Ever played a game where you intentionally kept all factions alive?

[BFG]

I decided to try something different in my latest game: going out of my way to keep every faction alive.

Playing as  , I soon found myself in some interesting situations.    and  joined forces to fight against me when I refused to give them my tech.  later was forced to become Pact Brothers with  to keep her from being wiped out by the same group.    ended up declaring Vendetta on  and while  was just content to watch the whole spectacle.

Anyway, I've made it to year 2400 and everyone's still alive.    is the only faction with any significant power left, but it's been fun.

[Matt the Czar]

Yes, and i find it very fun to have little puppet-factions.  I am a big fan of having my own story in a playthrough.

[testdummy653]

I try to do this almost every game. I usually make them be submissive to me and most games. I will have everyone except one or two that are to weak to even deal with. I can usually keep the peace. Occasionally I will lose two submissive pact brother because another submissive pact brother frames me for a probe team action..

[ete]

Usually I leave beaten foes with one base if I can, an extra forcible vote on council is worth more to me than a badly placed/low pop/low infrastructure base.

[Green1]

I have seen a LP or two where factions were kept around merely for the commerce and trade benefits and extra EC to make rushing final SPs easier.

[JarlWolf]

I typically am against destroying factions in the first place. I play the game for it's story aspect and the interesting situations developed between factions, and I also like the epic battles and grinding warfare that takes place between the factions.

The only way faction's typically die in my game is if there is an actual reason my faction in the storyline that forms would want them destroyed, or if computers eradicate each other.

[ariete]

I also try to keep alive all the factions in order to maintain a status quo in my favor, more player in game less other factions become super powerful. Securing military protection and aids or economical support, or free the capture leaders, my tendency is to create a block of low - medium factions (i play thinker difficult level) which i can direct the decisions to ensure that the strongest losed his force.

[Tarvok]

One thing that can be interesting is carefully pruning other factions in an effort to maintain a true balance of power. When I'm playing this way, my goal in a war isn't to force a pact to serve, it's to reshape the power dynamic such that I am perpetually in second place by the numbers, with the other factions all very, very close in power (by handing the bases of the most powerful over to the least powerful factions). Since I'm in second place in a (theoretically) competitive situation, I don't have any problems with factions being all "blur de blur ur 2 pwrful", so I have the ability to end any war just by asking for it.

[ariete]

yes, I also handing, and just lately more frequently, the bases of the most powerful over to the least powerful factions, in geographic positions that do not interest me strategically, it's better not be selfish and keep a balance of power in this way too. Pacts and other diplomatic choices follow the principle of balace, so the block of average - weak factions will be united against the 1 or 2 strongest factions.

[ariete]

another thing makes more balance between the factions and help to kept all factions alive is to use 2 acquatic faction in the game: just one becomes too strong, also because is little attacked until an enemy faction develops an adequate fleet or begins with air strikes. My custom factions have 2 aquatic, one human and one alien, and i see more competition in the seas than just one sea-lord of the oceans.