Coming soon - Get a detailed view of why an account is flagged as spam!
view details

This post has been de-listed

It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.

76
In many war games (e.g., Diplomacy), capturing enemy territory increases your production and ability to support an army. How accurate is this mechanic for wars fought since the 19th century?
Post Body

A common mechanic in strategic war games is the gaining of additional production and/or ability to support an army after capturing enemy territory. The rationale for such rules (besides making the game more enjoyable and directed) is presumably that access to additional resources, facilities, soldiers, and workers could potentially boost the war effort.

But how does this potential gain balance against the increased resources required simply to maintain additional territory and the time taken to exploit any newly acquired resources? It seems to me that in many cases it would take years (i.e., longer than the war itself) to implement the necessary infrastructure to reap any such benefits, especially if the invaded country's infrastructure is damaged by the invasion. Are there specific examples of military gains in modern times due to the acquisition of new territory?

Author
Account Strength
100%
Account Age
13 years
Verified Email
Yes
Verified Flair
No
Total Karma
149,114
Link Karma
15,604
Comment Karma
133,451
Profile updated: 18 hours ago
Posts updated: 7 months ago

Subreddit

Post Details

We try to extract some basic information from the post title. This is not always successful or accurate, please use your best judgement and compare these values to the post title and body for confirmation.
Posted
12 years ago