automatic leader succession

[countzero]

after reading some posts about how some civilizations should be added into the game, I had this idea about automatic leader succession which will introduce variety into the game. We know that civilizations change in time due to cultural exhange and scientific advance. I thought it would be interesting if leaders of civilizations change if certain scientific advances are discovered (or maybe certain civics triggered). For example, France led by Jean D'arc until the discovery of divine right, then replaced by Louis until the discovery of rifling when napoleon takes over. Persians led by cyrus until the industrial age, and in the industrial age, if persians switch to theoracy, khomaine (sorry if mispelled) takes over. Also the name of the civilizations can change. (persia to iran in this case) Or Rome to Holy Roman empire(with theology) to italy (with nationhood). In my opinion different leaders with different traits will introduce unexpectedness into the game and increase the gameplay experience.

 

[Storkraft]

sounds great. and more realistic.
but also more interesting gameplay.

 

[Mrdie]

You would have to have the game be like in some scenarios. 7 turns = Seven weeks, etc etc

Otherwise, every single turn would be a new leader pretty much. And what about the civs like America? Wouldn't that be slightly overpowered to have the same leader with the same traits and not have to worry about trait differances suddenly untill 1796? (I think that is when Washington resigned and John Adams became President)

 

[countzero]

You would have to have the game be like in some scenarios. 7 turns = Seven weeks, etc etc

this isn't neccessary. The game already has eras. And leader succession should be limited to once per each era.

And what about the civs like America? Wouldn't that be slightly overpowered to have the same leader with the same traits and not have to worry about trait differances suddenly untill 1796? (I think that is when Washington resigned and John Adams became President)

yes, America is a problem but not too much. I think America's leadership should be dependent on its foreign diplomacy, if it goes to war, a warmongering president could take over (guess who ?). After the war ends, and Era changes, a builder leader could continue. Realism, or time-line accuracy does not count for america, because it's existence from the 4000BC is non-sense anyway.

Now that I think about it, I think mandatory leader changes could also be very exciting. Especially if a warmonger leader loses a war, there should be a possibility that he could step down, and leave the nation leaderless until a new leader is triggered (the civ don't get a leader bonus in this period.). Maybe this could be an option in the diplomacy screen when negotiating for peace.

 

[benjamin28]

I suppose this would bring a lot of problems, but is also a great idea. I was making a long list using all of the civics (except the first ones: Despotism, Descentralization, etc...) = 20 x 3 = 60, this created a very nice list.
My options are: Aztlan (Aztec) to Mexico, Ottoman Empire to Turkey and Rome to Italy. Mexico, Turkey and Italy are really important civilizations, and they don't have the leaders that they merite.
The leaders could be: for MExico: Benito Juarez, Organized-Philosophical, favors Free Religion. For Turkey, Kemal Ataturk, Industrious and Organized, favors Emancipation; and Victor Emmanuel for Italy, Industrious and financial, favors Hereditary Rule.
If you start in the Industrial or Modern eras, the names could change instantly.

 

[Kaenash]

I think this is a fantastic idea. Every Civilization gets a leader for each era, and the player gets to choose between the initial two at the start of the game *IF* there are two available.

Thats brilliant.

 

[Mrdie]

this isn't neccessary. The game already has eras. And leader succession should be limited to once per each era.

Mmkay.

(guess who ?)

Lyndon B. Johnson? But that would be stupid and make non needed hatemail for the developers.