Great job diving in. I would also do a search for similar discussion and efforts in this, the RevDCM, and old Revolutions and Dales Combat Mod forums, likewise you could explore discussions from the previous versions that led to C2C as well, AND, and ROM. Insight could be found anywhere where it was explored.
Ongoing discussion and problem solving is great.
I'm all for continuing this discussion and trying to help you. In any way that is feasible.
I like Revolutions, and see a lot of potential for it being redesigned correctly and fun if we can figure out how to implement it better and improve it.
Consequences and Obstacles are supposed to improve the game by varying it up and challenging the players, like volcanoes if done right it can add immersion and new strategy elements to C2C, so long as it doesn't bring frustration and nerf a carefully built strategy completely. Learning how to compensate and prepare for unknowable events, minor and major, can be part of playing in a living breathing world. Making those events exhibit unpredictable patterns makes things interesting (even at low impact levels). Law of unintended consequences and surprising interactions. Dynamic and fun in my eyes!
I think these things should scale up with difficulty and allow those who want negative(bad things/challenges) to be optional and toggleable during games (like disasters in Sim City) or having adjustable and random probabilities like dynamic toughness would add a dimension to the game that won't scare people away. Training wheels are great at first, scaling up the difficulty and challenges both seen and unforeseen is what make a game feel less like a repetitive logic and analytical game and more like a breathing simulation that also engages intuition.
Dynamic, living, and challenging versus predictable, safe, and easy going.
People want to play their own way, and the depth and dynamics of their experience is what brings fun and replay value. Sometimes you want a quick 1hr or 1day game, sometimes you want an epic journey that last months. Sometimes you want to play by yourself, sometimes you may venture out and see how multiplayer adds to the equation.
If done right Revolutions can seem like just another nominal dimension that adds depth to C2C, as well as a selectable wall that affects gameplay radically and raises the challenge level.
Bridge the gap and give options, and you open the door to all types of players and philosophies.
The reason I bring up the Roguelike (NetHack ,Slash'Em ,ATOM , Dwarf Fortress) games and Ultima(IV-V especially) gameplay when I see something interesting, is that there is a dynamic between simple items, monsters, and effects that can make simple gameplay fun. Combination games bring deeper elements. In my opinion most games are way too linear and tied more to direct rules than dynamics. Balancing both is key to achieving that depth of gameplay. That is why most strategy games from RTS to 4x turns seem one dimensional to me. Revolutions is a chance to have underlying dynamics, like what was done with subdued animals here, what could be done with climate(SIM CITY,SIM EARTH, etc.), dynamic storytelling (Ultima 4-5) with events,
and dynamics of relationships between units (roguelike games), items, and why not events, like Revolutions! It may all come down to layers of relationship and simulation and putting control to a fun degree in the players hands.
It just takes will, sustained effort(experimentation), and time. If all someone can do is talk about it, then it may eventually move it forward. If someone wants it bad enough, they will try to make it happen.
It may be enough to turn a player into a modder(much of which is just learning how to edit, experiment and ask questions). Make it a challenge.
We have to lay a path between want and will to see things happen.
