So, partly it is said, partly it is implied, and mostly I accept it as "you can if you are strong enough to manage", a Rogue Trader may claim an entire world for themselves, and the Imperium they represent. So, what all is to stop them from doing so more often? To use Lure's several worlds, I don't believe Zayth is an Imperial world, nor Vaporius. Were your players to find either of these worlds in a scenario outside Lure of the Expanse, which at least tries to impose a sense of urgency and time limit on things, what stops them from saying "Zayth is full of nifty stuff, if a bit outdated in a few fields; I claim this world in the name of the Imperium." The landships CAN fire back, but you might raid them with agile fighter/bomber runs, and show them you mean business, while some crews might actively support your claim, if it brings aide to their side of a war they don't even remember why they are fighting. The Priest-Kings of Vaporius can be strange, and might have some decent psychic power, plus numerous throwaway slaves to guard them, but with the right applications of force, or stealth, you might be able to take them out, at least enough to get a foothold on the planet.

Blah, blah, blah, what's the best way to have the Rogue Trader NOT just claim any world they find, outside the Imperium, and not known to be in the clutches of a rival, for themselves? Why not just purchase a space station (ridiculous, except Rogue Traders CAN), set it up near the entrance to the Processional, and tow out parts, to sell for profit? Certainly, I'm making some of these things seem simpler than they really are, but if they thought they'd be able to claim the Dread Pearl, why would any place else they stop at be out of bounds?

An unrelated aside, Zayth's landships have ship-level armaments, and can hit void ships in low orbit, if they have a mind to. I imagine that Vaporius, or other sites, might have the macrocannon or lance battery facilities a world would use for defense, maybe even void shields, though I don't know. If these worlds are so far removed from the Imperium, how do they still have these things? Still make ammunition for them? The AdMech has had constant access to much of its stuff for millennia, and still forgotten more than it will ever learn again. How do these other people STILL remember how to maintain these systems, when even the groups whose job it is inside the Imperium can so easily forget?

What's wrong with rogue traders claiming worlds for themselves?

An average-sized world generates enough profit to pay for a small ship every 5-10 years.

"I claim this world in my own name"

"Neat"

The question is, what next? The Processional of the Damned is a blasted void-touched hellscape where the laws of time and space don't imply. I don't even think it has an entrance that can be normally found. Zayth is a radiation blasted hellscape where the only distinguishing feature is well-armed enough to protect itself. So let's exclude places that have either significant defenses or are touched by Chaos and are a threat in and of itself.

Let's look at somewhere like Vaporious, which I actually see as not having much in the way of void defenses. Currently the Adeptus Ministorum is trying to bring it into the Imperial Light, but its people are strangely loyal to its Priest Kings because they have secret psychic powers that control all the water. And even if you somehow get a foothold, what sort of profit would you make off of them? The planet seems to be of roughly Egyptian-level dynastic power. They produce find hand-me-down crafts that some nobility might like that maybe would be worth a profit factor or two, but it'd take a lot of time and resources to set up that connection that might be better spent elsewhere. The people die if they're removed, and if you kill a Priest King then they all die anyway.

You could raid its people of worlds and get a pretty good haul of population, but that's still a fraction of what your average Hive city would produce in a press-gang, so you need more than actual resources. Let's say you find a planet with a population and resources. If you press them into slavery and force them to now produce for you that's how you get daemonic incursions when the Chaos Gods recognise their misery and desperation and offer them untold power to throw off their invaders in exchange for nothing much at all I'm sure...

But what about an abandoned world! Those would be great, except if there's something really good there, it should already be claimed by another Rogue Trader. Even if it's not and you claim it, then you're letting everyone else know that there's something good there, and as soon as you look away the Cold Trade or Winterscale show up and then there's nothing there anymore.

But what about a Xenos world? Let's say you declare war on them, raze their cities, murder their populace and grab whatever technology is left. Then what? Unless they're really advanced, the AdMech and the Inquisition won't want it. If they do, they don't have to pay for it. There are weird collectors who will buy anything, but then you're clearly dealing in heresy and can be assassinated for it.

But let's say you find a world with something valuable that hasn't been discovered and you don't tell anyone. Then you can buy a fleet of transports, mount an expedition, found a colony, and in a few years time (or a very short period of time if you don't apply some sense to Stars of Iniquity), then you will have some profit. However those should definitely be the exceptions rather than the rule.

So let's just take what we want from weaker Rogue Traders! This depends on how your campaign views legality and a Rogue Trader warrant, but if you go around blowing up other ships then the official Imperial organisations that supplied this ship (ESPECIALLY the Astra Telepathica and the Navis Nobilite) should stop dealing with you, and then your power and influence slowly dries up. Also other Rogue Traders will realise there's a border-line pirate running around, and Chorda has been enough of a pain in everyone's side that they start laying ambushes for you to protect their own interests.

So to sum up, if you claim it in the name of the Imperium and are okay with likely destroying a large portion of what makes it valuable, then the scraps are absolutely yours to pick through and sell back. It depends on the kind of game you're running I guess, but I think enforcing a policy of just "Be mine or die" will lead to more problems in the long run.

Hmm, which makes me question why the Imperium would want anything out there, then, why they might forge a Koronus Sector, someday, and how some of the other Rogue Traders can make such ludicrous profits...? I know sometimes the Imperium is just "what? It's there? MINE!!! In the name of the Orange Light of Our One Emperor, Larfleeze, we claim all that exists within the Light's scope!" but I'd loosely think any of several things the Imperium might benefit from actually claiming out there, you might, too, first, and then they can have it when A. You are tired of it, B. have gotten what you want out of it, at your scale, or C. When they finally rouse Saint Drusis's brother to lead the Koronus Crusade, after Jericho falls, and this area gets its standing armies back (what will be left of them).

I'm not just saying "oh, look at the shiny. Mine!", well, not entirely, but I would think that some RTs would like worlds already somewhat colonized, and take them. Chorda and Winterscale have been tango-dancing on Lucien's Breath for ages, and all that is there is sticky tar that makes good fuel, something I'd think, with the "rarity" of starships, that the Imperium could manufacture enough of. I don't have the book with Damaris in it, but several other people here seem to be smitten with it. I'm not sure if a RT could claim it, if one already has, or if they are Imperium enough be off-limits, but yeah.

Granted, I've only fleshed out two Rogue Traders, and the bulk of their Dynasties, and they only "own" three worlds between them. Qel-Drake has a volcanic planet with some semi-valuable mining on it, and his base planet is the paradise moon that orbits it (Pyros Magna and Pyros Satella), and Korvallus is seemingly spending his twilight years on a station orbiting an agri-world, Valos III, of which he serves as Planetary Governor. Neither is amazing, or even so much profitable, but each has possession of such resources. I can't really say I'd want to own Kreig, umm, I meant Zayth, really , but it can be a nice thing to know about, when other players start saying, in a game I could someday be running "oh, this is NOT an Imperial world, yet? Well then, I suppose we'll claim it for the Slappy Dynasty", and not JUST sound like I'm the GM saying no, to remind the players I can. The whole premise of Stars is to colonize these very same worlds, so you have to be able to, and a benefit has to be procured as a result, but it would seem easier if at least some infrastructure was already there (ie. claim an inhabited, but not "owned" world).

Erathia covered a lot of it, but there are a few things I'd add. It's partially an issue of risk versus reward and the cost of logistics.

Let's look at Zayeth.

Zayeth has a bunch of technology that the Ad Mech itself is interested in, including some archeotech and that “the macrocannons of Zayth are some of the highest-quality starship-class weapons found in the Expanse.”

Definitely something worth having. The problem is getting it.

Well those land ships are pretty mean in a straight fight, having triple void shields, lots of hull, and a skilled gun crew, mechanics, and leadership compared to the bog standard void ship. And the truth is, the only thing of value on the planet (so far as most know) is the land ships themselves. How are you going to disable them without destroying them? Ok you decide to land troops and take them with the equivalent of boarding and hit and run actions. Well each land ship has quite the crew population, being about the size of a light cruiser, and each of them is actually pretty well equipped and trained according to the texts and bits of zayeth gear scattered around various RT books.

And there is more than one of these land ships. Once it becomes known that you're trying to conquer their entire world what are the chances that they'll at least temporarily band together to drive you off (historically the only thing that can get a people to stop killing one and other and put down old grudges to work together is an outsider invading. Ask the Scots). Maybe they can even call to off world trading partners and such for a bit of help.

Conquering Zayeth isn't impossible, but it's one hell of a nut to crack.

Vaporius on the other hand doesn't, on the surface, seem worth conquering. No technology or natural resources of note (except for that water, and a savvy RT will have alarm bells ringing after only a short stay on Vaporius). A relatively small population, given that it's a desert world, who are fanatically loyal to their leadership, who is not interested in being conquered.

Sure you could land a single ship's worth of soldiers and slaughter the spear armed warriors of the priest kings by the thousands (assuming the GM doesn't start pulling psychic shenanigans from the priest kings). But given that the priest kings have “absolute control” over their citizens the bloodbath might continue until every man woman and child there is dead or they have drowned you in a tide of flesh.

And then what have you won? Not much.

My characters have started up a colony on Dross from Lure of the expanse. For those that don't know it's a world that had an eldar device that disabled ships that got too close and over the centuries and millennium accrued a pretty big ship's graveyard on it's surface. Well after the events of Lure the eldar device was successfully disabled and now the valuable cache of un-touched (although quite roughed up since they all crashed onto a planet's surface) ships is there for the taking, even the minimal population of human savages can be brought over to their side relatively easily (and already have) to work as manual laborers.

Step 1 of claiming it? Pay an exorbitant amount of money to discreetly hire a salvage company out of Footfall to drag a dozen defense satellites into orbit to defend their claim.

Step 2 is send someone into the Calixis sector to establish a Writ of Claim with the Administratum of Terra for the world so that the Imperium will recognize the world and it's contents as belonging to the dynasty. Some people won't care, but some do and it's good dissuasion for those that don't since those that do wouldn't deal with them if they took it over. They wind up having to burn a little more profit factor since word seems to have gotten out pretty quickly, but manage to acquire the Writ.

Only at step 3 do they actually worry about starting up the colony, organizing it, bringing in colonists, and getting the salvage company salvaging to start recouping their expenses.

Even then it's probably too lightly defended for it's value, and they're going to probably have to beef up the defenses. They've already received reports of a ship or two laying low at the edge of sensor range and scoping them out. So while it's very valuable and they took it relatively easily they're having to expend a lot of resources to exploit it and to hold onto it.

Basically what I'm saying is that if something's long term profitable, not a single take it and go treasure, but long term profitable, then somebody's going to have to spend money to hold onto it and exploit it. And RT's may be silly wealthy, but their resources aren't unlimited. If somebody's already claimed it then they've probably already invested resources in defending it appropriately, and have interests that they'll want back and **** you for trying to take it from them.

The reality is that simply claiming something isn't enough. You have to then pacify it, administer it and defend it. Each step is difficult and expensive.

If you look at RL imperialism, you find out it wasn't worth it in many ways. European nations set out in a belief that the wealth of the world was a zero sum (mercantilism) so if you had part of it, your enemy didn't. Imperialism worked out well for the merchant adventurers who in reality made most of the profits but the administrators had great difficulty making it pay of for the mother land.

A Cecil Rhodes type would try to grab the diamons but it was the British government who would have to pay to fight the boers and then keep paying to occupy the land....

The British had to pay to prop up their American colonies instead of profiting from them. When they tried to increase taxation, the ungrateful louts rebelled.

Imperial Germany annually benefitted more from its trade with Norway than from all its colonies.

My point is that if you are merely interested in turning profits, occupying a planet and then having to administer and defend it is usually far more expensive than getting some kind of (exclusive) trade going. If profit is not your main concern (prestige, denying assets to others, getting real estate along a particular route etc.), then it might well make sense but expect to pay for it.

As a RL example I offer Putin's annexation of the Crimea. It is costing him economically but in a geo-political sense, it makes perfect sense.

As an RT, you're not in the business of empire building. You want profitable trade deals and and perhaps just a few choice planets which will keep profitable for a long time or which will be stragetically important (stable warp routes, invasion routes, bottle necks etc.).

The more fixed assets you have, the more vulnerable you become. Rivals can easily target these assets (and every RT has rivals) so they need defences. Which become very expensive very quickly and it all adds up.)

There's a lot of decent advice here. It mostly comes down to the tone of your setting. Is it super gritty, work for every inch? Is it by hot blooded heroes who live up to Imperial propaganda? Do 100 PF RTs have 100 ship fleets, dozens of planets, and billion of subjects? Do 60 PF RTs have 3 ships and all their eggs invested 2 planets? Are problems usually resolved in a single scene "Will our heroes scam House Krin for the loan," or does it take weeks of IRL play to set the stage to properly colonize an uncontested but wild planet? A lot of it is up to what your prefer and there's no wrong way to do it.

I generally run things as "You can keep what you kill, and if you keep killing maybe you can keep it." Sort of permissiveness with RTs running the gamut from broke people armed with warrants and ambition, to sector wide superpowers. There's numerous difficulties in any particular endeavor, if it's worth having then due to rule of fun if nothing else it's likely going to be some effort to take. Whether it's because it's already occupied, really hard to travel to get to, is (un)naturally dangerous or whatever else. Then you have to make sure that however you got past the obstacle didn't mess up the goal. Then you have to deal with the resulting complications and fallout, how are you going to defend the planet, sell off the treasure, avoid the Inquisitor's kill squads, explain this to your wife. Any of these adlibs are as endless as the tones to portray them in.

When it comes to legality. I leave things at RTs can on paper get away with most things without having their Warrant straight up revoked. Unless they are directly assailing their enemies in such a way as to seriously mess with the Imperium's infrastructure in a way they can't talk their way out of, or they keep teetering on the line of totally unacceptable for long enough that their bitter resourceful rivals were finally able to get a hearing called by some likely ad-hoc tribunal made up in part by those they've directly pissed off. Other than that I generally portray the Imperium as a place where there's always a conflict of interests and jurisdiction, and to the winner goes the spoils.

My RT won't be stamped Excommunicate Traitoris for resisting the orders of an Inquisitor with deadly force. RT will almost certainly feel backlash from dead Inq's massive web. Conflicts between splinter groups of loyalists is common. The winners are sometimes, but not always punished officially. The surviving losers aren't either. But a lot of people have the 40k version of a lynch mob show up outside their house, anyone in a position of power is going to get it eventually. That's usually enough to keep my players, and NPCs at least pretending to color within the lines. You're not going to get a massive crusade called on your holdings for snubbing a Bishop, but you might get some death cultists hiding under your bed.

YMMV

So there are a lot of different approaches which depend a lot on your game. If you want to have the Koronus be more unexplored than explored, then run with that. However my golden rule whenever my players propose something is this:

If this is so straightforward, why hasn't anyone already done it?

This is a setting with 10,000 years of history, and the Koronus Expanse has been open for 1,000 years. You could go with the "No one has ever thought of this" or "No one has found this yet", but I strongly feel those should be the rare exceptions. The cost should either be prohibitive, holding it should be too difficult, or there should be some unexpected threat from trying to claim it.

I think I'm with Erathia for the most part.. It's not that taking planets wholesale cannot be done, It is all the time! It's more an issue of how much Effort The RT is willing to put into it! Granted, A beginning RT is probably not going to take the whole planet of Zayeth! But does anyone believe Winterscale or Chorda couldn't if they were so inclined?

Consider this: A Rogue trader creates a Single Regiment of troops in accordance with the rules in BFK. Does everyone agree that a single regiment could capture a city? Not Necessarily a Metropolis like NY or Los Angeles, but rather a mid sized city like say Buffalo. I'm pretty sure they could! According to Stars of Inequity; that city is worth 10-12 PF as a Colony! I'd say that would be worth it! A fully populated world with three territories, Let's say 1 Metropolis and 2 City sized Colonies is worth 38 PF!

I'd say that would be worth a significant investment to take! Wouldn't you?

I think I'm with Erathia for the most part.. It's not that taking planets wholesale cannot be done, It is all the time! It's more an issue of how much Effort The RT is willing to put into it! Granted, A beginning RT is probably not going to take the whole planet of Zayeth! But does anyone believe Winterscale or Chorda couldn't if they were so inclined?

Consider this: A Rogue trader creates a Single Regiment of troops in accordance with the rules in BFK. Does everyone agree that a single regiment could capture a city? Not Necessarily a Metropolis like NY or Los Angeles, but rather a mid sized city like say Buffalo. I'm pretty sure they could! According to Stars of Inequity; that city is worth 10-12 PF as a Colony! I'd say that would be worth it! A fully populated world with three territories, Let's say 1 Metropolis and 2 City sized Colonies is worth 38 PF!

I'd say that would be worth a significant investment to take! Wouldn't you?

Taking stuff from primitives seems easy. It's what historical imperialist conquerers tried. But when you read about them, they never quite achieved it without (eventually) receiving either government support or by basically acting as an ally to a local warlord who could provide the necessary manpower and local (acceptable) rule.

The thing is, people simply don't like to be conquered, abused and raped & pillaged and they absolutely don't want it from foreigners. To the surprise of many (most recently the Americans), people prefer their own leaders, no matter how bad, to the enlightened, beneficial rule of foreigners. People tend to fight back against occupiers and if open battle doesn't work (because they have primitive arms), they tend to fall back on insurgency. Which can only be combatted by huge numbers of 'boots on the ground' to use a modern term or by political accomodation or a compromise.

Even the fluff supports this. Winterscale's Realm is not a closed pocket empire belonging to the Winterscale family. They lack the strength to make it so. And when Winterscale and Chorda fued, they lack the strength to fully defeat the other, leading to stalemate. RT's keep a close eye on each other and work hard at keeping a balance of power going so no single RT can lord it over the others.

Take this for example: RT Meany McMean finds a planet rich in resources and habited by backward (medieval) humans.

They have swords & spears, he has chainswords & lasguns....So he enslaves them and starts to strip mine the planet.

How long before RT Smarty McSmartpants shows up and makes a deal with the oppressed locals? He gives them lasguns and in return, he gets valuables and/or mining rights in the future. Which is just gravy to him because he has effectively crippled his rival for the price of a few crates of lasguns....because now, Meany McMean has to put significant numbers of guards on the planet and they ain't cheap....

Uhmm... Your History is a bit short sighted. While I certainly do not support the "conquer and enslave" mentality IRL, it's much more effective historically than you are suggesting. In fact, until the 20th century it was fairly common through most of Europe! (Ever hear of Napoleon?) Even in the 20th century, Hitler managed to control large swathes of Europe using exactly this method! If you live in France or Poland, You should be extremely grateful to the Allied powers of Britain, The USA and the Soviet Union! Without them, even with the much Vaunted Resistances, Those countries would still be under Nazi rule!

Secondly, I would suggest that not every Military conquest results in the kind of enslavement you suggest. Take Japan for example: At the end of WWII America occupied that nation and they grew into the world powerhouse they are today!

Also, The declining return on investment is already part of the game. The population increase suggested in SOI is exponential whereas the profit gained for larger settlements is Linear. How the player's govern their colonies should have a great impact on how hard it is to maintain it. It is not the role of the military to capture the "Hearts and minds" of the people. It never has been! (THAT BTW is the lesson to modern governments!) In the 40k Universe, the job of winning over the people falls to the Missionaries of the Ecclesiarchy.

Note that the 40k universe and especially RT suggests a very Expansionist and Colonial mentality!

Now before the PC police excoriate me: I am not advocating the above approach. Simply noting some Historical realities!

History is always short-sighted. Because otherwise it always repeats itself .

So where do you think I am wrong?

Britain founded colonies in the US. Found out it was more costly than it was worth. Tried to increase taxation to make it worthwile. Lost it to the Americans after France helped them....

Napoleon? Great general. Lousy statesman. Never managed to pacify any former opponent and was defeated when they all banded together against him. Leipzig was the killer, Waterloo just an afterthought. He never understood that pillaging the neighbours didn't make them love him. His reign of terror only lasted a measly 20 years. Even Austria managed to hold on to occupied territory longer....

Hitler? Which region of Europe was truly pacified during WWII in your opion? He needed massive occupation forces to keep the local populace down. Yes, he succesfully pillaged other countries but it didn't really do him any good, now did it? Had he been less....Hitler...he could have eventually reconciled the conquered territories to German hegemony. A friendly, collaborating local party and no onerous demands and continental Europe would have gladly accepted the fact that Germany was the most powerful country in Europe. Because Germany has always been potentially the most powerful nation in Europe.

But by pissing everyone off, he was forced to continue fighting while at the same time holding down any territory he had conquered. And we all know how that went for him. Obviously, the resistance couldn't have defeated the German army on its own but no resistance movement can. They just need to exist and ratchet up the cost. Eventually, the cost simply becomes too high. In this case, the Germans were happy to follow Hitler as he erased the shame of Versailles. But would they still be following him if 20 years later huge German armies were still required to keep France etc. pacified?

Japan? That devestated country which America pumped billions in? So they could make it their ally against communism? Can you really imagine any RT investing in a conquered planet and then letting it become independent? While still being responsible for their defence? America had geo-political reasons to be nice to Japan and Germany. Their initial plans were less...kindly. Not sure of a RT would do the same?

Where are the succesful colonies created by Western countries? All I see is that much of the globe was conquered (not without difficulty) by European nations and then pillaged, roughly between 1500-1900 before they all became independent in less than 70 years. Often after a violent liberation war. So not really a very lasting conquest in the greater scheme of things.

Or where are the succeful conquer & enslave wars of modern times? Any war which ends which the victor permanently occupying the conquered has ended with victor eventually leaving, usually with his tail between his legs. Most recently the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. No matter the spin, those are defeats, plain and simple.

I still stand by my claim that people will reject occupation by foreign forces. It can be done (for a time) with sufficient troops to effectively control the population or if the invaders are sufficiently advanced but over time, the large troop numbers become too costly and the advantage of the invaders erode. Especially if a third party helps....

Example: America vs. North Vietnam which was supported by China/Russia.

As an aside, Winterscale and Chorda are locked in a stalemate but not because they're weak, because they are both strong. They are also smart enough to not commit their fleets into one massive battle to try and break the other, because whichever side wins would be left greatly depleted and their holdings would evaporate. Also the AdMech is enforcing a treaty.

And the habit of Rogue Traders trying to grab things is also what I support, which is why my preferred approach is "There is something horrible on this planet that you didn't see that you now have to overcome to profit/survive".

Sometimes it's daemons or the Warp.

Sometimes it's an intelligent Xenos race that have technology that poses a threat to you

Sometimes it's psykers (which creates daemons and Warp interference)

Sometimes it's a hidden base of the Logicians/Cold Trade/Temple Tendency/another Rogue Trader.

Sometimes it's pirates who destroy your holdings and plunder them once you take your eyes off of them.

And then lastly there's the other thing I alluded to which is if one Rogue Trader just plunders and burns the Expanse, only salvaging a fraction of what's left, other Rogue Traders will collaborate to end the person who's "ruining their fun".

History is always short-sighted. Because otherwise it always repeats itself .

So where do you think I am wrong?

Britain founded colonies in the US. Found out it was more costly than it was worth. Tried to increase taxation to make it worthwile. Lost it to the Americans after France helped them....

Napoleon? Great general. Lousy statesman. Never managed to pacify any former opponent and was defeated when they all banded together against him. Leipzig was the killer, Waterloo just an afterthought. He never understood that pillaging the neighbours didn't make them love him. His reign of terror only lasted a measly 20 years. Even Austria managed to hold on to occupied territory longer....

Hitler? Which region of Europe was truly pacified during WWII in your opion? He needed massive occupation forces to keep the local populace down. Yes, he succesfully pillaged other countries but it didn't really do him any good, now did it? Had he been less....Hitler...he could have eventually reconciled the conquered territories to German hegemony. A friendly, collaborating local party and no onerous demands and continental Europe would have gladly accepted the fact that Germany was the most powerful country in Europe. Because Germany has always been potentially the most powerful nation in Europe.

But by pissing everyone off, he was forced to continue fighting while at the same time holding down any territory he had conquered. And we all know how that went for him. Obviously, the resistance couldn't have defeated the German army on its own but no resistance movement can. They just need to exist and ratchet up the cost. Eventually, the cost simply becomes too high. In this case, the Germans were happy to follow Hitler as he erased the shame of Versailles. But would they still be following him if 20 years later huge German armies were still required to keep France etc. pacified?

Japan? That devestated country which America pumped billions in? So they could make it their ally against communism? Can you really imagine any RT investing in a conquered planet and then letting it become independent? While still being responsible for their defence? America had geo-political reasons to be nice to Japan and Germany. Their initial plans were less...kindly. Not sure of a RT would do the same?

Where are the succesful colonies created by Western countries? All I see is that much of the globe was conquered (not without difficulty) by European nations and then pillaged, roughly between 1500-1900 before they all became independent in less than 70 years. Often after a violent liberation war. So not really a very lasting conquest in the greater scheme of things.

Or where are the succeful conquer & enslave wars of modern times? Any war which ends which the victor permanently occupying the conquered has ended with victor eventually leaving, usually with his tail between his legs. Most recently the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. No matter the spin, those are defeats, plain and simple.

I still stand by my claim that people will reject occupation by foreign forces. It can be done (for a time) with sufficient troops to effectively control the population or if the invaders are sufficiently advanced but over time, the large troop numbers become too costly and the advantage of the invaders erode. Especially if a third party helps....

Example: America vs. North Vietnam which was supported by China/Russia.

First: Thank you for not going down the troll route in your response!

To your points:

1.) Britain was involved in a generational war with france at the time (Which controlled a large number of colonies themselves btw!). Britain tried to raise revenue from their american colonies in order to fund their war with France. Had King George not kept raising taxes culminating in the tea tax, the Revolutionary war may never have happened. It's not that the Colonies weren't profitable (They were!), It was the British government's inability to effectively manage the Colonies that led to rebellion. Add to that, the French actively encouraged the revolution! Why do you think they did that? It was to Deny Great Britain the resources of their 13 cash cows!

2.) You are right that Napolean was a lousy politician! In reality, many of the ideas of citizen's rights and democracy that we cling to today were pioneered in europe by him. Napolean's downfall could arguably be laid on the fact that his own Nobility hated him more than his enemies did!

3.) Hitler: You said yourself! If Hitler had not made a point of irritating all of his neighbors he might very well have been able to hold his conquered territories!

4.) I sighted Japan and most of the former Japanese territories as a successful occupation because they were! The problem is that the American method does not really fit what we are talking about. We do not really occupy even defeated nations with the intent of keeping them or absorbing them into an "American Empire" (Despite what the Islamist nutjobs keep telling us!).

*.) Please stop using Afganistan and Iraq as examples of failed conquests. They were never intended as "Conquests" at all! America won the Military engagements and had pacified the areas but Political expedience and cowardice have handed those nations back to Chaos!

Most of this is tone and viewpoint. Do you think that taking and keeping lands through violence against foriegners includes examples like the Mongolian, and Roman empire? The US's conquering of the West, where they continually pushed back the natives and annexed lands from rivals. Or even feudalism where villages were ofttimes somewhat xenophobic and considered all outsiders to be outlaws not to be trusted? More importantly of what you make of Earth's own military history is what you make of the settings history and fluff. The setting is rife with planets with large slave populations, largely oppressed populaces living in squalor. You have references to RTs exterminating and enslaving locals whole sale. To conquering a planet, moving on. and letting the slow creep of the Administratum take over after their deaths. You have RTs you held onto their holding for generations, becoming defacto mini sector governers.

It's all up to your group, not what would necessarily be the most logical thing. 40k is never what I considered the most logical setting but I imagine there are plenty who disagree. The only thing I would strongly object to, is the colony rules that were recently mentioned. I think the book had great inspiration and that's it. From your example alone you can see how that in doesn't scale with the vast majority of peoples view of the setting. But that's me, I'm sure some people love the idea of a few normal size cities being worth 20 PF.

The colony rules in Stars of Inequity can lead to some very strange results. Huge profits from a handful of worlds, cities even. Which doesn't really make a lot of sense unless you're talking hive cities which should require *far* longer to create than the rules suggest.

Anyway. I'm going with a "if you can take it and keep it, you can keep it" attitude to worlds in the expanse. In one of my campaigns, the party realised they had an untouched system full of riches. They horse traded entire moons, some full of resources to various factions just to get enough political backing, economic support, and military clout to keep the rest. With cleverness and luck, they (so far) have held onto the rest of the system and the beginnings of a flourishing system have taken root. Of course, they've been away for a while thanks to the events of "The Soul Reaver" so that may or may not be the case when they get back.

In a game I played in, we did a NPC endeavour of sorts with Vaporious. Trading on the fact missionaries had died there, we sent the rogue trader's wife Lady Charabelle Armelan-Paterbourne with a Mass Conveyor full of troops and baneblades to take it over. Our plan was to turn it into a shrine world, using Maccabeus Quintus as an example of a shrine world that doesn't bank on its own actual resources to be important and profitable. It didn't get covered in game as we were distracted by other matters but the GM was talking about the dynasty's descendants ruling the Koronus Sector...

>>> we sent the rogue trader's wife Lady Charabelle Armelan-Paterbourne with a Mass Conveyor

>>> full of troops and baneblades to take it over

This needs to be a animated youtube series, pronto. Voiced by Judi Dench

*.) Please stop using Afganistan and Iraq as examples of failed conquests. They were never intended as "Conquests" at all! America won the Military engagements and had pacified the areas but Political expedience and cowardice have handed those nations back to Chaos!

I think the American invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are excellent examples for RT dismemberment and study.

You have a highly advanced power (superpower) with orbital imagery/targeting and complete air dominance tackling nations who initially have a decent but outdated military with very weak morale. After their inevitable defeat, the fight becomes an insurgency against the American occupiers. Based on tribal relations, not military unit cohesion or organization but with much higher morale, and with simple weaponry yet somehow, the Americans aren't able to pacify them permanently, despite their high-tech advantage.

The fact that the structures left behind (political and military) are totally ineffective (see ISIS' advance in Iraq or continued barbarism in Afghanistan) shows that the goal of turning them in model states has failed. That goal might not have been "conquest" as historically understood but these two countries were certainly meant to subsequently be embedded in the Western world with pro-Western governments (much like West Germany, Italy and Japan were). These were not quick smash & grab incursions but full blown attempts to install friendly governments and change the local way of life.

Leaving behind the right or wrong of these invasions, the mechanisms involved are fascinating and provide ample inspiration for GM's and players when considering invasion of backward planets. Not just military but also the tension between imposed modern administration and Western values vs. tribal loyalities and local values. Modern nations faced much of the same problems as rural communities were exposed to the industrial revolution. It took decades to solve that....Just imagine a medieval society suddenly enslaved and forced to work in factories....

The message I take from this is that it may well be relatively easy to invade a planet, actually occupying it and/or pacifying it sufficiently to force the population to slave labour or strip mine the planet is far more difficult and will be more time consuming and costly than any initial estimate....While a government with tax dollars to play with may well accept that, for a RT who's all about the bottom line, these are not good things to hear. All of which could provide alternative endeavours....

One major difference between the Imperium and (most) modern nation states: mass destruction and genocide are not off the table for the Imperium. The Imperium has canonically wiped out entire planetary populations for chaos worship, politics, and any number of other reasons. They usually don't bother as that is expensive and time-consuming even for them, but it is an option.

It's as decent a go to of the sort of situation to 40kify. A society that greatly resists foreign occupation, and is for decades(or in 40k terms centuries) if not totally than somewhat resistant to pacification despite a financial or tech based disparity. One that may be exacerbated by rivals arming or training them, or even just opening up another front. Other decent examples to look at include the States continually pushing back and marginalizing the natives for 100s of years. For windows with certain groups things were somewhat friendly, there was some assimilation but far from total, they adapted certain forms of tech but didn't give up all their ways, they had some victories here and there. But for the most part they were pushed until the brink where they gave up.

You have the Roman Empire. Conquering and holding large swathes of land. They were able to beat up the locals, and get them to assimilate. There was a bunch of wars and it wasn't always great. But for the most part they were fairly successful for a time(some of the armsmen have funny names now and have imported a few old superstitions). You had the Chinese where outsiders who invaded were military successful and slowly assimilated into their culture(the last few generations of RTs look like the natives, the line has taken on many cultural qualities of the planet, and the planet is the dynasty's capital).

And you also have the group I personally like defaulting to the conquistadors, who due to a number of factors generally had a fairly massive success as far as assimilation goes. The natives have their names, their religion, their language, they pay taxes. Not all of them were successful, not all of them survived, and there were complications. They got by on guile, technology, and working with the natives. They largely succeeded and they generally were handsomely rewarded. The problems that came hundreds of years later weren't dealt with by conquistadors, just as an RT's holdings might end up being totally consumed by the administratum hundreds of years before the planet rebels in earnest.

All of those options, and others, work. All of them are easy to 40kify, and I've used them all at various points in my game. It's all up to your interpretation of the setting, the tone of your game, and how you want to play it. The setting material itself supports any of these playstyles or interpretations.