the past. It's very loose, of course, but I'll have a general mission statement, vision statement, strategic objectives, etc. But honestly, it almost always falls through when I begin the campaign. There's a lot of room for error in these games, so you can just follow a small set of criteria and usually do decently enough. For me that criteria has been simple: make alliances and only take a retaliatory stance when it comes to warfare. If you do this you can usually eventually surpass anything the AI can do financially, giving you a huge resource advantage. I play exclusively on normal or hard though. Anything above that makes your options so limited it's not fun for me anymore. I'm an obsessive, task-management person in real life so I play the game like I "play" my life: risk-averse, conservative, and efficient as possible. I also follow some of the principles of "Art of War" and never make the obvious mistakes from WWII (war on two fronts is a big no-no.) Sometimes I'll read up on the history of a faction and create a probable persona of my faction leader. Again, it's all loose and I usually lose interest once the AI can't possibly stand a chance against me.

  3. #3
    Atlas5515's Avatar Foederatus
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    si meum locum requiris, circumspice
    Posts
    29

    Default Re: Systemic Empire Management

    I tend to play very loose as well with this type of stuff. But if I had to abstract the campaign part it would be kind of like this.

    Evaluate national compulsions and constraints. (SWOT might help here, but I usually just freeform this)

    Define long-term imperatives. (Obtaining strategic depth from my industrial heartland, certain military capabilities, eliminating a potential threat from a neighboring nation.)

    Usually here you would go over methods, but I don't really use diplomacy, so it's mostly smash everything to bits and try not to have too many wars going on at once.

    Define short-term imperatives. (Armies you need to mass at a critical juncture, the minimum number of troops you need to raise, that negative happiness or food, a settlement, chain of settlements, or nation you need to conquer.)

    Determine methods (using spy to slow army, sending an extra army to conquer territory faster, etc etc etc.)

    Tools: Buildings, recruitment, agent/army movement. I almost always start with buildings first, get the ones you need (usually food/gold/whatever you decided was the most important), then recruit the troops you need (if you're short on money decide whether to cancel a building or make do without the troops and make sure you have enough gold left over for planned agent actions).

    Move agents/armies. End turn.

    Evaluate opponent's turn. Meld with current short term imperatives/evaluate effectiveness of current methods. Start on buildings, then recruitment then army movement. Loop until there are changes in your long term plan. Then loop from the beginning.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Systemic Empire Management

    I usually use a "regional" approach, i.e. divide the map into several different "Theaters of war" and working down the fifo-Queue

    One of those ToWs is always the "homefront theatre" which includes provincial Organisation & economy, but also taxes, trade, politics and Research

    Different geographical Theaters are defined mainly Military, but not exclusive so.

    e.g. playing Carthage I might first deal with my North african homefront, then jump to Spain where I have a war under way, then jump to Italy supporting the Etruscans, weakening the Romans and making allies for future war, then jump to the eastern frontier (Cyrenaica, Egypt) where it is all about non-Aggression and trade Agreements, just moving this single spy a Little around...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •