Suggestion on planetary invasions
from 
Stardock Forums
Stardock Forums
Something I´d like to see in galciv2 is that planetary invasions don´t by default slay the whole population.
I mean, how common is it in real-world conquests that you slay all of the enemy´s people? Mostly you want to rule over them rather than just taking the land, right? And even if the defender puts a gun in the hand of every man, woman and child it is unlikely they will fight to the last drop of blood. At some point the conquering side will control all the strategic positions and the only realistic option for the majority of the population is to surrender. Now of course they will still resist, but most can´t do it on a military level - this is what´s called occupation
.
Also, as it is now, invasion isn´t even an option if I want to play as a good civilization (good in my own opinion then). I mean, how good is the "regime change" argument if you kill the population you were supposed to save?
So how do I want it then? Well, battles could work almost like they work now, only it will end earlier. I imagine the battle is behind the scenes follows some kind of turn system. There could be a random chance every such turn that one side is forced to surrender, this chance would depend on the relative strengths - so more even battles would mean more casualties on both sides. The enemy survivors would after the battle be part of the planets population.
One could add a system for resisting population, similar to that in civ3. Adding a population variable for people that resist the rule and don´t contribute to production and if they´re majority, might be able to rebel and take back the planet. This resisting population would gradually turn into normal population as people give up or see the good things in their conquerors culture. This process would go faster with higher morale and it would also be affected by relative cultural strength.
For the evil civs it would be nice with an option to kill them all off to be safe, but that as default is wrong IMO.
So, what do you say?
I mean, how common is it in real-world conquests that you slay all of the enemy´s people? Mostly you want to rule over them rather than just taking the land, right? And even if the defender puts a gun in the hand of every man, woman and child it is unlikely they will fight to the last drop of blood. At some point the conquering side will control all the strategic positions and the only realistic option for the majority of the population is to surrender. Now of course they will still resist, but most can´t do it on a military level - this is what´s called occupation
.Also, as it is now, invasion isn´t even an option if I want to play as a good civilization (good in my own opinion then). I mean, how good is the "regime change" argument if you kill the population you were supposed to save?
So how do I want it then? Well, battles could work almost like they work now, only it will end earlier. I imagine the battle is behind the scenes follows some kind of turn system. There could be a random chance every such turn that one side is forced to surrender, this chance would depend on the relative strengths - so more even battles would mean more casualties on both sides. The enemy survivors would after the battle be part of the planets population.
One could add a system for resisting population, similar to that in civ3. Adding a population variable for people that resist the rule and don´t contribute to production and if they´re majority, might be able to rebel and take back the planet. This resisting population would gradually turn into normal population as people give up or see the good things in their conquerors culture. This process would go faster with higher morale and it would also be affected by relative cultural strength.
For the evil civs it would be nice with an option to kill them all off to be safe, but that as default is wrong IMO.
So, what do you say?
!
