Welcome to the Prime Election debate hosted by the Poverty Pub's Guild (drink up!) This debate is not only a place for all the factions to announce their platforms, but also a place for any citizens to ask questions. Although an open debate, this will however be done in a controlled manner. So let's get this thing going, but first a few rules and guidelines.

All factions are able to participate. The first post a faction makes should be the faction's platform as well as any other minimal additional information.

The floor will then be open to all citizens. Any citizen may ask the first question. Each faction must answer the first question before they answer any others. In the event of a faction taking too long to answer a question, the moderator (me or an issued moderator from Poverty's Pub) will post that the faction had been skipped. Then the next question asked will be answered in the same manner. Citizens may ask questions before all factions are done answering, but must realize their questions will be put into the queue, and not answered until the previous question is finished.

Each faction may discuss another factions answer once per question per faction. This is to ensure it does not turn into a war of words that the average citizen gets lost in.

In order to help citizens keep track of the factions' platforms and answers, as well as the current question queue, the next post will be used to post all the information.

Good luck.

Reserved for platforms, question queue and answers.

Please give us some time to get up our platforms :)

Yes, the thread which suggested a debate was intended as a debate on when to hold debates.

To help promote the pub and thank the proprietor for volunteering to host what will be a most important debate,

I propose a :beer: festival while we wait for the factions to be ready. :cooool:

http://thepoliticaltipster.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/040416_mccain_vmed_1p_widec.jpghttp://news.filefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/hillary-clinton.jpghttp://www.obamayouth.com/images/small_obama_image.jpg

O wait, wrong elections...

Nice one, Dutchfire!

BTW, I'll be sipping my Guiness until things get started, then I'll switch over to either Yuengling, Killians, or SamAdams heffewiesen....so many choices...

So I just looked through each of the 4 factions, and we all have 5 members... weird... but cool.

I would say Tribal is getting close to 10, but the remainder is around 5.

Yes, but if you look through the citizen registry, we probably have at least 40 people registered, about 20 affiliated with a faction, and I'm not sure how many are in the guilds.

I'm not sure how many are in the guilds.

0<X<100 :lol:

0<X<100 :lol:

Oi...too bad this is not a team demogame :devil:

@Dutchfire: I can recognize McCain on the first pic, but who is the second? And who has animated those eyes? they're horrible!
Oh, and third pic, nice background graphics... :lol:Oh, and :beer:!

Yes, the thread which suggested a debate was intended as a debate on when to hold debates.

To help promote the pub and thank the proprietor for volunteering to host what will be a most important debate,

I propose a :beer: festival while we wait for the factions to be ready. :cooool:
Sorry about that, didn't even notice the thread when I posted, I've had this in mind for a while now.

Tentative Plans for Shadowed Hand Rule:

If Rashiminos [Darius I (Fin/Org)] is Chief:

I will assume the title of Chieftain Rashiminos the Progenitor.

I will decide to settle the capital based on the availability of production and food, for the rapid output of workers, settlers, and exploratory units.

The second city will be a commerce city if at all possible.

Our initial territory will be used to support a strong espionage program. In accordance with this goal, the espionage slider may be used to maintain a favorable spy ratio with at least one rival, and any excess will be optimally used to gain favorable ratios with other rivals. If we should happen to develop a way to train elite espionage units, we will make extensive use of them in foreign territory.

As a result, pure scientific research will not necessarily proceed at a maximum rate, and religious research won't be a top priority unless a neighbor spreads it to us (where we can then use it to our advantage).

Upon founding of the capital, I will appoint a Reeve to oversee vital record-keeping of the city. The Reeve would be allowed to make suggestions on city resource use and production. Further cities will also be under the record-keeping authority of the Reeve. For each additional city, the Reeve may appoint a subordinate to carry out his duties in that new city. Exceptional service in this regard will result in rewards for the members of the clan involved. Inadequacy will result in loss of position and shame for the families of the failures.

Military and Exploratory units are my purview, and shall remain so for the entirety of my rule. Clan members may volunteer to command individual units for roleplay purposes, and non-member citizens may volunteer to serve under them at their discretion.

For the time being, I intend to control settlers, workers, and non-exploratory workboats.

To make sure my will is done, I will be playing the save as per the core game rules. I will endeavor to play no less than 15 turns a month and no more than 60 turns a month without the consent of all citizens (all citizens can poll to slow the game down or speed it up).

All citizens will be allowed a flexibility in the range of roleplay. I will issue decrees in response.


Views on the other "factions":

Warlords, Tribal, and Philosophers: Too much delegation. They will likely slow us by spending a lot of time deliberating in the early years of our realm. Power must be centralized.

Mysticracy: They insist that we must formalize our religious practices and base our society around it. I feel our hands, heads, and hearts, as well as the occasional club, will be sufficient to the task.

Check this thread. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=265499)

What one calls "delegation", another calls discussing important issues and making big decisions with the faction, not with oneself.

The second does not require the first.

The Tribal Council is not about delegation, we are about a council appointed by the Chief to support the Chief, but in the end our Chief has the final say...it's just in his/her best interest to form a simbiotic relationship with the Council. No Chief can rule effectively without support of the council, but a good Chief rules with wisdom, direction, heart, and strength.

That being said, I think the faction of the Shadowed Hand deserves some gratitude from our community for being the first to make their official election platform publicly known.

The platform is not currently official.

/emote :raises eyebrows:
/emote :studies his ale some more then goes back to contemplating the maelstrom:

That being said, I think the faction of the Shadowed Hand deserves some gratitude from our community for being the first to make their official election platform publicly known.

That's because power is centralized ;) (a.k.a. not talked about with anyone else)

That's because power is centralized ;) (a.k.a. not talked about with anyone else)


That was actually a quite humorous comment Oni :)

That was actually a quite humorous comment Oni :)

Did you read Rashi's post with Tentative Plans for Shadowed Hand rule?

That's because power is centralized ;) (a.k.a. not talked about with anyone else)

If you read the main thread (as you should), you'll note that discussion is allowed, although not formally contructed as a prerequisite to initiate action. I'm saying the time you'll waste discussing will be far worse than the insignificant possibility that a Chief would forego sound advice.

If you read the main thread (as you should), you'll note that discussion is allowed, although not formally contructed as a prerequisite to initiate action. I'm saying the time you'll waste discussing will be far worse than the insignificant possibility that a Chief would forego sound advice.

I disagree about the wasting part, but that's why we have multiple factions :goodjob:

I disagree about the wasting part, but that's why we have multiple factions :goodjob:

We are entitled to our opinion.:assimilate:

We are entitled to our opinion.:assimilate:

For now. :nuke::nuke::nuke:

How many factions are close to posting a platform?

The Philosophers will be done at the latest on Wedensday.

Ya we have just chosen our Followers of the Way, and so each respective one is creating their part of the platform

Most of our platform at the Tribal council is complete, however, due to member time constraints, we have a few key items that are as of yet, undecided. I would put us in line with the Phylosophers in terms of completion.

The Mysticracy faction has some platform ideas, but we have yet to actually put them together, so it may be a little while longer for us.:sad:

The debate shall start on Monday, platforms, although you are encouraged to post them before starting, are not necessary in order to start. (A simple copy and paste of the platforms on each faction's respective thread will do.)

When is the election planned?

See This. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=267885) Strider, DaveShack, Shattered, Provolution, and others are agreeing. It will porbably be Monday or Tuesday.

Considering the elections are going to be so soon, we'll start up the debate now. All factions may now post their platforms. All citizens can enter their questions now too. Remember that questions are answered on a first come first served basis, so you'd better post them soon!

Factions, please look at the rules in this spoiler tag too.
Also, please state your fraction at the bottom or top of every official post you make, for sake of clarity.
Welcome to the Prime Election debate hosted by the Poverty Pub's Guild (drink up!) This debate is not only a place for all the factions to announce their platforms, but also a place for any citizens to ask questions. Although an open debate, this will however be done in a controlled manner. So let's get this thing going, but first a few rules and guidelines.

All factions are able to participate. The first post a faction makes should be the faction's platform as well as any other minimal additional information.

The floor will then be open to all citizens. Any citizen may ask the first question. Each faction must answer the first question before they answer any others. In the event of a faction taking too long to answer a question, the moderator (me or an issued moderator from Poverty's Pub) will post that the faction had been skipped. Then the next question asked will be answered in the same manner. Citizens may ask questions before all factions are done answering, but must realize their questions will be put into the queue, and not answered until the previous question is finished.

Each faction may discuss another factions answer once per question per faction. This is to ensure it does not turn into a war of words that the average citizen gets lost in.

In order to help citizens keep track of the factions' platforms and answers, as well as the current question queue, the next post will be used to post all the information.

Good luck.

Summary:

Tribal Council Faction Platform (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6631880&postcount=43)


Question #1 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6626509&postcount=37)
Tribal Council Answer (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6632629&postcount=44)
Warlord Faction Answer (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6632747&postcount=45)

We just elected our leader, Warlord NZL, and we are not having in our faction platform before friday, as we agreed on in this forum.

If I may be so bold I wish to ask the first question:

I am not affiliated but that does not mean disenfranchised so as a legal citizen I still have my right to ask.

What are these factions going to do about those of us who wish not to join the "established" factions? What are our rights in this great land?

We just elected our leader, Warlord NZL, and we are not having in our faction platform before friday, as we agreed on in this forum.

It's friday, so are the factions ready to post their platforms?

It will still be Friday for another 15 hours here...

My friday ends in 5hrs15mins...

Our platform is done, it just needs some editing.

2 and a half hour left on my friday...

Citizens of Civnation!
On behalf of the Tribal Council Faction, and in the hopes of a prosperous begining to our budding civilization, I humbly present the Election Platform for the Tribal Council. Please review and support the Tribal Council Faction on election day for Prime faction!

Election Platform
Tribal Council Faction
In the Beginning…

Leader head
Huayna Capac (IND/FIN)

Game Goals
Research

This will largely depend on our strategic position. Factors such as our civilization’s starting technologies, nearby resources, terrain, and proximity to other civilizations will have a major impact.
However, our over arching desire is to try and secure one of the three early religions, while also getting bronze working, pottery, and agriculture early on.


Domestic

Our current Domestic strategy is to optomize the strategic situation once it is made known to us.
Our faction will focus on growing our industrial, economic, and technological might while maintaining flexibility to handle our strategic situation.


Exploration

Explore as much of the initial landmass as possible.
Find new sites for additional cities, preferably within reach of resources.
Find new civilizations, to assess our strategic position.


Strength

The best way to win civilization is to be strong enough to control your own destiny. We will strive to make our civilization the most revered civilization in the world.


Start an Ancient Wonder

The choice of wonder will depend on our strategic position in the world.


Flexible diplomacy

Always start on peaceful terms, and then allow necessity to dictate future posture towards other civilizations.


Faction Description
The Tribal council faction is lead by a council of equals with the Chief at its head.

The Chief is chosen by the members of our faction, and represents the wisest voice among us.

In general, the Chief presides over the council, and consults with them, recognizing their position of respect within the faction, but his voice is a command to the rest of the tribe and the members of the council.
The Chief has final authority in all matters, but only a foolish chief ignores the advice of his council.
Chiefs are chosen by the tribe, and may either step aside voluntarily or be pushed aside by a unanimous council vote. An election can also be held at the beginning of every new election cycle should the tribe wish to do so. (Needs to be discussed!!!)


The council is seated by individuals, who have demonstrated their superior quality in the position charged to them by the Chief.

These individuals will be chosen based on merit demonstrated through their deeds and their words, and serve at the will of the Chief.
Council decisions are passed by a simple majority, however, the Chief always has the power to override the council.
A seated council member cannot be removed from the council during a moot (meeting) concerning confidence in the Chief.


Current Council positions:

CHIEF
Seat of the Hammer (Domestic Affairs, workers, infrastructure, cities)
(Future Seat) Seat of the Axe (Military Affairs)
(Future Seat) Seat of the Oracle (Research)
Seat of the Shaman (Research, Religion, and Culture)
Seat of the Falcon (Military, Exploration, Foreign Affairs)


Delegation of authority
Each council member has the right to delegate their function temporarily to another member.

Game Play
Will occur during open chat with Civnation when possible, and to encourage roll-playing of significant events. In order to streamline this roll-playing experience, the Chief will disignate a player, who may be in faction or non-aligned, based on consent of the faction. This would also require a designated surrogate who does not have to be a faction member. The Council will present their plans at the beginning of the chat. The members of the faction, who do not have a seat on the council are still free to make statements in the chat, and we’d urge roll-playing reactions, especially for enhancing the fun of the experience.

Additionally, we’ll allow citizens to “inhabit” cities and to “move” to other cities. Moves would be done before and during game play, but only one move allowed per session. This is just for roll-playing aesthetics. However, this could be a great way to run local politics to try to persuade a council member to get a certain building or unit or improvement accomplished.

Sessions will typically run fluidly until one of the following happens (the list is just an example, and just a pause for RP reasons, but depending on what happens, could result in a true stop for discussions), but be no more than 10 turns long, with a 2-5 day break. The expectation is to complete 50 turns.


Finding a new kind of resource
Meeting a new people
Animal sightings or attacks
Coastline found, if that is novel
Tech finishes
Build finishes




Land Usage
Land is granted by the will of the Chief to his most honorable and deserving subjects/tribe members.
Land may be passed on to another tribe member.
Land may be taken away by the Chief.
What roll land usage will play, other than a signifier of honor within the tribe/faction, in the future, has yet to be determined.

Guiding Principles

Mutual respect between faction members.
Open discussions
Chief consults with the council but has the final say
Only a wise and noble Chief will hold power over the council, and only the worthy may sit at the council.
RP encouraged but not a requirement

That is an excellent question (http://http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6626509&postcount=37), Italianajt, and one I'm sure all independents want answered. As you can see from the Tribal Council Election platform (http://http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6631880&postcount=43), all citizens will have a say. Even though our chief would make the final decisions, a non citizen can be a member of the council or even a designated player should the community deam that their skills warrant such a position. Additionally, we offer up a chance during the turn chats to influence the Tribal Council Faction decisions. You will never be without a voice with the Tribal Council Faction.

Thank you again for your question, and I hope that my response has provided you with the answer you were seaking.

Sincerely,
kw

If I may be so bold I wish to ask the first question:

I am not affiliated but that does not mean disenfranchised so as a legal citizen I still have my right to ask.

What are these factions going to do about those of us who wish not to join the "established" factions? What are our rights in this great land?

Great question. I will answer honestly to that one. As this is a factions game, and the entire idea of this game is to have factions competing for influencing the gameworld, we need to make sure that elected/chosen factions, not a random selection of individuals, decide what we do. However, since this is a forum game, we do not want to exclude independents or the opposition for that matter. The advantage with the Triad Coalition Platform is that we are transparent, you have an idea of predictability on what you are voting for. If we said we are "open" and "flexible" and "democratic", it would be true within the factions themselves and indeed true when it comes to these Faction elections.

I suggest you figure out what core interest do you have in this game. I for example come from the Warlords Faction, but we decided to ally with the Philosophers Legion Faction and the Atlantis Faction, which suggests a triad of Philosophy, Religion and War-mongering, where the Tribal Council is a different type of Faction, as it is highlighting gold and building projects.

I think you rather should consider what traits and the reasoning behind you like best as your first move, then consider what side you want to support.
Choice of leader traits is perhaps the biggest main choice in this election, as you are aware of that. When it comes to the rights of non-affiliated members, there are two ways to handle that. You can decide to join one of the factions and work within the leading factions if you agree on the main policies there, or to join an opposing faction if you dislike the ruling faction in place.

However, the faction system suggests the real influence are within the factions, and whether a faction says that it is open to everyone and so on, you should take that with a grain of salt, as some players communicate better with each other, share certain sentiments and have a prehistory between them. There are also formal and informal power structures, based on other conditions, who posts or not, who is privy to which privileges and responsibilities and so on. It is also a question if you are more interested in the metagame or not, roleplay or not or merely the gameplay.

The best way to influence all of these, is to join a faction, or be affiliated with a faction. If you decide to more or less be an associate non-member of a faction, you may still be considered as an extension of that faction by the other side. So being totally neutral is not always as easy either, as every action or inaction will be weighed in the bigger context by all sides.

I do think that neither faction got more or less democracy, more or less flexibility, more or less structure, more or less transparency, more or less vision and creativity and more or less stimulating and energetic communities.
It boils down to what you like and where you feel you fit in, where you vote, not about factions overbidding each other in terms of claimed libertarian/democratic qualities. So, first I would ask about how each faction platform want to go about the game, then ask for independent rights.

If we said we are "open" and "flexible" and "democratic", it would be true within the factions themselves and indeed true when it comes to these Faction elections.

Ahhh...but the Tribal Council Faction is "...'open'...and 'flexible' and 'democratic'..." and not only in our faction but towards all citizens. We indeed see the tribal council as the earliest form of a democratic government, one where the people select people to govern over or to represent them based on perceived and actual abilities, deeds, and actions. Indeed if you look at our platform (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6631880&postcount=43), you will see that we do not even specify that the Chief nor the position of any council seat, not even our designated player, has to be a faction member. We would choose the best person, based on merit and ability, to include their availability.

I suggest you figure out what core interest do you have in this game. I for example come from the Warlords Faction, but we decided to ally with the Philosophers Legion Faction and the Atlantis Faction, which suggests a triad of Philosophy, Religion and War-mongering, where the Tribal Council is a different type of Faction, as it is highlighting gold and building projects.

Why is it that you believe our leaderhead choice or even the discussion in our faction thread or platform has anything to do with a focus on building projects and gold? Our platform and strategy has everything to do with flexibility. You need money to be flexible, and indeed there are some wonders in this game that can significant increase your chances of winning. Our leaderhead choice had everything to do with choosing from a pool of possible choices, based on the best chance for victory. That's what we are about, flexibility and victory. We are not overly obsessed with rules and control of the people.


I do think that neither faction got more or less democracy, more or less flexibility, more or less structure, more or less transparency, more or less vision and creativity and more or less stimulating and energetic communities.
It boils down to what you like and where you feel you fit in, where you vote, not about factions overbidding each other in terms of claimed libertarian/democratic qualities. So, first I would ask about how each faction platform want to go about the game, then ask for independent rights.

I feel that the differences between our platforms speaks for itself. Clearly, flexible doctrine, coupled with the simplistic organization of terms allows freedom to thrive, and allows diverse personalities to optomize their benefit to the community. Participation is key in a game like this. You do not have to be an active poster, but you simply must engage yourself in the issues of the times in order to get the maximum benefit of fun from this experience. It is true that certain factions place a great deal of reward to their members over non-members (see the Triad platform concerning land-use rules) (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6630856&postcount=1) and then look at ours, from the Tribal Council Faction platform (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6631880&postcount=43)...in fact, it's so short and uncomplicated that I'll just post it here for you, Italianajt, and all other citizens of this budding civilization:
"Land Usage
Land is granted by the will of the Chief to his most honorable and deserving subjects/tribe members.
Land may be passed on to another tribe member.
Land may be taken away by the Chief.
What roll land usage will play, other than a signifier of honor within the tribe/faction, in the future, has yet to be determined.

That's it. Transparency and the path to victory begins with simplicity and the efficient rule of law that guides but does not bind its citizenry.

A couple of questions...

How are each of your factions/ coalitions despotic or otherwise in tune with the perceived need to roleplay governments that are not so democratic, as per the limitations in the game rules?

What allowances, if any, will be made for the new circumstances :bts: in this world as opposed to previous worlds?

Ahhh...but the Tribal Council Faction is "...'open'...and 'flexible' and 'democratic'..." and not only in our faction but towards all citizens. We indeed see the tribal council as the earliest form of a democratic government, one where the people select people to govern over or to represent them based on perceived and actual abilities, deeds, and actions. Indeed if you look at our platform, you will see that we do not even specify that the Chief nor the position of any council seat, not even our designated player, has to be a faction member. We would choose the best person, based on merit and ability, to include their availability.

See, we of the Triad do believe in being "open" and "flexible", but only with the factions we represent. To believe that the Tribal Council offers power to every individual is an empty gesture at best. By participating in the faction election, every faction is really open, flexible and democratic. The choices we make between elections, are the ones we are voting on, and since flexible can mean anything or nothing, "flexible" is nothing but political opportunism, fake as it is. What is this "democracy" you speak of anyways? Our factions have selected their best members to rule them, and that is how it should be. Every member in our group has equal say. If I am correct, the traditional sense of ruling is what destroyed our last world. We need not to dream about fancy ideas of "equality" and "popular rule". We understand that there are those few in the world with a vision, a vision which requires strength and ingenuity of a few, not the masses. The Triad considers itself the best of the world, and we offer invitations to anyone seeking Enlightenment. We do not trade favors, but reward intelligence and idealism.


I feel that the differences between our platforms speaks for itself. Clearly, flexible doctrine, coupled with the simplistic organization of terms allows freedom to thrive, and allows diverse personalities to optomize their benefit to the community. Participation is key in a game like this. You do not have to be an active poster, but you simply must engage yourself in the issues of the times in order to get the maximum benefit of fun from this experience. It is true that certain factions place a great deal of reward to their members over non-members (see the Triad platform concerning land-use rules) and then look at ours, from the Tribal Council Faction platform...in fact, it's so short and uncomplicated that I'll just post it here for you, Italianajt, and all other citizens of this budding civilization:
"Land Usage

* Land is granted by the will of the Chief to his most honorable and deserving subjects/tribe members.
* Land may be passed on to another tribe member.
* Land may be taken away by the Chief.
* What roll land usage will play, other than a signifier of honor within the tribe/faction, in the future, has yet to be determined.

That's it. Transparency and the path to victory begins with simplicity and the efficient rule of law that guides but does not bind its citizenry.


You speak as if the Triad doesn't offer these things. We are the thinkers, warriors, and prophets of the world. We believe that all should be involved, providing their own brand of thought to our way. We definately do not support those who call themselves a faction member by name only. Everyone in our Triad is encouraged to act on ideas, they are not just votes for us.

Yes, it is true we reward those in our faction. Yet, will you not do the same? How would your members feel should you give a position of power to someone who has contributed nothing? We promote the competition of ideas amoung our members, and we reward those who contribute the most. Single-mindedness and hive like behavior will not be found in our factions.

We are neither rule hungry or controlling. To say these things without knowing for yourself is just arrogance. True, we have a more complicated idea system than you have, but we do this because we see simplicity as a fault. We have a vision for the world, and that vision is not simplistic at all. Think of what simple really means. Simple means easy, and easy means boring. We of the Triad offer challenge and excitement, devoid of the black and white posturing of the Tribals. We don't see the world as "simple" nor is it transparent. Though I respect the Tribal Council for offering a comfort zone to the populace, we still find it more pleasing to challenge one another, improving our minds as well as our understanding. I refuse to think that the Triad is "simple", that we are "transparent." We have many minds under our banner, and none of them find the world simple. We advocate difficulty and personal expansion, not the boredom and collectivity that the Tribal Council proposes. This is not simply a matter of words, but that of action. The Philosophers, Warlords, and Atlanteans are three different ideals, yet brought together by our visions of a brighter existence. We still offer membership to all those who want to actually change things, instead of just voting.

Shattered slowly lowers his stance, and procedes to exit the room. The dust in the air never moves as he glides out into the unknown lands.

A couple of questions...

How are each of your factions/ coalitions despotic or otherwise in tune with the perceived need to roleplay governments that are not so democratic, as per the limitations in the game rules?

What allowances, if any, will be made for the new circumstances :bts: in this world as opposed to previous worlds?


1. We have no shame calling ourselves despots. We appoint our leaders internally, away from the eye of the public. We will also control the game as we wish, just as a Despot would. The only democracy we show is our inner faction voting. Those under the Despots faction will have equal say in our policy, but the leader still has final say.

2. As i was only active for a short time in the last game, I do not think i can answer this question. Maybe there is someone within our Coalition that can.

*cough* Our civic is Despotism *cough*

Before I say anything about the debate, I would like people to note that kwarriorpoet is obviously one of the most involved and dedicated people in the demogame. But now I would like to point out the flaws of kwarriorpoet’s case that Tribal Council best represents the wants of the independent voters in this election. I will point out a few items in their platform:
1. The Chief is chosen by the members of our faction: As a voter you only choose the faction, not the leader. The Triad leaders have already been announced, you can question them directly. But the Tribal Council still hasn’t determined who their leader is, and I can assure you that you, as an independent, are not one of the candidates for the leader of the Tribal Council. Power is held in their absolute hands.
2. The Chief has final authority in all matters...and Council decisions are passed by a simple majority, however, the Chief always has the power to override the council. Yes elect a tyrant and give him tyrant powers. That is the true spirit of the independent voter in the eyes of the Tribal Council. They would put you on the council in good faith, to appease the independent voters, only to overturn every decision you make, because it goes against the wants of the tyrant. kwarriorpeot says in his post “We indeed see the tribal council as the earliest form of a democratic government...” A dictator ruling with some semblance of democracy is still a dictator.
3. Land Usage: First of all, according to Tribal Council rules all land is given out by the Chief for loyalty. If you disagree with him on certain matters, you could lose the land. Secondly, The Triad Land Usage ruleset is a PROPOSAL, kwarriorpoet’s post would have you think that what is in the post is decided fact. It is still currently up for debate, that is why on Lord Civius’ post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=268502) there are two proposals, open for discussion by all citizens, especially the independents. Why? Because everyones opinion matters.

Finally, The Triad Coalition wants all citizens to be involved and have a voice in government. As it is stated in the Triad Platform, “We plan frequent polls and threads to discuss national interests.” To answer your question, Italianajt, The Triad Coalition believes in working with independent citizens, in fact the reason I joined the Philosophers of the Legion, was because I had a member reach out to me, as well as others, encouraging us to join. The Triad Coalition understands the power of the independent voter, and values their opinions. Why else would we post our plans for Land Usage and open it up to debate for everybody if we didn’t want to hear your opinions or criticisms of it? We want to create a land system that works for all, regardless of faction membership or lack of faction membership. By all means, I encourage the independent voters to stay independent, and keep this election, and the ones to follow, competitive. But lastly, here is my analysis of the two competing factions. If you want your voice to be heard and matter, vote Triad. If you want your voice to be heard and ignored, vote Tyrant, sorry, I mean Tribal Council.

Lostcause,
Philosopher

From my initial post on Tribal Council, which also happened to be the very first post about a specific faction... :cool:


* Members of the council are chosen by the leader with consensus of the council, and of the tribe.
* The council does not normally interfere with day to day activities, except for dispute resolution, to give general advice, and in times of emergency.
* A good leader and council will usually maintain their position by limiting their use of power to that which is necessary, and by being responsive to the tribe's needs.


What this means:

Your input matters when choosing council members.
The Chief and council won't interfere with your fun. In fact, we'll go out of our way to leave you plenty of time to do whatever you want to do. Take a good look at the "reasons to stop game play" list in the platform.
Being responsive to the tribe's needs means, if you question an action we will listen, and give a respectful, direct response. You'll never see a response like "don't worry all will be revealed in time."
As for who wants to allow polling and who doesn't just take a look at the poll subforum. Same thing for who wants to lock you into a permanent course of action and who wants to grant you flexibility. ;)

From my initial post on Tribal Council, which also happened to be the very first post about a specific faction... :cool:



What this means:

Your input matters when choosing council members.
The Chief and council won't interfere with your fun. In fact, we'll go out of our way to leave you plenty of time to do whatever you want to do. Take a good look at the "reasons to stop game play" list in the platform.
Being responsive to the tribe's needs means, if you question an action we will listen, and give a respectful, direct response. You'll never see a response like "don't worry all will be revealed in time."
As for who wants to allow polling and who doesn't just take a look at the poll subforum. Same thing for who wants to lock you into a permanent course of action and who wants to grant you flexibility. ;)


Well, this is a different demogame than the previous, so you cannot use the same argumentation you used to blemish me last demogame for the famous longbowman story, I did a singular mistake with not listening to two players (don't worry all will be revealed in time), and my in-game point was proven right in the end. I acknowledged that mistake, very much unlike you and a few others that is firmly within the tribal camp, that never did apologize wrongs even when it was obvious and most agreed.

I will respond respectfully if asked in a respectful manner, I can promise that much. I will also respond less respectfully to less respectful comments. I think this is an individual issue Daveshack. For example, I think it is individual, not factional, to solicit for new voters in the citizen registry thread, make 22-3 run off polls and so on, as it is individual to present the "come first gets first" leadership of one faction as much more democratic than a negotiated coalition of three elected faction leaders.

I am not even the leader of Triad, not even our faction, so please do not even consider me as an official.

Triad believes that some continuity should be in place, for example, you should know that we will make 40-60 turns for a term within a month, just to create the basis for setting up new factions, new ideas and so on. This predictability of progression is guaranteed, which means you will not be surprised to see the game come to a grind, or if someone took way too many turns because they got excited. Steady and well-documented progression is a must.

Also, we are not advocating a permanent course of action as the tribals argue a "flexible course of action". Our strategies depend on the civ we get, lie of the land, resource availability, our neighboring civs, village discoveries and the presence of forests. However, we have already researched all leaderhead (Alexander) synergies with all the civilizations in BTS.

I am sorry this has turned out to become a metagame debate, but there is not much roleplay from the tribals camp, and their platform is void of personality and full of generic statements about "flexibility", "openness", "democracy" and so on. Triad got distinct roles, distinct profiles, we are accountable, so when we make a mistake, we are easier to remove than a Zerg-like entity that proclaims they can do it all with flexibility and minimum rules, where Triad is fatalistic, locked, too many rules and so on.

I will just warn new players that there are a few unwritten rules, acted out within this game, that the tribals seem to follow, rules not explicitly stated in order to win more voters, but crypto-rules still in effect. Do not expect it to be YOUR flexibility, YOUR influence or YOUR vision to be enacted in the game, as tribals is firmly into the hands of 3-5 core players, and they may or may not listen to you. There is a reason they want to close out the smaller factions, where Legion took mercy and invited us in (Church of Giruvegan with Strider opened for us).

If you believe in that smaller factions should also run the game, not a generic mass with no true core identity, please vote Triad.

1. The Chief is chosen by the members of our faction: As a voter you only choose the faction, not the leader. The Triad leaders have already been announced, you can question them directly. But the Tribal Council still hasn’t determined who their leader is, and I can assure you that you, as an independent, are not one of the candidates for the leader of the Tribal Council. Power is held in their absolute hands.

We have now, and it is DaveShack. :)


you should know that we will make 40-60 turns for a term within a month, just to create the basis for setting up new factions, new ideas and so on. This predictability of progression is guaranteed, which means you will not be surprised to see the game come to a grind, or if someone took way too many turns because they got excited. Steady and well-documented progression is a must.

From Tribal faction platform

Sessions will typically run fluidly until one of the following happens (the list is just an example, and just a pause for RP reasons, but depending on what happens, could result in a true stop for discussions), but be no more than 10 turns long, with a 2-5 day break. The expectation is to complete 50 turns.

but there is not much roleplay from the tribals camp, and their platform is void of personality and full of generic statements about "flexibility", "openness", "democracy" and so on. Triad got distinct roles, distinct profiles, we are accountable, so when we make a mistake, we are easier to remove than a Zerg-like entity that proclaims they can do it all with flexibility and minimum rules, where Triad is fatalistic, locked, too many rules and so on.

True, we haven't dived into roleplay, but this is because we believe that anyone who wants to set up a roleplay thing, can do within our faction, we are not going to try and direct the roleplay, we will let it drive it's own course.

If you believe in that smaller factions should also run the game, not a generic mass with no true core identity, please vote Triad.

The triad consists of three other factions of similar sizes and the tribal conucil is about a half to two-thirds smaller. :)


I will just warn new players that there are a few unwritten rules, acted out within this game, that the tribals seem to follow, rules not explicitly stated in order to win more voters, but crypto-rules still in effect. Do not expect it to be YOUR flexibility, YOUR influence or YOUR vision to be enacted in the game, as tribals is firmly into the hands of 3-5 core players, and they or may not listen to you. There is a reason they want to close out the smaller factions, where Legion took mercy and invited us in

Why would we do that. I dont see where you get this idea of them controlling the game, you seem to think that several players on this game want to shut everyone out. If that was the case then they could play a succession game between themselves, or even stick to playing civ 4 on their own. Sure some deicisons haven't gone the way you like, some haven't gone the way i would have liked, but that incident with the difficulty was justified as new information came to light and alot of us wanted a higher level. If we wanted to declare war on civ A but civ B declare war just as the poll is entering the final days and it would be unwise to fight both of them, surely you would want a repoll because the situation has changed.

the famous longbowman story, I did a singular mistake with not listening to two players (don't worry all will be revealed in time), and my in-game point was proven right in the end. I acknowledged that mistake, very much unlike you and a few others that is firmly within the tribal camp, that never did apologize wrongs even when it was obvious and most agreed.

Please can we drop this, we all came out of that quite badly. :)

If you believe in that smaller factions should also run the game, not a generic mass with no true core identity, please vote Triad.

It would appear you gave up the benefit of your "small" faction status when you made the Coalition. I think your words that you used for the Tribal Council in this statement could also be used for the Triads with the same or better appropriateness...

I respect everyone here. And part of the reason why I speak so frequently here is that the community is so active...so responsive...so engaging. I wish I had stumbled into your earlier demogames. This concept is still very new to me as it is I'm sure for many of the non-faction members. It is true than there are a few in this forum, who are more vocal than others, but their words are shaped from no doubt hours of private consultations and their own readings from other posters. We have all listened to you, the voter, and we have all listened to each other...it is all part of the natural evolution of relationships. But to say that one side is trying to shut out another side or attempting to control the game is just preposterous and smacks of an insult born out of a grudge that should have died long ago in the fires of forgiveness. Unfortunately, this sentiment has festered in a pool of paranoia and insecurity, it has not been allowed the salve of understanding that it needs. Indeed, it has infected the minds and hearts of others...

Provo...who's being negative and trying to control the metagame again? Who constantly brings up the past? Who constantly tries to goat the public with their fearmongering about manipulation, excessive re-polling, etc...? Surely you cannot be talking about anyone in the Tribal Council. We have been ameliorating, and in fact has expended much effort in trying to include the voices of others, who for what ever reason were not as vocal or were perhaps very new to the game. Indeed, it was I, who have admitted my earlier mystakes...I, who never played a demogame before. It was I, who tried to rectify those situations...sometimes for the better and sometimes not so much so...but it is I, a loud voice here, I admit, who also had a great influence in the developments leading up to this ellection, and the Tribal Council platform, which was born from the seed of DaveShack's initial concept and framework, which I fell in love with, and then later expanded on and formalized with the consent of the majority of our faction. We have bent over backwards to get the ideas of our members and some even outside of our faction included in our processes.

I am not the brightest star here by a long shot, and I humbly admit my failures...can you? Part of admitting to a failure is seaking wisdom to repair the damage to become better. The triad approaches the non-faction members as if the Triad have "all of the answers". How can the Triad be so sure? The Tribal Council approaches the non-faction members with an outline, a structure within which all citizens can participate, and share in the development and evolution.

The Tribal Council, is a Despotism, but a Charismatic one still, that does listen to the people, who have entrusted their lives in the government. We chose our Chief based on who the people in our faction felt would be most wise amongst us, most even keeled, and most easily understood. He can say in a couple short paragraphs what might otherwise take me a full page to relay. He listens...he considers carefully...he is not so brash as I and not so willing to throw himself into the fray until he has considered who's involved and what's at stake.

I am under no man/no woman's sway. I rule myself, but they say that the greatest wisdom one can have is knowing when to listen. In fact, most of what I do and say here in this forum is based on what I hear and read and witness. I take it all in, digest the nuances and flows of power and communication, sensing the desires of the citizens and then construct my phrases here to ensure my own understanding at times, but to also attempt to keep things moving forward.

If working toward the better good of all is crewl and injust...if that is what an enemy of the people would do...if shying away from the strictures of excessive laws and regulations prior to allowing the developments in our world to influence the evolution of our nation and its relationship to its people and the land...If that is what an enemy of the common good wood do, then I have missed my point entirely, and throw myself apon the mercy of the people. May they be more merciful than some who have spoken equally as loud.

2. The Chief has final authority in all matters...and Council decisions are passed by a simple majority, however, the Chief always has the power to override the council. ...They would put you on the council in good faith, to appease the independent voters, only to overturn every decision you make...kwarriorpeot says in his post “We indeed see the tribal council as the earliest form of a democratic government...”...

The following is taken directly from our platform, found here: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=268446)

Faction Description
The Tribal council faction is lead by a council of equals with the Chief at its head.

The Chief is chosen by the members of our faction, and represents the wisest voice among us.

In general, the Chief presides over the council, and consults with them, recognizing their position of respect within the faction, but his voice is a command to the rest of the tribe and the members of the council.
The Chief has final authority in all matters, but only a foolish chief ignores the advice of his council.
Chiefs are chosen by the tribe, and may either step aside voluntarily or be pushed aside by a unanimous council vote. An election can also be held at the beginning of every new election cycle should the tribe wish to do so.


The council is seated by individuals, who have demonstrated their superior quality in the position charged to them by the Chief.

These individuals will be chosen based on merit demonstrated through their deeds and their words, and serve at the will of the Chief.
Council decisions are passed by a simple majority, however, the Chief always has the power to override the council.
A seated council member cannot be removed from the council during a moot (meeting) concerning confidence in the Chief.


Only a foolish Chief, a Chief unfit to rule, ignores the will of the people. We ignore no one. Speak your mind and you will be heard.

I'm not big in talking diplomacy or persuading independants to vote one way or another, but if we're talking about getting opportunities in Factions I only have one simple argument:

Look at the date I joined this forum, look at my post count, and know that I made it to Leader of the Warlord Faction [one of the Triad coalition partners].

I rest my case.

So you are suggesting the Tribal Council got an "unfoolish Chief", whereas Triad Coalition got a "foolish Chief"? Do you really think it is that simple?

Do you really think we ignore people and Tribal Council do not? Do you really think it is that simple?

You want to rule, which is a want, but not necessarily a law of nature. This is an election where both sides got some good aspects and bad aspects, depending on interests, which is why the two sides got a support base, but utterly denying the other side status by branding it as "foolish", "ignoring", "undemocratic", unflexible", "over-complicated" and "closed" is too cheap. Of course we are closed to non-members, but all members can attest that due process has been followed.

If I was half as sinister as you suggest KWP, I would be leader not NZL, and be assured he got his own mind, as he votes what he wants. Yet, we share a common sentiment, which is why he is in the Warlords Faction, not Tribal Council. Denying us that sentiment I find at best mildly authoritarian, and not consistent with what Tribal Council claims to be.

I'm not big in talking diplomacy or persuading independants to vote one way or another, but if we're talking about getting opportunities in Factions I only have one simple argument:

Look at the date I joined this forum, look at my post count, and know that I made it to Leader of the Warlord Faction [one of the Triad coalition partners].

I rest my case.


NZL is our faction leader (Warlords Faction) with a postcount of 17, which suggests we are less elitist than the Tribal council, which remains a stronghold for demogame veterans. Shattered, Coalition Faction Leader, is also a new player.

Triad represents a much needed renewal to the demogame genre, whereas Tribal is more of the old.

So you are suggesting the Tribal Council got an "unfoolish Chief", whereas Triad Coalition got a "foolish Chief"? Do you really think it is that simple?

Do you really think we ignore people and Tribal Council do not? Do you really think it is that simple?

If I was half as sinister as you suggest KWP, I would be leader not NZL, and be assured he got his own mind, as he votes what he wants. Yet, we share a common sentiment, which is why he is in the Warlords Faction, not Tribal Council. Denying us that sentiment I find at best mildly authoritarian, and not consistent with what Tribal Council claims to be.

I never suggested that you were synister, nor foolish, nor even the chief of the Triad. I was only stating a common point of truth. I was simply defending our actions and words. However, as you state, nothing is ever simple.

As for newness to the demogame and one faction having more knowledgible or more seasoned individuals and another faction having less seasoned individuals or people who may simply just be newer to the metagame process and demogames in general...consider this: I am also new, and yet, I appear to be one of the most outspoken proponents of this demogame and its principles. I do not "want to rule" as you say. In fact, I have recommended others before myself, as can be varified by looking at the Tribal Council thread. I submit that I have more availability during the day than many to enjoy these forums, but there will come a time when I may not be seen here for days at a time, due to changing work and R/L requirements, but I will still strive to be as outspoken of my appreciation for the concept and the community here.

Furthermore, this comment:

Only a foolish Chief, a Chief unfit to rule, ignores the will of the people. We ignore no one. Speak your mind and you will be heard. Was in reference to the bolded text of the same thread in which it originally appeared (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6642332&postcount=57), concerning how the council can overthrow the chief.

I think its fair to point out just because our faction has "new" blood, meaning new to demo games, that doesn't mean we don't have civ skills. Our coalition is full of really good civ players, in my humble opinion that is very important. All this metagame stuff is fun, but we make it up.

The coalition is neither unready or too unexpierenced to lead our nation to greatness. I think this fear mongering and dirty tactics displayed by tribal, shows fear, and tells the voter that tribal wants the voter to vote for them because they are not coalition. The people of this game are too smart for that.

If you want your voice to be heard and matter, vote Triad. If you want your voice to be heard and ignored, vote Tyrant, sorry, I mean Tribal Council.


: Fear Mongering/ Dirty Tactics?


I acknowledged that mistake, very much unlike you and a few others that is firmly within the tribal camp, that never did apologize wrongs even when it was obvious and most agreed.

: Fear Mongering/ Dirty Tactics?

but there is not much roleplay from the tribals camp, and their platform is void of personality and full of generic statements about "flexibility", "openness", "democracy" and so on.

: Fear Mongering/ Dirty Tactics?

we are easier to remove than a Zerg-like entity that proclaims they can do it all with flexibility and minimum rules, where Triad is fatalistic, locked, too many rules and so on.

: Fear Mongering/ Dirty Tactics?

I will just warn new players that there are a few unwritten rules, acted out within this game, that the tribals seem to follow, rules not explicitly stated in order to win more voters, but crypto-rules still in effect. Do not expect it to be YOUR flexibility, YOUR influence or YOUR vision to be enacted in the game, as tribals is firmly into the hands of 3-5 core players, and they may or may not listen to you. There is a reason they want to close out the smaller factions

: FM/DT? (getting lazier here)


If you believe in that smaller factions should also run the game, not a generic mass with no true core identity, please vote Triad.

: FM/DT?

Triad represents a much needed renewal to the demogame genre, whereas Tribal is more of the old.

: FM/DT?

@Ballazic, I'm not so sure you need to be taking the supposed high ground of the Triads not resorting to certain tactics which you have labeled a certain way.

All of the the questions about the quotes being examples of fear mongering and/or dirty tactics are meant rhetorically, but you can answer them at your leisure.

Let's move on to another question. The current question is on how "democratic" the factions are, I'm also interested in a similar but different aspect of this.

My question (as a citizen) is on the apparent dichotomy of role players vs non-role players, where there appear to be more role players in the Triad than in the Tribal Council, both on a percentage basis and in raw numbers. I make no secret of the fact that I don't produce a lot of RP material. This is mostly a factor of time -- the amount of time it would take me to produce a story that I'd be proud of is far too prohibitive for my RL time constraints.

Q: What specifically will your faction (coalition) do to ensure that both role players and people who can't or don't want to role play have equal access to direct participation in the democracy game?

==============================
I yield to Triad and reserve the balance of my time.

Again, i'm not big on diplo talk, just quoting here..

Answer on DaveShack:

1. For the gameplay-players:
This is quoted from the Triad Faction Platform.
...We plan frequent polls and threads to discuss national interests...

2. For the roleplay-players:
This is quoted from DaveShack's post right above mine
...where there appear to be more role players in the Triad than in the Tribal Council, both on a percentage basis and in raw numbers...

And therefore more people to create and lobby for role player's interests. :D

How would both factions react to outside organizations who wish to take part in political matters without being part of either faction?

For instance, I've considered creating either a merchants guild, church based on whatever religion we get, lobbying party, or some other interesting group that isn't already covered by another player. This group would maintain their neutrality and work with whatever government was in power at that time. Would the factions listen to such a group?

I'm fairly positive of the Tribal Council's answer, so my question is more towards the Triad.

Off-Topic: Even though I'm a member of a faction, do the rules allow me to create a separate group that is neutral?

@Methos - yup! See the Pub ..

-- Ravensfire

Question to the Triad: How are the disputes between your three subfactions going to be resolved?

Interesting -- Triad plans frequent polls? Reducing the number of polls and increasing the role of the leaders was one of the core beliefs which led us to a faction ruleset to begin with. Acting despotic was one of the core beliefs which led us to a civics based faction system. Yet when faced with an election challenge, polls, which were going to be rare, will now be frequent?

Tribal Council has always said that input from the people matters. It's not a new thing for us. :) Whether it comes by discussion or polling depends on how things go.

Still, whether discussions and polls are frequent or not is not the question being asked. The question is, how will the roleplay vs non-roleplay division be handled.

Tribal Council will take specific, measurable steps to ensure that roleplay needs are covered. We plan to adjust the timing of gameplay to facilitate roleplay, and the needs of roleplay will factor into in-game decisions.

The opposite can not be said of roleplay enthusiasts with respect to gameplay. Some roleplay enthusiasts have even suggested playing the :bts: game in a way which will lead to poor in-game results. A strong well-played game is anathema to some, who think success in-game means the "civ pros" had too much influence. On the contrary, playing well means the underlying game is a stable foundation on which to base an economy, stories, and any other roleplay that comes to mind. At the very beginning of the discussions for this game a question was asked -- play a roleplay game or a civ game. When roleplay had a strong showing, the next question was whether we should have two games, one for roleplay and one for civ. The civ players chose to come here and have one game.

Tribal Council offers a game where role players have complete freedom to take their roles anywhere they want to go, and game players can still do what they do best. It will be a game where the 1st term builds a strong foundation, but guided in the direction our citizens want to go. We'll make the most of whatever situation we find ourselves in, so that later when we choose to take a risk for story's sake it isn't risking a humiliating defeat.

Methos: We encourage any and all members to join, or start a guild. Faction membership matters not when it comes to guild members. If your guild has good ideas, not taken by another guild, you will have the Triad's full support in both RP and governmental involvement. It all depends on how involved the guild will want to be. If they want to be a mainline guild, such as a merchant guild, or any guild involving heavy RP, you will not only have the Triad's support, but also my own personal support, as this is what I see the game is lacking as of now. Guilds promote ideas and fun roleplaying, and should be kept separate from the metagaming of the factions. We want to encourage out of faction interaction and roleplay, as faction talk can be kind of static, as we have seen here. Know that under Triad leadership, we already have plans for an economic system, a land grant system, and many other RP elements that guilds will be apart of.

KWP: We have the Chamber of the Triad for that. Any matters that are not resolved through inter-faction talks are taken to the Chamber of the Triad, which consists of the three faction leaders, Me, NZL, and Strider. It is here that all disputes, (not involving courts or laws) will be settled. Nuff said.

we already have plans for an economic system, a land grant system, and many other RP elements that guilds will be apart of.

Plans which could (and almost certainly would) be used by Tribal Council if we are chosen. No sense in letting good ideas go to waste. :)

BTW have we mentioned local politics? The Tribal Council approach to this is to have each citizen designate their location, either in a city or with a unit. The people connected with a decision should have greater say in the course of action we take, and should reap greater rewards in roleplaying benefits from those actions.

Still, whether discussions and polls are frequent or not is not the question being asked. The question is, how will the roleplay vs non-roleplay division be handled.

Tribal Council offers a game where role players have complete freedom to take their roles anywhere they want to go, and game players can still do what they do best. It will be a game where the 1st term builds a strong foundation, but guided in the direction our citizens want to go. We'll make the most of whatever situation we find ourselves in, so that later when we choose to take a risk for story's sake it isn't risking a humiliating defeat.

You have me here DS, as I wholly choose RP over civ playing. We want people to RP. We want people to think outside the box, create new atmospheres, and have the freedom to do so whenever they want. Metagame can be fun, but when it comes down to it, this is a forum game, not a single player civ game. We want RP to be the main factor that powers the civ game, not strategies and metagaming. The Triad plans to make our government, and RP, a symbiotic relationship. More decisions will be made in character than OOC, and this doesnt mean we strive for a poorly played game. In fact, its quite the opposite. We will play the civ game in character, and why would we want to cause the downfall of ourselves? In our coalition, no one will be put down for making a bad civilization gaming decision. We want all people in out factions, RP or not, to have a say in the world. Yet, you can be rest assured, our leaders and top players will RP.

BTW have we mentioned local politics? The Tribal Council approach to this is to have each citizen designate their location, either in a city or with a unit. The people connected with a decision should have greater say in the course of action we take, and should reap greater rewards in roleplaying benefits from those actions.

Copying of our ideas is the main reason we have separate factions, so that we will be measured to lead on our own ideas. It is fine you have adapted your decision to be slightly different from ours, but in essence, its the same idea we have.

Onto other things. The Triad seeks to make this demo-game feel like you are living in a breathing world, and not just playing a game. This, we feel, is what separates us from the Tribals.

Let's add another question to the queue...

However, we have already researched all leaderhead (Alexander) synergies with all the civilizations in BTS.


Since you brought up the topic...
How would the "leaderhead synergies" of Alexander compare versus Huayna Capac for each and every civ?

I would prefer we had sectorial debates, to divide metagame from in-game issues. Note, I already posted an in-character thread for a debate on leaderhead choice, no one even cared to respond.

I would prefer we had sectorial debates, to divide metagame from in-game issues. Note, I already posted an in-character thread for a debate on leaderhead choice, no one even cared to respond.

The question has been copied to that thread, continue your answer there if you want.

I leave that to Shattered and Daveshack for now.

On local government...

Copying of our ideas is the main reason we have separate factions, so that we will be measured to lead on our own ideas. It is fine you have adapted your decision to be slightly different from ours, but in essence, its the same idea we have.


Ahem, I refer you to this post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6081905&postcount=19)from October 2007, and subsequent discussion, where I started putting some flesh on an idea started by grant2004 (note giving credit to the 1st person to post on that idea chain). Of course, character stats and locality of events are nothing new in the gaming world, they have been around as long as RPGs. Nor is the idea of local government in CFC DemoGames. What is different is a commitment to actually do it, here in this game.

As the pub door opens, a giant of a man enters, stooping to clear the doorway. As he straightened up you see a weathered face, long disheveled hair, and clothes made from animal hide. At his side is a large ornate knife made of bone. It’s obvious the weapon has seen much use.

“People of this city, let me introduce myself. I am Timus the Protector. I offer you my services as Chief to this city. “

He looks around the crowd. “My tribe has wandered these lands for many generations, but recently under the rule of my father my tribe was slaughtered. Few of us survived and few of us maintained our freedom. I know what it means to lead. These lands are dangerous and I promise you I will keep you safe, for so long as I breathe. I maintain that I will seek to grow this city during my reign. That is my promise to you.”

"Finally Timus, said the Warrior Monarr, you have come out of that herd of peasants to step forward like a man. No need to run around in the skirts of the women, when you can step up to the challenge like a true Master. I would like to show you into the two religions of the realm, there is one with many gods, the Church of Giruvegan, a full family of gods, and if you are more into secluded contemplation, there is the Monks of Magma. There are various lores my friend."