Civil War

*Disclaimer*-I have no modding ability whatsoever, so this up to the masses to figure out.

This idea does not refer to the American Civil War, or any Civ-specific Civil War either.So, how about a random event pertaining to a civil war in your nation, based on the colonization system and the Labor Civics?

Here's the summary. Serfdom, Slavery or Caste System have the following demerit tacked onto them: Slavery increases the chances for Civil War by 50%, Serfdom by 25%, and Caste System by 25%, for every X (to be specified, I'm thinking 20-40) turns they are in use. A starting variable for each difficulty level would be affected. At the same time, when any of these civics are in use, a random event can show up:
Civil War
Citizens of our Empire are shocked by the mistreatment of their own brethren in chains (Slavery)/own people in bondage to the upper class (Serfdom)/class by other castes through the constraints of a caste system (Caste System). Some are openly revolting at the practices that they refer to as "vulgar, demeaning acts". What should we do?
-Enact a law banning the practice in question
-+5 in cities that the whip has been used more than 15 times/more specialists than normally allowed/more improvements (not sure about this one)
- + 5 Angry in cities that the whip has been used 15 times or less/normal or less specialists than w/o Caste System/less improvements
-Ignore those treasonous commoners! What do they know about governing a burgeoning empire?
-reverse of above

Either choice increases odds of Civil War in next 10 turns by 150%. If the starting variable goes above 'Y' ( to be determined), then CIVIL WAR! All the cities that got the unhappiness go into rebellion for a turn, along with anarchy throughout the empire. The anarchy and rebellion are replaced by a "colony" Civ which is not a vassal, but at war with you!

This reflects historical events,etc, and could make gameplay a lot more challenging.

i like the idea

If you havent already seen it and based on this it dont seem like you have might i suggest you look into the revolutions mod made by Jdog 5000 (if i remeber correctly) you may enjoy it.

I like that idea. A Change of civics, religion or law could trigger a civil war. Also religion and ethnicity can play as well. If a quater of your citizens are for example French and you are the English. They can try and seperate from you

Why just these? Any civic change could potentially spawn a civil war. France's was due to Government more than anything else. Iran- religion. In many a place the revolutionaries have instituted a more oppressive form of Government than the status quo ante. China and Russia to state property. Many nations, upon gaining independance, adopted Nationalistic and protectionist policies.

Love the suggestion. I think it should only happen above Noble, though, either that and/or a button to switch it off.

When people bring up Civil War in reference to civ, they actually mean three different types of wars...

War of Succession
This is when part of a nation wants to break away from another part for some reason (usually civics).

War of Independence
This is when a colony or conquered nation breaks away from it's mother nation.

Civil War
This is a true civil war - that is two or more sides within the same nation fighting each other to gain control of that nation, usually eradicating the other sides, otherwise you're left with messy guerilla's skulking about your country.

If you're going to have a serious discussion about it, best to start by identifying those three different variants and considering them seperately because they are all quite different.

Isn't a war of succession the same as a war of independance? See Kosvo- it was fighting for indepdance, to break away from the nation. I agree that the third is very different, but the first two seem to be basically the same. After all, the Thirteen States were considered to be part of England.

Larklight said:

Isn't a war of succession the same as a war of independance? See Kosvo- it was fighting for indepdance, to break away from the nation. I agree that the third is very different, but the first two seem to be basically the same. After all, the Thirteen States were considered to be part of England.

Click to expand...

The Thirteen Colonies were never really considered part of the UK, that's why they were called colonies...

They were never considered part of the UK (did it even exist under that name then?) but they were considered part of England- until the rise of Scotish Nationalism, England refered to the whole empire.

Especially during the first empire, the 13 states were thought of on many levels as equal to what we now call GB. One of the reasons for 1776 was that the colonists expected to be given more equal representation after their work in the wars against France. The expansion of the empire prevented that. (Queen Anne's war I think)

It's just a slight variation in definition for why the war is fought really, thus changing the game mechanics that would trigger the wars...
A War of Succession is when a part of a country wants to break away due to idealogical changes, whereas War for Independence is when a part of a country wants to break free because they don't feel they really belong to that country and thus should have their own (especially true if they are a conquered nation).

Wouldn't that make the American war of Independance a war of succession, since their were quite ideologically motivated, but had, until Britain snubbed them, with the illegal quartering of troops and trade barriers, felt very patriotic.

I've already stated that I don't believe that the colonies were ever truly a part of England. I believe they were more like Puerto Rico is to the US - not part of the country, just territory administered by the country, and thus could not fight a war of sucession. That's what I was taught anyway.

While an interesting concept, your percentiles for citizen revolt do not reflect historical reality. Slave oriented societies flourished for millenia. As did caste and serf oriented societies.

Even today in modern India the caste system still underlies the modern "equality". The Indian caste system is dozens of centuries old, if not older.

Serfdom and slavery still exist today in many forms. Slavery as defined by Western nations do not reflect the realities of people ownership of the older world. The Romans had slaves that were quite well treated and had many liberties. They weren't tied to an agricultural combine as a source of enforced labor. Instead, the Roman slave simply meant they were not a proper citizen with full rights. The Greeks before them severely limited citizenship. Everyone else was in some form of bondage or liberty restriction.

Even long before and after slavery in the US, there was the second class status of many other segments of society.

For most of recorded history, and before, societies and cultures all over the planet have resided in a "tiered" citizenry system. The "free" societies of today comprise a microscopic fragment of the timespan from our first communal groups through today.

And yet there was little precedent for civil war in these systems. Sure, societies subjugated from without had a habit of rebellion, but rarely from a domestic system.

You would be more historically served by assigning percentiles in the low single digits until the Industrial era.