The idea behind the alternative structure came from observations that the offices used in prior DemoGames did not really correspond to the in-game actions they are supposed to correspond to. Let us first examine how the previous games were organized. The discussion can be limited to the executive offices, as those are the ones which differ between the traditional government and the alternative.


Domestic Advisor (F1)
Trade Advisor (F2)
Military Advisor (F3)
Foreign Advisor (F4)
Culture Advisor (F5)
Science Advisor (F6)


As you can see, the executive positions were based on the user interface screens. This makes some sense, although if you more closely examine how decisions are made, or even how the user interface works, you will quickly find that the whole idea of defining the government on these screens is seriously flawed.


The trade screen (F2) is nearly useless. Trades themselves are conducted using the F4 screen, and the only information on the F2 screen which is remotely useful is seeing a summary of our own unconnected cities and a summary of the resources others can trade.
The F3 screen shows only the current composition of the military and a very rough guess of our strength vs. others. Later in the game with a spy you can see opponents actual troop strengths, but this exposes another weakness of the 6 advisor system.
The FA screen (F4) is where most of the non-unit and non-build queue action takes place. This includes treaties and trades.
The Culture screen (F5) can show status of cities, but can't control anything. Without a way to set build queus, the Culture advisor is completely impotent.
The Science screen (F6) most closely resembles the actual DemoGame office, but two all-important aspects of Science, slider setting and tech trades, are split into other offices.
The Espionage screen is missing entirely from the canonical list of 6 advisors. Some things (embassies) are well known how they are handled, but others (espionage) are often forgotton in the rules.
The Victory Status screen (F8) is handled by the DemoGame in the most haphazard way possible. We have a perrenial case of schitzophrenia regarding victory conditions.
The Spaceship screen (F10) is also under-represented, but it is not a problem mainly because it is short-lived.


Now, let us look at the evolution of a game of Civ, and how these screens are actually used vs. the decision making process of the human player.

1. Initial settlement
A human player (at least a good one) looks at tile values, visibility of resources, and the attributes of the civilization to decide whether to settle in place or move a short distance. This is not covered by the F-screens, and we traditionally place it in the hands of Domestic.

2. Initial builds
Most initial queues are extremely straightforward. Some number of scouts or warriors, based on civ type. If shield rich and food poor, sometimes a barracks can be completed before the first settler. Again, this is not covered by a F-screen, we put the city in the hands of the governor, which actually makes good correspondence.

3. Initial exploration
This should be rote, but our term 1 military leader is usually uptight about controlling exactly where each explorer goes, sometimes leaving the DP no choice but to follow inefficient instructions.

4. Initial science
Good players decide their long-term goal right from the start. In a C3C game it depends on whether the player can get Philosophy first, or if Ivory is available and a fast track to Mathematics is available. If neither of these paths makes sense, then preferred government type and difficulty level decide -- aiming for resource revealing techs on lower difficulty and for monetary value in higher levels. In contrast, the Demogame tends to decide on techs one at a time, without regard to bigger issues like which government to switch to or what we'll be able to sell.

Notice a theme -- the structure in previous games lends itself to instructions at most 10 turns in the future. This is what I'm trying to fix.

So, how does a real person play civ, and how can we model that? Major decision points can be categorized as follows:


Decisions on how to handle the player's civ (Domestic)
Decisions on how to handle other civs (External)
Decisions on how to acquire techs and resources (Resources and Technology)
Decisions on how to balance cultural improvements (including wonders) with other items (Culture)


The game also challenges a player to efficiently manage turn by turn operations.

Effective use of military units to implement a plan of conquest or defense. (Commander of Armed Forces)
Efficient planning of build queues (Governor)
Efficient tile improvements to maximize productivity and connect resources (Infrastructure)
Control of sliders, committing funds to various endeavors (Commerce)
Getting the most out of trades and treaties (Trade)
Settling in the most efficient pattern to maximize the usability of each tile. (Expansion)


The astute reader will notice that the turn by turn operations listed above have more items than the alternative structure has offices. This is not an oversight, the original plan was to have the Expansion director phase out as soon as the expansion phase ends.

What does this mean to the average reader? I'm mainly posting this for two reasons -- to show that there is coherent thought behind the idea for the alternative structure, and in response to a comment about "private notes". Nothing is private, it's all out in front of you now.

Ask yourself, do you play a game of civ one mouse click or button press at a time, or do you think about where your civ is going to be and work towards that goal? If you really play one click at a time with no forethought then no explanation in the world is going to help you understand why I was motivated to create an alternative structure. If you plan in advance, I hope this thread helps you "get it". :D

After reading through, I can now see your side of the story. All of the offices and their reasons for living makes sense.

Daveshack

Still, you have to remove some powers from the Director of Commerce, and establish a transitory replacement for the Director of Expansion tasks, and the most logical thing to do would be to transfer FA/TA functions to the Director of Expansion, since there are very few FA/TA tasks in the first two terms anyways. Director of Commerce outshines all other Directors by a vast margin. I hope you see this clearly.

Additionally, Director of infrastructure is too weak and monotonous, you may need to transfer Director of Commerces technology tree adjustment to this one. Still Director of Commerce would be The Superior Director in this game, with budgets, sliders and rush decisions.

Finally, Cultural Consul is too weak, and you need to divide long term military planning with long term diplomatic planning. That is why I proposed the amendments so each Consul got one Victory condition to focus on. You have not responded to this in so many threads, so I wonder if it is stuborness, disinterest, lack of time or that the proposal is your baby you do not want to change.

Provolution,
I do clearly see the imbalaces between the positions. I think the lack of balance between the positions is actually a good thing. This allows people with different amount of time to participate at a level they are comfortable with. In the old model this was the case as well, for example: Domestic had much more responsibility and power than Trade and Culture.

I actually think that Infrastructure and Expansion should be one position. Clearly this is a position that "the builder" players would be interested in. As the need for expansion decreases the need for infrastructure will increase. Of course in the end game there isn't much to do with the workers other than clear polution ( :hmm:, first time I've noticed how close the word Polution is to Provolution, coincidence? I think not. :p )

You have not responded to this in so many threads, so I wonder if it is stuborness, disinterest, lack of time or that the proposal is your baby you do not want to change.

I'm reviewing those posts. The ones in the definition of offices thread are very detailed -- almost too detailed, but better than seeing only generic statements about what doesn't work, and they are better organized than other input that has come in.

My priorities:

Get the game started -- nation name, CoC, appointments, etc.
Make sure there is enough understanding of the positions for term 1 that we can continue -- the point of this thread and the Q&A thread
Look at potential term 2 adjustments

DS

I agree 100 % to your priorities, and I sticdk to only Wonder discussions and some temple lip service for Term One. However, for Term two we need to equate and upgrade the positions for scaleability, sustainability and balance of the offices. I see in your profile you are an innovator, so you should know more than any of the scaleability needs.

I think the Culture Consul is fine the way it is. It is, along with perhaps the technology and resources Consul, one of the game-related positions that is workable without C3C. If governors are doing their job correctly and posting relevant information on the cities, the Consul can plan out wonder and cultural construction without actually viewing the save.

Provolution, though, does make a good point about the Commerce Director. When I look at the duties listed for my office in the most recent proposal from Black_Heart (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2595600&postcount=80) (directly related to DS' original, if I remember correctly):

2. Director of Commerce - Decides on foreign affairs and trading. Sets exact tech queue. Manages budget. Adjusts slider and approves/denies requests from leaders regarding the use of gold. Also decides on espionage missions.

That is a very long list, especially when it comes to later in game. It may be best to move the foreign-affairs related duties to another position. I actually like MOTH's idea to combine the Expansion and Infrastruture offices (as both are indeed very similar duties). A combination of this offices would allow room for a Director of Foreign Affairs.

Octavian, or even simpler, transfer foreign affairs to expansion, since late game, all cities will be build anyways. Then this position will have meaningful tasks throughout the game. Also transfer adjustment of the tech queue to infrastructure. This will trim down Dir of Commerce, but Dir of commerce will still be one of the two most powerful directors.

Also , Culture could get the job to carve out provinces, as Cultural borders is the base for provinces.

Giving Culture provincial boundries is a great idea, now that you mention it, though it's probably a duty that should be specified in a constitutional article dealing specifically with provinces.

The thing about moving FA to the Expansion Director, though, is that the tactical areas covered by the Expansion Director are very different. We'd do better, I think, to elect a person to be the city placement guru only, so he can focus on that job. Foreign affairs really don't come into play when placing cities.

Sliders, I think, are fine with Commerce. Again, it simply goes along with the rest of the job description - the person who oversees spending our gold should probably be able to control how much we make.

I think the sliders should belong to commerce, but the very tech queue adjustment could go to Dir of Infrastructure, now Labor.

About the city placement guru, he could do FA and Trade as well, as almost nothing of FA or trade is going on in the first two terms on the treaty contract signing level.
FA-Trade will still be subject to Consul foreign policy. Expansion and foreign affairs go hand in hand and should be synchronized.

As you can see, the executive positions were based on the user interface screens. This makes some sense, although if you more closely examine how decisions are made, or even how the user interface works, you will quickly find that the whole idea of defining the government on these screens is seriously flawed.

Look at the bolded part... the BASED ON. Think about it for a long, long time. Then tell me... why the hell are you going over something that has almost nothing to do with the tradational form of government?

So, how does a real person play civ, and how can we model that? Major decision points can be categorized as follows:

This is where you screwed up, we are not one person. As such, what or how one person plays the game has nothing to do with how we play the game.

The game also challenges a player to efficiently manage turn by turn operations.

Effective use of military units to implement a plan of conquest or defense. (Commander of Armed Forces)
Efficient planning of build queues (Governor)
Efficient tile improvements to maximize productivity and connect resources (Infrastructure)
Control of sliders, committing funds to various endeavors (Commerce)
Getting the most out of trades and treaties (Trade)
Settling in the most efficient pattern to maximize the usability of each tile. (Expansion)


The astute reader will notice that the turn by turn operations listed above have more items than the alternative structure has offices. This is not an oversight, the original plan was to have the Expansion director phase out as soon as the expansion phase ends.\

Most readers will hopefully read through the propoganda and understand that, as I said above, this is not one person playing the safe. This is multiple people, and then throw in our own mock government with that deal. Also, strangely enough he left out a very important part of Civ3. So were going to be stuck in the ancient ages for a very long time.

No forethought, and your reasoning is illogical. Sorry, but I'm not that easy to brainwash.

What does this mean to the average reader? I'm mainly posting this for two reasons -- to show that there is coherent thought behind the idea for the alternative structure, and in response to a comment about "private notes". Nothing is private, it's all out in front of you now.
Ask yourself, do you play a game of civ one mouse click or button press at a time, or do you think about where your civ is going to be and work towards that goal? If you really play one click at a time with no forethought then no explanation in the world is going to help you understand why I was motivated to create an alternative structure. If you plan in advance, I hope this thread helps you "get it". :D

It means that they get to listen to me for another couple of weeks, because your trying to throw abunch of propoganda out. There is no coherent behind it. Do not ask yourself how you play a game of Civ3, because how you play it has nothing to do with how we should going to play it.

This whole entire post can be ripped to pieces with a short phrase I've already said multiple times. How you play a game of Civ3, has nothing to do with how we play it.

End of discussion.

This whole entire post can be ripped to pieces with a short phrase I've already said multiple times.


That is very constructive. :blush:

Giving Culture provincial boundries is a great idea, now that you mention it, though it's probably a duty that should be specified in a constitutional article dealing specifically with provinces.

Giving Culture control of provincial boundries was my idea. Thanks for the compliment though.

That is very constructive. :blush:

It wasn't meant to be, it was meant to get the point across harshly, and I think it did it's job very well.

I'm not going to spend 5 minutes saying basicly the same thing over and over again. I'll end up running out of ways to say it differantly each time, and it's easier for the citizens to read.

Now to get to the other posts in this thread.

Provolution,
I do clearly see the imbalaces between the positions. I think the lack of balance between the positions is actually a good thing. This allows people with different amount of time to participate at a level they are comfortable with. In the old model this was the case as well, for example: Domestic had much more responsibility and power than Trade and Culture.

So your saying that a citizen should not beable to hold a certain offices because of a differant time commitment?

I actually think that Infrastructure and Expansion should be one position. Clearly this is a position that "the builder" players would be interested in. As the need for expansion decreases the need for infrastructure will increase. Of course in the end game there isn't much to do with the workers other than clear polution ( :hmm:, first time I've noticed how close the word Polution is to Provolution, coincidence? I think not. :p )

I've said that several times, nice that you see things my way though.

So your saying that a citizen should not beable to hold a certain office because of a differant time commitment?

So you think a citizen should hold an office they don't have the time for?

-- Ravensfire

Well, I get tired of seeing you trying to tell people to look at the holes you made in someone else idea and how your idea is well proposed and "hole-less". So my suggestion is to stop pointing and ripping other ideas apart and work on your useless stuff.

Well, I get tired of seeing you trying to tell people to look at the holes you made in someone else idea and how your idea is well proposed and "hole-less". So my suggestion is to stop pointing and ripping other ideas apart and work on your useless stuff.

I didn't "make" any holes, they were there to begin with. The only thing I've done is to help them fill them by pointing out that there was a hole.

Actually, just incase you've forgotten, my idea currently has a large amount of support, and could very easily replace this one. Useless is a severe understatement.

Apparently you don't value other people opinion.

So you think a citizen should hold an office they don't have the time for?

-- Ravensfire

Nope, I think that a citizen who doesn't have time shouldn't hold any poistion. If they don't have enough time to hold one poistion, then doesn't that seem like they don't have enough time to do any poistion properly?

Most poistions shouldn't take much more than an hour or two a day, and most of that is just leading discussions.

Most poistions shouldn't take much more than an hour or two a day,

Most. Hmm, that sounds dangerously close to some positions doing more than others, requiring more time. Oh my - don't tell me you actually agree with that, and not the totally balanced positions that you so stridently advocate! :eek:

-- Ravensfire

Most. Hmm, that sounds dangerously close to some positions doing more than others, requiring more time. Oh my - don't tell me you actually agree with that, and not the totally balanced positions that you so stridently advocate! :eek:

-- Ravensfire


No possible way to make every poistion perfectly balance, if I thought so I'd be an idoit. Even if I did think that way, I could always say that differant poistions will have differant workloads depending upon events in the game, which is the absolute truth. Also the reason why I said the second part of that post.

However, having extremely unbalanced poistions makes one leader dominate over others, and in a system where there suppose to be on equal terms, this doesn't work to well.

However, having extremely unbalanced poistions makes one leader dominate over others, and in a system where there suppose to be on equal terms, this doesn't work to well.
Oh come on now - you can't really think that say, Domestic is dominant over Culture because Domestic has more? What's next, worrying about one office taking over another one mid-game, over dominance?

There is nothing wrong with one office having more "power" than another office. That power comes with an increased amount of time and effort required. We have some citizens that thrive, and desire those circumstances. Give it to them. Provo showed last DG how a person with less time can divide up the roles of an office to others, allowing someone with less time to still run for that office.

-- Ravensfire

There is nothing wrong with one office having more "power" than another office. That power comes with an increased amount of time and effort required. We have some citizens that thrive, and desire those circumstances. Give it to them. Provo showed last DG how a person with less time can divide up the roles of an office to others, allowing someone with less time to still run for that office.

Okay, then tell me, why not make them all balanced out then? If a leader can just divide it up to make it to where almost anyone can do it, why keep them inbalanced? Is there any particular reason for this that I'm missing, or is this just because of a fancy?

So your saying that a citizen should not beable to hold a certain offices because of a differant time commitment?

Yes, that's basically right. For example, there is no way I would ever run for President because I couldn't commit to the time needed for playing the save. Real Life affects different people in different amounts. If the positions are balanced it will also be tougher for a new player to get there feet wet in an "easy" position like culture or Infrastructure.

In RL Governments different positions have a lot different powers. The Secretary of State is much more powerful than the Secretary of Education for example. (Off Topic Liberal Rant: That's not the way it should be, Education is more important than Foreign Affairs)

I haven't seen most people consider the imbalances a significant problem that needs to be fixed.

Now for some constructive criticism. I hope you will consider this in the spirit of cooperation in which it is offered:

When reading most of your posts, even ones with which I agree, I get a feeling that you are being deliberately (sp?) obstinate and unwilling to understand the points being put forward. What's the solution? I don't know.

Now for some constructive criticism. I hope you will consider this in the spirit of cooperation in which it is offered:

When reading most of your posts, even ones with which I agree, I get a feeling that you are being deliberately (sp?) obstinate and unwilling to understand the points being put forward. What's the solution? I don't know.

I'm not being unwilling or uncoorprative. I just don't consider it might right to make a solution for someone else's idea. I have no idea what they were thinking at the time, or how they were forming it in there mind. What gives me the right to come in and make a solution that might be opposite of what they intended?

Nope, you fix the problems you make. Which is why I've been pointing out the problems in the alternative structure for the pass couple of weeks. However, what I find is that people are unwilling to fix the problems.

I've already fixed many of what I find to be my problems, I don't see anybody asking questions about my proposals, and I don't see anybody pointing out any problems with my proposals. Why is that? Because I look at what they say and try to find away to keep my main idea, while fixing the problem.

It's called critisim, and I will continue to do it untill they finally get there act together and fix it.

Yes, that's basically right. For example, there is no way I would ever run for President because I couldn't commit to the time needed for playing the save. Real Life affects different people in different amounts. If the positions are balanced it will also be tougher for a new player to get there feet wet in an "easy" position like culture or Infrastructure.

In RL Governments different positions have a lot different powers. The Secretary of State is much more powerful than the Secretary of Education for example. (Off Topic Liberal Rant: That's not the way it should be, Education is more important than Foreign Affairs)

I haven't seen most people consider the imbalances a significant problem that needs to be fixed.

In real life, differant poistions are wanted more than others. Also in RL, all of those poistions you mentioned are appointed (if were thinking of the same country). If we have imbalances inside of our game poistions, that makes it to where more people will want the powerful poistions, and no one will want the un-powerful one. So we have 5 people running in one election, and no one running in another.

Well Strider warned you of a flamewar on the contitution, and he delivered on time.

Look at the bolded part... the BASED ON. Think about it for a long, long time. Then tell me... why the hell are you going over something that has almost nothing to do with the tradational form of government?


Umm, the 6 F-screens are the traditional government. That's the whole point of trying to come up with an alternative in the first place, to get rid of the idea that the positions need to match the F-screens.


This is where you screwed up, we are not one person. As such, what or how one person plays the game has nothing to do with how we play the game.


Excuse me for thinking other people besides myself play the game by coming up with a long term strategy and then following it. My bad... :mischief:


No forethought, and your reasoning is illogical. Sorry, but I'm not that easy to brainwash.


I could reply to this, but would probably get a three day vacation. As such will let it go.

Again, another showdown of our zealous polarities. We just need to redivide the External Consul into Military and FA/TA/Culture, and leave Finance/Tech and Domestic as new Consuls, as well as bringing the tech adjustment to from Commerce to Labor and FA/TA from Commerce to Expansion.

Umm, the 6 F-screens are the traditional government. That's the whole point of trying to come up with an alternative in the first place, to get rid of the idea that the positions need to match the F-screens.

Oh, wait, but didn't you just say that they were based on the F-screens? Now your saying it is the F-screens? There is a huge differance, we needed a starting point when working on our constitution, and the f-screens was the most reasonable starting place. Is the tradational anything like the f-screens? Nope not at all, we changed the base and added onto it. Also, alot of aspects of the game aren't even covered in the f-screens or covered over several differant ones. Settlers and workers being prime examples. Drafting citizens is another one.

Nope... it's far to differant to compare the two.


Excuse me for thinking other people besides myself play the game by coming up with a long term strategy and then following it. My bad... :mischief:

Oh, I'm sure everyone makes long-term strategy's when playing Civ3. However, no one has two dozen other people making long-term strategy's for the game also. Not only that, but when you play the game, you have all the information you want and need within seconds. It's no so here, even with the information department, there is still going to be somethings that aren't on the forums.

Even with our best efforts, there is going to be imperfections and blotches. Things that a single person playing Civ3 won't have. One relatively small piece of information can change our entire plans, but if a consul accidently forgets to post that information, well you should get the picture now.