Quote Originally Posted by Cheetah
The clear novelty of TW series are the tactical battles (there are many empire building games with better diplomacy, more depth, etc). Yet, most people are interested in the campaign. Why?
Interesting question - I agree with Tincow and frogbeastegg, the answer is that the campaign gives meaning to the battles. What I really enjoy are the amazing battles, which as you say are the novelty and comparative advantage of TW over other titles. But I only can be motivated to play the battles if they are part of an over-arcing campaign, where they matter.

Forget about MP for a moment, as there is the social side and other sides to that, but think about the SP historical battles. They generally provide a better challenge than SP campaign battles and can be more realistic, but still they hold zero interest to me. They just seem a little pointless. Most hardcore wargames also seem rather like this - offering standalone battles or at best linked scenarios. The beauty of TW is embedding the awesome battles within an open campaign, with a real economic and strategic layer as well as increasing diplomatic and role-playing features.

I good analogy might be with a TV series, whether people like standalone stories (one per episode) or a long over-arching plot that spans the entire series. I find the 45 minute standalone format can often be rather limiting and lead to something rather trite, whereas my imagination can be caught by the 5 year story arc of Bablyon 5 or Lost's planned 6 year story arc that really lets you get caught up with the story and plot.