24 minutes ago, Daniel13 said:

And then, Gandhi organized peaceful protests, tried to spread ideas....
It's a bit hard to turn into a fun gameplay, isn't it?

The difference between "sending your followers to spread ideas through a region, causing the residents to reject their current rulers, causing more local people to follow you" and "sending your riflemen across the border to attack the defenders in the neighboring region, so that you take over the region and it's resources" is purely graphical

5 minutes ago, 1024 said:

The difference between "sending your followers to spread ideas through a region, causing the residents to reject their current rulers, causing more local people to follow you" and "sending your riflemen across the border to attack the defenders in the neighboring region, so that you take over the region and it's resources" is purely graphical

I would disagree, because one won't be able to use the region's resources
The only availible resource with such a concept is more followers. Which is rather boring... Or am I wrong?

This screenshot illustrates my current concept and what I've already created

Just now, Tom Sloper said:

Lines of dialogue are more interesting. A lot of subtlety can be contained in dialogue. A player can choose which dialogue to use at various junctures. 

Oh, sounds interesting, thanks a lot!

3 hours ago, Tom Sloper said:

So it's hard. Stop talking about how hard or how possible something is. 

Lines of dialogue are more interesting. A lot of subtlety can be contained in dialogue. A player can choose which dialogue to use at various junctures. 

Dialogue can be subtle, but communicating subtlety in text alone can be difficult --especially when you might be thinking about multiple languages (one could argue humor is worse--Knights of Xentar scribe here. Google it and see the insults of my weak jokes and equally weak voice direction)  

Alternately, colors, symbols, numbers and icons and communicate a great deal (insert caveat about clutter and overcomplication). Kismet: just today I was reading about the leftist Paris protests of 1968, and unease many felt with the adulation of Che Guevara and opposition to war in Vietnam did not mean philosophical alignment with the Vietcong. Later I heard a news piece about those who voted for Obama and Trump. 

In a game, commitment is something to be nourished in your people, but 100% commitment? Those are fanatics and it could go sideways. 

To go back to the just like a wargame perspective, replace "commitment" with "morale"...
 

Hey, maybe you can consider something similar to the game Plague, Inc. where you have to "infect" the world with your ideas of peace step by step. Players can choose between different upgrades or events like a protest and need to share the idea of peace, while some enemies try to stop the idea from spreading and to defeat you.

3 hours ago, Logende said:

Hey, maybe you can consider something similar to the game Plague, Inc. where you have to "infect" the world with your ideas of peace step by step. Players can choose between different upgrades or events like a protest and need to share the idea of peace, while some enemies try to stop the idea from spreading and to defeat you.

Yes, I've played that game, thanks. It may be a nice source of inspiration, though, may also require some research on how core systems work there.

Are adding money and separating inspiration and influence good ideas to implement?
Money could be used to:

• Provide financial help to different provinces in order to make them loyal to the player
• Strengthen the player's movement

Influence could be used to:

• Call for peaceful protests
• Negotiate with the British
• Gain other leader's support (gives various bonuses)