Your style of playing a single player campaign in relation to diplomacy

[twgamer20197]

What's you style of playing? I mean, do you like to use the diplomacy section of the game very often? Do you like making alliances with others? Either defensive or military alliances. Or do you prefer not getting along well with all or most factions ( for example at least those factions that are near your borders ) and instead relying on force to fulfill the chapter objectives?

I know the positive side of making alliances with others is that they serve you to distract other enemy factions while you can concentrate all your military forces on a particular one at a time. But the negative side is that when another faction declares war on your either defensive or military ally or client state or satrapy and you don't want to get involved, the alliance or the client state or satrapy breaks. Or when you ask for military support to an ally but it refuses, then that coward ally it is of no use for you.

[KoryHold]

Yeah, I always use diplomacy.

First turns of the game is the time when large amount of money is needed ASAP. So I try to offer a Trade Agreement/Non-Aggression Pact to all nations that are not my first 10-turns targets. Of course, asking for some coins from their side for such an offer.

Later in the game it's always Trade with everybody I can reach, as well as Non-Aggression where I don't plan to fight for 10+ turns. I like to create Client States/Satrapies later in the game, after Imperium V, in some kind of isolated part of my empire (so this nation cannot be engaged in conflicts with other clients/satrapies or with more powerfull enemy). But sometimes I specifically create such an 'ally' between me and potential enemy, especially when I plan to use limited amount of my forces.

As for alliances, I tend to create them only lategame and only with large enough nations that can stand upon themselfs. Thus I can 'fight' in their wars, but if they are powerfull enough - I even don't need to look over them, they will be fine.

[Alwyn]

I like having an ally when I'm going into a tough war, such as when there's a high risk of having to fights wars on two fronts and my ally can hold off the enemy on one side while I fight on the other. I like the way that regions held by full military allies count as yours for victory purposes. It can also be useful having an ally when you're a faction which can have cheaper mercenaries, and there are useful mercenaries in their territory.

[LuckyPistol]

I enjoy making trade agreements too much. Sometimes if I find myself with no immediate threats or need to expand I'll send my spies and fleets out to explore to try and boost my economy with trade routes.

When I get bigger and don't want to hit the next level of Imperium I try to establish client states/satrapies (if possible), and some factions have an early game where your immediate enemy may serve better as a conquered vassal than acquired territory (Colchis comes to mind).

I try not to make NAP/alliances with factions that share a province or are sitting on a trade resource (that's MY lead!). But defensive alliances with a nearby faction of equal strength have definitely benefitted me in the past, particularly with factions that can confederate.

[kesa82]

Lol , I'm sure THE reason Rome 2 is still my go - to computer game is I'm still trying to create the ideal ( My version of ideal ) Greek / Spartan Empire.

And that means endlessly trying to finesse diplomacy.

To begin with , trying to paint the entire map my color simply doesn't make sense , and , indeed , would be deplorable.

My goal is to make the world Greek / Spartan.

But I think that is a highly dubious proposition if I take the whole map. If I take the entire map , I must inevitably create a circumstance where I could not possibly assimilate the whole.

On the contrary , what is certain to happen is that one day my Spartan citizen will awaken to a new day where the reality is that he has become a foreigner in his own country.

The only way I could absorb the entire map , but avoid this , would be to somehow compel Greeks to breed literally like roaches ... for 300 years straight ... ( quite an unlikely scheme ) , and plain exterminate everyone else . Also a very unlikely scheme.

So I must needs get creative with diplomacy.

Of course , An All Diplomacy Options - Mod is a must - have.

The way the game works , Client States are simply hopeless. You must have the option to create Satrapies instead.

And , likewise , you must have the option to loot a settlement , but not take it.

So that --- hopefully --- you can set a target objective in Diplomacy , then march YOUR army up to the settlement and destroy the garrison , so that on the next turn ---hopefully --- your Satrapy can occupy that settlement with ITS army.

( Unfortunately it seems like in this game no sooner do you turn a faction into a puppet state than the puppet states IQ and / or military capability drops through the floor. It's like trying to prop up The Republic of South Vietnam. --- But then I suppose that's where the fun is.

While I habitually / compulsively play Sparta , there are many factions I like very much in the game. --- I just don't like playing them.

Egypt , for example , has cool temples , a lot of history , the gangster chic Ptolemy's , and I don't like North African real estate ; It's too hot , and too much desert. Also , it's the only Greek culture faction in the game that occasionally has female rulers . When my ruler is 70 years old anyway , and I'm going broke educating my many , many grandchildren anyway , it's kinda neat to marry him off to an Egyptian Cleopatra.

Between Egypt , Cyrene , and hopefully Syracuse , I can turn North Africa Greek from one end to the other , but without having to colonize it myself.

Allies ? Grrr , most of the time , non - aggression pacts are as far as I'll go. Allies have a nasty habit of blobbing and taking land I want myself.

There are a few exceptions ;

-- Again , Egypt . Egypt is near always too busy with North Africa to interfere with my designs on Anatolia and the Black sea. Egypt might make a mess of my designs on Syria . ( I absolutely must have Syrian elephants , Syrian archers , silk , and the Paradise of Daphne ! ) But , in that case , I will simply have to kick them out of Syria , and then later make friends of them again.

-- Syracuse . As I understand it , historically Sparta and Syracuse were generally very chummy . And in my games Syracuse habitually never expands into Europe on account of Rome being in the way.
It always expands into North Africa , which , as I said , someone else is welcome to have.

-- Massilia . I might have to kick them out of northern Italy . Otherwise ; Western Gaul and Spain ? I really don't need that much real estate in the frozen north , And I really don't care much for Spain.

Getting back to Satrapies ; As I said , there are many factions that I like for various eccentric reasons , but which I don't want to play , and which I HATE to see disappear from the map.

Crete and Colchis. Royal Scythia . The Scordisci. The Seubi. Dragiana , The Pictones . Persia . Cyprus. The Celtiberi. The Etruscan League ( They are sorta like Greeks , right ? ) . Saba.

One of the two Ethiopian Factions . And one or two of the minor factions in the British Isles.

Perhaps all of this gives you something of an idea of why I'm still playing this game years later , and primarily on account of Diplomacy ?

[kesa82]

It can also be useful having an ally when you're a faction which can have cheaper mercenaries, and there are useful mercenaries in their territory.

By the way , if anyone is interested , Seebie's Auxilliary Mod applies the Roman Auxilliary system to other factions . It can , in some cases , reap considerable savings in Mercenary hiring costs.

For example , in the case of Sparta ; It is of no help when it comes to Cretan Archers , Gorgos slingers , Molossian War dogs , Syrian elephants , Syrian archers , Gladiatrices , Samnite Warriors , or Etruscan Hoplites . I gotta buy those at full purchase and maintainance cost .

HOWEVER , Thracian , Dacian , Cappadocian , and Illyrian cavalry , Rhodian Slingers , Scythian Armored horse archers , and Illyrian Raiders , are some of the units which I have found that I can buy and maintain for the same price as my native Spartan troops !

It saves me a ton of money ! I love my exotic foreign units !

[twgamer20197]

Some people don't like the idea of having allies or client states/satrapries because they betray later or break the treaty. That doesn't necessarily have to happen. That happens because people don't study what those factions like and dislike. If you continuously do things your allies/client states hate, in that case they would gradually break treaties with you over time.

This is what I learned from playing campaigns:

Don't ask any ally nor satrapy/client state to join a war at the moment you declare war to a faction or when a faction declares war to you. The treaties with your allies or satrapies/client states would break if they refuse to join. It is better to ask them to join later in the diplomacy section. Not at the moment you declare war to a faction ( Nor at the moment when a faction declares you war )

[twgamer20197]

One mistake I see some gamers make is when they need a city to complete a province: a defensive ally or military ally or a friendly faction ( with whom the gamer has treaties ) has the city he needs to fully control the province, they attack that faction. That would just give a serious diplomacy penalty in relation to all factions because they condemn attacking an ally or a faction with whom you have at least one treaty or agreement.
They are either unaware or they forget that it is possible to get the city they need by diplomatic missions. I always get the city I need after 5-7 tries ( in 5-7 consecutive turns ) of diplomatic missions I send to that faction.