Help: Civil Wars

the_orange1 · February 23, 2001, 08:12

Can anyone tell me what the criteria for civil wars starting in Civ II is? I thought there was a chance they would start when an opposing civ's capital was captured, but in the few years I've played civ II, this has never happened. They always escape to another city. How regularly are civil wars supposed to break out? Similarly, using nuclear weapons against a capital city and then capturing it doesn't seem to ground an opposition spaceship, but only when I take it with conventional forces. Why is that? Any help anyone?

Albert B · February 23, 2001, 09:10

Question 1, civil war: There is some debate over the exact circumstances that cause a civil war but here are the basics based on some brief testing and the documentation:

Things known for sure:
1. There must be an 'open slot' - i.e. less than 7 active civs in the game.
2. The capital must be captured.
3. The civ that lost the capital must be 'bigger' than the one that captured the capital.

What is in doubt:
Basically what the definition of 'bigger' means. From testing I have done and what I have experienced from past games, bigger means more cities. Others believe that population may play a part. Either way, since most human players usually have both more cities and a larger population, civil wars are pretty rare.

Question 2, grounding ai space ships: It shouldn't matter how the capital is captured, the ship should come back. However, if the AI has 1000 or more gold, it can relocate its capital to another city if it is captured and thus the spaceship continues to soar. The human player can also purchase a new capital if the old one is captured for the same 1000 cost. If this is the case, you should receive a message telling you that the capital has moved. I don't think that you need an embassy to get the message but you might (I usually have the UN and the automatic embassies)

I hope this helps a little,

Albert B

the_orange1 · February 23, 2001, 10:50

Thanks for the help Albert. One other thing though: If you have selected "Do not restart destroyed civs" in custom rules, does this prevent civil wars? Or does it not make any difference? Thanks again

Albert B · February 23, 2001, 14:21

My gut would say that it does not prevent it from happening because you aren't starting a new civ but splitting an old one. However, that's more a feeling/hunch than anything else.

finbar · February 23, 2001, 21:39

I think there has to be another colour available to be taken by the renegade civ. So if you're playing 7 civs, without the "do not destroy, etc" activated, you might run into problems.

------------------
Founder, ACS Pedantry Institute
Founder, ACS Gourmet Recipe Exchange
Troll & Hydey Wrangler
Mono Rules!
#33984591

Wiglaf · February 26, 2001, 12:19

quote:

3. The civ that lost the capital must be 'bigger' than the one that captured the capital.

In my most recent came I lead in pop and cities, nuked a capital and paradropped in there and split them in two.

Now I'm confused, maybe it's broken again

?

the_orange1 · February 26, 2001, 12:58

That's a bit confusing. Has anyone else managed to cause a civil war even if a bigger civ? Maybe it's a probability thing, where being smaller increases the likelihood of a civil war, but it's still possible (however remote) when your civ is bigger. Any other thoughts?

Albert B · February 27, 2001, 09:14

quote:

Originally posted by SMACed on 02-26-2001 11:19 AM
In my most recent came I lead in pop and cities, nuked a capital and paradropped in there and split them in two.

Now I'm confused, maybe it's broken again

?

Did you capture more than just the capital city in your turn? From other's experiences in the past, it appears that the calculations are done at the beginning of a turn rather than at the time of capture. Maybe not, but just a thought...

Wiglaf · February 27, 2001, 20:48

Interesting, alb. I did take two coastal cities (I think) before going for the gold. Personally, I think if you take the captial of a large nation it goes to civil war, end of story. After all, why would your size play a factor at all? If it's a big nation, it needs leadership. Whether or not you have that leadership is irrelevent. Either that or it's a bug.

Dis · February 27, 2001, 23:00

if I wasn't so lazy (I am) I would run a test

but for anyone who is interested in testing- the scenario: battle of the sexes (in best of the net2 scenario folder with the fantastic worlds expansion) is a good place to run a test. I only played that scenario once as the men. This was a while ago, and I think I was only playing on Warlord or Prince (it seems higher levels the ai moves his capitol when it is captured more easily). But I found the scenario fairly difficult at first. I had no hope of conquering all their cities quickly. So I went for their capitol. And they split (the scenario designer should have made this no schizm but they didn't). It was cake after that (I made piece with one civ and conquered the other- I even allied with the one civ

)

I don't have the save game, so I can't go look at the population, # of cities. But the females had more better developed cities, so I'm sure they were bigger in both aspects. But one could play around with the population if they wanted to test it.

Rufus T. Firefly · February 28, 2001, 06:50

quote:

Originally posted by the_orange1 on 02-26-2001 11:58 AM
That's a bit confusing. Has anyone else managed to cause a civil war even if a bigger civ? Maybe it's a probability thing, where being smaller increases the likelihood of a civil war, but it's still possible (however remote) when your civ is bigger. Any other thoughts?

I haven't done it myself, but I've seen a bigger AI civ -- bigger in every way -- split a smaller AI civ. And, fo what it's worth, neither of them was biggest (I was). This event put to rest, for me, both the idea that the split civ had to be bigger and the idea that the biggest civ had to be involved. Now I'm as confused as everyone else.

------------------
Dig trenches, with our men being killed off like flies? There isn't time to dig trenches. We'll have to buy them ready made. Here, run out and get some trenches.
-- Rufus T. Firefly, the original rush-builder
[This message has been edited by Rufus T. Firefly (edited February 28, 2001).]

the_orange1 · March 2, 2001, 10:00

So it seems we're back where we started. The only thing I can think of is a probability thing as mentioned earlier. Anyone else got any experiences to add?

Wiglaf · March 4, 2001, 00:28

^bump

Arghh, I think if you take the capital of a big civ, it's split, darn the confusion!

Marquis de Sodaq · March 9, 2001, 01:03

I've been in games in which i was not even involved in a civil war.

In one case, the huge Mongol empire was squashing the once-grand Spaniards. The Spanish were reduced to about ten cities when the Mongols (1st by far in pop and cities and might) captured Madrid. Civil War!

In case two, the English lost London to somebody, and a civil war resulted, despite them being middle of the pack in all ways. The only difference I could think of is that they were vastly spread out across infertile lands.

Perhaps how distant the cities are from the sacked capitol affects the likelihood of civil war? Or maybe the resulting palace-less anarchy triggers unhappiness enough the split the empire...

the_orange1 · March 9, 2001, 07:37

I'm trying a little experiment - playing a diety game with 3 civs (me, Indians, Chinese). We all have all tech and I am the smallest of the 3 civs. I captured Delhi with a nuclear bomb and a couple of paratroops and caused a civil war. Now 2 civs half the size. I plan to attack each new Indian capital until civil wars stop happening - will this be when I am then bigger? i still think it must be a probability thing and I agree that how spread out your empire is and how happy/unhappy it is before the capture could have something to do with it. Hmmmm, curiouser and curiouser.