Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

What if you add several additional attitude traits and then when an affect happens to reduce attitudes, they reduce down, when it reaches the Last attitude, each turn it stays at that attitude, chance of rebellion increases by 5% (or more). Example;
planet goes to rioting, then complete civil
disobedience, then insurrection. At insurrection, each turn increases the possibility of rebellion for that planet by increments of 5% accumulative. When it finaly does rebel, all planets in that system, no matter who they belong to drop 1 attitude from their current status and they in turn drop 1 attitude for say every 3 turns, until rebelling world is either re-taken or they in turn rebel and join the rebellion which in turn could creat a new system wide empire...

Just some ideas mac

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Wow! 50 replies to my lowly thread. Don't you just love when a topic takes off. Anyway thanks to everyone for all the response on this idea. Hopefully together we can get MM to implement this. Now back to business http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Mac your idea sounds a lot like Trachmyr's with one world triggering the rebellion and thus influencing the others around it (read his post below).

This idea (one small rebellion instigating one BIG one a.k.a. Civil War) could be another trigger. Along with the loss of the regional or galactic capital, we now have two triggers http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

What could be some other triggers? or rules for revolting planets?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

In regards to system wide civil war, all ships, ftrs, troops, bases on originating world & all other worlds would go to the rebellion. The originating world would become the seat of the new empire and would become the seat of your new Govt. facility. In addition, The originating world would be the one that dictates the kind of ships, weapons, etc, that new empire would build. thus you would not have a conflict with different races/cultures/etc, of other worlds that were colonized by other races but which have joined your rebellion, when it comes to building ships & units. (It basically takes over in this area.)

Other possible triggers could be if you have more then say 3 or 4 planets in anarchy at the same time for a specific period of time within your empire. this could cause all of your planets to start dropping in attitude following those I listed in earlier post, this could cause an empire rebellion instead of a system rebellion, except for planets you have re-taken.

just some ideas mac

However, I don't know if this could be done outside of hard code changes, you might ck with one of the modders or MM. It mmight have to fall under catagory 2 as listed in my earlier thread. just some ideas mac

[This message has been edited by mac5732 (edited 06 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Mac, again good stuff http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif having the originating planet determine those thing s is a good idea. And like was discussed before the colors would probably be changed in the ships along with the flag.

As for the new trigger for an empire wide rebellion, ie civil war, another good idea.

And yes all of these would probably need a hardcode change. But I think a lot of us would be willing to pay for an expansion with this feature in it along with others from Category 2. And like you said in your thread, they could make some money off of it in the process.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I fully support the Civil War Idea. It adds more dimensions to the game. I personally would like to see whole systems break away for reasons of course. Like if you are going through the galaxy glassing every alien planet you should have a rebellion, it only makes sense that people would not like genocide. If you use plague ships, BAM, one whole system breaks away from your empire.

I think my whole point is that I don't see the point of anarchy Groups. They create one easily glassable planet that has about the chance of a snowball behind a Quantum III engine of doing anything significant.


Anyway time for an original idea. Make this Civil War thing like the Mega-Evil Empire trigger but after it. Like you have been fighting the entire galaxy of races for a few years and your people are sick of war. Ya know like in World War I, Russia had a revolution because of the hardships on the country because of the war.

So... If you are MEE too long it kicks in and splits up your systems because they are sick of war. There would have to be a few things to go along with this. After your empire splits there would have to be a reverse MEE trigger.

That's all I have for now. I'll be back though.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Baal, Brilliant!!! another new trigger. Plus it would give some incentive and even necessity to loose the mega evil empire flag. However, some players are so darn good at this game that they can't help becoming the MEE because they outscore everyone by so much. So how do we get around that problem. Perhaps make it really hard to become the MEE?

What does everyone else think?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I don't think it should be an incentive to not become MEE. It's more like an egg timer, it gives you an amount of time to do the Mega-Evil thing or you are back to square one with another empire out there that is just as bad *** as you.

It gives purpose to try to win fast or as I said you are back to square one.

As for the splitting of the empire. It should calculate your size and split you into multipul pieces accordingly. And even better it's coded to give the human player the smallest alotment of planets/ships/stuff.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

UNION STRIKE!

all planets / ships / bases with space yards break away from your empire.

if that is overly harsh, how about every planet with some other facility? or maybe 1yr after you research SY-2, each place with a SY-1 has a chance to break off.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Puke, nice name http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif, this one seems a little harsh to me. Maybe if you are capable of level 3 of some facility but only have level ones then there could be a small chance for revolt. But probably a better way to implement this would be to have a happiness decrease which would eventually lead to revolt and civil war if not taken care of. This way your good idea could be implemented but not so harshly http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif.

Baal, you little devil, this idea is real good but seems dangerous to me. I guess to some players it would be as you say, but to the less timid than it would provide incentive to not become MEE. But i do like the idea and it should be a trigger. Lets keep developing it.

Thoughts?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chewy027:
Thoughts? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This discussion makes me think about my earlier repelling emotions towards the AI ANGER.

"Like if you are going through the galaxy glassing every alien planet you should have a rebellion, it only makes sense that people would not like genocide."
-Baal

I totally agree - shouldn't there also be an empire genocide trigger that would affect the MEE anger.

"You're not evil just because you are big."
-Lucanos (first time I ever quoted myself)

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Baal:
I don't think it should be an incentive to not become MEE. It's more like an egg timer, it gives you an amount of time to do the Mega-Evil thing or you are back to square one with another empire out there that is just as bad *** as you.

It gives purpose to try to win fast or as I said you are back to square one.

As for the splitting of the empire. It should calculate your size and split you into multipul pieces accordingly. And even better it's coded to give the human player the smallest alotment of planets/ships/stuff.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personally I don't think this necessarily makes sense. What if I am a bloodthirsty empire that enjoys war? How would the other races regard your breakaway republics? Personally I don't really like this idea, I hate it when games try to force me into finishing the game in a set amount of time for no real discernable reason. I would suggest if MM includes this feature, include a flag to turn it off.

The other thing is I don't totally agree with the MEE idea. While there should be some trigger that makes the computer realize you are a threat, just having a large empire should not be a bad thing. If you implement this empire split up you are essentially penalizing the player for doing well.

[This message has been edited by jc173 (edited 07 April 2001).]

[This message has been edited by jc173 (edited 07 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

JC173 I agree with your statement

"The other thing is I don't totally agree with the MEE idea. While there should be some trigger that makes the computer realize you are a threat, just having a large empire should not be a bad thing. If you implement this empire split up you are essentially penalizing the player for doing well."

It would be like being penalized for doing well but maybe we could change the parameters for being MEE and then implement this trigger.

Also, do you not like the Civil War idea or just the MEE trigger?

Thoughts?



[This message has been edited by chewy027 (edited 07 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

As an addendum to my earlier post:

As for ships that join the new empire, only vessels in systems that now have planets of the new empire have a chance to convert. All ships in the same sector as a planet, retain the loyalty of that planet... ships in sectors with out planets have a chance to convert equal to: (# of planets converted in system) out of (# of planets loyal + # of planets converted).

As to a MEE like trigger dor civil war, I would not want that implemented.

As for Genocide, that should be made a new line in Happiness.txt (?) (you know: Bloodthirsty, Peaceful, Neutral)... some races wouldn't care, some would be upset, others would cheer.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Thanks Trachmyr. I'll update the overview. Keep the ideas coming. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Sometimes things don't always make sense. But here's my try. If you are bloodthirty then if you make too many treaties with other races you should have a civil war because you are not mean enough. That would require a different trigger.

Anyway MEE doesn't make sense for peacefully expanding races anyway, but it does work for bloodthirsty races. So, I guess that it is a trade off.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Since some people have stated they don't like the MEE trigger maybe we could just have it influence happiness. If you are peacefull society and a MEE than people become unhappy. Likewise, as Baal stated, if you are bloodthirsty but have treaties the people become unhappy. This way the MEE indirectly can cause civil war through unhappiness.

this trigger still needs to be discussed by everyone but i have put it in the overview.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

My opion, only, From all that I read in the thread, it sounds like the best possible trigger would have to do with attitude of the population each planet, each system and empire wide. Civil war could be a planet, which in turn affects the system and several systems infect the empire. If the empire goes to civil war the easiest way (I'm not a modder or programer) I think would be for the computer to check all planets of the empire, those with specific attitudes would have a chance to join or not join depending on their attitude at the time. Example, Jubulient, 95% not join, Happy 85% not join,
unhappy 65% not join, indeferent 50%, riot
30%, total civil disobedience 15%, insurrection 100% to join. This way it would not matter what size the planet was etc, Also the new rebellious empire would automatically be at war with its parent. The AI would treat it the same as any other player, The new empire would have the same make up as its parent, traits, attitudes, ect, or they could be racial traited as warriors or blood thirsty or whatever.
Sorry its so long,
just some ideas mac

For empire civil war, the trigger could be if 2 or more systems rebel, This would give the chance of civil war but not made easy.
Also the new empire would automaticly be given a space yard on the originating planet as well as a Govt. Facility, It would become a new empire. You could code it as either a neutral (I personaly don't like neutrals) or a bona fide expanding empire. Remember, the less hard code changes, the easier it is to implement a change. that's why I think if we look at attitudes and what triggers them it would be easier then massive changes. Example, if your bloodthirsty, at war pop happy, lose battle goes down in that system, if lose world goes down empire wide, If peaceful, war goes down, treaties goes up, If you use biological weapons for some races attitude would go down, others goes up, depends on your racial traits. again sorry for the long post, sometimes i get long winded.
just some ideas mac

[This message has been edited by mac5732 (edited 07 April 2001).]

[This message has been edited by mac5732 (edited 07 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I don't have a problem with the civil war, I like the idea actually. I also think the MEE is not necessarily a bad thing, but I just don't like the way it's triggered now. Granted being the largest and most prosperous empire may cause resentment and envy (seems to work that way in our world sometimes), but declaring war on such an empire does not necessarily make sense to me. For one thing it is not necessarily in the other empires' best interest for long term survival. The other thing is I think that systems should way more heavily in the MEE trigger not planets. Why would colonizing a moon in one of my core systems that I have claimed for years suddenly make the rest of the known galaxy decide I am the ultimate threat?

Anyhow I might not have been clear enough in my Last post, but I think that tying a rebellion to MEE is just putting a limit on the player's options just because that player is doing well. Some people may like that, and I am certainly not going to tell people how to play. But if such a feature were implemented I'd prefer to be able to turn it off.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

JC173 I agree with you. But i think MEE is a good trigger if the conditions for MEE would be changed.

Mac5732 happiness on each planet probably would be the second best trigger. The best trigger would be the loss of your capital or homeworld. As for the happiness that could follow one of the rule sets in the overview.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

THANK YOU Chewy027!!!!!!!!!!

thank you for saving me at least 30 minutes of reading! your hard work has not gone unappreciated!!!


THANK YOU CHEWY!!!!!!!!!

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Dumbluck, it is my pleasure http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif. I am doing this for the whole SE4 community and anything I can do to present this idea better to the people out there I will do.

BTY, Dumbluck wnat do you think? Any thoughts/suggestions?

And would you please post a vote in the sister thread for this idea http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

It has been brought up by Deathstalker that if you start out with more than one planet then they are all "Homeworld" type colonies. This would pose a problem to the homeworld trigger.

My thoughts on the solution are to have one of the planets have the galactic capital on it and/or have one of the planets colony type be "Capital" not "Homeworld." This would end the confusion. If the planets are in different systems then the above rule applies and one of the planets in each of the other systems is a regional capital.

These are my thoughts. What are yours?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

One moment about the comment on the Homeworld splitting off: why not? Basically, your subjects are subjects where ever they happen to be; a homeworld really wouldn't mean much later on in the game.

Take the cases of Revolutionary France, Roman Empire, and modern America:

During the Last 200 or so years of during the 'Fall' of Rome there were numerous occasions where the city of Rome itself was in open rebellion against whichever emperorlet that was running the western empire; this usually ended up with a general driving into the city, killing the old emperor and declaring himself emperor (after giving his troops lots of gold).

And, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't there a series of riots during the French Revolution where Paris was revolting against their civil authority when a good chunk of the outlaying countryside wasn't particularly ticked off more than 'normal'?

If, for example, Philidelphia (argueably the home of the American Government if not the current residence) succeeded from the Union, would that be any more silly than if San Diego leaving?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Well, or we can have MM change it so that additonal starting planets aren't Homeworlds!
I think that would be easier than creating an entire new class of planet (and would be better I think).

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Agreed, that would be an easier way of doing it Trachmyr http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

And BlueMage I think the Homeworld would only join the rebellion if it was extremeily unhappy. Otherwise if the Homeworld broke off then that would be a trigger in an of itself.

Also, it has been suggested be Suicide_Junkie that the amount of planets braking off in the event of civil war should be in proportion to the size of the entire empire. I agree with him. Large empires loosing up to half and splitting into possibly more than two new empires, and small empires lossing only a small x percent.

What are everyone elses thoughts on this?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Thank you for updating the discussion on this. It makes it a lot easier to research. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

------------------
"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats! They invade our space and we fall back -- they assimilate entire worlds and we fall back! Not again! The line must be drawn here -- this far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!" -- Patric Stewart as Captain Picard
UCP/TCO Ship Yards

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Atrocities, as I told Dumbluck it is my pleasure http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

It is nice to know that my humble effort doesn't go unnoticed http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

In ref to homeworld and starting with multi plantes, why not just have computer when generating starting maps, assign or designate one planet say with minimum of 2000 pop as home planet. It could put your govt facility on it as well. this way when game starts every player would have home planet with facitliy. Home world would be hard to get to revolt, but here again, attitude would come in to play. Also if you use attitude and homeworld triggers, you should probably beef up or tweak the facilities that create happy pop. maybe add another level or 2. Needs to be balanced.

just some ideas mac

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

when it comes to how many planets revolt, if you use the system rebellion, then all planets in that system revolt. Empire rebellion could be based on percentage of total planets, systems that have already revolted count against total. to try and make it easier to mod or hard code, maybe set a parameter of what exactly is a small, med, large or huge empire, base number of planets that revolt on a percentage or set number for each type. example, small - 10 planets or less, med - 20 or less, large
30 or less, huge over 30, then when empire wide revolt happens the computer could divide by percentage minus systems revolted planets. a small or med empire should have less chance of multiple split empires, large and huge have 25-40% chance of multiple split off empires, but all should be at war with original empire. Or something similiar to this idea.
anyone else have ideas?

just some ideas

mac

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Inter galactic civil war, ok chewie put me down as a huge YES!!

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Mac, again thanks for the great suggestions I'll upgrade the overview http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Sirkit I'll post your vote in the vote thread unless you want to do it yourself http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif
At least i'll upgrade the vote overview.

Thanks for the feedback http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon10.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Something I just thought of. Do moons rebel along with their orbiting planet or are they treated seperately?

OK Mac so lets say there is a small empire with 20 planets instead of saying -10 lets say up to 25% of the empire (5 planets) could break away. And give a percentege to each size empire as to how many could break away. Is this what you had in mind?

Thoughts on the above questions?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chewy027:
Something I just thought of. Do moons rebel along with their orbiting planet or are they treated seperately?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

seperate. at least thats the way it works now.

how about balkanization of empires? as a varaition of civil war where 1 large chunk of your empire breaks off, what if you had 50-75% of it break of into 10-20 little chunks?

i think its fairly clear that break away pieces of an empire in this game are not a real space borne threat, but they are really a hassle for the lost resources. as far as the balkan thing goes, it would be more effective if those factions concentrated all their resources on planetary defense WPs / Sats / Troops / local mines. they know they cant win a space war, but darn if they wont preserve their way of life! this would be much more effective coupled with penalties for orbital bombardmant. the lost facil/pop/10% resource penalty is good, but maybe a trade loss with your neighbors or something, or empire wide happyness hit (oh my god, we're bombing our own people?!)

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Puke you don't think a large chunk of your empire splitting off could be a real threat?
To me a bunch of non-cooperating little factions would be easier to take back.

What does everyone else think?

BTY have you voted yet? http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I like the concepts but I not agree with all the suggestions.
From Trachmyr's post:
In 1)and 2)I think this random event should trigger only the possibility of a general revolt, not automatically request the joining of rioting/angry planets and that would be influenced by the presence of loyal forces and ships in the system apart from the rebelling planet.
4)I Think the conVersion of only 1 planet is not enough for the check for adjacents system: a system would be claimed by the new empire only if at least half the number of colonized planets joins the new empire.
From Mac5732's post:
I don't agree with the automatic drop of attitude every fixed number of turn for non rebelling planets.
From other ideas:
I don't like:
1)Beaucause this should cause only rebelling planets if they aren't in the same system.
2)Only with very restrictive limitations about location of planets and "loyal" forces available in the others conquered planets.
4)Only for regional capitals beaucause I think this concept would be hardly well handled by the AI.
Triggers:
I dont like:
2)Beaucause I think automatical break away should be not requested.
3) I think the rioting planets needs to be localized in the same region of the empire (i.e. in adjacents systems).
4)I disagree at most: you're evil for the others empires , non for your people.

Sorry for my bad english.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Couple of ideas, well more like one idea and another comment.
If a non-blood thirsty emires glasses one of its old planets which has rebelled, this should trigger some sort of happiness penalty which if we're basing this civil war idea off of happiness sort of, should increase the chance of other planets to rebel. Granted along with this we need for the AI to remember which planets it used to own and have AI's take appropriate actions based on their play style, ie some empire may just blockade the world, most should try to retake the planet with ground forces, the very aggressive/angry AI's should just bLast the planet into cinders.

I still don't agree with MEE always triggering a delayed rebellion, for non-bloodthirsty empires. The citizens may end up with a serious of sense of righteousness even if it's a peaceful empire, ie we're a peaceful people all we did was expand our colonies, who are they to declare war on us?!? etc. Depending on how wars go sometimes they may engender a sense of nationalism(empirism?) in the general populace, especially if you're winning, which may be the case if you are MEE since you are supposed to be ahead of the other players.

Just my thoughts.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

sorry been busy haven't been on line for awhile.
Chewy, ref your question. take the 20 planets, if you use empire wide rebellion, whatever you use for a trigger goes off, then computer computes the percentage you set, in this case you stated 25%. therefore 5 planets would rebel. Howver, if you also use system rebellion, and say you had l system of 6 planets that rebelled, the computer would subtract the 6 from the 5, in this case 6 greater then 5, so no other planets would rebel and the 6 would be the only ones in rebellion.

I think I would stay away from multiple break away rebel empires. I think this could be a programers headache. I would just go with 1 new empire being formed per rebellion. You already have puppet intel in game and this would also create new empires. Remember the more complicated and involved, the harder to hard code or make changes. How about list of triggers, their effects, and how to try and decrease the liklihood of rebellion for either planets, systems or empire? Once this is solved then the rest should fall into place. You need both triggers and ways to de-trigger in order to have balance.

just some ideas, Mac

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Marco, In regards to the attitude per planet, If you have an empire wide rebellion, then the attitude of all planets in empire would react, (ie go down) until there is some type of positive reaction. I just used 3 as an example number, this could be any number, percent or random factor. The longer the rebellion festers without a positive, either by winning a battle, destroying a planet, or whatever, the attitude of those left in the empire would continue to go down. I was just trying to come with a way that this would happen which would force the player to take some immediate action. This could entail building more or better type pacification centers or whatever to bring the attitude back up. I'm open for suggestions. tks for feed back

just some ideas Mac

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Sorry if this is in the wrong thread but,I read somewhere in this thread about interstellar travel? (too tired to retrace to find the right link), instead of researching engines why not research a facility to be used on 1 planet in 1 system and only in a system you have total control of, to allow interstellar travel anywhere from within your system to the next, that way you not only have to make sure your planet is well protected (because the enemy could destroy it thereby rendering your travel useless until you have repelled the enemy and built another) but also only allows one system jumps at a time and you have to gain overall control of that system before you can repeat to the next.

tic

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

tictoc you were reading the warp tech debate. The idea was to be able to create spacial distortions and warp anywhere in the galaxy. This would go hand in hand with the wormhole facility that would prevent players from opening a wormhole in a system. With the warp tech you could still get in a attack them. This way there could be no players who isolate themselves.

Mac I will try to upgrade the overview the way you said. It probably would be easier to understand that way, and probably not be as long.

jc I also have some reservations about the MEE trigger, but I think it could be worked out so that it is fair for all the socities if it would be used.

Marco this is not a random event. But it is greatly influenced by the happiness of the planet. And I agree that one planet is not enough to check the adjacent systems. Perhaps 25% should revolt to check next system. In the PPP intel that would happen if planets were targeted together and wouldn't necessarily cause a empire wide civil war. That is just an idea to give the rebelling planets a fighting chance. As for regional capitals that would be just like the loss of your homeworld except on the system level. So if the AI could handle the empire wide level it could handle the regional level as well. Why couldn't captured planets of another race rebel together no matter how spread out they are. They would still keep in touch with eachother and want their freedom back wouldn't they? Good idea about the rioting planets being close together! And yes the MEE trigger is not liked by all.

And a note to everybody non of these ideas are set in stone http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif That is why this thread was started in the first place, so we could all debate them http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

In the vote thread many people who don't like the idea think that if you go through a civil war, then you are done. Why? Why would you be done? Granted a percentage of your empire broke away, but you could still get them back. Anyway, you could easily defend against the triggers by keeping your people happy and defending your caps well.

What are your thoughts? Especially you guys who don't like the idea http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I like the idea of Civil War! I think it should be more than 4 planets though... happiness can be hard to maintain, especially if you meet the Darloks http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif or some other high intel race.

I currently am playing a game where I am 5th out of 12 and winning more through intel (food contamination and anarchy Groups) than with my fleets.

The capital being destroyed trigger is excellent. How would a world be designated the system capital?

Anyhoo, this sounds like a great idea especially if there is a trigger in the set-up that allows it to be toggled on/off.

Jason2

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Jason2 the capital would be the planet that has the regional capital facility on it. That way you could change your regional capital if you want to. Likewise for the galactic capital which would start out on your Homeworld.

And I wouldn't say any more than 6 or 7 planets in a given area. Remember that they do have to have some proximity to eachother. Example, planets1,2,3,and 4 are all rioting.
1 is in an adjacent system to 2 and 3 is in an adjacentt to 2 but not to 1 and 4 is adjacent to 3 but not to 1 or 2. This would be the MOST spread out they could get. The revolting planet would have to be in contact with the rest at least through the other revolting planets. That is why, for now, the trigger is at 4. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

BTY Jason2, if you like the idea why don't you head on over to the vote thread and let your opinion be heard http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Thanks for your thoughts.


[This message has been edited by chewy027 (edited 11 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

My strong vote against is based on playbalance and difficulty of coding in all the pieces to make this work.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I would like to see the feature added if it's similiar to my description below:

Only a few unhappy planets in close proximity to each other would rebel at any one time. Most of the nearby ships would join their cause. If the rebellion is stopped, then the planets rejoin the empire, and if the conflict is not resolved then the rebels could become a neutral empire using neutral colours and such from the game files.

Visit the Spoogy Federation: http://spoogyfederation.tripod.com

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

OK, this topic is FAR too long, so could anyone write in short what its all about?

------------------
Emperor Klis't of the Taera Republic.
Proud member of the League of Empires.
E-Mail -
Ora Planet - Taera Republic - League of Empires

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

For mac5732.
I agree to your reply if an empire wide rebellion spread out and a rebel planet is in a system with loyal planets, but if the rebelling planet is not a part of a new empire I woud prefer the dropping in attitude would stop, let say, at angry level, before causing the entire system to revolt and possibly the collapse of a strong empire in a chain reaction.
Often it happened to me to have in distants corners well developped and jubilant systems with a few or lonely rioting planet acquired by surrender or ground troop and without the possibility to counter this before a considerable amount of turns. In the case of conquered rioting planets the rioting people is a race at war or previously at war with my empire and I prefer it should not have the possibility to start a civil war on my planets simply beaucause I can't force a pacification just after the conquest.
For chewy027
I think that captured planets of the same race have a great chance to rebel togheter but this should be always a check proces for all the planets involved, influenced by the relatives conditions of each planet, and not an automatic event triggered only by a revolting planet.
For the concept of regional capital I only thinked that a human player could plan few selected capital-hannihilation attacks to make a rival empire collapse far better than AI, and that it could also plan a far better defence against a similar attack.
If there is only a empire capital I think is far more simpler for the AI, and for AI modders, to plan the defence or the attack of a lone capital, without problems of resources destination and priority among differents capitals.

Thanks and regards.


[This message has been edited by Marco (edited 11 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

If MM decide to implment this idea, prhaps they could do it in stages - introduce empire capitals, se how it goes, and if it works, introduce regional capitals later on.

Umm.. did anyone think my idea for all this was a good one? I don't like the idea of having government centres as facilities, so I posted a rather lengthy suggestion a while back. Seems to have been largely ignored. *sniff*

------------------
There is an exception to every rule. Including this one.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I agree, they should not be able to be scrapped. Maybe the ability could be applied to a planet. One of your homeworld planets would be designated as the Capitol, the first planet colonized in a system would be that system capitol, etc.
You should be able to move your capitols though, with a small penalty.
Sorry about not checking back further. This is a long thread!

[This message has been edited by Nitram Draw (edited 11 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Yeah, that's exactly how I suggested it. The first city in each system to reach a minimum capital size becomes the regional capital. Systems without a big enough city are counted as part of a nearby system.

Moving a capital (either by choice or because the old one was lost) should take several turns and have a cost in resources. It should also cause a temporary drop in happiness because there is no centre for law and order. It is during this happiness drop that you risk civil war, especially if there is no city of the minimum capital size.

The minimum sizes for imperial and regional capitals are determined by the size of the empire - that way, when a capital is destroyed and cannot be replaced quickly (because the remaining cities are all too small), happiness drops, civil war breaks out and the empire splits up.

As the empire becomes smaller, the required minimum capital size becomes smaller and smaller until it matches an existing city. When that happens a capital can be assigned and happiness would increase again. The civil war would end and the fragmentation would stop. That would answer the "how much of the empire splits off during civil war" question.

I also thought that if an empire has no capital and can't build another, it could become a protectorate / subjugated empire, and get it's law and order from the controlling empire. Those treaties are hardly ever used otherwise.

Does all this make sense to anyone else or am I too deep into it to describe it to other ppl?

------------------
There is an exception to every rule. Including this one.