Expansion Pack Civs (Part 3): Just one more...

[MarkG]

Originally posted by krzysiek
1 & 2 & 3 -> we can expect more posts with "Poles 20" string.

yet, the Poles were very low on the vote, until lod made the page linked above

But have in mind that noone is forced to vote. They want to vote.

noone said the opposite

[Cantonek]

jdd2007 - it's ... no comment

[krzysiek]

Originally posted by MarkG
yet, the Poles were very low on the vote, until lod made the page linked above

Mark, I agree.
And because of the LoD's page, many polish civ fans learned about poll.
Nowadays information is a power.

Ok, maybe LoD should encourage them in a less specific way...
You know, Poles are spontaneous and eager to make spectacular shows (this thread is an example).

[Cantonek]

jdd2007 - it's ... no comment

[Karol]

Poles 20

I think Poles may have "interesting" parameters, like "not expansionistic, not scientific, loosing their own Empire in less than 100 years" but when conquered "generating plenty of guerillas and other red colour soldiers"

[Mankind]

Originally posted by krzysiek

Ok, maybe LoD should encourage them in a less specific way...
You know, Poles are spontaneous and eager to make spectacular shows (this thread is an example).

eheheheh, well it's truth, but hey! I didn't show it ... YET

but i'm damn mad becose of the lame-man that send me lame-PM about Poland again, it's not important becose he looks on &@#$@#, and i don't care what is thinking people like "&@#$@#"

[Internationalist]

Originally posted by Gramphos

The reason why the other parts closed was that the first thread messed up and didn't allow posting, and the second thread was not started by Locutus, so he could not update the list.
I see no reason why more then 300 posts should result in closing the thread.

Judging from posts after yours, it would seem that many people already can't find some posts.The best thing about a thread is it's clarity/accessibility.I hardly think this is the case any longer, unfortunately.In my case, there are times I don't come to these forums for days.In the current pace it means 2-4 pages I could't read.Going there is a bit time consuming.I'm suggesting this only since it's rather commonplace in other forums, additionaly some people might have problems with it,people that don't want to jump to the last page or aren't extremely familiar with Internet.
Still it remains only a suggestion.

[Internationalist]

Btw, if the new rules aren't accepted I want to make some modifications to my votes:

1. Mongols -20=0
2. Spanish -20 =0
3. Arabs -20 =0
4. Byzantines 20 =20
5. Hebrew/Israelis -20 =0
6. Koreans -20 =0
7. Zimbambuans -20=0
8. Aborigines -20 =0

[LoD]

MarkG:

a) i used the word "ask"

Actually, you used the prasal verb "ask to".

b) i dont think you consider locutus stupid enough to count a vote for "Blinbas" and "Blablus"

No, I don't think so. Neither do I think you are not intelligent enough to realize that it was only an example used to illustrate my point.

c) the idea of this vote is for each voter to suggest the civilizations that should be in a expasion pack. notice that i use the word "civilizations" and not "civilization"

Thank you for finally making your point. I will edit the page in question adding the concept you mentioned plus maybe a 'dictionary' of civs.

MarkG and JellyDonut: Since I'm writing this for the second time allow me to put it in caps and boldtype so you don't miss the following: I HAVE EXPLAINED THE CONTENT OF THE PAGE IN QUESTION TO LOCUTUS IN TWO POSTS IN PAGES 10 AND 11 OF THIS THREAD. And may I remind you, that it is in accordance to savoir-vivre (or netiquette in this particular case) to acquire the knowledge of what was said in the discussion before voicing ones opinion. By the way, the links to those posts: here and here .

I sincerely hope this will explain everything.

LoD

(edit): I have allowed myself to ignore those posts which opened subject I have already dicussed and closed. This includes those by Solmyr and orange.

[ranskaldan]

1) you must give all your points
2) you must vote at least 8 civs
3) at least 4 of your votes must be a 20 or all must be 10

Rules one and two are redundant. If you use all your points, you Have to vote for at least 8 civs. As for rule 3, what purpose does it serve? What if I want to vote 20, 19, 18, 17 etc?

At this rate, we only need one rule:

You must give all your points
or maybe
You must give at least 120 points.

and you can also add a second one:

Only Chieftain and Up can vote.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by ranskaldan
Only Chieftain and Up can vote.

That is against the Forum rules, No one should be locked out for a thread because of low post count.

I believe that vote on alt least 8 civs is relevant, but if someone miscount its votes and miss 5 points I think it should be okay to do so therefor I suggest a You must give at least 150 out of 160 points

[Mankind]

...And if someone don't want to vote for any other civ? where is democracy?

I don't say "vote for one civ"

I say "vote for that civ(s) that you want to be in expansion pack"

[Staszek]

Calm down, everybody!

1. Let's wait for Locutus opinion. He's the boss here.
2. Please think twice before posting ideas like "Only Chieftain and Up can vote". You can post hudreds of post in all different spam threads not discussing anything in particular. You can even vote 32 civs x 5 points in separate posts - see how easy it is to get to Warlord? It is not the point.
3. I regret that Poles are so organised and this is so shocking to everybody.
4. I am happy because that means we will have very successful Polish forums when the game finally appears in the shops.

[ranskaldan]

Okay, I'm sorry about the "Only Chieftain and Up can vote", i'm just taking it from some suggestions offered by others.

Thus we only need one rule:

You must use at least 120 points.

...And if someone don't want to vote for any other civ? where is democracy?

In order to prevent such unfair incidents from happening, we have to have this rule. It is unfair to rally Poles, who have never been to Apolyton before, to vote "poles 20" all together. If you want this to be fair, then we should do this for every single civ on the list, not just Poles.

[LoD]

Argghhh... no one rallied anyone here. For Heaven's sake, read before you write.

[ranskaldan]

And because of the LoD's page, many polish civ fans learned about poll.

[LoD]

Do you know the difference between "inform and suggest to do sth" and "rally to do sth"?

[ranskaldan]

Ok, you did not 'rally' in the sense of herding everyone to the polls and telling them to vote for Poles or *else*. But the thing is,

a) encouraging Poles who previously aren't in these forums to join
b) thereby raising the proportions of Poles in this forum
c) and thus increasing the votes for Poles

that is unfair.
Why? because by artificially increasing the number of Poles, the proportion of Poles voting here is higher than the proportion of Poles who play civ, simply because non-Apolyton Poles are now joining, while non-Apolyton non-Poles are not.

a fair scenario is:

a) encouraging civ players around the world to join
b) ensuring that the voters in this forum reflect the actual demographics of civ-players
c) increasing the votes for all civs accordingly

[LoD]

In my opinion it was unfair that the Poles were behind the Eskimos. Hence the "manifesto", which has already fullfilled its role and will be modified.

[ranskaldan]

I felt that there was something wrong with the Poles below too, so I voted for them. But there is no glory if a civ is propelled up thru unfair means. There is no glory in finding out that if we gather up a lopsided slice of the civ community, with a disproportionate number of Poles, and ask them to vote, them the Poles are in the top 15.

[lockstep]

IMO, we need to prevent 'strategic voting' for a particular civ. The suggested rule 'You must at least use 120 points' allows for a vote that gives 20 points to the Polish civ and allocates 100 points to 10 civs a la the Bulgarians, Fiji, Quebecois and Swiss (at the moment not even in the top 100). With 40 votes like that, Poland is number one, and the poll isn´t significant anymore. OTOH, it should be allowed to vote for ar least one or two 'also-ran' civs.

Therefore I suggest as additional rule: You must use at least 120 points, and you can allocate these points only to 'top 24' civs (as of Locutus´ last update).

(Note: This rule would allow to assign 40 points to 2 'also-ran'-civs, and the remaining 120 points to 6-14 'top 24' civs, according to the rules stated previously by Locutus.)

(The top 24 civs are (in alphabetical order): Arabs, Assyrians, Australians, Austrians/Austro-Hungarians, Byzantines, Celts, Dutch, Ethiopians/Aksumites, Hebrew/Israelis, Inca, Inuit/Eskimos/Aleutians, Khmer, Koreans, Mali(ans), Maya, Mongols, Phoenicians/Carthaginians, Poles, Polynesians, Portuguese, Sioux/Dakota, Spanish, Turks/Ottomans, Vikings.)

[ranskaldan]

So, the rules rules:

1. You must use at least 120 points to vote for the top 24.
2. You can use an additional 40 points to vote for any civ you like.

But what if someone's top24 civ falls under the number 24 mark?

[lockstep]

To avoid this problem, I enclosed the list of 'top 24' civs as of Locutus´ last update.

[ranskaldan]

Locutus would kill us all... we are making his life horridly difficult. Now he'd have to sort everyone's votes into above-24 and below-24. And these sortings will have to change whenever a civ rises above/below the 24-25 boundary.

[Mankind]

Originally posted by ranskaldan
So, the rules rules:

1. You must use at least 120 points to vote for the top 24.

But what if someone DON't want to vote for other civ becose he WANT exactly THAT ONE civ for godnes sake!

2. You can use an additional 40 points to vote for any civ you like.

So can I give 40 points for 1 civ?

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Mankind
So can I give 40 points for 1 civ?

No, as the other rules (notably 'only 20 points for a single civ') would still be effective.

[orange]

Originally posted by LoD
In my opinion it was unfair that the Poles were behind the Eskimos. Hence the "manifesto", which has already fullfilled its role and will be modified.

Lod - are you saying you recruited a bunch of settlers to sign up and post only "Poles - 20" just so you could overturn something that, is in your mind, unfair? I can't understand much of what you say.

[ranskaldan]

But what if someone DON't want to vote for other civ becose he WANT exactly THAT ONE civ for godnes sake!

we are not going to have ONE civ for an expansion pack. This poll is not about finding out what your favorite civ is. It is about what civs you'd like to be in the expansion or unofficial mod or whatever.

[Fiil]

How about asking Firaxis to make a special Polish edition where you can play Poles - and only Poles!

I'm sure with so many organized civ'ers in Poland, this will be a big success.

Wait a minute... why not make it a game where every organized Polish player can play Poland in multiplayer in the very organized Polish forums. 16 Polish players playing Poland in one game, imagine that!! Sold out in the first week in Poland.

And of course it will all have to be translated into Polish because most Polish players don't speak English!

And maybe it will be a problem for most Polish players to do more than one move in multiplayer because most of them have sooo bad connections. But of course they will still play.

Soon we will see (organized) riots in Poland because not everybody can start their game Poland. Whereafter the Polish government will have to ask Firaxis to remake the world map into one big map of Poland.

The world will be a better (and more organized) place!

[orange]

Originally posted by Fiil
How about asking Firaxis to make a special Polish edition where you can play Poles - and only Poles!

I'm sure with so many organized civ'ers in Poland, this will be a big success.

Wait a minute... why not make it a game where every organized Polish player can play Poland in multiplayer in the very organized Polish forums. 16 Polish players playing Poland in one game, imagine that!! Sold out in the first week in Poland.

If you want to reseach popularity for this idea, Fiil, you could always start a new thread with a...

...poll?

:no one laughs:

...By poll I mean both a questionaire which people answer and a person of "polish" decent...double...meaning...

: pets Mr. Bigglesworth :