I think it would be interesting to see another map with the political battles. What about when Lincoln started fucking with the Constitution? What about when he suspended habeas corpus? War always brings a reduction in rights 'for the greater good'... I have a friend who noted not long ago that the Civil War was the beginning of the end for states' rights, and I'm inclined to agree.
As I understand it the "Southern Romanticism" school of history views the US Civil War as pretty much the start and end of the real battle for State's Rights. IIRC their explanation for the war has little/nothing to do with the more generally accepted reasons (slavery et al... and they've got good arguments) and instead was more a series of State vs Fed and Small Gov vs Large Gov issues. As the Union won, ever since State's rights have been severely weakened... the ultimate (and only real) defence a State has against Federal incursion is the ability to leave the Union... a right that was taken away during the Civil War (and may never have actually existed... technically States may be entrenched).
Have to say your civil war was alot cooler than ours. More interesting causes, more interesting battles. And who the hell cares about Cromwell and Charles when you've got actually interesting, vibrant personalities like Lincoln and Lee?
While I like (is that the right word... I doubt it...) the US Civil War, the English one gets a pretty poor deal all things considered. We have the first true regicide (a king/queen executed by a non-royal), the new model army (which was one of the first Western professional armies), the destruction of first Royal and then Parliamentary power, a conflict between Catholic leaning Protestantism, traditional Protestantism and the Puritans, the setting up of "committees" with innocuous names but great powers (which would be followed in the French Revolution), the horrors that followed in Ireland, a powerful Scottish independence movement and IIRC the civil war was one of the first times where leaders stopped "arranging" battles; where the respective leaders would meet and arrange the exact time and place conflicts would occur.
As for characters, you had the central players of Cromwell and Charles, both of whom have a whole host of interesting character points... as well as others such as Earl Devereaux first leader of the roundheads who used to carry his coffin around with him and was noted as a great planner and trainer but too cautious within battle... and also led the noble faction who opposed Charles, the dashing Prince Rupert... a man with the bad luck to be born in the wrong century... to whom many of the Royalists greatest victories (and a few defeats) can be assigned, who had a white poodle go into battle with him which the enemy were convinced had magic powers and became a buccaneer after the war, Charles Nott... a parson who organised the Clubmen, groups of citizens who refused to bow to either side and just wanted to protect their homes, Thomas Fairfax one of the great generas of the age but with no skill for the politics that followed, John Lambert a great general, writer and speaker who first attempted to codify the powers of the sovereign but was also cursed with considerable arrogance... and was seen as the Roundhead version of Prince Rupert, Henry Vane an early voice for religious toleration, one of the few not to vote for Charles's death... but was executed anyway.
And that's just scratching the surface... the civil war had a whole host of interesting characters out there.