National revollutions

[Palaiologos]

History is full of revolutions of nations long conquered against their rulers.Egypt although destroyed as a state rebelled numerous times against Persian rule.During the 19th century the ottoman empire was fragmented by the rebellions of its balkan subjects.Some of this rebellions were succesful and destroyed nations resurged.Such was the case with Greece in 1821, after 400 years of turkish rule, and modern day Kurds.

Why not in Civ3?.Civilizations conquered have no chance of ever reappearing on the scene.Since national identity is implemented in the game, it would be logical that the oppressed nations would one day rebel.

I propose that when culturally inferior civilizations conquer a culturally superior civilization, the conquered civ would have a chance of rebelling against its occupants even if all of their cities are occupied.It would depent of course on the size of its cities ,the troops garrisoned and periods of general unrest in the empire.
The assimilation procedure should take much longer.

[Palaiologos]

Of course if there are a lot of happy citizens the chance would be reduced,etc.

If the rebels start winning battles the rebellion would spread,etc.

It would also be cool to have a message like "My liege,the Romans of Antium have revolted and massacred the local Greek population", thus having the assimilated citizens slain by the rebels.A sort of national cleansing.

[Caliban]

Well, hmhm, there should at least be ONE way to stop culture flipping of conquered cities one and for all:

Exterminate the enemy civilization and forget about population of that nationality.

[Palaiologos]

There should be no culture fliping.

It is historicaly inacurate.

Never in the history of mankind has cultural awe developed in a change of political control.A backward civilization may admire another's cultural achievments and adopt the other's way of life, but it is impropable that their cities switch allegiance.

[statusperfect]

PalaiologosCoracle?

[Palaiologos]

PalaiologosCoracle?

I admit i am new to Apolyton(less than a month) and therefore i know little about the people who frequently post and chat here.I have only expressed my own views.

However, i find culture fliping socialy impossible. People who stand in awe of another people's culture perhaps adopt the other's way of life but they never surrender the political control of their cities to them.

The Romans being in contact with the Greek colonies of Magna Grecia admited the superiority of the Greek culture and adopted their way of life.All Roman artwork is copied from Greek equivelants.This however, did not mean the Romans wanted to give the Greeks political control of their territory.It happened the other way around.

All i say that a conquered nation in civ3 should behave just as that.As a conquered nation.And that means it would occasionaly rise up in revolt.

If one of you gives me one example in history ,just one,
where a city out of admiration of another nation's culture decided to surrender the POLITICAL CONTROL of its society to another, i will take it all back and admit i am mistaken.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by statusperfect
PalaiologosCoracle?

No, just someone else with education enough to see what a non-historical crock Culture Flipping is. But I wouldn't mind it so much if it worked in the game mechanics - but it does NOT.


National Revolutions? Good idea! It could happen if the civ becomes bankrupt, if there is anarchy, etc. Just a CHANCE for it happening. It could also result in Civil War - something else we miss from Civ 2.

A Revolution could result in problems OR it could revitalize the civ with WLTK Days for every city. This is whay France became so powerful after the French Revolution. It MIGHT unbalance the game though.

But I like the concept.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by Palaiologos


I admit i am new to Apolyton(less than a month) and therefore i know little about the people who frequently post and chat here.I have only expressed my own views.

However, i find culture fliping socialy impossible. People who stand in awe of another people's culture perhaps adopt the other's way of life but they never surrender the political control of their cities to them.

The Romans being in contact with the Greek colonies of Magna Grecia admited the superiority of the Greek culture and adopted their way of life.All Roman artwork is copied from Greek equivelants.This however, did not mean the Romans wanted to give the Greeks political control of their territory.It happened the other way around.

All i say that a conquered nation in civ3 should behave just as that.As a conquered nation.And that means it would occasionaly rise up in revolt.

If one of you gives me one example in history ,just one,
where a city out of admiration of another nation's culture decided to surrender the POLITICAL CONTROL of its society to another, i will take it all back and admit i am mistaken.

You are NOT mistaken, You are wise.

Also note that the Culture Flipping model depends on the assumptions that there have been national cultures throughout history. This is false! Only in the past several hundred years (with some exceptions) has national cultures become a dominant factor. So Firaxis got that wrong too.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Palaiologos
History is full of revolutions of nations long conquered against their rulers.Egypt although destroyed as a state rebelled numerous times against Persian rule.During the 19th century the ottoman empire was fragmented by the rebellions of its balkan subjects.Some of this rebellions were succesful and destroyed nations resurged.Such was the case with Greece in 1821, after 400 years of turkish rule, and modern day Kurds.

Why not in Civ3?.Civilizations conquered have no chance of ever reappearing on the scene.Since national identity is implemented in the game, it would be logical that the oppressed nations would one day rebel.

I propose that when culturally inferior civilizations conquer a culturally superior civilization, the conquered civ would have a chance of rebelling against its occupants even if all of their cities are occupied.It would depent of course on the size of its cities ,the troops garrisoned and periods of general unrest in the empire.
The assimilation procedure should take much longer.

That would annoy me severly...

I bairly win a war against America and finally take some city when suddenly....They all revolt! It may be historically accurate but would be annoying in a game.

However, I would like to see Civil war come back from civ2...It would make capitals something far more important than they are now.

[Palaiologos]

I think that you have all misunderstood me.I meant that nations that are totaly conquered should some day rise up and rebel against their masters.As the Hungarians have done against the Soviets, the Scotish against the English,the Ionian Greeks versus the Persian Empire, Vercicentorix and his Gauls against the Romans,etc.

Not revolutions as in social revolutions.I think my English were bad.

[whosurdaddy]

Originally posted by Caliban
Well, hmhm, there should at least be ONE way to stop culture flipping of conquered cities one and for all:

Exterminate the enemy civilization and forget about population of that nationality.

You Germans ....

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Palaiologos
I think that you have all misunderstood me.I meant that nations that are totaly conquered should some day rise up and rebel against their masters.As the Hungarians have done against the Soviets, the Scotish against the English,the Ionian Greeks versus the Persian Empire, Vercicentorix and his Gauls against the Romans,etc.

What you have described here is called in civ3's terms: "culture flipping" (the Hungarians flipped back to the western European culture, etc). Only it is not possible with civs that were totally destroyed/conquered. This could be an interesting addition. Maybe it could happen to civs that have a very high rate of corruption, low culture, unhappiness, or somebody conquers their capitol, etc. (there must be a trigger to activate such a rebellion)

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Coracle
Also note that the Culture Flipping model depends on the assumptions that there have been national cultures throughout history. This is false! Only in the past several hundred years (with some exceptions) has national cultures become a dominant factor.

You will never stop with your false statements, do you?
This post of you is so stupid, that it doesn't even deserves an answer.

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Palaiologos
If one of you gives me one example in history ,just one,
where a city out of admiration of another nation's culture decided to surrender the POLITICAL CONTROL of its society to another, i will take it all back and admit i am mistaken.

East Germany, 1989.

Edit:
...and virtually all the Eastern European countries flipped (or are flipping) from the Sovjet Union to the European Union. (you can count them as cities in terms of civ3: Budapest, Prague, etc and where the civs would be: Sovjet Union/Russia, European Union, USA, etc; got it?)

[dannubis]

I also agree that culture flipping is a good way to represent a secessoin of a city from its mother country... However I would like to get some kind of indication in the city screen of the probability of a culture flip happening the next turn. In this way you could raise/lower the military presence in the city in question

[statusperfect]

I would like the poeple in the city that is about to flip to slowly copnvert into the nation they are bout to flip to and maybe start som resistence (just like a captured city does) and THEN flip. The only thing i don't like about flipping is that in 1973 everything is calm and in 1974 a couple of millins citizens declare themselves Frennch or whatever. In reality cultureflipping is a slow and complicated process.

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by statusperfect
In reality culture flipping is a slow and complicated process.

You are half true. Let me explain:
IMHO in civ3 there are 2 kinds of "city flipping" combined under the generic name of "culture flipping":
- the first is some kind of armed rebbelion, when the population revolts against a foreign rule. Basically this is a flip based on "nationalism" (Kosovo?)
- the second is a cultural assimilation, when a city, beeing under the influence of a culturally powerful and wealthy civ decides to flip (btw, I encountered flipping cities even in civ1, but very rarely and I don't know based on what mechanism?). Now this is indeed a slow and progressive process.

Since these 2 processes are related to each other (nationality is an integral part of a civ's cultural identity) I find it logical that Firaxis combined them and worked out a formula that works for both cases. Maybe it's not perfect, but in terms of gameplay is simple and playable (and for me enjoyable).

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by statusperfect
I would like the poeple in the city that is about to flip to slowly copnvert into the nation they are bout to flip to and maybe start som resistence (just like a captured city does) and THEN flip.

Reading it twice, it is actually very interesting what you are suggesting here. Basically it would be a flipping in more steps, not just one; a conversion, not a sudden flip (a sudden flip would still occur when too many conditions are met; this could happen in wars, after an enemy conquest). The problem is, how this can be done? A change in people's nationality is even less realistic than suddenly flipping cities.
It would be interesting even for culture flippers, like myself. Right now I just wait, and wait, and don't know when will a city finally flip.

[Palaiologos]

What you have described here is called in civ3's terms: "culture flipping" (the Hungarians flipped back to the western European culture, etc). Only it is not possible with civs that were totally destroyed/conquered. This could be an interesting addition. Maybe it could happen to civs that have a very high rate of corruption, low culture, unhappiness, or somebody conquers their capitol, etc. (there must be a trigger to activate such a rebellion)

Indeed.When a capitol falls unrest should spread throughout the Empire, and foreigners could see this as chance to break their bonds.Perhaps when a civ is at war with an enemy culturally linked with its conquered peoples(France is at war with Rome, some Greek cities under French control view the Romans as liberators instead of just another tyrants),occupied cities would revolt and the populace fights it out with the garisson.

Low culture and corruption should certainly be another factor, just remember how quickly the Mongol Empire collapsed.Actually the Mongols were assimilated into the very cultures they conquered.

[Palaiologos]

East Germany, 1989.

That was triggered by the general colapse of the
Soviet Union and the ensuing anarchy( In civ3 terms the Soviets changed their goverment from communism to democracy, or perhaps republic?, and were experiencing a period of anarchy in which opressed peoples saw a chance to revolt.)

I believe anarchy and corruption should be causes for revolts.

P.S You didn't really believe i would admit a mistake,did you?

How do you guys have your quotes write underneath "originally posted by x "

[Tiberius]

It doesn't matter what was the trigger. Civ3 has several triggers, too. Low culture, anarchy, corruption and unhappiness increases the chance of a flip, while WLTKdays, miltary units and high culture decreases it. The city flips when a sum of these conditons is met. So was in East Germany in 1989.

In 1956 Hungary flipped too and the Sovjet Union wasn't in anarchy back then. It's another question that they reoccupied it. You can do this, too, in Civ3.

P.S You didn't really believe i would admit a mistake,did you?

No, I didn't

How do you guys have your quotes write underneath "originally posted by x "

When you answer to a post there are above it several links, including one called "quote" (near "edit"). Click that when you answer and "originally posted by x" will automatically appear.

[Galvatron]

Originally posted by Caliban

Exterminate the enemy civilization and forget about population of that nationality.

Well it's an easy and 100% perfect option. No civilization, no culture flip, no rebellion.

But I like Palaiologos idea of civil war. Perhaps he was inspired from his own historical background: think of the Greek uprising for independence against the oppressive Turks. So rebellion should be included but of course when I put a full army of tanks in this city the rebellion should be over as fast as it started

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Galvatron
... but of course when I put a full army of tanks in this city the rebellion should be over as fast as it started

Of course only if your army doesn't fraternize with the rebbels!

[Palaiologos]

Originally posted by Galvatron


Well it's an easy and 100% perfect option. No civilization, no culture flip, no rebellion.

But I like Palaiologos idea of civil war. Perhaps he was inspired from his own historical background: think of the Greek uprising for independence against the oppressive Turks. So rebellion should be included but of course when I put a full army of tanks in this city the rebellion should be over as fast as it started

Exactly.

[Palaiologos]

When you answer to a post there are above it several links, including one called "quote" (near "edit"). Click that when you answer and "originally posted by x" will automatically appear.

Thanks a lot Tiberius.It was really helpfull.

[Fighter]

Warsaw near the end of WW2, as the Sov's advanced rose up and actualy took back the city, for all intents and purposes, this was Poland (a dead civ) rising up again, or a culture flip to Russia, whichever your view holds.

(Its another question entirely that the Sov's refused to help them because they werent Communists and subsequently the Germans marched in and brutaly quelled the rebellion, all of which actualy happens in Civ3, the Ruskies just refused to take the city)

As an example of a culture flip that actualy happened:
Newfoundland, late 1940's. The province had a referendum, on it were three choices, 1, join USA, 2, Join Canada, 3, become Independent of britian. Of course, Canadian culture prevailed over Yankee culture and we now have the province of Newfoundland as part of our nation.

[Caliban]

Originally posted by whosurdaddy
You Germans ....

Oops... no historical comments, please...

[AlecTrevylan00]

Originally posted by Palaiologos
That was triggered by the general colapse of the
Soviet Union and the ensuing anarchy( In civ3 terms the Soviets changed their goverment from communism to democracy, or perhaps republic?, and were experiencing a period of anarchy in which opressed peoples saw a chance to revolt.)

Um, the soviet union didnt change governments till 1991, the berlin wall fell in 89. So....

Eastern europe didnt break its bond because the SU fell, the SU fell because eastern europe broke its bonds

(well, i am REALLY over symplyfying in that last paragraph. The SU fell due to many, many conditions, i just dont want to bore you with a 256 russian history (and thats just 1980-1991 ie. Gorbachev) )

[Caliban]

Originally posted by AlecTrevylan00
Um, the soviet union didnt change governments till 1991, the berlin wall fell in 89. So....

Eastern europe didnt break its bond because the SU fell, the SU fell because eastern europe broke its bonds

In addition to this, Eastern Germany (and other European countries) tried "culture flipping" once before by revolting (in 1953). The soviets disrupted the uprising by using force, i.e. tanks to get rid of the protesters. So culture flipping can be prevented by stationing military forces in a city. And we can find this in CivIII...

[Palaiologos]

Ok Caliban, Alec Trevylan00 point taken.


But what about the Greek war of independance, the Egyptian revolts against the Persians and Vercicentorix?

How are these revolts of tottaly subjucated nations implemented in civ3?