Since it's been missed, running an empire isn't exactly warfare. They've just gone back to what they excelled at before having to split, running an empire.
TEC have fortified civilian ships, quick jump calculations and planetary shields in the empire tree, all at least loosely related to military action. Vasari have phase gates, jump speed improvements, jamming devices, jamming device improvements, orbital structure shielding, culture reduction increases from capital ships, gravity cancellation, wreckage salvage, galaxy wide psidar, free ships from returning armada, a fleet point increase.
The Vasari empire tree is geared toward fleet efficiency on defense. Did you notice they have more antimatter regeneration? 30% upgrades instead of 20% for TEC. Their line ships can repair themselves, they can slow reinforcements, instantly repair damaged hulls, rapidly bomb planets out of existence. Their armor upgrades are vastly superior as well, they make the ships lighter. Even Vasari capital ships can run away from a losing fight.
Yes, having one of each type on every side seems kinda lame, although the command cruiser is rather different in usage, but they are no where near identical in tech, and they are most definitely a side geared for warfare. TEC are the economy side, refinery ship upgrades, more culture upgrades, huge logistical advantages, you guys did notice the development mandate didn't you? The Vasari can improve to the first tier on terran, and have more substantial increases for volcanic planets, TEC can improve all but the volcanic planets, much more useful are the terran upgrades that get them a substantial advantage in credit collection over Vasari even before the superior economic upgrades.
Read, use, ignore the obvious problems with a two hour multiplayer game. The differences are there, and the Vasari are superior combatants.
Edit: My textbook took too long, but it's nice to see you're mostly still agreeing with each other while pretending to argue.
