Crazy idea here

[Bergerperson]

Ok, so I have been thinking of this idea for future versions of Civilization V. My idea is that have natural events like what happens in Civilization IV, but ALSO!!!!!! have leader deaths. Now we can still have the leader heads like Elizabeth I, Wu Zetian, Napoleon, etc. But my idea is them being heads of state, and having deaths of heads of governments like prime ministers and presidents.

So as an example, playing against England, you're diplomatically stable (Not at war), but you get a warning saying "English Prime Minister Benjamin Disralei has died, he is replaced by William Gladstone." NOW!!!! You have been doing good diplomatically with Elizabeth under the Ministership of Disralei. But recently you haven't had good trade deals or Elizabeth has been asking too much of you lately, and you don't agree with Gladstone's legitimacy as Prime Minister (As it is under Gladstone that Elizabeth has been making these outrageous demands of you.) So you want to dispose Gladstone as the English Prime Minister and you want him replaced by someone that won't inspire Elizabeth to make more ridiculous trade demands of you. I think this option will add more diplomatically to Civilization V.

My suggestion here is that you go to war because Elizabeth refused to dispose Gladstone (Changing the head of government can be a new trade option, like accepting an embassy), you overwhelm Elizabeth completely and part of the peace agreement is the installation of a more friendly head of government. This option will give you a major friendly boost towards Elizabeth (Until the new head of government dies and is replaced by a new person). But having a more hostile person as head of England's government will give you a negative point with Elizabeth.

This may sound like it is too complicated to add, but if it can it will certainly make this game more interesting.

 

[I_qua_I]

This seems not only overly complicated and unnecessary but flat out annoying to have to deal with. What does this meaningfully add to the game? Why do we need a prime minister to be the face of Elizabeth's mood swings (as opposed to Elizabeth herself just deciding to get a bit fussy for a couple centuries or so? For a reason to go to war? For something to distract us from other aspects of the game? The only thing novel I see in this proposal is the fact that we could improve our relations with a leader for declaring war on them and messing their stuff up (a change I see making war even more exploitable than it already is.)

It's also asymmetric. The human player obviously wouldn't (at least I hope not!) have her choices and diplomatic relations governed by her own little AI prime minister. (Asymmetry isn't necessarily a problem in and of itself but should be kept to a minimum seeing as it's useless in multiplayer...)

 

[9gkj548hkm20vk79dj689bnj4]

But I am the leader of my civilization, not some underling I have no control over.

This just sounds like a different version of adopting different social policies/civics than other civilizations. It's not really adding anything.

 

[ljofa]

You could have this as a random event *generic civ's chief advisor died suddenly and is replaced with a person more/less disposed to your civilization: +1/-1 Civ Influence. Though to be honest, I think a revitalised Culture/Influence will sweep this up in BNW