idea

tomcat ha · June 13, 2002, 11:53

when this apolyton demo game is finished i have an idea to continue!
go multi!
that means 7 different leaders for each ''country''
that`s mayebee a little much but you can start with 2 or 3 different countrys
or is this impossible

-Jrabbit · June 13, 2002, 12:07

= PBEM with public strategy discussions, sounds like to me. Slow play, no unexpected strategic moves.

Tough to visualize an efficient working model.

Kropotkin · June 13, 2002, 12:52

Would hardly work. There's probably not enough active posters for that even if we could get seven closed forums...

atawa · June 13, 2002, 13:37

We could however play a duel against CF

tomcat ha · June 13, 2002, 14:42

CF?

Kuciwalker · June 13, 2002, 15:39

CivFanatics.

Xenozod · June 14, 2002, 01:35

I'd like to just start a new game. Give a lot of people a chance to be part of the beginning. But neat idea!

civman2000 · June 14, 2002, 09:39

this has been proposed...with the same responses before. I think cfc may have actually made one (havent visited in awhile)...i think our best choice would be playing against cfc, but this game still has quite a bit left to go (and playing cfc might be too easy)!

Zedd · June 14, 2002, 10:17

I am a frequent visitor to the civ fanatics website and although I have not taken much part in the Democracy game they are playing i know it will be comeing to an end very soon.

[QUOTE]
(and playing cfc might be too easy)!

I think we could have a really good battle on our hand should we decide to try a MP game. Fanatica has a different playing style that Apolyton which would make for some interesting Play.

DarkCloud · June 14, 2002, 12:36

MP- wouldnàt that just cahnge the game to a glorified Multiplayer Toureny? It would sort of defeat the purpose of a democracy game... unless-

people could sign up for different countries and vote for the leaders of the countries, then vote on referendums, use pm's to backstab, etc?

tomcat ha · June 14, 2002, 14:52

that`s what i ment with the original post DarkCloud

atawa · June 14, 2002, 15:06

But can we get enough people for this?

Another thing I'm affraid of is cheating witch will become very likely in this type of game

Nice idea though

tomcat ha · June 14, 2002, 15:13

thanks
how can this or something like this really possible

DarkCloud · June 15, 2002, 06:19

Well, if thats what you meant, I suppose I could support it- but it really changes the style... and I doubt we coudl find 5 people eager to play that way, unless we raid the civII multiplayer forums or spanish forums

because MP games take a lot of time.

tomcat ha · June 15, 2002, 07:00

yeah ok try that anyway

cavebear · June 15, 2002, 14:21

I think the idea sounds complicated, but it might be made to work with some simplification. I would suggest that each civ be limited to 3 elected leaders: President, Foreign Advisor, and Domestic Advisor. President plays the game. Foreign Advisor controls War, Expansion, and Diplomacy. Domestic Advisor controls city development, tech research, and trade. From the experiences gained in the current game, that should be a balanced distribution of work.

I suggest no more than 4 human civs in the game; 12 active leaders will be difficult enough. Citizens can choose the civ they are (permanantly) members of (but they convert if their civ is killed). Or they could be initially assigned at random to assure even distribution.

I don't know anything about PBEM, so I can't suggest anything about the mechanics of taking turns. I'd be interested in learning, though.