Independence!!!

[Michael York]

Just as there is culture flip, if there is a spot for an additional civ, how about if cities fully corrupt are in disorder for 3 turns in a row, they will break away. They will produce an army (slightly weaker than the loyalist army) and try to take the remaining loyal cities that are fully corrupt and near them as well.

Maybe expelling units from a city when a culture flip would be cool too.

 

[SoCalian]

Instead of forming a new army the units al ready in the city and its surrouning areas should flip.

 

[Lynx]

it would be nice if under espionage you could arrange a coup...

 

[SoCalian]

That would make things veery interesting.

 

[EddyG17]

An spy that tell you if any of you cities if going to revolt or something, so you could do something about it

 

[RX2000]

Arranging a coup would be pretty cool, but it would have to cost a LOT, or else it would be way to unbalancing.

 

[alireza1354]

I LIKE THIS IDEA VERY MUCH EddyG17


THAT IS SIMPLY COOL

 

[Lee2003]

I was wondering why they did not include the barbarian's idea in Civ2 where they can have their own cities and have a leader. I think that was a great idea.

Maybe this had been suggested long ago, but i think putting a babarian tribe in each region from start will be nice. More challenging where their attitude should be the same to all race. Maybe races starting in same region will have a better relationship with the babarians and all races can have diplomatic options to all the babarians in the world. I think this is applicable for Huge world map.

Babarians start with settlers as well and maybe some slower production so that they will not become as strong as another rival race

Anyway just my puny opinion.

 

[Junzi Nicuzn]

I remember way-back when, in the era of square units, (nostalgia, anyone) when you captured a large, rival civy's capital, sometimes a revolt would take place and a new civy would emerge from half of the rival's cities.

I miss this

 

[EddyG17]

I will love if once you have capture the 80% of you enemy's cities you can either annex the nation or install a pupet nation if they agree if not finish capturing their units. If they aggree to be your pupet nation they will keep their color, you will be able to build units using their cities and even biuld their UU. BUT they will still nationality will remain (like capture workers). if you become weak after a war or something and the pupet nation is strong than you they may rebell, their goa,l to become free. I cant think of any benefits for installing a pupet nation but sure it will be add alot of fun to the game

 

[joespaniel]

Originally posted by Junzi Nicuzn
I remember way-back when, in the era of square units, (nostalgia, anyone) when you captured a large, rival civy's capital, sometimes a revolt would take place and a new civy would emerge from half of the rival's cities.

I miss this

Yeah, that's what I meant about "splitting" civs.

I would like to see this come back.

 

[Junzi Nicuzn]

Originally posted by joespaniel
Yeah, that's what I meant about "splitting" civs.

I would like to see this come back.

It always gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling when the Romagazines (a custom civy I've used since Civ I) forced a culture superior to mine to split.

I remember my first time when the Romagazines destroyed London, and then the Americans arrived (art imitating life...well, almost)

 

[joespaniel]

First time I captured an enemy capitol in Civ3, I was very disapointed when nothing happened. I had purposely carved a swath right through the center of the enemy empire too. No split. Bah.

 

[Junzi Nicuzn]

I KNOW. My very first CivIII game that was the first thing I tried to do. I got so disappointed when nothing happened I tried to destroy my rival's (France) entire civy then. Of course this was my first time, and I got creamed because of it.

 

[RX2000]

Its kind of illogical really. Why would a country decide to split up right when they need to stick together the most? If someone invaded Washington D.C., I dont see us splitting into 2 separate countries to fight the war. I see everyone banding together to kick some ass. Maybe thats just me.

 

[skylined]

Anyway i think that the idea of new civ arrival as a result of civil war is R E A L L Y T H E G R E A T ! ! !

 

[EddyG17]

well done RX2000, I don't see why would they slip up insted of stick together either. In the other hand i think my idea of a pupet nation if much more interesting

 

[joespaniel]

Originally posted by RX2000
Its kind of illogical really. Why would a country decide to split up right when they need to stick together the most? If someone invaded Washington D.C., I dont see us splitting into 2 separate countries to fight the war. I see everyone banding together to kick some ass. Maybe thats just me.

Lemme explain, when you took out a capitol in Civ2, that government went with it. No free Palace in another city, you have to build it again.

In Civ3, the capitol moves.

See, the rules have changed between the old and the new.

My suggestion for Conquests is, if a civ has REALLY bad unhappiness in 50% or more of it's cities for more than 3 turns, for whatever reason, then there is a chance every turn after that of a culture split (new civ appearing).

That would be realistic enough.

 

[skylined]

And what about new civ appearing which is triggered by the enemy spy missions ???

 

[Junzi Nicuzn]

Originally posted by skylined
And what about new civ appearing which is triggered by the enemy spy missions ???

Ummmm......What?!?

Maybe I'm just stupid, but could you clarify that?