The real problem is the Solomani. None of the 'outlands' or 'wilds' are
in their own space - they are all in parts of the Imperium that they've
(re-)conquered. Their industrial worlds are mostly untouched (some that
relied on cross-border trade will be feeling the pinch a bit), and while
they have a weakness in that their industrial core is near the border,
there's no real risk of an Imperial advance that would threaten them.
Their internal 'strife' is just political and once it's solved they can
capture as much of the Imperium as they feel they need simply by keeping
the pressure on, as there is no faction that has the resources or
production capacity remaining to stop them. They wouldn't even have to
put that much military pressure on - sending in security forces and
anti-piracy fleets, and then investing in rebuilding worlds would get
them results.
OK, I'm intentionally putting on my "How can we justify the Rebellion as written" spectacles here, so bear with me! :)
SOLOMANI
Correct. The Confederation is essentially untouched and, for the first time in 100 years, is safe from the Imperial threat. I agree also that any "internal strife" is overplayed in the GDW material. After all, external wars have a way of weakening internal opposition.
That said, unlike the early phases of Dulinor's War, the Solomani are not aiming for a surgical decapitation strike on Capital. Right from the time they cross the border, the Solomani are going to be facing an "invade and occupy" grind through the HiPop worlds of the Rim, Daibei, and Old Expanses. In early stages, if not later too, they are going to be looking at the long-term hearts and mind issues, so Black War ortillery tactics are likely to be out.
So how fluid would the Rimward frontlines be?
Let's assume Solomani naval superiority in 1117-1120 is equivalent to the Imperial naval supremacy in the latter stages of the Rim War. The fleets can move at will, so the rate limiting step will be how quickly HiPop worlds can be forced to surrender ... and how many can be put under siege/invasion at the same time. In both cases, the invading force (Imperials in 998 onwards, and Solomani in 1117 onwards) are seeking to occupy a population who, while generally supporting the "enemy", contain significant minorities that would actively support the invaders.
Using that comparison, the Solomani advance in the Rim, Diaspora, and the Old Expanses is only just behind the rate of Imperial advance in the latter stages of the Rim War. Once two factors are taken into account:
* The Vegan Polity is a very powerful, uniformly anti-Solomani bloc that would support an Imperial advance and stymie a Solomani advance; and
* The Confederation of 1118 is a weaker state than the Imperium of 990 (and also probably weaker than the Confederation of 990, too!);
... then the Solomani advance is smack bang in the middle of my expectations of how things might turn out.
(On the other hand ... Daibei?! I can see the Solomani going nowhere there, sure! But Daibei managing to go on the offensive and capture _any_ HiPop Solomani worlds? Nuh-uh.)
Then there's Margaret. Her greatest weakness is given as 'tends to see
everything in economic terms', which would obviously apply to her
(largely megacorp sourced) advisors as well. The problem is, when
fighting wars of this scale, economics is just about everything. So is
gaining public support - making the trains (ships) run on time and
suppressing piracy is going to get more people liking your than shiny
3-Vee messages and big fleet battles. That's why they (DGP/GDW - not
sure who made the decisions at that point) had to make her a racist, or
at least someone who put their megacorp friends ahead of the labour
rights of minorities.
MARGARET
Yeah. I agree with Phil about the "burn it all down, make them all crazy" way GDW undercut the otherwise-sympathetic Margaret in Survival Margin.
But the only way Margaret was going to be Emperor was by her own forces marching on Capital early in the era (and she forces didn't have the cohesion and preparation that Dulinor's did). Or else by forces on Capital deposing Lucan and appointing Margaret WHEN SHE WAS ALREADY ON CAPITAL. "Lucan" was no fool - on the day he was announced as Emperor arrest warrants were issued for others who might be acceptable candidates, and the Moot was shut down.
It was almost a year before "Margaret" became a faction. THAT was the greatest weakness of that faction - by the time it declared itself, it was only a regional player. Any person or world in Core who advocated for Margaret to become Emperor would have been committing treason (or been accused of having a "really, really bad attitude"). Margaret - the individual - might have been noble and wise, etc, etc; "Margaret" the faction never had anything to offer anyone outside of Delphi and adjacent sectors.
Yes, in the longer-term, by setting up a strong and stable "Successor State" (I am sure Margaret would never have formally seceded) it is possible that Margaret or her descendants would have eventually claimed the throne. Most likely, I think this would have occurred after the death of Lucan, especially without heir, where the powers-that-be in Core would cut a deal with Margaret as the "obvious heir to Strephon". Alternatively, with the exhaustion or spontaneous combustion of the "Lucan" faction, when worlds along the border would be able to defect to "Margaret" without fear of retribution.
*********************
Cheers,
KenB.