Ideas for new revolution nations

[MatM1996]

@MUTYLATOR5553

I think Revolution options should be limited to continents. This would make the Revolution options more immersive and would also add a lot more of them.

I don’t know…limit the amount of revolutions you can rev with…

@Sheph

Nice work everyone. I have one request: Let us have Ukraine in the game. They had a number of forbears including Ruthenians and Cossacks. Or Bulgaria. It would attract some great publicity and draw in players from around the world fed up with the current conflict.

Yes, maybe when Poland arrives it will bring a Ukrainian revolution (the Cossack Hetmanate)…

[M00Z1LLA]

@UpmostRook9474

But it is an obvious objective fact that the Revolution is an mechanic only available to Europeans (I think the Revolution for Mexicans is another matter)

That isn’t the case at all. Mexico isn’t European and it’s the revolution civ. The only reason the USA doesn’t have revolutions is to avoid dealing with the Confederate States. They could easily have options like the Philippines or California. The Mexican counterpoint is enough to demonstrate that it’s not an inherent quality of the European archetype like Livestock Markets and influence are for Africans.

@UpmostRook9474

Absolutely you can dislike Somalia as a revolution, and you can recommend a potential option as an alternative that serves the Portuguese and Italians. However, whether Somalia should be one of the options has no clear bearing on my premise.

Somalia being a bad choice is not just because of the unlikely chance of it being added. It just lacks the hallmarks of what makes a revolution. Nearly all the other revolutions have at least one of the following attributes:

1. Is a settler colony (USA, Argentina, South Africa, etc)
2. Is a distinct ethnic group within a contiguous empire (Hungary, Finland, Egypt, etc)
3. Actually revolted (USA, France, Haiti, etc)

The only exception is Indonesia, but essentially everything about that revolution is off. Even the concept of Indonesia as a country is a post WW2 development.

There should be some kind of continuity between the population you start with and what you revolt into. When founding a colony as one does in the game it’s going to be populated primarily by people from your core empire (and maybe some “sevites”). So Spain will settle with Spaniards, Ottomans will be Turks, Hungarians, Egyptians, etc. Overseas resource colonies just don’t have that connection, they are too alien in culture to the parent civ. The Italians or Portuguese wouldn’t be trying to colonize a region by settling Somalis.

If you go the route of revolting into any completely alien culture then that undercuts far more potential civs than just Somalis. If Somalis can be an Italian revolt then Maoris, could be a British revolt, Tlingit could be a Russian revolt, or Shona could be a Portuguese revolt. Any one of these civs are individually unlikely, but setting this precedent jeopardizes them all. On top of that it just feels wrong to completely upend your starting culture, religion, ethnicity, etc.

[Konahrik1140]

@UpmostRook9474

It’s ideally suited to replace Argentina or Brazil (the latter may be replaced first).

I would really hate for the developers to remove Argentina or Brazil as revolutions for Italy, luckily I know that’s not going to happen.