Civ IV Demogame IV - Starting the Game

A link has been placed in my signature. I encourage others to do so as well.

Glad to see this idea isn't completely dead.

count me in. I love the idea about land ownership. I played a Demogame a year ago. You know I was appointed cartographer. The game was so paralyzed with polls on everything I couldnt even name a Lake on the map without a poll on that. I mean c'mon i'm the cartographer of her majesty! I'm not talking about a city but a Lake which they dont even have a name in game. So i left and also quit playing Civ 4 because I bought an X-box but know i started playing Civ again because I bought some memory...

also i'd start the game anyway. i'm guessing people will join once it started. i dont care if we are 5 to start this anyway the beginning is a bit dull

Thought I'd check in, glad to see alot of interest the past few months. I'm in whenever you decide to get started.

I am ready to get started. I've PMed Thunderfall for separate forums, I'm just waiting for him to get back to me.

Good hopefully we can start getting discussions going on the details. So are we going with the orthodox demogame (President, representatives and judicial)? Any structure is fine with me but you know I favor the unorthodox. I have also opened a discussion for the RP.

Maybe we could come up with a new structure...

I don't particularly like Orthodox, and we don't have too many people to do factions (and that was a mega disaster), so I am in favor of coming up with one.

Any suggestions Civplayah? I particularly like the Monarchy structure with King or Queen at the top with regional governors. The Monarch can then appoint volunteers for government positions and we can cut down on massive elections. Governors could be chosen at the settler phase and those that choose to leave the Capital with the settler could be a part of that cities' placement decision and then its local government. The power structure could depend on our government civic granting the King a great deal of power during despotism/Hereditary/police state and very little power during representation/universal suffrage. However he/she would never hold absolute power as this goes against the very idea of a democracy game.

I do like that idea. I haven't really come up with an idea yet, but I just want something stable so it doesn't fall apart like the last one did (after the Triad was taken out of power).

I agree as long as a system works I'm all for it. The faction system creates a little too much conflict and has the potential to sink a game. We don't have to go with the Monarchy style I was just throwing out an idea we can consider. I think anyone who has an idea should bring it up and lets come up with a good, simple and fun Dgame.

So far we have a few ideas in this thread so far.

• The standard Dgame with President, a representative body, and a judicial body. Along with multiple cabinet positions and city mayors/governors.
• Fgame, a feudal style government that is taylored around land-ownership and building armies.
• Mgame, Monarchy structure with King or Queen at the top with regional governors that control their cities.
• Social Structure System along the Dgame model but with a more complex Government body.
• A combining of Athens Democracy and the Roman Republic with 2 Presidents and a new twist that one citizen is exiled each term.
• Ogame, an oligarchic council that starts small, ruling as an or with more limited positions and expand as demand and player involvement expands.

While we begin this discussion I'll PM those that said they want in.

civplayah said:

Maybe we could come up with a new structure...

I don't particularly like Orthodox, and we don't have too many people to do factions (and that was a mega disaster), so I am in favor of coming up with one.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say MEGA..... more like GREAT!


I am definatly interested in the new Demo game. Although I did quite enjoy last year when we would RP the different government changes.

My vote is fo an MFDSOgame, were we would take some areas from the previous options stated.

Vandal good to have you in on the discussion. So are you talking about merging the systems by taking the things that work out of each one or change the government system as it changes in-game?

If we have an MFDSOgame, the government could work like this:

1. King/Queen
2. Presidents
3. oligarchic council
4. Lords (owners of land)
5. Everyone else.

This allows for a lot of people to be involved in government, while not being overly complicated.

If we don't go with this, let's have it be an OGame.

civplayah said:

If we have an MFDSOgame, the government could work like this:

1. King/Queen
2. Presidents
3. oligarchic council
4. Lords (owners of land)
5. Everyone else.

This allows for a lot of people to be involved in government, while not being overly complicated.

If we don't go with this, let's have it be an OGame.

Click to expand...

Could you explain the Ogame? I like the idea and would like to see how it would be structured. As for an MFDSOgame that just sounds compicated. I do like the idea of a representative council and a President or Monarch as our civs leader. I don't see how the Presidents would fit in though. Perhaps replace presidents with Governors that would oversee cities. I am also a little sketchy about land-ownership unless we made it very simple.

So, if it's just an OGame, then the King/Queen/President(s) would have a panel of advisors, such as:
Foreign Relations
Governors
Espionage
Technology
Religion/Culture
Armed Forces

Each of these committees would have one person to begin with, then maybe later on, the committee can grow. The President(s)/King/Queen would listen to their advisors and then play a TS (that's Turn Sessions for the noobs). Simple, and everyone who wants to be involved can.

I am most interested in the Fstyle game... How does that one work?

Now, having never done this before, I could be talking out my ass and this could be a terrible idea, but it seems to me an interesting idea would be to structure the player government after the in-game civics that we are using. So early on, we can have a Despotic/Strongman at the helm, delegating nearly absolute authority to city-governors/military-leaders who would control their respective fiefs, (and also allows the game to start with a few players) but as we graduated to more sophistocated civics, set up more participatory roles. Or has this been tried and proven to be disastrous?

Sommerswerd said:

I am most interested in the Fstyle game... How does that one work?

Click to expand...

The F-Game is more of a game of competition than running the empire as a team. It is a Feudal style government where players own land (tiles) and try to expand their territory through military or peaceful expansion. Each tile has 3 values; gold, food and hammers. Gold of course increases your coffers, hammers dictate your military production and food is used to feed your growing army. Each round players can bid on unowned tiles for purchase and or attack a neighbors tile in hopes of a glorious victory and retain the tile by force. Alliances are made and military pacts are binding. While all this is going on there is still a government to be run. It is far more complex than a normal Dgame so I don't have the will to explain the whole game now but that is the basics. It takes dedicated players along with a Game Manager. It is my personal favorite but I'm afraid it would not get the participation it needs.

StormD said:

Now, having never done this before, I could be talking out my ass and this could be a terrible idea, but it seems to me an interesting idea would be to structure the player government after the in-game civics that we are using. So early on, we can have a Despotic/Strongman at the helm, delegating nearly absolute authority to city-governors/military-leaders who would control their respective fiefs, (and also allows the game to start with a few players) but as we graduated to more sophistocated civics, set up more participatory roles. Or has this been tried and proven to be disastrous?

Click to expand...

I have brought this style up in previous Dgames and it didn't get much traction. The big problem is the absolute authority, this is a team game after all. Now following the civics in game has been used in a few games and works out good, especially the Role-play aspect. Keep up the good ideas StormD

I"ll join but in a more passive role as this is my first demo game and I am happy with a small role.

Definitely still interested in this. I don't care which kind we go with as they all look fun.