The Glory of War

[Donegeal]

Trip wants diversity in his team and talks about how this diversity will help his team avoid pitfalls that a single minded group might miss. He also talks about how he belives that a straight warmongering team won't win (or might not win). I would actually agree with him. I tend to believe that diversity is what has made the Apolyton Civ III demo game so succesful. However, since we will be playing against other humans, old stragety will be thrown out the window and we will have to start from scratch. New questions will be asked (like diversity over single-mindedness) and answers will need to be made. And since I think of PTW teams as just a learning tool for when we destroy the other Civ sites, I am proposing that this team that I am forming will be single-minded and tend toward victory through war.

Come Warmongers! Join this team and show the superiourity of War!

I am looking for active participants in this team, the size of which will be limited to no more than 30 citizens (people who can actually vote and run for office). The Code of Laws for this team will be the NewCon of the Apolyton Civ III demo game (with changes that team members will discuss and vote on before the start of the game). I am also hoping to entice GF to join this team so he can set up a $Mini-game open to all civilans (open to all members of Apolyton).

This will be a 'warmonger' team and I hope that someone else follows my line of thinking and sets up a 'builder' team so we can actually answer some things about human v human stragety.

In final, I will be pushing for all teams to start as a random civ and play on smaller maps (to make the games go quicker so we can get together more frequently to discuss what we did and why); tiny, small and regular.

Current Members:
1. Donegeal
2. UnOrthOdOx
3. Jdd2007
4. GhengisFarb
5. Aro
6. UberKruX
7. korn469
8. Panzer32
9. =OttomusCeasar=
10. Ennet
11. Aggie

[UnOrthOdOx]

Sign me up here. It is an interesting project, actually, and I am a tester at heart. What better test than a single minded aproach. I won't be all that active for about a month, however.

[Inverse Icarus]

edit: forget it

[Donegeal]

Hey Uber, nice sig....

This team can choose to pick a civ if its wants, but, I as an individual, prefer that all teams start random. Its the order in chaos theroy. If all are random, then all are in chaos. If all are in chaos, then all are equal. However, if this team wants to choose a civ, so be it. I and we will be at the whim of the team.

I have also been doing some flag work. Tell me what you think of this:

[Donegeal]

Dammit! Why can't I ever get a pic to stick?

[Inverse Icarus]

make it a gif or jpg

[Donegeal]

Oh well, close enough.

hehehe! Notice the resemblance to my country flag?

[jdd2007]

i want to join this group, don. lets get fightin!

[GodKing]

I joined Togas' group, but if that one doesn't work out, I will gladly join you folks.

[GhengisFarb™]

It doesn't look there is going to be enough people in the Simpsons group for the first game, so I would prefer to be in this group.

[Aro]

It's an experience, I can see... I'm a tester, too!
Not to mention the old friends here...
Count me in!

[Donegeal]

Excellent! Now Ghengis will have Monstrous Maps to go along with his Magnificent $Mini-game!

We will do all that we can to um... aquire all the tiles you desire!

[ruby_maser]

I'd hate to be the Civs located next to your team... especially with such an upfront approach to what you plan do with them. Though I consider myself a hawk, I would prefer a little deception in the matters of war. One of my favorite quotes Apolyton is always meting out is

Make peace with your enemies every once in awhile; it confuses the hell out of them

IMHO, such an in-your-face stance could prove to be an insurmountable obstacle to diplomacy and trade. Like starting out a single player game with ever other civ positive that you are evil

[Ninot]

yes... i wonder, with such an upfront warmongering attitude...

how do you expect all your neighbor civs to ignore you?

they will surely put heavy defences on their borders with you, and perhaps decide its better to take out the threat before it stings.

[Togas]

I'll echo Ninot here. You guys may want to curb back your concept a little. If my Civ ran into this one, we'd immediately build up an army and pull in allies to try to crush it before it took our wine resources and women.

Maybe structure it as a more noble, proud, honorable civ that keeps it's word and heavily punishes transgressors. A civ that has no qualms in taking resources if a fair agreement cannot be reached. A civ that would be an excellent ally, and a horrible enemy.

Just something to think about. You never want to go into a game with other humans and be the "evil Civ" ... that kind of a bad reputation will make the game really difficult for you.

Unless you like that sort of challange. I dunno.

--Togas

[korn469]

this sounds like a civ i'd be interested in joining, though i think we should pick a civ with the militaristic trait

[Donegeal]

Yes, I understand your concern, Ninot and Togas. And, frankly, your right. IF you run into us, your going to instantly reel. You'll say "oh ****! Change all "Q's" to Spearmen!". But that is if you approach this game with the unfair knowledge of what we emphasize. In the Multi-site game, none of us will know what "type" of civ we will be facing. Here, you know because its announced so we can gather together specific types of players.

Who would want to join a team that expresses:
We will always take the middle ground! We will whore science but not share. We will build peacefully and fight as true warriors!

If I did that, then I would have a bland grey team in all repects. The selection of what team you wanted to be on would boild down to a popularity contest.

This team will refuse to sit on the fence. One or the other, not both. This team will have warmonger tendancies so people know that if they tend to be more warlike, this is where they would like to play.

[Ninot]

the middle ground atleast leaves an element of surprise to neighbors, keeping them guessing about our intentions

with YOUR intentions... it will be a natural tendency to expect an attack, and thus, your attacks are more likely to fail

[UnOrthOdOx]

As I said, I like the idea of sticking to a single minded aproach even if it is doomed to fail as Ninot and others claim. It is a test, and those of us who are testers at heart know that one mus use extremes in such a test. As long as we have fun at it, I don't care if you all gang up and poind us into the earth. At lest then we can call you all cowards for fearing us so much you couldnt face us alone with you middle ground nonsense.

The very fact that we would be FORCING our neighbors out of their style to switch to our own style of warmongering may even provide something of an edge, who knows?

[korn469]

at best, better tactics will overcome prior knowledge of the general strategy, at worst this team will turn into a better directed AI

playing an agressive civ dedicated to glory and conquest still allows for some strategic and tactical wiggle room, i think if anything it restricts diplomatic options more than production strategies and it is far less handicapped than a team that refused to ever launch an offensive war or a team that choose to play the game as an OCC

[GhengisFarb™]

It looks like we have a few definite teams in Trips, Trash Trip, and Glory of Trashing Trip (of War), as they have a good amount of sign-ups. How are the other teams doing on sign-ups?

[Ninot]

Togas looks to have a strong team, doesnt he?

[UnOrthOdOx]

Donegeal, one little thing we should consider.

While the C3DG NewCon is well written, and a very fine document, it is also based upon the masses that the C3DG has accumulated. We will need to come up with a different system, at least to start with, I believe, to take into account the lower numbers we have, and will continue to have even if more people join, we will not be approaching the 60 regular, active members that the NewCon was designed to accomidate.

[Donegeal]

Good point Unortho. The document that governs us is actually not very important to me. The stragety that we approach the game with is what I'm concerned with. I mentioned the NewCon only as an example. I was actually thinking about this last night and came up with an interesting Idea. One vote for each tile that we have under our control. We sell the tiles in our control via GF $Mini game and we would inesense turn into a warmongering civ run by land owners. The more land you own, the more power you have. Definately an example of survival of the fittest, which would be very approiate with a warmongering civ. Maybe we should be the Klingons!

[UnOrthOdOx]

Perhaps it would be interesting to expand this a bit, making regional administrators, or even setting up a system of feudal lords with a Monarch? Each one wanting to expand his own holdings...do it on the level of cities, not tiles, though. We have few enough people that there would be cities/regions for all (depending on the map settings, perhaps).

[Donegeal]

Hmmmm... I like this. And the City lord could make requests to the Monarch for military forces and PW. The CL could be incharge of everything about the city with the King making orders for workers/settlers/military units when nessecary. CL would be incharge of naming the region and City.

The King would play the game, control the sliders, deal with other civs and appoint Advisors.

The feudal system working off the $Mini-game buy purchasing new Founded/defeated cities from the King via a silent bid. One vote per city you own on national matters (like a GL or such)?

Hmmm... this is sounding more and more interesting all the time...

[UnOrthOdOx]

Only one caveat.

on the voting per city, and bidding on new cities, perhaps a rule pennalizing the winner of the last vote to even it for newer members? Something to even it out somewhat?

Should make for some interesting debates over wonders, palace, FP, cash rushing, and such.

[Donegeal]

That was what I was thinking. Hold cities for new members first, then allow for the purchase of a second city once everyone on the team has one already....

This gets us into the debate of a population cap. With a system like this, people like GF (or myself for that matter) will accumulate enormous sums of cash to purchase a new city but never get the oppertunity to do so because new people keep joining. Plus, if we keep the map small, like I want, even ten cities will constute a large empire.

*** Donegeal gets out his hammer and anvil to start working out a government for the Glory of War ***

[Donegeal]

Speaking of the Glory of War, what do you guy think of it as a name? I only put it out there to attract warmongers, its not official.

And Speaking of warmongers, are any of you actually warmongers? I sure hope so, cause I personally am a builder (but was exceedingly impressed with war in the DG). Perhaps Uber might be interested in joining once again (he didn't like how the government was set up in the DG)

Also, as it looks like picking our civ is going to win the poll, maybe we should start talking about that.

[Donegeal]

WoooHooo!

Just got a PM from Uber that he wants me to list him as a member!


He did say he would be a muted member, but anything from him will help!
Rock on Uber!