Intergalactic Civil War !!??

chewy027 · #1 April 7th, 2001, 05:17 AM

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.

mac5732 · #2 April 7th, 2001, 10:16 PM

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).]

jc173 · #3 April 8th, 2001, 01:42 AM

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.

chewy027 · #4 April 8th, 2001, 02:39 AM

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?

dumbluck · #5 April 8th, 2001, 10:05 AM

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

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

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

chewy027 · #6 April 8th, 2001, 02:29 PM

Dumbluck, it is my pleasure

. 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

chewy027 · #7 April 8th, 2001, 10:41 PM

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?