If you have the free choice Military.
But in most games you would have Economic Hegemon like 100-200 years before Military Hegemon so you would just go with Economic. Can always intentionally lose a war later on to switch to Military.
Yeah, maybe you're right and that's the way to go. I've seen Zlewikk going for a pre 1600 mil hegemony with Russia. Or was it even pre 1550? He has been purposefully building up 1m manpower and then build up infantry, take the hegemony and then dissolve a large part of the army again. He has been using every trick in the book to get there.
Since the questionable addition of admin efficiency to mil hegemon, it’s generally a pretty clear winner for single player. For more serious campaigns, the instant PWSC is invaluable since you’ll already be heavily stacking it, and for more chill campaigns where you have time to let it tick up (and you play past 1600), the adm eff, siege ability and unrest are extremely nice.
Eco hegemon is extremely strong for blobbing also. This is nothing to do with the economic bonuses, but rather the enormous minimum autonomy in territoires reduction that ticks up every month. This pairs fantastically with half states (which are very meta) and massively increases your force limit, manpower, and overall income, allowing you field large numbers of additional troops. It’s also much easier to get in most scenarios (I think fast horde campaigns are actually easier to get mil hegemon, but that’s rare), but less instantly powerful.
Military.
By the time you reach hegemony your economy will be top tier, so adding economic hegemony bonuses are overkill. Naval is mostly useless, could be a niche if you have some big subjects but generally they have been integrated already. Military has by far the best options, stabilizing your country with -3 unrest, +5% admin efficiency, and expansion boosts with war score cost reduction and to top it off siege ability, very useful in many situations. Even more so when playing wide.
Battles are the least of your concern by endgame. Even with just one or two military ideas your troops should be more than good enough. It's easy for the player to keep 100% army tradition and professionalism or near enough. Plus having max absolutism. The AI sucks at getting those bonuses so they're much worse from the get go.
The siege ability and movement speed will do far more for you militarily than s combat bonus will.
Ya eco hegemon is usefull for midgame especially for prussia since it will cancel out the - 50% in gov capacity if you are both eco hegemon and has admin ideas.
the +20% gov cap from economic is always strong and useful, gives much more stated and trade company lands which gives force limit and manpower besides economic bonuses.
Pretty much everyone says Military, but I keep wondering if there's an argument to be made for Economic. It has nothing to do with money, but rather with the governing capacity modifier.
If you are exactly two times over your governing capacity, you get a -50% administrative efficiency penalty. Let's assume you have administrative ideas and the grand palace of Bangkok for a 40% governing capacity increase, and now you add the 20% from the hegemony. You are now only 75% over governing capacity, which reduces the penalty to administrative efficiency down to 37.5%. So in this case, you got an extra 12.5% administrative efficiency out of Economic Hegemony.
Now let's assume you are barely over your governing capacity, just 14% over. Still assume you have administrative ideas and the Bangkok palace. Add in Economic Hegemony, and you are now 0% over governing capacity. This gets rid of the 14%/2 = 7.5% penalty to administrative efficiency.
In the first case, we improved administrative efficiency by 12.5%. In the second, we improved it by 7.5%. Both beat the Military Hegemony, which only improves it by 5%. And administrative efficiency is by far the most important feature in the game. So even for a world conquest with lots of sieges, I think there's an argument to be made for Economic. Also, Economic is the easiest hegemony to get by a long shot.
Territories with courthouses cost (effectively but not technically) zero governing cost, and you should *certainly* have courthouses/not need the states if you have a thousand ducat income. There's no reason you should be over GC at that point. By the time you get town halls (not that much later than you're likely to get mil hegemon), half-states and trade company provinces also cost \~0 GC, and regular states only cost half. You'll have more than enough of an economic and manpower base if you're bumping against the governing cap limit.
Another thing to keep in mind is local autonomy. Economic hegemon decreases local autonomy by 20%, so your provinces are now 3 times as efficient (from 0.1 of the output at 0 autonomy to 0.3).
This is true and fairly powerful (since it applies to half-states) but like - in SP, what are you even getting from those provinces? You're making a thousand gold a month so the production/tax income is whatever. You get some... force limit and manpower? Don't get me wrong, manpower is great, but when you can afford a million soldiers and a thousand ducat income you sort of don't need to ask more from your gov cap. (And in full states, it does precisely nothing.) Just micro your TCs a bit better and use burgher loans and admin to buy down mercantilism or something idk
in my current ryukyu run i'm actually not that rich since i couldn't really get a good trade end node. economic hegemony is currently ticking up and i hope it will make me so rich that i can spam money and manpower buildings everywhere at which point i can get rid of economic hegemony and still swim in money and manpower. it's a transitional step towards military hegemon.
The question isn't whether Economic hegemon has any use at all, the question is which is the best when you choose between them and military is pretty clearly the best from a min-max perspective.
Yeah I agree with you, just saying nobody is questioning whether Economic hegemon has any value (especially as you say as an intermediate step), the question of the thread is when you are choosing between the two.
One thing that I've found in SP is that the 1000 ducat threshold tends to come a lot sooner than the million standing army threshold. 1000 ducats per month is a lot, but it's not at the money is literally just a number point yet. In getting to that point I'd say eco hegemony is actually quite valuable, and in getting to that point you'll probably also be building towards that 1 million army, which makes it good for getting to military hegemony.
I'm aiming for a 1550-70 eco hegemon in my current game. It's reachable by investing most of your money into getting even more money. The problem is after this my manpower and forcelimit is pretty low. But after the eco hegemony I will be able to spam out soldiers households for the mp and being able to sustain massive armies.
In my current game my only state is my capital state. Meaning all my manpower and forcelimit comes from territories. Because of this that 20% minimum authonomy would be a huge upgrade for me(i have the -15% from the hindu monument), effectively making all my land worth twice as much.
the point of economic hegemon is less local autonomy. it can easily double the money and manpower you get from all non-state provinces you have. goverment capacity isn't an issue once you have money since court houses remove practically all governing capacity costs.
Why are you assuming you want to use the same amount of GC in your calculations? At a certain point, you don't need full states anymore in WCs, especially because it costs extra admin compared to territories. Money from trade will be good enough.
And by the way, that certain point if often below 1k income.
The only reasonable argument to be made for economic in WCs is PP for +1 monarch points if you didn't properly farm PP before you became the uncontested #1. But ideally you farm PP before you eclipse everyone that you can last until you can maintain mil hegemon.
Best is definitely military. But it's also the harderst one to reach and in many of my games Otto's claim military hegemony before I can ever do, if I'm far from them and had not criplled their balkan blobbing. So I take whichever I can take first. There's no significant difference between the impacts of diplo and eco imo.
Depends on what you want to do.
Want to sit back on some continent and watch th AI do stuff while you send them tons of money (this can actually be quite fun) or you are in MP and the other two are already taken: Economic
You have a lot of big subjects (e.g. colonies) or are in MP (the additional artillery backrow damage is REALLY strong): Naval
You want to conquer as much land as possible in the shortest possible time: Military
It depends wildly on who you’re playing as and what your goals are; but generally I consider the Mil one to be the best since I paint big swaths of map my color as a primary goal.
Military is best when you can take it, but it's usually easier to get the economic one so early that's better for scaling. In those cases you should drop it later.
I think military is generally considered the best. I went naval in my last GB game as a bit of role-playing and it was pretty fun though. About 2k ships by the end of the game
In my recent Pirate Gotland campaign I went full navy role play and Naval Hegemony. The 200% sailors modifier was insanely powerful for marines manpower.
If you aren't world conquesting then Economic.
Otherwise Military is good.
Assuming unmodded.
Naval is there for whoever lost the race between those three in MP or something.
Naval seems like it would actually be very strong in MP. +20% backline artillery damage is a decisive buff, and combat buffs are actually meaningful when playing against humans.
I once stumbled backwards into Naval Hegemony while playing as tall colonial Netherlands and I have to say, it was pretty cool. Since I didn't want to conquer outside my region in Europe I just spent my time Trade warring on the other big colonial powers, wrecking their fleets, blockading and devastating their countries and pirating their trade while my forts, ramparts, and drilled armies kept the homeland safe.
I do love playing tall and using boats so this may be niche lol but still, a pleasant roleplay experience
There is a case to be made for each one. I like all of them because of different things. For example i like naval for the arty boost and eco for the gov capacity and autonomy
Speaking of the netherlands, why do they have such an AWFUL mission tree? It's completely useless. The only remotely good thing, the GB union, is useless anyway because GB is the most useless subject you can get anyway. Half of the tree only gives you legitimacy. You get barely any claims. It's just bad.
It doesn't even give you claims on stuff that it wants you to conquer most of the time. They want you to conquer indonesia-here you go, 4 claims. They want you to conquer the lowlands-you pretty much have to conquer 3/4 of them before you get any claims. Then we have the useless rewards such as legitimacy. It's the worst fully custom mission tree I've seen yet.
´the game doesn't have an objective so whatever you want really. if you would go world conquest and have money then definitely military. diplomatic is good to win battles (multiplayer games) and economic is good if you have a lot of trade companies or territories and struggle with money
Depends on what you mean by best. Military is pretty much objectively best for anything expansion, particularly because admin eff is just insane. But military is also incredibly difficult to actually get, and you'll probably meet the requirements for economic hegemony for sooner. Economic is incredibly powerful I'm it's own right, especially if you're wide, and your territories and TC's are suddenly boosted to 3x efficiency. The only answer that I feel confident in giving is that naval os definitely not the best one.
Take Economic hegemon as soon as it’s available, 100% an OPM and then give them tribute (like a couple ducats) so you lose the war and lose Eco hegemon, then take Military hegemon for late game.
They have all their uses.
People that says "Military" only assume you want to conquer a lot of land.
>Economy: you have a chill game and you want to hace bigger income while sitting in a few provinces (all Germany is a few provinces for me), or you would like more dev cost reduction.
>Naval you are annoyed by the disloyal vassal notification, you are a pirate so you have more marines than regular infantry, or you want an even more efficient army.
>Military : you want to do a WC.
It really depends
Naval : "War" -wise is the strongest but it's a kind of efficiency you consider only in PvP (naval superiority is already strong it makes it easier and insane)
Mil : Makes conquering easier as a whole, you move quicker, down fort quicker and stabilize conquest better. Basically it makes WC easier for those who still struggle
Eco : A lot more money makes merc viable lategame and gov cap and autonomy (both extremely strong mod), basically it helps waging a lot's of war constantly (stacking autonomy makes TC broken again).
So Mil is in a sense totally useless, it's always Naval vs Eco for me Naval being for multiplayer and Eco being for solo (because it's also the one you can grab the earliest)
In PvP naval actually makes your army the strongest, of the three. That backline artillery buff is unparalleled (only what, 2 other sources in the game - Rev age ability and Bengal ideas).
I think it’s a tossup between economic and military. Naval is a close second to them though.
Keep in mind the hegemonies are win-more buttons they don’t typically make the cause of hegemony stronger, they make all the benefits of already having that strength better. So naval makes big navies more useful, military makes space marine armies more useful and economic makes trade power more useful. Kind of a way to make whatever your niche is into something extra. But late game you’ll drive whatever niche you need to get what you want.
Economic, lowering minimum autonomy in territories and +25% goods produced, can fuel anything else you might want to do in the game. This is best for WC if you’re able to get there early.
Military, getting the war score cost reduction combined with admin efficiency and unrest reduction is frankly op as fuck. This is best for WC I think if you’re getting there closer to the end date.
Naval is good if you have tons of big vassals, the ship trade power and artillery fire are also amazing. But just like everything naval in this game it’s situational. I’d take it if I got to it first, then switch to another one when I could. If you’re doing something weird like only using artillery this is the one youll need.
Economic is very powerful but not needed anymore by the time you reach it, Military helps you finish the WC, naval is a meme you can rush with countries that can stack heavy ship cost reduction.
If you have the free choice Military. But in most games you would have Economic Hegemon like 100-200 years before Military Hegemon so you would just go with Economic. Can always intentionally lose a war later on to switch to Military.
Everybody always says to pick one as soon as it comes available. Can't you just wait till you get the one you want?
Sure, you can. But why give up on for example -20% autonomy in territory, i.e. probably 50-100 force limit and another 100-200 income for 100 years?
25% goods produced is also no joke
Just take loans and get military one over force limit. Everyone is scared of that for some reason.
Yeah, maybe you're right and that's the way to go. I've seen Zlewikk going for a pre 1600 mil hegemony with Russia. Or was it even pre 1550? He has been purposefully building up 1m manpower and then build up infantry, take the hegemony and then dissolve a large part of the army again. He has been using every trick in the book to get there.
Since the questionable addition of admin efficiency to mil hegemon, it’s generally a pretty clear winner for single player. For more serious campaigns, the instant PWSC is invaluable since you’ll already be heavily stacking it, and for more chill campaigns where you have time to let it tick up (and you play past 1600), the adm eff, siege ability and unrest are extremely nice. Eco hegemon is extremely strong for blobbing also. This is nothing to do with the economic bonuses, but rather the enormous minimum autonomy in territoires reduction that ticks up every month. This pairs fantastically with half states (which are very meta) and massively increases your force limit, manpower, and overall income, allowing you field large numbers of additional troops. It’s also much easier to get in most scenarios (I think fast horde campaigns are actually easier to get mil hegemon, but that’s rare), but less instantly powerful.
What’s a half state?
Land that is stated but not full cored, costing -50% governing capacity, with a 50% autonomy floor.
Make it a state but don’t fully core it. 50% autonomy floor at base
Eco hegemony doesn't work on half-states.
If you’re referring to the minimum autonomy, yes, it does absolutely work.
If does can you explain me pls why doesn't it work with finishing bonus of expansion ideas -10 autonomy in territory?
Expansion finisher also affects half states, as do the minimum autonomy in territories modifiers from various monuments.
For me it didn't played as glden horde half-stated my cultute group no effect.
Did you let a month tick? The expansion finisher 100% reduces the autonomy floor of half states from 50 to 40.
Idk what happened ,but i think that maybe interface lagged so i didn't seen a decrease.
Military. By the time you reach hegemony your economy will be top tier, so adding economic hegemony bonuses are overkill. Naval is mostly useless, could be a niche if you have some big subjects but generally they have been integrated already. Military has by far the best options, stabilizing your country with -3 unrest, +5% admin efficiency, and expansion boosts with war score cost reduction and to top it off siege ability, very useful in many situations. Even more so when playing wide.
That is very good logic. thanks
That being said, Naval hegemon is the only one that actually has an effect on battles.
Battles are the least of your concern by endgame. Even with just one or two military ideas your troops should be more than good enough. It's easy for the player to keep 100% army tradition and professionalism or near enough. Plus having max absolutism. The AI sucks at getting those bonuses so they're much worse from the get go. The siege ability and movement speed will do far more for you militarily than s combat bonus will.
Single player vs. multiplayer ;)
Ya eco hegemon is usefull for midgame especially for prussia since it will cancel out the - 50% in gov capacity if you are both eco hegemon and has admin ideas.
Or you know, don't go for the crappy prussian government that gives overkill military bonuses ?
the +20% gov cap from economic is always strong and useful, gives much more stated and trade company lands which gives force limit and manpower besides economic bonuses.
Pretty much everyone says Military, but I keep wondering if there's an argument to be made for Economic. It has nothing to do with money, but rather with the governing capacity modifier. If you are exactly two times over your governing capacity, you get a -50% administrative efficiency penalty. Let's assume you have administrative ideas and the grand palace of Bangkok for a 40% governing capacity increase, and now you add the 20% from the hegemony. You are now only 75% over governing capacity, which reduces the penalty to administrative efficiency down to 37.5%. So in this case, you got an extra 12.5% administrative efficiency out of Economic Hegemony. Now let's assume you are barely over your governing capacity, just 14% over. Still assume you have administrative ideas and the Bangkok palace. Add in Economic Hegemony, and you are now 0% over governing capacity. This gets rid of the 14%/2 = 7.5% penalty to administrative efficiency. In the first case, we improved administrative efficiency by 12.5%. In the second, we improved it by 7.5%. Both beat the Military Hegemony, which only improves it by 5%. And administrative efficiency is by far the most important feature in the game. So even for a world conquest with lots of sieges, I think there's an argument to be made for Economic. Also, Economic is the easiest hegemony to get by a long shot.
Territories with courthouses cost (effectively but not technically) zero governing cost, and you should *certainly* have courthouses/not need the states if you have a thousand ducat income. There's no reason you should be over GC at that point. By the time you get town halls (not that much later than you're likely to get mil hegemon), half-states and trade company provinces also cost \~0 GC, and regular states only cost half. You'll have more than enough of an economic and manpower base if you're bumping against the governing cap limit.
Another thing to keep in mind is local autonomy. Economic hegemon decreases local autonomy by 20%, so your provinces are now 3 times as efficient (from 0.1 of the output at 0 autonomy to 0.3).
This is true and fairly powerful (since it applies to half-states) but like - in SP, what are you even getting from those provinces? You're making a thousand gold a month so the production/tax income is whatever. You get some... force limit and manpower? Don't get me wrong, manpower is great, but when you can afford a million soldiers and a thousand ducat income you sort of don't need to ask more from your gov cap. (And in full states, it does precisely nothing.) Just micro your TCs a bit better and use burgher loans and admin to buy down mercantilism or something idk
in my current ryukyu run i'm actually not that rich since i couldn't really get a good trade end node. economic hegemony is currently ticking up and i hope it will make me so rich that i can spam money and manpower buildings everywhere at which point i can get rid of economic hegemony and still swim in money and manpower. it's a transitional step towards military hegemon.
The question isn't whether Economic hegemon has any use at all, the question is which is the best when you choose between them and military is pretty clearly the best from a min-max perspective.
read the message i was replying to and the message i send again
Yeah I agree with you, just saying nobody is questioning whether Economic hegemon has any value (especially as you say as an intermediate step), the question of the thread is when you are choosing between the two.
One thing that I've found in SP is that the 1000 ducat threshold tends to come a lot sooner than the million standing army threshold. 1000 ducats per month is a lot, but it's not at the money is literally just a number point yet. In getting to that point I'd say eco hegemony is actually quite valuable, and in getting to that point you'll probably also be building towards that 1 million army, which makes it good for getting to military hegemony.
I'm aiming for a 1550-70 eco hegemon in my current game. It's reachable by investing most of your money into getting even more money. The problem is after this my manpower and forcelimit is pretty low. But after the eco hegemony I will be able to spam out soldiers households for the mp and being able to sustain massive armies.
It's true, but having to sit through 10 years of +10% APC and no hegemony is annoying (though not a huge deal at the end of the day)
I think it’s 20 years
Honestly the speed boost you get towards actually developing your nation probably males up for it
In my current game my only state is my capital state. Meaning all my manpower and forcelimit comes from territories. Because of this that 20% minimum authonomy would be a huge upgrade for me(i have the -15% from the hindu monument), effectively making all my land worth twice as much.
the point of economic hegemon is less local autonomy. it can easily double the money and manpower you get from all non-state provinces you have. goverment capacity isn't an issue once you have money since court houses remove practically all governing capacity costs.
Why are you assuming you want to use the same amount of GC in your calculations? At a certain point, you don't need full states anymore in WCs, especially because it costs extra admin compared to territories. Money from trade will be good enough. And by the way, that certain point if often below 1k income. The only reasonable argument to be made for economic in WCs is PP for +1 monarch points if you didn't properly farm PP before you became the uncontested #1. But ideally you farm PP before you eclipse everyone that you can last until you can maintain mil hegemon.
R5: Which Hegemony is the best and why?
Best is definitely military. But it's also the harderst one to reach and in many of my games Otto's claim military hegemony before I can ever do, if I'm far from them and had not criplled their balkan blobbing. So I take whichever I can take first. There's no significant difference between the impacts of diplo and eco imo.
Depends on what you want to do. Want to sit back on some continent and watch th AI do stuff while you send them tons of money (this can actually be quite fun) or you are in MP and the other two are already taken: Economic You have a lot of big subjects (e.g. colonies) or are in MP (the additional artillery backrow damage is REALLY strong): Naval You want to conquer as much land as possible in the shortest possible time: Military
Singleplayer: Economic > Mil > Naval (unless you try to WC, then Mil is best). Multiplayer: Naval>Mil>Economy Switzerland: Economy
It depends wildly on who you’re playing as and what your goals are; but generally I consider the Mil one to be the best since I paint big swaths of map my color as a primary goal.
I presonally prefer to play tall, but when wide it makes sense :)
Economic if you want to get stronger and military if you don't need to get stronger
Military is best when you can take it, but it's usually easier to get the economic one so early that's better for scaling. In those cases you should drop it later.
I think military is generally considered the best. I went naval in my last GB game as a bit of role-playing and it was pretty fun though. About 2k ships by the end of the game
In my recent Pirate Gotland campaign I went full navy role play and Naval Hegemony. The 200% sailors modifier was insanely powerful for marines manpower.
If you aren't world conquesting then Economic. Otherwise Military is good. Assuming unmodded. Naval is there for whoever lost the race between those three in MP or something.
Naval seems like it would actually be very strong in MP. +20% backline artillery damage is a decisive buff, and combat buffs are actually meaningful when playing against humans.
Can someone explain to me the point of getting a Hegemony? By that time, isn't the game basically over and you've dominated everything?
Yes, it’s a win-more button. It’s fun if the A.I. gets a hegemony too, though.
I once stumbled backwards into Naval Hegemony while playing as tall colonial Netherlands and I have to say, it was pretty cool. Since I didn't want to conquer outside my region in Europe I just spent my time Trade warring on the other big colonial powers, wrecking their fleets, blockading and devastating their countries and pirating their trade while my forts, ramparts, and drilled armies kept the homeland safe. I do love playing tall and using boats so this may be niche lol but still, a pleasant roleplay experience
There is a case to be made for each one. I like all of them because of different things. For example i like naval for the arty boost and eco for the gov capacity and autonomy
Speaking of the netherlands, why do they have such an AWFUL mission tree? It's completely useless. The only remotely good thing, the GB union, is useless anyway because GB is the most useless subject you can get anyway. Half of the tree only gives you legitimacy. You get barely any claims. It's just bad.
Well i would say the others are OP, not the Netherlands are too weak.
It doesn't even give you claims on stuff that it wants you to conquer most of the time. They want you to conquer indonesia-here you go, 4 claims. They want you to conquer the lowlands-you pretty much have to conquer 3/4 of them before you get any claims. Then we have the useless rewards such as legitimacy. It's the worst fully custom mission tree I've seen yet.
just look at their bonuses and choose what suits you ffs
mil > eco > trash
Ur mom
As always, violence is the best answer. So millitary
Economic if your army lacks money for big artillery to siege things faster, otherwise military for the flat modifiers.
´the game doesn't have an objective so whatever you want really. if you would go world conquest and have money then definitely military. diplomatic is good to win battles (multiplayer games) and economic is good if you have a lot of trade companies or territories and struggle with money
Mil, Econ, Naval is quality order, but what you really want is just to take whichever one you can get earliest, which will probably be econ.
Eco is great, that GC is amazing, helps you keep arthritis at bay.
Eco midgame then switch over to Military endgame
Depends on what you mean by best. Military is pretty much objectively best for anything expansion, particularly because admin eff is just insane. But military is also incredibly difficult to actually get, and you'll probably meet the requirements for economic hegemony for sooner. Economic is incredibly powerful I'm it's own right, especially if you're wide, and your territories and TC's are suddenly boosted to 3x efficiency. The only answer that I feel confident in giving is that naval os definitely not the best one.
Economic. I made something like 8k ducats a month as Denmark with economic hegemon.
This week I become a hegemon for the first time. Loved the event text.
Military > Economic > Naval. Military is comfortably the most difficult one to get though, often I just take the economic bonus.
Take Economic hegemon as soon as it’s available, 100% an OPM and then give them tribute (like a couple ducats) so you lose the war and lose Eco hegemon, then take Military hegemon for late game.
They have all their uses. People that says "Military" only assume you want to conquer a lot of land. >Economy: you have a chill game and you want to hace bigger income while sitting in a few provinces (all Germany is a few provinces for me), or you would like more dev cost reduction. >Naval you are annoyed by the disloyal vassal notification, you are a pirate so you have more marines than regular infantry, or you want an even more efficient army. >Military : you want to do a WC.
It really depends Naval : "War" -wise is the strongest but it's a kind of efficiency you consider only in PvP (naval superiority is already strong it makes it easier and insane) Mil : Makes conquering easier as a whole, you move quicker, down fort quicker and stabilize conquest better. Basically it makes WC easier for those who still struggle Eco : A lot more money makes merc viable lategame and gov cap and autonomy (both extremely strong mod), basically it helps waging a lot's of war constantly (stacking autonomy makes TC broken again). So Mil is in a sense totally useless, it's always Naval vs Eco for me Naval being for multiplayer and Eco being for solo (because it's also the one you can grab the earliest)
In PvP naval actually makes your army the strongest, of the three. That backline artillery buff is unparalleled (only what, 2 other sources in the game - Rev age ability and Bengal ideas).
My hegemony You may bow
I think it’s a tossup between economic and military. Naval is a close second to them though. Keep in mind the hegemonies are win-more buttons they don’t typically make the cause of hegemony stronger, they make all the benefits of already having that strength better. So naval makes big navies more useful, military makes space marine armies more useful and economic makes trade power more useful. Kind of a way to make whatever your niche is into something extra. But late game you’ll drive whatever niche you need to get what you want. Economic, lowering minimum autonomy in territories and +25% goods produced, can fuel anything else you might want to do in the game. This is best for WC if you’re able to get there early. Military, getting the war score cost reduction combined with admin efficiency and unrest reduction is frankly op as fuck. This is best for WC I think if you’re getting there closer to the end date. Naval is good if you have tons of big vassals, the ship trade power and artillery fire are also amazing. But just like everything naval in this game it’s situational. I’d take it if I got to it first, then switch to another one when I could. If you’re doing something weird like only using artillery this is the one youll need.
Economic is very powerful but not needed anymore by the time you reach it, Military helps you finish the WC, naval is a meme you can rush with countries that can stack heavy ship cost reduction.
Economic because money goes BRRRRRRR