Whatever happened to Civil War?

[BrewPatriot]

I was just wondering what happened to the civil wars of the Civ2 days, when capturing an enemy capital resulted in their empire being split in two. Does anyone know of a way that can be implemented in Civ3? IMHO I'd like it if there was a more crippling effect to a civ if they lost their capital, be it civil war, rampant corruption (by means of not being able to move the palace automatically, having to rebuild it) or some other means. If anyone can think of a way any of these scenarios can be brought about, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks,

Eric

[Jethro83]

Nope. Can't be done. At least not in this game, within its own limits. Looks like another concept that has to wait for Civ IV.

[Playa del Carmen]

I didn't even know it was missing until now.

[Cyclotron]

Well, I played Civ2 for years and it only happened to me once... so I don't miss it.

No, Civ3 doesn't have the feature.

[bongo]

If you knew how to provoke it could be really destructive. Only the strongest civ would suffer a civil-war when they lost their capital, which explain why it is rare. The others rebuilt their capital in another city if they had the cash to rush-buy it, if not all their cities became extremly corrupt and real cheap if you wanted to buy them.

[The Pioneer]

That's a great shortcoming of Civ 3. Capturing an enemy capital has no real impact on that particular civ

So long...

[NeoStar]

Civ splitting civil wars was one of the few good things I remember in CTP2 - however, you'd want to be able to turn it off. Can get very annoying.

Capturing an enemy capital has no real impact on that particular civ

Except with spaceships...

[The Pioneer]

Well that's true the Spaceship gets destoyed but the matter of the fact is that the impact is minimal if you choose the path of War!


So long...

[Traelin]

Originally posted by NeoStar
Except with spaceships...

Hehe I think the last time I ever even played with the Spaceship option was Civ I.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

OK, I know I've said this before but, just for the record:

First, I don't see why we'd have to wait for Civ 4 for this feature. After all, they've added a lot of stuff in patches which would be much harder to code than CW's. That said, capital capture should not be the only means of causing a CW, nor should it be automatic. It should instead be one of several "Triggers", along with Low Culture (compared to average), high corruption (Compared to Average) and high Unhappiness (again, compared to average).
If any of these triggers are met, then the chance of a breakaway (as opposed to a Flip) would be based on the cities distance from the Capital, the levels of culture, happiness and corruption present and the number of troops present. If the city breaks away, then adjacent cities should also have to check! This way, if you keep your empire happy and non-corrupt, then a chance capture of your Capital should not be a sign of imminent destruction. Also, though, it should be a LOT harder to move your capital!!
On a final note, in the absence of CW, try the following. Through the editor, try creating some small wonders which require the palace to build and which, when built, increase happiness and productivity, and reduce corruption and war weariness! Some examples are Parliament, Senate, Empire, Supreme Court, Federal Police, Union Movement and the like. This way, if your capital is captured, or if you capture someone elses, then it's likely to have a devestating effect on their Civilization (and might take a while to recover from, too !)

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[Unconquered]

They resued old civ2 code for civ3, it is obvious (no improvement in the governments at all), to implement Civil War would not be hard, as they could reuse the code, with minor modifications...

[Naiveplayer]

Wow, I'm a Civ 3 newbie (haven't played Civ or Civ 2) and I'm suprised at how much they took out of Civ 2 in making Civ 3. Senate, spy and diplomat unit, caravans, capture city and get a tech, all these other stuff.

No they did not reuse the code for Civ 2 on Civ 3. On another Civ forum, one person said that it's not easy to use the same code for two games.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Welcome NP,

I have to say that I'm glad that the diplomat and spy units are gone it was too much bother having to move them around. I feel much the same way with caravans, though I do wish they had introduced a CtP style trade route system-where you could pirate or blockade them!
Definitely miss the old senate, though if it came back, I'd like to see it revamped to take account of War Weariness, cultural factors and Civ traits. I didn't much like the way they did the capture tech idea in Civ2, but do believe that capturing a civs capital city should give you a chance of getting a tech-but only if you've already got the prerequisites for it! Failing that, their capital should give you a one of science bonus (to reflect the capturing of key documents!).
What I REALLY miss, though, comes from SMAC-namely Protectorates, Social Engineering and Military Alliances that allowed you to base units in allies cities!!


Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[Dis]

gameplay issue. It was too overpowering. And how realistic was that really? Not very. War brings people together not split them apart.

I played one scenario in civ2 where you have two evenly matched civs. I was having a difficult time conquering the other civ until I decided my only hope was capturing their capitol. Lol and behold their empire split in two. I made peace with one while I wiped out the other. Far too easy a victory.

[bongo]

Dissident , you're right. Civil wars were simply too powerful in civ1 & 2. It's an interesting idea though, maybe it would work better if just a smaller part of an empire broke away, demanding freedom. The idea of your productive core cities splitting in two and fighting each other is a bit absurd, but a remote, totally corrupt province breaking away makes sense.