{"id":17823,"date":"2019-07-11T07:00:30","date_gmt":"2019-07-11T12:00:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.d20radio.com\/main\/?p=17823"},"modified":"2019-07-11T06:17:49","modified_gmt":"2019-07-11T11:17:49","slug":"command-school-deterrence-and-compellence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.d20radio.com\/main\/command-school-deterrence-and-compellence\/","title":{"rendered":"Command School – Deterrence and Compellence"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cNice place you got here. Be a shame if anything happened to it.” – Mob Intimidation Innuendo<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This series has found a recent focus on diplomatic strategy. Last week, I covered collective defense<\/a>. Before that, balancing<\/a> and bandwagoning<\/a> got a post each. The beauty of diplomatic strategy is that it transcends a specific game or game series. So long as the basic dynamics are there in the abstract, namely strategic actors pursuing understandable interests, diplomatic strategy principles can be applied.<\/p>\n

That said, without some game effect forcing another player to do your bidding, the question becomes how to force their hand? Although no guarantee of success, understanding the principles of deterrence and compellence gives you a set of tools useful for getting your way.<\/p>\n

Deterrence and Compellence<\/h3>\n

While similar and often employed together, deterrence and compellence are best understood as distinct concepts.<\/p>\n

Deterrence<\/strong> is the process of\u00a0discouraging another party from taking hostile actions by presenting a credible threat of retaliation. Deterrence relies upon the perception that the defending party has the strength and willingness to retaliate, possibly in escalation of the conflict. Retaliation must be credible and probable not only for flagrant aggression, but also should be perceived as a possibility even for smaller scale transgressions. This uncertainty on the lower end helps protect against salami-slicing (taking an objective one slice at a time) and faits accompli (taking an objective immediately, and thus putting the defender into the role of an attacker), which are common counters to strategies of deterrence.<\/p>\n

Compellence<\/strong>, on the other hand, seeks to force another party to actively take a specific action. As discussed in my post on deception<\/a>, making another party act the way you want is no easy feat. Attempts to coerce another party rely on a good understanding of their psychology;\u00a0understanding their motivations and fears is essential to guiding their actions. There are two main tools to compellence: messaging and demonstration. Messaging is just that, communication of threats and promises to coerce action. As with deterrence, such messages must be backed by credible force. Demonstrations are forceful, but limited actions undertaken to achieve compliance. Controlled levels of pain are administered alongside instructions on what behavioral change is necessary to coerce the target into a specific action.<\/p>\n

Explanatory Example\u00a0– Twilight Imperium<\/h3>\n

Although\u00a0Diplomacy\u00a0<\/em>might be the obvious choice for an article on diplomatic strategy,\u00a0Twilight Imperium (TI)<\/em> and its higher degree of\u00a0granularity offers a few different ways to illustrate today’s concepts. Not familiar with the game? Check out this review of\u00a0Twilight Imperium 4th Edition<\/em>.<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Copyright Fantasy Flight Games.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Here’s a short list of example approaches to either deterrence or compellence in TI.<\/p>\n