Great Rebels

I had an idea that could be implemented into an expansion of civ IV. Certain conditions such as too many unhappy citezens could allow a 'Great rebel leader' (e.g, Sparticus, Cromwell...) to appear in control of the rebel civ that some of your empire could defect to. These leaders could then move around certain cities in an area and 'rally' them to defect to their new Civ, with all or some of the military units in the square. The rebellion could be quashed by killing the leader as he is trying to raise support for his cause.

Any thoughts?

I guess it would work im certainly a supporter of allowing civil ars in the game. They could happen in Civ II under certain circumstances. Certainly a great way of adding a few extra leaders. A addition to it could be prehaps you (the player) gets the choice of playing the rebels if you want at that point.

i just hope the AI would have the ability to cope with such things. we will see

Himalia said:

I guess it would work im certainly a supporter of allowing civil ars in the game. They could happen in Civ II under certain circumstances. Certainly a great way of adding a few extra leaders. A addition to it could be prehaps you (the player) gets the choice of playing the rebels if you want at that point.

Click to expand...

I really like this idea. Almost every nation in history has faced rebellions of some sort. Taking the leader of the rebellion from history is an excellent idea. I'd suggest that these leaders only be available in rebellion, and not from the start of the game. Giving the player the choice of playing the rebels if his/her own civ breaks up is icing on top.

Yeah, the rebellion / civil war theme is a constant in the forums... but this is an interesting way to implement it.

The main problems I see with having this sort of features is:

Problem: Turning 'governors' on automatically eliminates any possibilities of rioting or revolting cities.
Possible solution: Have rebellions or civil wars depend on something more than simple happyness status... on distance from capitol, food supplies, science, etc.

Problem: Even if other factors are added, a player could easily learn how to avoid rebellions by working on these factors and therefore only the AI at lowest levels would have rebellions.
Possible solution: 2 options: (1) either complicate the factors rebellions depend on so much that player's cannot keep track of them and control them 100%; (2) either give rebellions a certain necessity under certain conditions (ai, civilizations that expand to other continents have extremely high chances to become separated as time goes by).

Just my 2 cents

I like it, nice idea. I'm not sure that Firaxis likes the idea of civilwars though...

im not sure civil wars are gonna be a part of any of the civ titles anymore..i love the idea and the concept..but its heavily debated..to such an extent that even though i love the idea..i dont see how it would make the majority happy..and fraxis..reaching out to expand there name..i feel..is making the game more simple...rather then more complacated..which sucks for us..and these types of ideas

J-S said:

Problem: Even if other factors are added, a player could easily learn how to avoid rebellions by working on these factors and therefore only the AI at lowest levels would have rebellions.

Click to expand...

Avoiding rebellions comes at a cost, though. You dedicate resources to building temples and cathedrals and roads. You have social engineering that is favorable to different ethnicities and religions, etc. You have to balance one goal against another. If you pursue a strategy that eliminates the possibility of rebellion, you're condemning yourself to be a backwater in other ways. If you manage to create a leading civilization without risking rebellion, that means you're really good. Or you're playing on too easy a level ;-).

Pursuing that thought a little further... Maybe civil wars and rebellions would be more acceptable if there were more of them, like random events. Maybe the problem was that it happened so infrequently and with such randomness that they were hard to combat. On the other hand, if you have a rebellion every thousand years or so and you know how to fight them, then they're a lot less annoying when they do happen. After all, every nation in the real world has had them, most of them numerous times, and enough of them have survived...

Frankly, despite the virtue of this idea I prefer the "classic" version of civil wars.

Loppan Torkel said:

I like it, nice idea. I'm not sure that Firaxis likes the idea of civilwars though...

Click to expand...

Well prehaps if enough people like the idea and it comes to there attention it may be something for Civilization V. On no stop that lets just get Civilzation IV installed before even mentioning what ifs for Civ V.