How are we going to handle the naming of cities/rivers/forests/mountain ridges/sea's/roads/whatever?

In the civIII demogames each person could name one city, but we've got almost 100 citizens already, and there's absolutely no way that we'll be getting 100 cities.

Another option is to let each person name one thing, but that would get people annoyed as they were only allowed to name a stupid hill in the middle of nowhere while someone else could name an important city.

Another option is to have discussions and polls about every name, organized by the president/warlord/prime minister or another official responsible.

Another option is to only do this for cities while other things get their name by people using a specific name for something, and other people following the trend.

Have a nominations and polling system for city names. Place names can be less organized, but could just follow the same process as cities to make it simple.

Maybe we could just let whoever was playing the save at the time when it was discovered name the geographic features. Thats how it works in the real world (Expolorer names what he explores), no ones really consulted. But for things that are built (Roads, Citys, ?Improvements? ect.) we could do votes for them.

Lottery, randomly select a person out of the active players.

Have everyone interested in naming a city post in a thread, and then make a list of those people, and randomly select a person.

Either through a Random Number Generator, or the good olde "pull a name out of a hat" method.

I like Falcon02's suggestion, it's fairly fool-proof except for the moment when someone is selected twice. Some people don't understand that randomness doesn't automatically rule out getting the same outcome again. We can keep a list of people that were selected before and make sure they won't compete for a namegiving ceremony again.

I like Falcon02's suggestion, it's fairly fool-proof except for the moment when someone is selected twice. Some people don't understand that randomness doesn't automatically rule out getting the same outcome again. We can keep a list of people that were selected before and make sure they won't compete for a namegiving ceremony again.There is a simple formula to guarantee such a situation doesn't occur.

Why don't we just do it like the last demogame. People request names, then we vote upon it.

ice2k4's suggestion seems simplest... It also guarantees that those who care most get their names at the forefront... Since they'll be the ones posting the request

if we follow ice2k4's proposition.. does that also include the name of the capital.. or are we going to leave that to the leader to decide?

dunno... guess we'll have to poll that?

I think for the capital's name, we may wish to wait till we know what our civ is before getting a name for it...

i hope we make our civ a custom one.. being japanese or british would take away from the fun of it..

being like say.. the braavosi.. or something along those lines.. would be fun :)

We normally make a custom name...

DG1 or DG2 Civ III was like Pheonatica (or something to that effect, I'm sure I'm horribly misspelling it)

I say Highcheif/president gets first city

In the old demogames, we would do this for making cities:


Option 1:

Elected officials first, sorted by the Chain of Command (President, VP, Foreign Affairs, Military, Domestic, Trade, Science, Culture, Governors (starting with the oldest province), Mayors, citizens (by join date). City names could only be used once per person.

Option 2:

Just run through the citizen registry starting from post one and select each city. (kind of like the city list in Civ games).

Just run through the citizen registry starting from post one and select each city. (kind of like the city list in Civ games).
Sweet, as I'm first registered.

Only problem with option 2...

I don't want to see people registered and left to end up getting priority over those who registered later but have been much more active.

Maybe it should go through the chain of command, then? That's fair, too, since those who have an official position are generally working quite hard....

At the same time, if it comes to somebody on the chain of command, they should have be able to give city naming rights to someone else (Assuming someone else hasn't chosen yet already).

Here's a thought for city naming. Let the Eldar of that city be the one who gets to choose the name, or organize the choice. A democratically inclined or benevolent Eldar might allow the people to choose, while a greedy authoritarian one might just choose the name.

We could elect the Eldar before the city is founded, or found it as "unnamed x", elect the Eldar, and then name the city. If we elect the Eldar first, then we might want to put the Eldar-elect in charge of determining where the city should be located.

Well, the objection I have to the normal method of letting officials/citizens decide is that we won't have many cities for a very long time, therefor only a few people will be able to name something.

I don't really care as long as we don't vote because it would be stupid to hold up playing the game just to decide the name of the city.

I don't really care as long as we don't vote because it would be stupid to hold up playing the game just to decide the name of the city.

There've been much more mundane reasons why gameplay was held up... Your statement is just one of several.

There've been much more mundane reasons why gameplay was held up... Your statement is just one of several.

Doesn't sound to interesting.

Voting on the naming of a place never held up gameplay. We would just give the city a temporary name like City #5 until we voted upon a name. Gameplay would resume as normal.

Often a city had been planned on a dotmap, and would be called "Red Dot" or "Orange Dot" until an official name had been decided upon.

Voting on the naming of a place never held up gameplay. We would just give the city a temporary name like City #5 until we voted upon a name. Gameplay would resume as normal.

Bingo!

How about something like this - for each city, we open a naming thread. All suggestion that get seconded are put into a poll. We take the top 3 (plus ties), and run one more poll. Most votes wins. If we start this process early, we'll have names ready.

-- Ravensfire

Well we should get a poll up on how to decide city names soon. Not long until we have our first city.

If you see a concensus building in this discussion, even a tenuous one, it would also work to just proceed as though you know which idea would win. If there are people who disagree with that method, they'll call foul, or even better yet get motivated to poll it themselves. If nobody thinks it's worth the trouble of challenging, then you've shown leadership and saved us from an extraneous poll.

And if you decide to poll it, we don't necessarily need a law for it. It would also work to just have a "which method do you want" type poll.

If you see a concensus building in this discussion, even a tenuous one, it would also work to just proceed as though you know which idea would win. If there are people who disagree with that method, they'll call foul, or even better yet get motivated to poll it themselves. If nobody thinks it's worth the trouble of challenging, then you've shown leadership and saved us from an extraneous poll.Agreed, usually I think along that path, but posting that Warlords vs. Vanilla poll made me second guess myself a bit lately.

Agreed, usually I think along that path, but posting that Warlords vs. Vanilla poll made me second guess myself a bit lately.

You shouldn't dwell on that one too much, it was a bit of a special case.

@Furius: Can you make your proposal its own discussion thread please. Sorry, but it makes it easier to locate the original proposal. Thanks.

V. Other features
Other geographical features, including, but not limited to: continents, mountain ranges, oceans, forests, and plains may also be named. Nomination threads for such features may be posted by any interested individual, and would follow the same procedure as in III.


Shouldn't this be II?

@Furius: Can you make your proposal its own discussion thread please. Sorry, but it makes it easier to locate the original proposal. Thanks.

I'd welcome an opportunity to try out the "move post to new thread" function. :D

I'd just do it, but like to be polite so will give Furius a little while to agree. Though I'll probably settle into the badge and gun pretty soon. :cool:

Though I'll probably settle into the badge and gun pretty soon. :cool:

:lol: So what your saying is whenever we need your moderator side we ask for the Marshal. :D

Right... I hadn't even thought of that... DaveShack, could you make it into a new thread, please?