Demo Game #4

[cavebear]

I think I've incorporated all the suggestions here (except the one about Presidential repetitions, it wouldn't fit and we'll do that one later).

3 days.

[Ben Kenobi]

I voted.

I think a bloodlust game without spies or diplomats or trade will be most difficult.

Having boats, etc. I don't care either way.

[rjmatsleepers]

I have also voted, but I expect to be a member of the peanut gallery rather than a candidate for high office.

RJM at Sleeper's

[MrWhereItsAt]

Oops.

[duke o' york]

That closed quite early!
I took the day off work on Friday and so missed out on all the days that this was open.
But there were only 5 replies, and some of the voters didn't even vote on all of the questions. If we're only going to have 6 people interested (myself included ), then I don't know how much longer the Civ 2 mods will let us play. It might end up as a complicated SXN game id so few want to play. The Israeli game seems to be doing a little better, but that's probably only because of the political angle. From my point of view, the Russian game pretty much died before being finished, and although we finished quite strongly here, no-one seems in too much of a hurry to play again. We should consolidate, and just have one Civ 2 Demo game! This one!

[Zedd]

RL kept me from checking on things so I too missed the poll. I generally agree with the majority in this poll however there seems to be a tie between 1b "500 AD" and 1b "1500 AD". So if it makes a difference my vote would have been "500 AD"

[cavebear]

Three days is the regular polling time, but if anyone posts the choices they would have made (all of them), I'll add those to the polling results.

[Sparrowhawk]

/me didn't vote, but will happily participate in whatever the group comes up with (oops I didn't vote in a democracy game......it seems almost sacreligious )

[cavebear]

OK, I propose the following:

1. I send the announcement of the Demo3 game end to "the powers that be" and add a statement about organizing a new game.

2. When that announcement shows up, I re-post the poll with a *5* day voting time.

3. After that, we go with the results and see what interest we draw.

Sound reasonable?

[Zedd]

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

I'm more in favour of changing how the game is played, rather than the parameters of the game itself.

For example... it makes no sense that we have elections when we don't even know Republic or Demo. Monarchies don't have elections! It also makes no sense that an established democratic regime would hold a revolution of its own volition - who overthrows themselves?

[my vision]

Monthly elections should only be held when we are in Republic/Demo. In all other cases, power should be held until someone else is sufficiently fed up to post a poll (the nearest we can come to a power struggle) saying "So-and-so (demagogue, witch doctor, SMC) should be replaced by me" - and that poll would reflect the ouster or non-ouster of the incumbent.

Polls in authoritarian governments would be replaced by discussion threads, with the loudest getting the attention of the current demagogue/SMC/whoever. And that loud person might well be able to overthrow the incumbent (by a power struggle resolved by polling, of course), should the incumbent not listen.

Once we learn a new (representative) government tech, that should trigger an election. Once we switch to a representative government, we'd hold elections and polls as we have always done. However... if some would-be demagogue feels we should switch to Fundy... he can always post a poll to do so, and oust the current government. Since a real-world democracy or republic would never switch to communism or fundy without a revolution, a seated representative government would have to resign, if the will of the people called for fundy or commie.

[/vision]

Maybe I'm crazy , but that seems fun, and less structured than the current system is - what with all the uncontested elections and all.

[Hydey]

missed it

[atawa]

Good ideas STYOM

But this would be a lot better to implement if there was a save for all policy.

(Yes, its that time again )

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, I did hold a turnchat, and only one citizen showed up, even though I offered the save. I just don't see sufficient demand to give the save to everyone, and some real dangers in cheating to discover events far beyond what we ought to know.

Secondly, since our ministers are going to be devoting more of their time to the game, they ought to be rewarded for their sacrifice, with access to the save.

Finally, I have striven to be more inclusive within the bounds of precedent to make the game more open to the citizens, in my screenshots, log and turnchat. Further suggestions beyond giving the save would be most welcome, ideas how we can encourage the participation of citizens, in providing them more information.

I suppose we could call this increasing the transparency of our government.

[duke o' york]

STYOM, what do you mean that the loudest in discussion would hold sway? Does that mean that if I were to go into the chatroom and type IN CAPITALS then I'd be ostracised for being rude, but would also see my ideas put into practice?
Maybe the monarch or despot could refuse to allow revolutions and remain in power for the entire game, maybe declaring himself the High Priest if he fancied some fundamentalist fun?
To allow everyone a say, then I'd prefer it if those taking part were viewed as advisors to the person playing the game and then the next "president" (for want of a better name) is chosen from their number. This is the system as it is really, but maybe when we're in a despotism they could be called thanes or something more appropriate than ministers.
Otherwise the system works and is more inclusive than what you're proposing. Of course, when we're in any non-representative government then the "president" will have absolute veto powers and can ignore what he's advised to do as much as he likes.

[Hydey]

WE DON'T WANT ANY STINKING LOUD TALKERS HERE

[cavebear]

I'd be willing to try a new format, and have the game available to all, if it increased participation. If the voting in the latest poll is any indication, people are bored with our regular style of playing. So, let's change it, as an experiment at least.

So the first person chosen to lead will be in charge through Despotism or until overthrown by a coup (poll). We will have government appropriate titles (in Despotism, none). Monarchy could have something like Master of Arms (War), Grand Vizier (Foriegn Affairs), Alchemist (Science), Chieftain (City-Planner/Expansion), and Guild-Master (Trade).

The Moderator conducts elections when they are held (for Representative governments). When we choose to change governments, the previous leader is out. Republic has a Consul to lead and Senators to serve. Democracy has a President and Secretaries. Fundie has a High Priest and Protectors. Communism has a Premier and Secretariats.

We should also have restrictions on ourselves, or the game will be too easy.

Sound good?

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by duke o' york
STYOM, what do you mean that the loudest in discussion would hold sway? Does that mean that if I were to go into the chatroom and type IN CAPITALS then I'd be ostracised for being rude, but would also see my ideas put into practice?
Maybe the monarch or despot could refuse to allow revolutions and remain in power for the entire game, maybe declaring himself the High Priest if he fancied some fundamentalist fun?
To allow everyone a say, then I'd prefer it if those taking part were viewed as advisors to the person playing the game and then the next "president" (for want of a better name) is chosen from their number. This is the system as it is really, but maybe when we're in a despotism they could be called thanes or something more appropriate than ministers.
Otherwise the system works and is more inclusive than what you're proposing. Of course, when we're in any non-representative government then the "president" will have absolute veto powers and can ignore what he's advised to do as much as he likes.

Loudest was a figure of speech. But someone who posts a lot of ideas will probably be listened to more than someone who doesn't post much at all. Assuming all of his ideas aren't bad , the more prolific poster might be able to lead a 'coup' (via poll) - and who better to run the nation than someone with a lot of ideas and the time to post them?

Obviously we would need to play fair... if someone is ousted in a coup, they should give up the save.

I'm not sure if a save is needed for all... people seem to have plenty of ideas and a good grasp of the game without it. Either way, I'm easy.

I'm surprised that the idea is gathering steam. I probably won't be able to join in much, but it could be a fun concept... it might generate more interest in the game, too.

[comte_umanov]

i ll be in, even that i could not check the dg every 24 hours, but i once want to participate in a dg from the beginning.

[cavebear]

Welcome, Comte! I will be re-issuing the settings poll after our announcement of the end of the previous game shows up in the Apolyton News. And the poll will be up for 5 days, so everyone interested should have a chance to see it and vote.

On MarkG's instructions, I re-submitted the report to news@apolyton.net, so we'll see if it shows up. Hopefully, that will attract new participants like you, so that everyone will be able to participate from the very start.

It's kind of a slow time of year, since many participants find themselves away from their college computers for the holidays, but keep checking this forum for announcements and polls.

[Ljube]

And some of the participants find themselves away from busy work schedules enjoying Christmas and New Year holidays.

Are we going to start the next one soon?

[cavebear]

ljcvetko - As soon as we have achieved consensus among the people interested in participating in the next game. It might be well to let the holiday time slip past before counting the people ready for the next one.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man

I'm not sure if a save is needed for all... people seem to have plenty of ideas and a good grasp of the game without it. Either way, I'm easy.

Well SOME people. You might be surprised how much easier I found it to get into the game when I had a save available to me (of course I was President at the time so I HAD to be into the game....). It can actually be quite difficult to visualise what's going on in the game with a long detailed report of all the military etc actions. Sometimes accompanying screenshots were posted, but that would be rather time-consuming for ALL the time. If perhaps I had a position long enough before the near-end game I might have memorised the city sites a bit better, but I could not do much going by the old (3000BC) saves I still have. And switching between the screenshot threads/posts and the reports to try and see what is going on is just not that much fun.

The reasons for making the save available to all are numerous, and I will not bore everyone by repeating myself TOO much (I have petitioned for the save to be made available at least once or twice before). It works in the Civ3 DG and we have had far more participants, at times. With the small number of dedicated participants here there is even less reason to worry about playing ahead.

And are there really fewer people around now? Can those who read this post make a post of their own so we can see how active we could be in setting the game up now? It's the OTHER times of year I can't be as active as I could right now, and I would hate to miss the setup of the new game if I didn't have to (back to work Jan 5 and overseas = too late by then).

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
And are there really fewer people around now? Can those who read this post make a post of their own so we can see how active we could be in setting the game up now? It's the OTHER times of year I can't be as active as I could right now, and I would hate to miss the setup of the new game if I didn't have to (back to work Jan 5 and overseas = too late by then).

One active observer posts in response - demonstrating that his keyboard still works even when his brain is fuddled.

RJM at Sleeper's

[Ben Kenobi]

Considering that I have a dial-up here and a cable connection when I'm at school does cut into my availability.

Also, I will have less time next term than last, which was rather slack (and I do need to graduate at some point.)

[shade]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
And are there really fewer people around now? Can those who read this post make a post of their own so we can see how active we could be in setting the game up now? It's the OTHER times of year I can't be as active as I could right now, and I would hate to miss the setup of the new game if I didn't have to (back to work Jan 5 and overseas = too late by then).

looks like that...maybe we are getting tired and need a rest for some time? I don't know.

I'm still alive, but a little to bussy RL to get really involved in the near future .

Shade, back to sleeper-mode

[Zedd]

I wanted to chime in with my intent to be a productive citizen of every democracy game played on apolyton

I have my home system(s) working now and civ is installed so I will be able to take a more active role as a minister at some point. Only have Net access at work though so I will be marginally handicapped.

[cavebear]

Well, I sent our Demo Game #3 report to news@apolyton on the 24th, and haven't seen it posted yet. I don't think there is much to gain by posting the settings poll again until the report shows up as news and attracts some attention from new players or previous ones who are looking for a different style of game.

[cavebear]

Happy New Year, everyone...

[atawa]

Happy new year all