Hmm... Civil wars are a must. The way to do them, though, can be debated.
What I must point out before the way a character-vs-character battle is conducted is that the armies used in that battle will be the armies of the character in game. Therefore, if Character A has 6 units in game and Character B has 12, Character B will be advantaged.
Also, the number of men in a unit will be those in game. If Character A has a unit of Pantodapoi (240 men maximum, I think) and he lost 40 of them, in the civil war battle his unit will have 200 men. See what I mean? Representing this is very difficult (if not downright impossible) in a multiplayer battle.
That's why alternate solutions have been found: tabletop battles, abbreviated tabletop battles, etc. And those solutions have always worked well enough...
Now that I've read the rules again, I propose adding a Civil War section (the content of which can be determined in this thread), and adding a rank: governor (the Seleucid equivalent). He'd govern one city directly, and would be above Strategos. He'd have basically the same powers, but can run for Chancellor. Also, I propose the Strategos Hetairos section be changed: he'd need to be in direct control of a city, and can propose up to 1 edict and 1 charter amendment.
Thoughts?