He posted so the idea could be fleshed out. that's kind of why we post, rather than simply e-mailing the devs.
My point was that he didn't specify details, so it's silly to accuse me of having misconceptions. Anyone who looks at this idea is going to interpret it uniquely, and it's silly to fault people for that.
I felt I made fair presumptions given the ambiguity of the suggestion.
make it a random event, triggerable by extremely low culture. it'd make the advent's culture an actual weapon.
There are no other random events in Sins currently. Frankly I think added them would be a major departure from the current way the game is built. Random works well in Civilization, where virtually everything has an element of chance to begin with, not so much in Sins where if you had all the facts you could theoretically make 100% accurate predictions due to its strong determinism.
the way you described it made it appear to be a shoddily integrated event. if it was properly integrated, it could work well.
Where are you getting this "shoddily implemented" from? When did I imply that at all?
My core presumption was that a civil war means you lose control of the affected planets, and a hostile enemy faction spawns on them. The rest of my post was simply analysis based on that simple presumption. How is that "shoddy implementation"? It seems to be the very definition of a civil war.
Yes, quite frankly, you sound like one hell of a douche. Sorry to let you know. I'm not just saying that because you disagree with me. Your tone is not conducive to agreement.
Yup, I apologize for my tone and manner, though I stand behind my arguments.
The "logical fallacy" you stated above makes little to no sense - technically it is fair by logic to have everyone harmed in the same way, to the same extent.
My entire point is that just because everyone is harmed to the exact same extent doesn't mean it's balanced at all. Balance is a lot more than just fairness between factions. It's about expanding the tactical options within the game.
Having a single very powerful option, even if it may be shared between all factions, is not balanced because it wipes out so many other options.
The civil war threat isn't supposed to be something "easy" to deal with. It's supposed to be an "oh, shit" moment. Yes, you do lose money. Yes, you do have a new enemy. Yes, you have lost territory. But these things would be preventable, and would be something the player would bring upon him/herself by not focusing enough on the threat of dissent. This is supposed to be a threat the player would fear and try his or her best to avoid.
The difficulty worth considering here is this: we agree that the costs of a civil war are very high, therefor any sensible player will invest in countermeasures. This leaves a simple conundrum: we have a highly complicated and elaborate feature that will require significant development resources to implement, but because of its nature players are going to work tirelessly to prevent it from ever actually occurring. The feature is self-defeating, its own ramifications ensure players won't ever allow it to come to pass.
That's not to say that there isn't a middle ground where it's preventable but still happens, but I think you have to make a case for that.
I personally find the pirates method of attacking and their "buyability" to be overwhelmingly disastrous, and potentially more devastating than the effects of a superweapon.
Uh, what? Pirates are weak. Maybe the first attack is dan./gerous, but after that they're nothing but free experience for your capital ships. Put up a few repair bays and leave a small guard and watch your defenders toast a force ten times their size.
such as the option to enable or disable civil wars, or a sliding scale of civil war intensity/speed/frequency
No, I didn't speak much about these because if it doesn't turn out to be a good idea then they shouldn't be implemented in the first place. If you need a toggle for your feature because it might be unpopular or potentially gamebreaking, then you probably should be reconsidering the feature.
This is uncalled for. Did I ever say my idea was flawless? Did I ever assume that the developers would incorporate an idea by a fan, as-is? Of course not. Do read the title of the thread: "[Suggestion] Civil Wars." The word "suggestion" means something here.
As I said, I apologize for my tone and demeanor. My point wasn't that there is something inherently wrong with fan ideas or suggestions. My problem was with you suggesting that the devs will figure it all out. The devs have lots of different ideas on the drawing board. If there are big glaring holes in a concept that doesn't have an obvious solution, do you really think they're going to actually put weeks of effort into trying to get it to work? No, they're going to go for more graceful concepts.
If you can't come up with a reasonable idea of how your own idea would work, why would the devs devote time and energy to do so?