Argetnyx's Empire-Crashing Idea

[kochman]

I have been away from Civ for a while (at school), so I've had time to think...

Would anybody like to see civil wars in Civ? I know this has been suggested before, but not in this way:

1. When a civ breaks apart, the mother civ cannot just ignore it -like the AIs probably would. The rebelling land is seen as 'theirs' and the civ will do whatever it can to regain the land.

2. When a country gets split, the new 'independent' nation is not a 'civ', in the diplomatic sense. The only way for it to be recognised by other civs to be a true civ is if it shows a definite edge against its mother country -either by having a stronger military, or simply fighting to a draw.

3. When this happens, the rebels are recognised in diplomatic relations and can carry on just like any other civ. This allows other civs to join the fight for or against the new civ.

I like the initial concept, with some tweaks. For example, #2... doesn't matter who recognizes it, if it is a civ, it is a civ. I understand what you mean, so the slightest rebellion can't be considered now a new civ. It should have to be a pretty major thing.

I think having this would be good if you have disgruntled cities (a percentage of total) that remain disgruntled for X amount of turns.

RFC has something like this in it...

 

[rysmiel]

Control of cities brings forth the problem of individual citizens and their opinions. If there is a majority of citizens in a city that want rebellion (let's say, for argument's sake, all the unhappy ones), will the whole populace, including the unrebellious citizens, rebel and take over the city as one whole, or will only parts of the city work for the new regime?

I see your point. I would be inclined to do this city by city myself, but possibly have the non-rebelling citizens behave the same way as conquered citizens in a newly-conquered city ? (Thinking specifically of the Civ III model of having some number of citizens in revolt when you first conquer a city which have to be pacified before you can do much else with it.)

Perhaps the best way of implementing this would be to simply provide a instability penalty for older civics as time progresses (although that really belongs in the other thread).

I think said penalty should increase with expansion/growth of empire rather than linearly with time, though.

 

[Camikaze]

I see your point. I would be inclined to do this city by city myself, but possibly have the non-rebelling citizens behave the same way as conquered citizens in a newly-conquered city ? (Thinking specifically of the Civ III model of having some number of citizens in revolt when you first conquer a city which have to be pacified before you can do much else with it.)

That's a good idea, and I guess it could be implemented with regards to normal resistance after city capture as well (as you say it was in Civ3). But I agree that as a general rule, whole cities should be rebellious as a single entity, rather than breaking rebellions down into even smaller units.

 

[pickle]

when a city rebels and splits, there should be a culture threshold that diminishes with distance from the rebelling city, all cities that have less culture than the threshold at their distance from the rebelling city will join the rebellion, all units in the cities go over to the rebellion plus a few free units for the new civ, having a strong military presence in the area should make the rebellion less likely and all units in the open countryside should take some damage.

 

[rysmiel]

when a city rebels and splits, there should be a culture threshold that diminishes with distance from the rebelling city, all cities that have less culture than the threshold at their distance from the rebelling city will join the rebellion, all units in the cities go over to the rebellion plus a few free units for the new civ,

That's not a bad idea at all, though the threshold would want to change over time and depend on other things.

having a strong military presence in the area should make the rebellion less likely

Which it does already if you use the pre-Civ 4 unhappyt-people model i advocate, because of the effect of military police on happiness.

and all units in the open countryside should take some damage.

That's interesting. I'd say that should depend on whether it's one city or a region in rebeliion.

 

[kochman]

I don't think, in a game where you generally control one empire the entire time, that time should have anything to do with rebellions growing. If that was a factor, every game would end up shattered... Size of an empire, I can see that being a factor... culture being another...

 

[rysmiel]

I don't think, in a game where you generally control one empire the entire time, that time should have anything to do with rebellions growing. If that was a factor, every game would end up shattered... Size of an empire, I can see that being a factor... culture being another...

Yes, but both of those are things that change over time, no ? So therefore your chance of a rebellion and what you needed to do to manage it would also change over time ?

 

[kochman]

Size of the empire doesn't have to ever change (after your initial growth that is).
Re: culture, I meant the cultures of civs withing cities, which can change, or remain the same...

Time just doesn't seem like a factor you can control, and must face in every game, whereas that is not the case with culture (example, you control a continent, from an isolated start...).

 

[Camikaze]

I can see your point, kochman. Penalties should be more based upon what in your empire changes as time elapses, rather than on time itself. However, time should still certainly be a factor, although probably mostly through the measurement of those things which do change over time and their affect on instability.

 

[Argetnyx]

In Civ, the larger the civ, the more stable it is, right? In real life, the larger the empire, the harder it is to control.

 

[Camikaze]

Well that really depends on a number of factors, rather than solely on empire size. It would seem best, therefore, to judge stability based on a number of factors, of which size is just one. I can't remember what I was arguing before, but that seems to be relevant.