I wasn't talking about what's realistic, I was tallking about what's nice, and whether the morality of acts in the real world should determine whether they get included in the game.
I must agree with a lot of what people were saying - the non-trivial peasant revolts in CivII were a good way of keeping a dominant human player at least a little bit awake.
And the possibility of triggering civil war by taking the enemy capital was brilliant. I was so chuffed when that first happened (took me completely by surprise). It was a great incentive to strike to the heart of a civ that had gotten a lead on you.
