Is it possible to mod civ3 so when ex. a group of citys are to unhappy they will revolt in to a new nation??

no

Damn, wouldn't that be nice, though ...

... Yeah, it's somewhat ironic that a much lusted after feature from CIV 1 isn't present in any fashion at all in Civ 3 ...


-Oz

nope not possible at all...interesting since there is a large amount of ppl that have yelled for it since day one of civ 3...

I too would support this...Hey, why don't we put this into the Civ4 wishlist thread?:D

I always thought, before CIV3, came out, that they had included this, but in a better way than in CIV2...

Well, I just hope it is in CIV4, and that they also include the rules allowed in the editor so far, do not wan't another step back again...

Heck even Call To Power had this. The unhappy citizens should revolt if you have continued to ignore them after they have been rioting for x number of years and destroyed x improvements.

Then they revolt, forming a new nation. That puny nation should then be at war with its parent civ, giving them little chance (but A chance) at independant survival. Any other civ at war already with the parent civ should then ally with the new Civlet.

I always thought they would use a culture-related Civ to play the part of the rebels. Then have the rebelling cities' units be replaced with like guerillas in the modern age and maybe just downgrade them in the older ages...like musketman become pikeman, medieval infantry become swordsman...then let them work it out with "aggressive negotiations."

I mean considering the rebels would be stuck in Anarchy until they rebuilt their destroyed buildings (assuming they effected the instability), and that creating buildings instead of units (or vice versa) would greatly hinder them - it would be a realistic Motherland vs rebels scenario.

The cool part would be the diplomacy on the side...support the rebels, or help crush them?

Next to maybe the loss of Wonder movies, that is my biggest complaint of Civ3, no Civil War.

It really should be more advanced than this, it could also be a "peaceful revolution" that the people of a certain region would be very upset and perhaps join in on the fight if you decide to crush them rebels...

It should also be possible with puppet states, and regaining independence an such. If you for instance occupied a civ in year 0, then in 1960s or so, they suddenly demanded independence. Because the people of cities, shoulden't really change.

You should also have immigration etc... Remember the Jews got their own country after what, like 2000 years or so?

But it should also be possible that civs capitulated when at war, to spare it's own citizens, and would come into negotioations of different kinds.

And allies should be allowed to move into the same square, that way you could defend your allied cities and important places.

Also: There should be the possibility in the editor (much like barbarians) to put down alternetive rebel fractions (new civs) for each civ in the game. Like the USA, could have the CSA and perhaps other. Scandinavia could have Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland etc.

while we're talkin about wut we want.... i would about kill for multilateral negotiations...nothing infuriates me more than when one of the civs im allied with declares war on another im allied with and we end up with this great big mess that no one can figure out who is on who's side or if there is a side...

i like this idea, and it should be exemplified the further you go from the capital, so colonies are affected stronger.

Here is something I posted at GameCatcher about what I wanted to see in Civ 4.


I'll give you a Civ 4 idea. A proposal I call:
Autonomy, Membership and Seceding

Civ 3 brought us the wonderful world of culture, mutual protection pacts, borders and many reasons for dissent, I want to expand on this idea to make it more realistic.

Autonomy
As we all know there are several (read lots) of places in the world where countries are hardly held together. Strong ideology or ethnic groups treaten to tear the country apart if they don't get autonomy or independence. Often autonomy is the first demand for the region. And for those who don't know, autonomy is when you control a region of a country without a lot of federal or national interference. So, applied to Civ 3 this would be a region of 3 or 4 cities that aren't hooked to your main civ....or are colonies, and not as well defended as other areas or maybe the cities aren't improved well, or you keep rushing production or they riot every other turn, and you do not suffecently deal with the problem or war weariness ticks them off or starvation and disease keeps killing them....but pretty much it's cities that are always mad at you because your doing something wrong or at least they think you are. These cities would demand Autonomy from you....as to say they want to control their own city queue and production. Granting autonomy would essentially make these people VERY happy, but by doing so, you lose control of the city production and worker allocation. Now the city is still yours, you still get trade and science and units built are still under your control (except for a small militia maybe a special unit that only autonomous cities can build for defense which changes with the times) but you can not control the city. Cities will not give up autonomy lightly, but if you want you can take it away. This will make a lot of people MAD. However, by this time you may be able to keep them happy, and eventually over time the anger will fade, and they will be just like your core cities. (Perhaps a moral scale would help) But if you still can't keep them happy, and you refuse autonomy after taking it back (only once) then the cities will threaten seceding from you and declare their independence.

Independence and Seceding
Not to be taken lightly, independence will cause a large problem for your empire. If a few cities declare independence, they will become a new civilization and you lose total control of the cities. Civ 3 introduced Culture Conversion. Where a city will change sides because of strong (or weak) culture. (This was also in Civ 1 FYI) The only problem I have with that is that the number of civs never changes. In the real world when America declared independence from Britian, they created their own "civ" and are now not considered Britons at all. But back to Civ 4. You have two choices, to recognize this independence, or declare war on the "rebels". This would create the good old civil war. Ahhhh...civil war. How I miss you from Civ 2. If you win the war you will have reconquered the new cities and they are yours again. They will be mad....but you will treat them just like a conquered city. They will lose their autonomy and their wish for autonomy unless you let it grow up again. If you don't win the war, and sign peace, a new civ will be officially created. Although this doesn't mean anything...as other countries may intervene during the civil war...it would just show that every country in the world recognized the new country. For morale, this civil war would really hurt your civ. It will take time to heal the wounds of open combat with your fellow countrymen.

Membership
Civ 3 also brought us Mutual Protection Pacts. Wonderful little things that can bring two civs closer together. I want to take that a little farther......the opposite of independence, membership would come in two forms. Complete, and partial. Complete membership would involve the complete joining of two civs. The Civ that is joined by another would gain control of all cities, units, and treaties. If two treaties are in conflict...the new civ would have to negotiate with the parties of the treaties. Complete membership would be pretty rare, as is in real life. Usually requires a huge civ and a smaller one, who have the same friends and enemies are probably have a good history of working together and a MPP, and RoP. A partial membership would be one where the smaller or joining civ retains autonomy over his cities. As in still controls production, and worker allocation. Before a queue is about to be emptied, the main civ would be able to suggest what it wants built. The autonomous city could then accept or reject this suggestion. Every 10 turns or so, it would be asked if the civ wishes to seperate, or join completely. If the main civ denies autonomy to the joined cities at any time, they have the option to become independent, but this has a much lower negative effect then if your countrymen do and will not trigger civil war. Over time the cities will convert to your culture and you can take away the autonomy with very little negative effects. But this will take a long time...50+ turns.

Well....this concludes my proposal. What do you think?

Version 1.0 - December 18, 2003 By: CornMaster

coming back a little bit, on the subject, i think cities who reached a certain level of disorder should become a new civ, or just a new city. After that it becomes a little complicated...

Awesome ideas CornMaster. This is the thing I want most implemented into Civ4 because I always have to pretend this happens and kill off my people and slow myself down.

This is the most missed feature from CTP, CTP2, and Civ2. I never played Civ1 so I wouldn't know.