Civil War Idea (RHYE)

[Eddiit]

Even in the new version I'm seeing civs collapse way way too much. In my most recent game Spain,Russia,Carthage,Babylon,Egypt,Arabia,Persia and China all collapsed. Thats just way way too much.


Collapsing civs should be a rare occurence and when it happens it should be big. There should be a civil war feature where a few cities from the nation break away and become neutral with the civ automatically being at war with them. If the neutral cities win then the civ collapses, if not the civ stays together but is definitely hurting from the civil war and needing to retake its cities.

 

[Shadowlord]

It might be interesting if a civ in 'collapsing' suffered individual cities rebelling, rather than dying off entirely. Say, if you are at -40 or lower, you lose 1 city and gain +5 stability until you're back above -40. That way a civ who falls deep into collapsing would still die off entirely, but ones who just slip into it might only lose a couple cities, and have a chance to recover from their problem.

In particular, the most unhappy or unhealthy cities, or the most distant, might be the best ones to lose first.

 

[NitroJay]

When I've been playing the newer versions, if MY civ colapses, this is what I see... When my civ is unstable, some of my newer cities go independant (with no notice or pop up, by th way... ) As for full on collapse, the one time it happened, while I was playing as China, I was left with just my capital... It took some time to reconquer all of my former cities...

As for the OTHER civs... I think Rhye mentioned that the AI would be unable to reconquer it's civ... I agree. The way the civ4 AI acts in my games, if it's backed into a corner, it just builds ##teen archers or whatnot in it's remaining city and never ventures out of it's city radius again... This would be a REAL pain if the map was left with Rome, Athens and Babylon filled to the brim with 50+ archers... And still having to deal with the annoying leaderheads asking me for my map...

I think the current system works fine... If anyhing, it's be cool to see it happen a little more gradually, i.e. when Rome is "unstable" have some of the outlying cities go independant (or join nearby civs) until it finally collapses, leaving all roman cities (including Rome) under the control of the independants... Or does this already happen for the AI as well as the player?

 

[Lord Apolon]

I have seen this happen with the AI. In a recent game as Germany, over the course of the later 2nd milennium, I saw the Vikings gradually fall to Unstable. The first time this happened, Kalmar apparently revolted from them; at any rate, it became independent. The same thing later happened to Oslo.. both became independent for a number of years before eventually flipping to me. Meanwhile, Scandinavia remained fairly strong and never fully collapsed.

So it seems like this is implemented in some way.
And I do agree that the AI doesn't know how to be aggressive. At all.

 

[Rhye]

what you are asking is already in the game. Even the notification of secession.

 

[NitroJay]

I just saw that, just now, in my most recent game... I'm sorry, I didn't see it before in the turn log...

I just finished a game with Arabia and I got a better view of the collapsing of civs... Greece stayed around, with a massive empire, until the end of the game, they were in the top 3 most of the time... The worst they got was "unstable," but only for a short time. Rome collapsed slowly, as did Babylon, shortly after I spawned. Never saw China, they were DOA. India was under Persian rule at my spawn, but resurected to become a vasal of Japan...

All in all, I love it. Thanks, Rhye.

 

[SadoMacho]

Resently I was playing with Japan (agian). I saw China become unstable, and 1 of there cities became independent (it happend to been the holy city of confusianism and taoism).Great!!!! What I haven't seen is that when 1 civ conquers an other and when it become unstalble that the conquerd civ respwans. I'd like to see that if it isn't in the game already.