what do you perfer

[The Blind Samurai]

well i perfer milltary might what do you guys perfer

[Underdog687]

dimpolacy (which to me incorpartes trade and religion), if that fails then take them by force.

[IrishArmenian]

I use a mix of diplomacy sabatoge but it all comes down to mite, in the end.

[Keba]

Diplomacy through military might. Some would call that bullying, but nobody is perfect.

[King Henry V]

The only way you can win is by military might, so that's where my vote goes. However, my huge wealth is founded on trade, which is thus indispensable. Sabotage is fun though, like when I was playing my last campagin as the Crusader States, I sent a load of Syria trained assassins to kill of the 63 year old Danish King, who was the only member of his family. They succeeded, and I moved my troops in to conquer Northern France, Scandinavia and England. One problem was that the Pope, who was already very powerful, moved into the Danish possessions in Spain. I also managed to bump off the Aragonese faction through assassins, which made conquering some of their provinces a little easier (they had a bout six full stacks in Cordoba alone), but again His Holiness got involved and took territories which should have been mine. But it did create a killer rebel faction which actually invaded the Pope's lands and mine.

[Underdog687]

I know the game always ends in a military takeover (all but 1 of my RTW games where i bribed 5 provence's to make up the 50.
But in the mid game where there are alot of 'strong' factions and alot of 'weak' factions their are alternite paths to take. For me i would do all but military might, as that comes anyway.

[Midnight]

Strength at arms decides everything, but that's based on wealth, so I'll say trade (no money = no army, or at least no fresh troops).

[Stig]

marrgie

erhh?

[The Blind Samurai]

marrying off you princess to a price of anthoer faction and milltay and money are the ones i prefer as a combo how about you guys

[screwtype]

dimpolacy (which to me incorpartes trade and religion), if that fails then take them by force.

Dimpolacy - isn't that what the Bush administration practices?

[The Blind Samurai]

but what combo do you perfer

[screwtype]

Military might. Dimpolacy, sabatoge and relgion are all cheating in my book

[Ibn Munqidh]

I prefer Keba's method, diplomacy through a show of strength. If the enemy does not yeild, then the sword.

[The Blind Samurai]

i will use trade first then might to crush the pope him self

[Mount Suribachi]

*sound of ABBA playing in the background*

Money, money, money.

In that order.

"Infinite money, the sinews of war"

[The Blind Samurai]

*slaps him*what about milltary might

[Martok]

I'm hoping the diplomacy will not only be robust, but logical as well. I don't want to see any one-province factions attacking an faction with 10 times its size/military might. Of course, that largely rests on the AI again.

That said, I believe in the maxim "peace through strength". If I have a strong army and am everyone's most profitable trading partner, they're not going to be very inclined to attack me.

[TB666]

I voted for trade.
You become so filthy rich you can do anything, nobody can stop you.
Someone tries to attack you then just bribe them and problem gone.
See a nice city then just buy it.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

no economy option?
basically if i have a good economy, i can just recruit two stacks and defeat a faction while still making thousands of money each turn.

[The Blind Samurai]

trade is the encomy option

[Bioximo]

I like the diplomacy with the military force I mean " Accept it or we will attack! "

[Haxorsist]

I prefer Diplomacy. Building up a huge army and whacking people around with it is so easy. I like tricks and scheming, it makes me feel so clever.

[Underdog687]

I prefer Diplomacy. Building up a huge army and whacking people around with it is so easy. I like tricks and scheming, it makes me feel so clever.

Exactlly how i feel all the other options but militry might id pefer as you have to use war anyway in the late game.

[The Blind Samurai]

lets get some of the mods to se what they prefer HEY MODS WHAT DO YOU PREFER

[Bob the Insane]

Sabatoge (or as it is better known 'Sabotage' )

I love having a army of assassins and spies at my bidding...

It is amazing how much you can dabble in other faction's conflicts without actually being at war with them. I suppose religion would fall into this too (as in generating religious unrest) and you need to have the military might on hand for when things don't go so well...

[The Blind Samurai]

soory about that and you are insane

[Vladimir]

How are you all going to finance those large armies? Hmmmm?

[Kralizec]

I try different strategies for different factions.

Playing as Byzantines should be done in a Byzantine fashion, cunning diplomacy and with lots of spies and assasins
As the French I'd probably use diplomacy to my best advantage, while as the HRE military expansion would be my preffered strategy.

Overall I chose sabotage because there's hardly anything more satisfying then leveling up your assasins and then let them finish off enemy kings

[grzeg]

Seeing the battle map is always nicer than spending time on the campaign one. I like to use my armies, but sometimes you have to think how to make use of military victories and not to waste too many precious units. You can't raise huge armies without stable economy. You can't have stable economy without trade.

But the look of the battle map, of a field or a besieged city is the best to me.

[Little Legioner]

Trade off course

Every great power nominee must have a strong economy first. For better equipment, larger force and support of your field armies with fresh troops depends on your financial capacity.