I rather like the though of having a civil war on my hands. Equal matched technology, having to put down the instigators, requiring an actual military presence in my own space rather than on the fringes...

This thread is the origin of discussions about low colony approval leading to revolt and system secession.

Other threads about this have been archived:

/#/endless-space/forum/29-archives/thread/13874-striking-systems-chance-of-revolt



Feel free to post here about this topic here and inform yourself about the variations the threads listed above have already discussed, but don't open new suggestion threads for anything alike.

hackysack4427 wrote:
All for it, this combined with a government system would be awesome. It would be so that the rebels could either be separatists or reformers.

Yes, more synergy.

All for it, this combined with a government system would be awesome. It would be so that the rebels could either be separatists or reformers.

I like it. And I see it is a great way to balance the fact that it is way too easy to expand your empire.

Great idea. I was horrified when some of my systems had 0% happiness, but not so when it turned out they could deal with it.

Sir_Destru wrote:
I think this would be a wonderful idea to incorporate into the polished finished product. The problem that is apparent to me is the complexity of actually creating the factions that could rebel and create their own society.

There are plenty of pathways to chose for this kind of feature.



For example:

Some factions maybe incapable of breaking off from their original leaders, some maybe too ready to do so. What could be a way to manage this is to already establish the political movements in the factions beforehand. When certain parameters trigger a shift away from the Leadership of the faction in a system, points build towards one of these political movements. When these points reach a critical mass the system, depending on the faction it belongs to does one of these kind of things (no doubt people can come up with a larger list, just giving some ideas):



Control Reversion: reverts to no control with all its attendant infrastructure in place. It needs to be invaded to return to the fold with a clean slate on anti-government points. The recovery is quicker than invading a foreign system too.



Political Secession: the political movement establishes a Rebel Capital in the system and attempts to expand its ideology to neighbouring systems within the faction's borders building anti-government points in those systems at a steady rate until the rebel capital is invaded. The rebel systems contribute nothing to the faction but remain within its borders. Just the rebel capital needs to be invaded inorder for the whole rebel movement to stop and the other rebel systems fall in line/return to the fold though a percentage of the anti-government points remain in those rebel systems afterwards.



Civil War: the political movement establishes a Rebel Capital in the system and actively starts to build a military infrastructure with the intention of overthrowing the entire original government it was once led by. The Rebels will also operate like the Political Secessionists above in trying to subvert neighbouring worlds too. The faction will focus solely on defeating their faction, all systems captured by the Rebels will have to be re-invaded by their original owner. If the original Rebel Capital is invaded, a new Rebel Capital will spring up from one of the other rebel systems. The Civil War does not stop until all Rebel Systems are brought under control.



Sabotage/Terrorism: the political movement attempts to disrupt the governance of the faction by destroying the infrastructure of random systems within it's empire until measures are taken in it's system to increase the influence of the original government.



Good to read that the Devs are thinking about the rebellion concept for the future.

I think this would be a wonderful idea to incorporate into the polished finished product. The problem that is apparent to me is the complexity of actually creating the factions that could rebel and create their own society.

GC13 wrote:
I'd like to go a step further: rather than simply have colonies rebel if they're unhappy, happiness should be one of a few key factors in whether or not a planet will rebel. The other two factors should be the planet's prosperity (how well they think they can do without you) and your military strength near the planet. A prosperous planet far away from your military forces might just have social elites who can get the planet to rebel, even if the general populace is content with your rule. The empire is so distant anyway...



It's just a pet peeve of mine though, an empire able to maintain far-flung holdings without having to worry about controlling them—all we ever worry about in 4X games is someone taking away our holdings, not the holdings deciding they're better off without us.

Aureus wrote:
I also agree that the contentment of your population should be a chief concern for every empire. I'm particularly fond of the idea that rebellions should not just occur because the populace is peeved at living on a lava planet, but due to a mixture of factors that ultimately lead to them believing that living without your empire would be the better option.



It's not just the serfs and proles that you're trying to keep off your palace either. A rebellion by a wealthy system/world should be far less 'bloody civil uprising' and much more 'mass defection of vessels and declaration of independence.'



Finally, rebellions and secession should be a major problem rather than a simple whack-a-mole nuisance. Major uprisings should have the possibility of causing other equally discontented worlds join in an effort to topple your rule. While an entire civil war mechanic is probably a bit far fetched, having major loyalist-rebel conflicts would be a neat addition and a possible clamp on over-extended expansionism.

i like these ideas

Hiddensavior wrote:
Good to hear....



And also , yes i agree with you lord i find it a bit annoying too when i have a low approval rating because my system is overpopulated, but what they could do with the rebellion system is make it so that the more population you have, the longer it takes for a rebellion to start up. For instance, lets say that the base amount of time of a system approval rating being strike before the rebellion starts off is 5 turns (just an exemple) and that the system population is lets say 10, well then the rebellion timer would be 5+10, which would mean 15 turns for a rebellion in a system with 10 pop.



Just an idea, because i think it would be annoying to have a highly populated system that you have invested alot in rebel just like that, where as if the timer for rebellion is 5+x (x= system pop), well you would have time to react and maybe do something about it. But again, just a thought.

That would be better, nice to see someone understands what i'm getting at.

Ghost73 wrote:
The devs do intend to implement a rebellion system later

Good to hear....



And also , yes i agree with you lord i find it a bit annoying too when i have a low approval rating because my system is overpopulated, but what they could do with the rebellion system is make it so that the more population you have, the longer it takes for a rebellion to start up. For instance, lets say that the base amount of time of a system approval rating being strike before the rebellion starts off is 5 turns (just an exemple) and that the system population is lets say 10, well then the rebellion timer would be 5+10, which would mean 15 turns for a rebellion in a system with 10 pop.



Just an idea, because i think it would be annoying to have a highly populated system that you have invested alot in rebel just like that, where as if the timer for rebellion is 5+x (x= system pop), well you would have time to react and maybe do something about it. But again, just a thought.

The devs do intend to implement a rebellion system later

Well riots never make sense but I'm saying that you'd think people would at least get that its there fault that they filled the planet with people not the empires. Large groups of people rioting because there are large groups of people just doesn't make sense.

Well i don't know about you, but people do thend to have a habbit of rioting over anything if they are already pissed off.

I disagree because in the games I've played my people have always been mad because the system is overpopulated, which btw makes no sense at all, It would be stupid for the people to rebel because there are to many people. If you only make people rebel because of poor conditions or high tax rate that's fine, I would agree with that.

Hi, new to the forums here...



After a good 10 hours of gameplay with endless space, i have to ask, is a feature that makes it so that if you have a very low approval rating (strike) for a period of time your colony rebels and you lose it being considered? Has this been requested by other users? Because right now it just seems too easy : you can expand and expand early game and never risk losing a colony until your fleets are outmatched. In other strategy games such as the total war series, if you had a low approval rating you would lose that colony and it would form a rebel faction of its own. It would be nice, in my opinion, to see a mechanic like this being implented.



EDIT: Sorry for posting this thread in the wrong section

GC13 wrote:
it won't work, of course, but they don't know that.

Surly it would be in their best intrest to start up once they do have a chance! making them a real pain in the ass.



Kinda like the AI rebellions in SOTS, real game changers.

TheVulture98 wrote:
I like it although I think the ability of the rebels should be limited. It would take a long time for an isolated outpost or colony to get together the resources to put together anything that would even resemble a fleet. It's rebellion has rendered it unable to draw from the resources of the planet. It should benefit only from the ships it has in it's queue to build perhaps (as supplies for them would undoubtedly be sent there or present already).

I guess that's why I should use the term "secession" for some of the "rebellions" rather than "rebellion". A citizen-led rebellion should be a lot easier to put down due to not everyone being on board, but an elite-led secession should have them immediately start building defenses to dissuade you from retaking them—it won't work, of course, but they don't know that.

There should be a system where rebellions have the ablity to possibly trigger other systems in your empire to also rebel, leading on to a possible revolution and civil war.

I like it although I think the ability of the rebels should be limited. It would take a long time for an isolated outpost or colony to get together the resources to put together anything that would even resemble a fleet. It's rebellion has rendered it unable to draw from the resources of the planet. It should benefit only from the ships it has in it's queue to build perhaps (as supplies for them would undoubtedly be sent there or present already).



I say this because I am not sure whether or not the AI does cheat and whether the fact that the rebelled system has an industry value of 1 will stop the rebel AI from building an impressive fleet to wreak havoc.

I like it! +1 these Ideas

Yeah, any opportunistic elite-led secessions should tend to occur in clusters: the areas a bit closer to your military outpost may be the tiniest bit too scared of your military to do anything on their own, but with a few other systems willing to back them up they'd throw in for a better deal. Any unhappiness-related citizen rebellions should happen one at a time, but having a nearby rebelling system should massively kick up the chance of another rebellion where the seeds are already sown—safety in numbers, after all.

I also agree that the contentment of your population should be a chief concern for every empire. I'm particularly fond of the idea that rebellions should not just occur because the populace is peeved at living on a lava planet, but due to a mixture of factors that ultimately lead to them believing that living without your empire would be the better option.



It's not just the serfs and proles that you're trying to keep off your palace either. A rebellion by a wealthy system/world should be far less 'bloody civil uprising' and much more 'mass defection of vessels and declaration of independence.'



Finally, rebellions and secession should be a major problem rather than a simple whack-a-mole nuisance. Major uprisings should have the possibility of causing other equally discontented worlds join in an effort to topple your rule. While an entire civil war mechanic is probably a bit far fetched, having major loyalist-rebel conflicts would be a neat addition and a possible clamp on over-extended expansionism.

I had a similar suggestion, but was given the old "this has been suggested by other members" speech, even though I could not find a similar suggestion anywhere.

3) Rebellion.

As far as I can tell, Happiness only has a complete negative when the whole empire hates you. So as long as you have some nice happy colonies, it will even out. I suggest when a colony sits at Revolt for a certain period of time (a notification should pop up saying x system is in Revolt) with out rectification, they will enter a state of Rebellion. This rebellion acts as if there is a fleet over the system, slowly taking it over. The combined FIDS counts as the MP of that fleet. At this point, just lowering taxes will not stop the revolt, and until it is quelled, you can not produce in the system. To combat it, you have to send a fleet to the rebelling system. You can occupy the system like an enemy system, in which an MP l less than the combined FIDS will slow the rebellion, equal to stops the decline, and greater than builds the bar back up. Once the bar is returned, the rebellion is over, and you can remedy the happiness problem. If the rebellion succeeds, it creates a new AI player of your faction. Needless to say, this faction will be at war with the original faction. Any other rebelled systems add to that player, meaning separate star systems of each end of the empire and any that happen after the initial rebellion will be under the same AI player. During the rebellion and after a successful rebellion, the systems connected by string will have a negative happiness bonus.



Separate Rebellion idea: This could bring some fun game play ideas in post-espionage-expansion game play. Perhaps the spies could seed the ideas of rebellion in certain systems. Or, maybe the spies of one nation could start the rebellion, and if it succeeds, the newly rebelled system would not be under control of an AI player, but under the spying player. In this way, players could subvert systems, and them use them to attack the enemy without even declaring war. Of course, there would be safeguards; techs and buildings that would be able to catch possible spies. This could lead to military intrigue and war.

They said because I mentioned espionage, which has been suggested by some other users, that my suggestion was invalid even though it was an after thought, not the suggestion.

I'd like to go a step further: rather than simply have colonies rebel if they're unhappy, happiness should be one of a few key factors in whether or not a planet will rebel. The other two factors should be the planet's prosperity (how well they think they can do without you) and your military strength near the planet. A prosperous planet far away from your military forces might just have social elites who can get the planet to rebel, even if the general populace is content with your rule. The empire is so distant anyway...



It's just a pet peeve of mine though, an empire able to maintain far-flung holdings without having to worry about controlling them—all we ever worry about in 4X games is someone taking away our holdings, not the holdings deciding they're better off without us.

I agree! Running an empire would be way too easy if you didn't have to worry about the happiness and well being of your people!

I certainly think this would help the galaxy be a bit more lively. It will also make you reconsider how fast you want to expand, because who cares if you have a castle if it's built on limestone.

This would be nice. Currently the game feels a little too much like balancing a spreadsheet. Among some other novel features this would help make the galaxy feel more organic and alive.

Yes, this would be nice. Currently there is little need for the later approval technolgies. Everyone is happy as can be