A new simple civil war system

[baptistus]

The goal of my idea is to create a civil war mechanics without to add anything new to the game. Keep this in mind please.
Of course we would like to have governor, family tree ect... ect.. but they will not add it to the game. It is time to be more pragmatic and to find solutions with what we already have.

this is my simple idea which come from the old medieval total war:

-the game select half of your armies (with generals of the other families/party in priority or the one with the less gravitas, so this data will have more importance as the loyality in old total war) and change them to rebels.
Another version if you want to have more armies into the civil war: select only 1/3 of the armies, and complete them news full stack whick could appear at the capital city to have the same number of army in the two side.

-the game select 1/3 (or 1/2 ?) of your regions (with the lower public order in priority) and change them to rebel.


and that is it ! now you have a real civil war.
simple, it doesn't need a lot of very complex scripts, so it could be possible to do it for CA.
Hope we will see this kind of improvement for the civil war.



don't forget to up the official topic
http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...vil-war-system


thank you

[baptistus]

first answer on the official forum

"That is not civil war, that is rebellion.

I dont want my own armies to betray me. I want another house to fight me."

official forum ..... why I try to go on the official forum ....

[Toho]

there are literally a thousand ways to do the civil war.
I expected regions under different families to declare war on me and armies with generals under those families would suddenly become theirs and any under "other generals" would become either family's allegiance.
political capital would be spent instead money and some mythical "senate seats".

[baptistus]

there are literally a thousand ways to do the civil war.
I expected regions under different families to declare war on me and armies with generals under those families would suddenly become theirs and any under "other generals" would become either family's allegiance.
political capital would be spent instead money and some mythical "senate seats".

of course !!!!
but I think about a very very simple system which CA could add the most easyly possible because it is quite sure they will not revamp the game.

[wulfgar610]

I think they were in a rush left a place holder civil war without fixing it. Basically territories with their Governors should pick a side so the Empire splits in two. Instead got a concept which would be rather lame even for a amateur creation.

[douglas]

Anything would be better then the thing set up now.

[Toho]

I think they were in a rush left a place holder civil war without fixing it. Basically territories with their Governors should pick a side so the Empire splits in two. Instead got a concept which would be rather lame even for a amateur creation.

and the reason for not fixing it now is....?

[baptistus]

and the reason for not fixing it now is....?

It will not sale more rome 2 ....
wait for the report of wangrin about the modding summit. The very begining of the summit is very very strange ....
I will try to translate it correctly:
"for CA, there is not absolute proof than mods help to sale more games
and they use the steam statistics to demonstrate that"

in french
http://www.mundusbellicus.fr/forum/s...l=1#post200591

[maexim]

I agree 100% with you, i proposed a simmilar thing

[krisslanza]

I think they were in a rush left a place holder civil war without fixing it. Basically territories with their Governors should pick a side so the Empire splits in two. Instead got a concept which would be rather lame even for a amateur creation.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't a rush job. It was probably just what they wanted in the first place.
There's not a whole lot I can see that exists in-game, to suggest this was a last minute job. They tied it to Gravitas, so when your family gets too strong - or too weak - a civil war happens. Given there's not anything like "Loyalty", and only "Ambition" (which just influences Gravita gain), there's nothing to suggest that they'd make it so your Empire would split itself picking sides.

It was just a simple, easy to understand, and a potentially serious enough problem to warrant player attention.

[iWarsaw]

I'm pretty sure it wasn't a rush job. It was probably just what they wanted in the first place.
There's not a whole lot I can see that exists in-game, to suggest this was a last minute job. They tied it to Gravitas, so when your family gets too strong - or too weak - a civil war happens. Given there's not anything like "Loyalty", and only "Ambition" (which just influences Gravita gain), there's nothing to suggest that they'd make it so your Empire would split itself picking sides.

It was just a simple, easy to understand, and a potentially serious enough problem to warrant player attention.

You think the civil war mechanic they have in place now is what they always wanted?

Theres not a lot in game to see it was a last minute job? Theres nothing to the civil war to see. Thats why.

They tied it to gravitas? Well you know Kriss it has be to tied to something for a civil war to be set off and right after you say 'ya theres nothing that really changes anything like loyalty and ambition' which would make it make sense.

Have you seen the civil wars? They are huge! Also think of the civil war from Shogun 2 where the entire map declares war on you. I'm pretty sure the civil war is suppose to split your Empire into 2 sides. It's a civil war!

So why not tie in the loyalty and ambition too so generals would stay loyal to you? or if they had to much ambition would join the civil war?

So you think it wasn't a rush job. Well do you think they did a good or bad job of it? Because I'm inclined to think you think they did a good job... which they didn't. I have 500 hours played Kriss and not once have I had a civil war. The whole mechanic is trash.

[baptistus]

It was just a simple, easy to understand, and a potentially serious enough problem to warrant player attention.

My proposal is simple, easy to understand ,and a potentially serious problem too. And it is tied to gravitas and families too. Everything are already in the game. And never talk about Loyalty or ambition.
But it looks like a real civil war, not a spam of full stack armies which come from nowhere .

[baptistus]

I'm pretty sure it wasn't a rush job. It was probably just what they wanted in the first place.
There's not a whole lot I can see that exists in-game, to suggest this was a last minute job.

http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...51#post1102651
When a civil war begins, the characters from other families will join it (if they lead your armies/fleets they will be automatically replaced) and have armies with new units, and your armies will lose men.

http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...51#post1102651

So how it is possible to say it is not a rush job ? the final product of the civil war is half finished compare to this description made only one month before the released of the game. ONE MONTH.

[Butan]

The full text from Jack Lusted:

How does internal politics and civil wars work?
This answer is going to elaborate on the one above about the internal families for Rome and Carthage. Other factions appoint Generals to armies and fleets in the same way as Rome and Carthage, and same for promotions, marriages and conspiring against them. Internal politics matter because it can lead to civil wars. It is all about maintaining the balance of power between the families for Rome and Carthage, and between the ruling family and the nobles for the other factions. If they lose too much power, or the ruling family becomes too weak (for Rome and Carthage this is the one you choose to play as in the front end), a civil war can kick off. This is also influenced by the size of your faction. At small sizes individual generals will rebel, but once you get to a certain size a civil war can happen. For Rome and Carthage, if you have high power the civil war will kick off away from the capital. It can also kick off at the capital if you have low power, and this is how it works for other factions. When a civil war begins, the characters from other families will join it (if they lead your armies/fleets they will be automatically replaced) and have armies with new units, and your armies will lose men. You won't lose any units, but your armies will need time to replenish up to full strength. The opposing faction in the civil war can conduct full diplomacy with other factions but will not listen to you. If a civil war drags on for a long time there is a conciliation event. Once a civil war has happened another cannot for that faction, but individual generals can still rebel.

I had never seen that thread before and I'm quite bothered now that I read that... Only half of what is described is in-game : how the civil war kick off and how it ends.
Anything in between isnt working as "intended", which is the main beef against the actual civil war mechanic : no generals, no armies, no settlements join the rebellion; there is just a massive instant generation of characters/armies/navies around your capital or another turnover fief, diplomacy/politics is removed with them, and thats it.


The oniric "political guide" CA offered us way after the game released is much more accurate to whats actually happening in the game :

The End of Politics: Civil War

By now it should be fairly evident that playing the political game is about maintaining the balance of Influence. Left unchecked, it is possible for stability to deteriorate to a point where there is too big of a skew in the amount of political power held between the parties, causing a civil war. This event involves the emergence of a new enemy faction, coming about via a coup d’état that will either occur at your faction capital, or far away from it. In either case, this enemy faction will have appeared as a direct result of the opposition to your party's rule within your faction; they will always hate you, will never engage in any diplomacy with you, and will always try to capture or hold the faction capital if the coup did not originate there.

What happened between the pre-release hype announcements and the writing of this political guide?

[stevehoos]

Wish CA would do this, but we all know how requests have been dealt with. Right now the "civil war" is not even a feature, it's just a spawning script, it's completely worthless and banal. It can't possibly be what CA had originally envisioned, could it?

[AnonMilwaukean]

The civil war mechanic is awful in Rome 2. They really should have just left it out until such time as it could be improved.

The proposed change in the original post would have been an improvement, though. Part of the farce of the current civil war system is simply seeing 10 large armies spawn out of thin air all into the same province. At least give the civil war a little more of a feeling of immersion by tossing them a couple more settlements than just one.

[Tsarsies]

The civil war as it is, is just mindless dribble with no sense. I originally thought (and hoped) that the various families/clans in the political view were vying for control of the senate. The more you use specific Generals, the more influence they gained (this would also be true of the various events and actions you can take in the political view). So you should try to give your house/family the most influence. Of course, that becomes harder as your empire grows and expands, and you are then forced to 'hire' generals from the opposing houses, who then gain influence. When they gain enough influence and power a civil war could then erupt and split your empire in two (or 3/4 depending on the houses/families individual influence). Where ever these generals were based when the civil war breaks out is what territories revolt (with a small chance of neighbouring provinces rebelling with them de[pending on thier individual influence/power/rank - especially if there is no garrison). If a General/Character was currently in the Senate at this time, then those generals would spawn outside the capital with an army (so would your generals from your family if they were in the senate).

That is how i was expecting the Civil war to work in this game after reading the wiki for the first time, and playing my very first game on day 1 and experiencing the glory of the latest and greatest TW series. But it was nothing like that at all, and any political action you take means nothing in the long run and the civil war is just a mindless hack and slash that just 'happens' And what i described above would NOT be hard at all for a programmer to set up at all. For an AI programmer that would/should be a piece of cake. We are talking about coding this in C++ or C# or whatever language they used. Come on CA, pull your ing finger out!

[prithupaul]

While OP's version of civil war will be more challenging than the current mindless random army spawn civil war system, it is also not sensible enough.

If you know the correct building combinations, it is very easy to maintain 100 public order in all provinces, except recently conquered ones. I will be severely pissed if random provinces with 100 public order suddenly revolt without any indication or rationale. You will be replacing one randomly contrived system with another randomly contrived system.

If you ask me - the whole idea of ONE MANDATORY civil war is stupid. Civil war should be preventable, and it should have a possibility of occurring several times in the course of 300 years.

And sadly, the current random generals system with no mechanisms for loyalty or family or plotting or provincial influence / governorship or a proper "court / senate", there is simply no plausible way to create a "real" civil war in this game.

[Epic]

If you ask me - the whole idea of ONE MANDATORY civil war is stupid. Civil war should be preventable, and it should have a possibility of occurring several times in the course of 300 years.

I totally agree with this. Even if we squash one civil war, we should still have the risk of another one starting. This will make the late game interesting.

Before the game launched, I believed that a certain number of settlements would rebel against you including generals that belonged to other families. But nope, we got a something that I also believe was rushed. O well, one can only hope that the upcoming expansion (we all know it's coming) has a better revamped feature.

[Aeneas Veneratio]

To have provinces to pick sides, we would need to appoint a governor for each province in the first place, where you would need to balance between your own family, the other named families and the "others". Any changes to make civil war more plausible/realistic require a more in depth system of the political scene. Members of each family should also have a personal decision to support either you or the opposing side, so it would make sense to look for political allies outside your family. Even members of your own family should be able to flip the family the bird and throw their lot in with the others.

Since I'm not really expecting anything on this issue from CA, my biggest grip with the civil war that I would like to see dealt with, is the extreme number of praetorian legionnaires in Roman rebels... Praetorian Legionnaires are meant to protect generals, politicians and the Emperor, they are not meant to be the main part of a whole army...