Position: Elder

This is the Nomination thread for the office of Elder. For this election, this Elder will take control of the first city created.

The Elder is the ruler of a specific city. They are in control of that city, including the allocation of citizens, build queues and all other city-specific settings.

To nominate a citizen for Elder, including yourself, post the name in this thread or PM Ravensfire. In order for a citizen to be accepted for the election, they must accept the nomination by posting in this thread or sending a PM to Ravensfire. Self-nominations are considered automatically accepted unless indicated otherwise. Citizens may only accept one nomination.

All citizens are encouraged to post questions to the nominees about their plans and qualifications for the office. Nominees are encouraged, but not required, to answer those questions.

The election poll will be posted at 6:00 pm, Feb. 24, CST, and will list all accepted nominations, in order of acceptance.

Good luck!
-- Ravensfire

Self-Nomination
I might add a platform tomorrow, but my main concern will be setting up some role-playing and other activities. I will of course take care of the in game aspect too, but that shouldn't be too complicated.

I nominate Cheiftess, i would nominate you for leader but i already have a horse in that race. (not calling ya a horse anybody)

I'll accept.

:old: Chieftess for Tribal Elder! :old:

Seconded both dutchfires and Chieftess' nominations.

I'm pretty torn between the two of you, if you could state why I should vote for you. I'd also like your feelings on synchronizing the initial build queue with the Warlord's plans (which would be based on the citizens.)

To all candidates:

Although it's hard to make predictions without even seeing the save, what would your goals be early on for your city? What would you build?

Thanks,
-- Ravensfire

I would focus on growth early on. If we have a wheat source, especially on floodplains, we could get a worker out in 7 turns. If not, and if we're a coastal civ with the fishing tech, then we can get a workboat out while our city grows. Then, a worker or settler. But, the priority will be to grow the city - granaries would help, too. In Civ4, workers and settlers use food and shields ("hammers" - I'm old school. :p) to be built, so the more food, the more workers and settlers.

My goal would be this:

worker (irragate tiles)
Settler (chop a forest or two to get it out quicker)
Get the city up to atleast size 5-7 quickly.


For the other question - It's really too early in the game right now (we haven't even started!), so I'd really like to see what our starting position looks like before making any long term plans.

Seconded both dutchfires and Chieftess' nominations.

I'm pretty torn between the two of you, if you could state why I should vote for you. I'd also like your feelings on synchronizing the initial build queue with the Warlord's plans (which would be based on the citizens.)

To all candidates:

Although it's hard to make predictions without even seeing the save, what would your goals be early on for your city? What would you build?

Thanks,
-- Ravensfire

I personally like worker first in most of my single player games. But if we can grow a population point by building either a warrior or a scout first (or a workboat if we're on the coast near a a sea resource), then that is an interesting option too. If I get elected, then I'll make a spreadsheet as soon as we get the initial save to compare all the different options.

Co-operating with the Chieftain is very important too, as he will make our research decisions. And these research decisions will only work best if supported by the city, and the city can only work best with help from the Chieftain for example, we will need to be researching techs needed for development of our resources and for building city improvements like granaries that can potentially increase the cities effectiveness a lot.

---deleted---

Although both candidates spoke well, I shall support Chieftess.

Best regards,

Dutchfire's Platform

Who am I?
I've been playing in the first [civ4] DG. I started out around term 4, and as I total noob I got in office for the first time that term. I was Minister of Science during that term, and some other terms. I've had several other positions during that demogame, including Secretary of State and member of the Judiciary. Sadly enough participation was already dropping when I joined, so I didn't have to run to get an office then.

I've also been Designated Player twice, but with the game already in the medieval age, my :badcomp: couldn't handle it as well as it should. I am running for Designated Player again, and I'm fairly confident that this time my computer will be able to handle it, at least until we get pretty far into the middle ages.

I'm also playing in both Multi-Team Demo Games. In team Innovia I don't have an office, but no-one really has. In team Saber I'm currently Chief Commander. I've played in the Hall of Fame too, becoming Quattromaster, and I'm still playing for the Hall of Fame every now and then.

My plans as Elder

I intend to co-operate with the Chieftain to get our civ in a good position to win this game. In my opinion our first goal should be building workers and settlers to grab land and develop it to get an advantage on the other civs. I don't think we should go straight for any wonders, except maybe the Oracle, depending on our civ. I think that those hammers and beakers should be spend on settlers, workers and axes. Land is power, as can be seen in many higher level games, like for example the Emperor Masters Challenge, written by Aelf.

On a totally unrelated subject, I will try to make the Meta-Game active. On of my plans is to start up something like the Game of the Month, but then with a starting position identical to our start (I'll have to World Build for that). I might also start other competitive activities, depending on interest.

In the role-playing segment, I'd like to give our city things like a flag and a history, together with all role-players here.

Any questions to me, or to my competitor Chieftess?

Questions for Candidates:

Do you see this position's duties as the type of things that require a lot of citizen input, or things that can be handled without much citizen involvement?

When you play, do you micromanage individual citizens, by policy using the emphasis buttons, or not at all? How would you tend to give DP's instructions for micromanagement? How forgiving will you be if a DP doesn't make a MM change on schedule?

I would like to nominate myself for this position. I know i am the outsider and this is the first time i have run for office.

I would at the start, encourage growth by puhing for a worker to improve the tiles in the city radius. I would then with cooperation with the chieftain push for settlers and miltary units to expand and defend our lands. I would then focus on making the city the greatest in the world, pursuing great wonders and buildings that promote science, production, culture and religion in association with the concern minister and the chieftain.

On DaveShacks question, yes i believe that citizens are an important part of the process to decide the fate of our capital afterall they are the ones that vote and their ideas should be hear.

I would also use the emphasis button but then make adjustments to what we need for example food, then tweak it so it grows but also so that we create enough hammers and gold that we needed.

Question to the canidate: How will you foster participation within your city?

I would ask for opinions on what the city should be building and possibly introduce votes for buildings/units to be built and act accordingly to them

I would focus on growth early on. If we have a wheat source, especially on floodplains, we could get a worker out in 7 turns. If not, and if we're a coastal civ with the fishing tech, then we can get a workboat out while our city grows. Then, a worker or settler. But, the priority will be to grow the city - granaries would help, too. In Civ4, workers and settlers use food and shields ("hammers" - I'm old school. :p) to be built, so the more food, the more workers and settlers.

My goal would be this:

worker (irragate tiles)
Settler (chop a forest or two to get it out quicker)
Get the city up to atleast size 5-7 quickly.


For the other question - It's really too early in the game right now (we haven't even started!), so I'd really like to see what our starting position looks like before making any long term plans.


Worker AND a Settler back to back !? How will our city find a chance to grow ?

I'm throwing my hat in the arena! My platform, to allow early city growth and increase the size of our military! I'm also for building a scout, to increase our exploration capacity. I'm against excessive chopping, as trees are the life blood of our people and destroying them is a sin, however, I'm not outright against it if the cause is right. Workers and Settlers will be built when the city is secured, and when we can provide protection for the Settler.

Being that our city will be the most important, and infact, the only city for awhile we'll need to encourage development of development technology and population. So, under my administration we'd see development of food and commerce tiles. Production will take a back to seat to our growth and development of worker technology.

TheAmerican for Elder! Clubs and bread for everybody!

Early Game Build Order
----------------------
Warrior
Scout (Undecided)
Worker
Settler

Questions for Candidates:

Do you see this position's duties as the type of things that require a lot of citizen input, or things that can be handled without much citizen involvement?

When you play, do you micromanage individual citizens, by policy using the emphasis buttons, or not at all? How would you tend to give DP's instructions for micromanagement? How forgiving will you be if a DP doesn't make a MM change on schedule?

I think the main goal of this office, and any office in general is getting and keeping the citizens involved. Managing a city isn't that big of a deal, but keeping the citizens active is. This demogame will only be fun if we are with a large group of relatively active citizens. The result of the game is important, but having fun while playing the game is the most important thing.

In my own games, I usually manage my most important cities on the level of individual citizens. Certainly in the beginning of the game when the biggest difference can be made. When I get tens of cities, I tend to become more sloppy in the city management of the less important cities.

Question to the canidate: How will you foster participation within your city?

I think I've answered this question in my platform, I will try to set up activities for the citizens.

Questions for Candidates:

Do you see this position's duties as the type of things that require a lot of citizen input, or things that can be handled without much citizen involvement?

When you play, do you micromanage individual citizens, by policy using the emphasis buttons, or not at all? How would you tend to give DP's instructions for micromanagement? How forgiving will you be if a DP doesn't make a MM change on schedule?

Yes, gameplay would focus on citizen input, as well as a general goal. I would micromanage the citizens by showing where to place the tiles and what to do when the city grows. While the "Emphasize XYZ" is much better in Civ4, I still prefer doing it manually. (I think there's a bug in vanilla where the governor starves the people sometimes if you use certain options).

Also, if the DP makes a mistake, I'm not that PI/CC happy. :p I would find a way to adapt to it, though.


One more point - the other candidate brought up wonders. Early on, the city will not build wonders unless:

1 - We're industrial or have stone, or a combo of both.
2 - A wonder takes less than 5-10 turns (stonehenge, oracle - those are two nice ones).

The reason is that to focus on wonders, you lose focus on building cities, infrastructure, and units to defend yourself.

Question to the canidate: How will you foster participation within your city?

Discussion threads. I'll also make a City thread (harkens to the old demogames) so that people can roleplay inside of the city.

Worker AND a Settler back to back !? How will our city find a chance to grow ?

Not nessecarily back to back. I would give it a chance to grow. It really depends on the situation - like I said, I'd rather see the map first. If we have tons of forests and floodplains/wheat/cattle, for example, I may be more inclined to try the worker/settler gambit. Yes, it is a tactic that may stall you in the short term, but increases your production in the long term as you have an extra city out early. I've seen it work, too.

I would ask for opinions on what the city should be building and possibly introduce votes for buildings/units to be built and act accordingly to them

Due to the nature of this being a forum game, this is FAR too much micromanagement. Do you really want to look through two pages of polls late in the game?

However, cities should focus on certain duties. If a city is high in food, it should be a worker/settler city. If the city has tons of forests or hills, then it should be a production city. If a city has a lot of water (oceans/lakes/rivers), or just plain nothing but grassland, it should be a cottage city producing commerce (by that, I don't meant "Wealth", I mean cottages/villages/towns).

How would you tend to give DP's instructions for micromanagement? How forgiving will you be if a DP doesn't make a MM change on schedule?

If he made a minor mistake, I wouldn't mind that much. However huge screw-ups are unforgiveable. The question now is where the difference lies. Well, I think that micromanaging that is vital to our main goals should be done perfectly. For example getting the first worker out in time with the needed worker techs is important. Or micromanaging so that your CoL slingshot with the Oracle (if we go that route) works out perfectly. Micromanaging errors that only lead to a few hammers or some coins being wasted wouldn't be too bad, but if we have a DP who makes these errors, and a DP who doesn't, then I do know for who I'll vote in the next DP election.

i would like to nominate myself for this position

I self nominate.

Who am I
I was involved with the first game up until the end. I served as Secretary of state, Secretary of War and served as a governor. I have not been active in the formation of this game simply because my interest lies in playing the game not designing rules and constitutions. I have zero interest in "law" only playing and learning new ways of winning at civ. I know I wont get many votes from those who have been around building this ruleset but this is more to show my involvement and desire to make this demo game work.

Goals:
This is our capital. It needs to be the driving force behind our country. Growth early in the game is crucial to help getting out settlers and workers quickly. Depending on the location I would increase food output first to help with the settlers/workers and not chop until we go for a wonder. Often times its not the obvious choice which is the most helpful. Consider a city with multiple sea resources...if it better to build 1 work boat or build a lighthouse which will benefit both sea resources. First build will probably be a warrior but the second build will depend upon our start and which tech path we decide. I am sort of a traditionalist in that I build my worker at pop 2 but occasionally wait if our start is resource weak until size 3. Again it all depends on what we have been given at our start.

Answers to questions:
daveshacks: All manual and changes just about every turn in my games. Probably less so in the demo game simply due to logistics.

civgeneral: City thread and following relevent discussions out side of that thread.



Good luck to my opponents

Wow, this is getting to be a very crowded race. :D

How do you think we should handle our first city placement?

I'm concerned about Chieftess' wonder statement. Although I doubt we even get to think about building the Pyramids first term, what say you if we built the Oracle (Slingshoted to CoL.) You can usually make the Pyramids easy unless you wait a long time, the only thing is you lose a lot of production from your capitol due to it's lengthy build time. The benefit however is CoL produces Caste System which is used with Representation (produced early by Pyramids) to make a Specialist Economy. In the situation that we have oracle, and Pyramids seems like a doable idea, would you waste that large amount of turns of production, to build it? Secondly, if we had stone to halve the production, would you build it? (Please answer, with and without stone.)

This applies to all candidates. If you do not plan to build the oracle altogether, please state so.

I can't say anything about building the Oracle or not.
If we end up with an industrious leader, starting with mysticism and with marble, sure I'd go for the Oracle.
However I general I prefer just building settlers, workers, axes and libraries in the begining. Going for Pyramids and Oracle is just a bit too much in my opinion. Sure, it's strong, but at the same cost you could have built 6 Settlers! Or 15 swordsmen. That's enough to give us an even bigger advantage.

Our city placement all depends on the land around us and our civ's traits. Having a costal capital has always benefited me in the past, but it does leave many tiles left unworked.(damn oceans :D) With me as Elder I would most likely look for floodplains or an aggricultural resource to exploit. Growth is paramount to winning the early game. If none of the above are within distance, than settling amoungst a forest would be best. Once bronze working is achieved, we could pop out settlers, wonders, workers, etc. so quickly it will be mindboggling. Of course, the forest would have to be a grassland forest to better support growth with farms once we cut down the trees.

More questions
The follow up to DaveShacks about DP not following "orders" I would not get upset if it was accidental BUT if it appears to be repeating or a blantant misuse of powers then I MAY be upset. It depends on the severity of the screw up. most things arent that big to be concerned over.

City placement....

Well it depends on whats there. On a river or ocean is great BUT if moving off of a river/ocean gives us a better resource or a more balanced start( hills and food tiles) then I am for moving. HOWEVER...its best to settle within 1 turn. No long journeys.

Wonders...
Depends on the situation, oracle is great if you have the right civ and right start. One of my favorite gambits is to try the Great lighthouse and Collolous double if you have a financial civ and a ocean start. The timing on that one is a bit touchy and almost certainly requires copper to be within the capital or the first city. No copper means you dont get the build bonus and you are left with no metal for defense which means iron becomes a top priority.

Early wonders are great but you have to have a direction to secure them within the first few turns. Civs without mining...need to get mining/masonry first if they plan on going for the pyramids. The prerequisites force you to plan from turn 1 if you want to insure success.

How do you think we should handle our first city placement?

Settle on spot unless there's really something great in the area.

Any desired terrain or resources? We could always have a round of discussion (polls are too long - 4 days).

Any desired terrain or resources? We could always have a round of discussion (polls are too long - 4 days).

What, a custom map? It would be just as hard to find someone to make one.

ay, and too much time i believe

Any desired terrain or resources? We could always have a round of discussion (polls are too long - 4 days).

discussion will also be very long. Nominations should end in about 1 day. then the polls which will last approx 4 days.:sleep: :coffee:

What, a custom map? It would be just as hard to find someone to make one.

No, what I mean is the resources we would like in the starting position. Then we could regenerate until we get them (if someone has the patience to do it). Just a suggestion though...

I'll also answer a few of the important questions people have been throwing around.

City Placement
----------------

I'd prefer the city be built near, or on a river, for the economic benefits. I'd be opposed to the city being built on the sea, unless there were 2-3 sea resources in our fat cross. I'd rather have more land tiles to work. I would not take more than a turn relocating our settler.

Working Tiles
-------------

Early on I'd build a lot of farms to promote early growth, and provide a boost to our settler production. Since the term is short, I'd most likely maintain those farms throughout it and leave replacement of farms with cottages to my successor. I'd leave forests standing for our civilization to enjoy, and worship.

Wonders
---------

I'm confident that wonders won't be a factor during my term, however, I will provide my city with the means to produce wonders in the future.

No, what I mean is the resources we would like in the starting position. Then we could regenerate until we get them (if someone has the patience to do it). Just a suggestion though...

This will require more polls and discussion though.:p

I'll be away Sunday and Monday, so ask your questions now! :p

does the Elder control the allocation of the workers? I was unaware that that position also controlled the improvement of the land.

Nominations are CLOSED!

Link to election poll (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=209071)

-- Ravensfire