Should we playa scenario or play a normal game. If the scenario option wins, then I will make another more detailed poll. Otherwise I will make a poll to decide what map type we want to play on.

As stated in the "what to do next" thread, I'd prefer a normal game, for (selfish :) ) learning purposes.

So would I but its nice to have a poll as some people may vote but not post...

I'll go for normal game too as I've got much to learn on Civ2 and normal maps are challenging enough for me. ;)

One more day and then I'll start some map polls if the Normal option still leads. The options will probably be:
- Custom map
- Islands
- Islands and continents
- Continents

If the total of the last 3 options is greater than the votes for a pre made map then I think we should choose the most popular random option. I'll also start a map size poll.

Normal map, to have the greatest appeal. It is likely that the democracy game is somewhat intimidating to some players, and a normal map would likely have the widest appeal to people over the months of a game.... I do think the level of play should be at Deity, however, as that is a level that many players would like to aspire to... and with a collective effort, anything less than Deity would not be particularly challenging to the Players as a whole. Plus, non-deity players would get to see exactly how and why, etc., Deity can be overcome :).

So use a big, huge map (10,000 cells), normal deity game, 7 civs, raging hordes. The map parameters can be adjusted, of course.

Well I am not going to make a difficulty level poll because it will be a Diety game...

Yep, I say go with a normal game.

I say normal. :cooool:

I voted for a normal game with a sort of teaching approach, leading by example for players who want to know more about Deity techniques, but would remind those that have voted to play a scenario that they should recommend which scenario they'd prefer to play when voting so we have some contenders if we need to vote for which scenario. Good work though Dell! :goodjob:

Well, I went with my first instinct which was that a scenario would be fun and interesting to play.

I tried to think of what was most fun about playing that first democracy game, and I think that it was about the time we started having wars. The building and the city planning were definitely worthwhile, but blowing stuff up and having the strategy sessions were pretty cool.

Also, I thought a secenario would take less time as a whole and allow for a quick start-to-finish - hopefully allowing for victory celebrations followed by new and different scenarios to keep up people's interests.

In any case, I also see the draw for a "normal" game - especially for the purposes of viewing others' styles and picking up a few tips and strategies. I have no problems with either one.

We can always do a scenario game after we finish the next game.

Either would be fine with me. A scenario could really be fun, although I think some of the exploration decisions, the "where to build a city" decisions, and what to research/build next decisions of the early game were quite interesting in a democratic environment.

Originally posted by Leowind
Either would be fine with me. A scenario could really be fun, although I think some of the exploration decisions, the "where to build a city" decisions, and what to research/build next decisions of the early game were quite interesting in a democratic environment.
Agreed! :)
I also liked the beginning when we had to decide where to put cities and where to explore and which islands to settle and that stuff. The end is maybe more spectacular but the beginning is in my opinion quite interesting as well!

Well, it would be easier and simpler to have a normal game since everyone would have an equal starting point. No-one would have any background knowlege on what is going to happen or where the AI units are and which cities trigger events etc.

If we had to go with a scenario then easily the best choice IMHO would be Cross & Cresent by BeBro. But even this relativley open-ended and early technologicaly scenario will greatly tilt the balance in the favour of people who have already played the scen. It is nowhere near as fuun IMHO if we whip the French by turn 11 because we know where all their units are and how the events dictate thier troop movements etc.

So, it has to be a normal game.

Normal game for widest appeal, and all other reasons previously mentioned.

I vote for normal game because I think that the whole development aspect of the game is what appeals to many of us. Many scenarios will not really allow that to the degree of a normal game. A scenario might be too much of a military campaign, which would be entertaining to be sure, but I think that it would not fit the structure of a democratic game as well as a game which encompasses all aspects of Civilization.