Rebellions should be immune to fracturing

Any kingdom that’s currently on the defending side of a rebellion-type war (i.e. a kingdom that rebelled from another kingdom) should never be able to fracture regardless of if their royal clan dies out. This is because this happens too often because the kingdom they rebelled from too often massacres every new king of the rebel kingdom, eventually killing the entire clan and causing the rebellion to fracture.

This is a problem because the new kingdoms from the fracturing event are not part of the rebellion war and therefore just get independence for free even though the kingdom on the attacking side of the war realistically should want all its villages back.

I propose that any kingdom that’s on the defending side of a rebellion-type war should always behave as if the kingdom’s culture has the unbroken chain culture trait, meaning if a rebellion’s royal clan dies out it would appoint a new clan from one of the village leaders. The attacking kingdom of a rebellion war would not get this immunity from fracturing and this immunity from fracturing that the rebel kingdom gets only lasts as long as they are on the defending side of a rebellion-type war.

My logic behind this is that the villages in a rebellion want to stay united against their oppressor, even if the rebel clan dies out, because they are stronger together and want to win independence at all costs.

I have not decided if rebel kingdoms that have the shattered crown trait should have this immunity to fracturing.