Okay, do we want to use any varients or mods for this game? I listed the two varients that got the most support in the discussion thread as there own options. Nobody took to mods all to well, so it's just left as it is.

Looks like I didn't post the grading suggestion fast enough...

Mods: DyP if on vanilla, RaR if on C3C -- but I'm game for pretty much anything.

Variants: Tailor a variant to DG play. What if we use random civ and have to take some aspect of the character of the real civ? For example if we get Korea then Japan and Russia are blood enemies and we have to declare war on them at first contact? (note: This example is intentionally more extreme than the real world situation, I'm not trying to suggest that the variant we choose truly does mimic the real world)

5CC, Epic, and MTDG.

5CC or Epic would be fine with me. Like in said in the other poll, maybe a city limit (10 or 20) would be an ok compromise between 5CC people and people against the idea.

I only want to play a MTDG.

Though I voted against 5CC earlier, I am now in favor of it. It could make this game more challenging, and a high level of difficulty is something the demogame could use. I think we should play a game where winning isn't a foregone conclusion. I also voted for an Epic game (though preferably with a higher difficulty level).

I am not in favor of a MTDG. I do not know that splitting us into multiple teams would do anything to improve lack of participation, and if participation is lacking it could well be that teams will be controlled only by a very few people with little input from the other citizens, hence making it not democratic at all. Also, I like the single-player ideal: we are all one large team, and we're trying to win this one together. However, I would support an idea to start a MTDG on the side, separate from a single-player demogame, if we can get enough participation to make that feasible. It could be a replacement for the ill-fated MSDG and CISDG games.

A MTDG is multiplayer. Simply put, MP is far different than SP. The only goal is to eliminate the enemy humans. The AI are cannon fodder who you do not worry about. MP is mainly a massive buildup of troops. I doubt the game will even last beyond the middle ages depending on map size. You saw how the ISDG unfolded with 5 teams and a standard size CONTINENTS map - the game didn't go beyond Astronomy and Navigation to get ships to cross the sea and declare war.

A MTDG is multiplayer. Simply put, MP is far different than SP. The only goal is to eliminate the enemy humans. The AI are cannon fodder who you do not worry about. MP is mainly a massive buildup of troops. I doubt the game will even last beyond the middle ages depending on map size. You saw how the ISDG unfolded with 5 teams and a standard size CONTINENTS map - the game didn't go beyond Astronomy and Navigation to get ships to cross the sea and declare war.
That is why it would be a good Idea to try something different. We nee to breathe new life into this. A MTDG is the best way to do that. If you want to breathe new life into the DG, then vote for a MTDG as the next DG.

I voted for either a 5CC, an epic game, or a multi-team game. My primary support is in this order:

1. Multi-team game
2. 5CC
3. Epic

I don't want to play a Multi Team DemoGame, if it replaces the single player game. This game is everyone working together, not fighting each other. If you want a Mulit Team DemoGame, have it replace the ISDG. Don't vote for a MTDG.

This game is everyone working together, not fighting each other.
Because this game saw no brutal verbal attacks. :rolleyes:

A multi-team demogame forces each team to use diplomacy to the fullest, and it also keeps you on your toes. "Will my ally backstab me next turn? Should I build up more units? Perhaps we can make another deal..."

A MTDG will be very interesting. The Diplomacy that is needed will show how good you are at working with the other teams. This might be the best chance we have of getting some much needed spirit back into this game.

I was thinking that the Multi Team demogame is two entity working as one. Hence, a permanent alliance.

This is why I didn't want a multiple-choice poll. It's far to close to make any decisions based on this, and now were going to have to waste acouple more days re-polling the top options.

This is why I didn't want a multiple-choice poll. It's far to close to make any decisions based on this, and now were going to have to waste acouple more days re-polling the top options.

I'm a little concerned, it's too few votes right now. 16 people is just barely enough to start with for a core team.

Also for the 6 who didn't vote for 5CC and 7 each who didn't vote for Epic or Multi-team, we don't know how strongly they disagree with those options.

I didn't vote for the 5CC because I felt it too limiting for the amount of people we have in our group. I was thinking of having as many cities as they are of active citizens. However I have no idea how to go about that way.

Double Stack, a 5CC would increase participation as it is (a) something different than an epic game, and (b) it is a challenging variant. Because there are less offices to run for, you will see more actually contested elections in the end game, not just Term 1 and 2.

That's right, if we do an 5CC, we could easily combine several offices. For example, we could make Culture and Science one office, and make one office for all Foreign Affairs.

Too few offices has the potential to push people away earlier rather than later, as it leaves them no hope of getting elected.

The office that we wouldn't need for long in a 5CC would be Domestic, since after the 5th city was placed the only remaining job for domestic would be planning government switches.

For a 5CC, I would elect the City Mayors right from the beginning. Establish a pecking order (random numbers, most votes, specific elections, etc), then give each Mayor the duty of determining where their city will be.

For the RPG folks out there - quite a few opportunities arise with this.

If we do want to go with local elections, this also allows people to start splitting up early on. Hmm, 5 RPG-oriented city threads right from the start.

-- Ravensfire

And those who are not elected gets to sit and wait for things to happen. I rather not have that happen and have something for everybody to do while not over extending ourselves. With the 5CC idea, it looks like to me that we will be limiting ourselves too much. Unless...we have a multi team demogame with that variant which will allow double to quadruple the number of people invovle.

That is my concern.

In a government, not everyone should be an official! You need citizens to tell the officials what to do, otherwise they are happy go lucky. The citizens are the ones that keep our government in check. I'd rather have 2 contested elections than 4 uncontested.

Limited cities variant.

Limited cities variant.

That sounds good to me.