Team MERLOT

I am reposting this comment from the 'concept' poll thread.

I am very interested in the concept and am considering joining the team.

I have two questions:

1) How would the Monarchy concept work if the overall teams vote for the, two civ per team, scenario?

2) I have concerns about the restrictions on the post of Administrator: a) not being able to be King. I appreciate that Ash88 has volunteered for the role but that takes a key team member (and founder) out of the court. Perhaps we could have a Magna Carta or a rule that the King chooses an Administrator for the duration of his/her reign on a fixed term of office.
 
From how I understood the consept answer to your first question is simple. It works just like the King wants it to work. If he/she so wishes the Sovereign could manage everything despotically alone, or for example set up a feudal system of sorts with regents/dukes/whatnots managing individually the civilizations and the King pulling the strings at the top of the ladder.

The second question is trickier and I have to admit I have some concerns about this as well. It's not nice to have a very active member of the team to not being able to fully participate the game. On the other hand the reason monarchy needs administrator at all is that there is still an option of overthrowing the king or king going AWOL. Having administration tied closely to reigning king would kind of throw any impartiality out of the window. I suggest that taking turns at being administrator might be the best solution. However I think reigning king should not be made administrator just because its his/her turn. My opinion is that only way to get rid of the king is to select a new one and not by some game mechanics issue kicking in.

These are just my opinions on the matter and do not represent official stand of the kingdom or his majesty in any way. Long live the King!
 

General Update / FAQ / Blog / Whichever​



Recommended Listening while you read: 1
​

Greetings from Random Beach off the Shores of our Mighty Kingdom. As his Majesty told me many have embraced their noble roots in such a short time and his Majesty expects that trend to continue. As his acting Chamberlain he has permitted me but a moments leave to discuss some matters of state. He would address you himself but he is attending to a matter of the utmost urgency, as pictured above.

Hercules90 said:
How would the Monarchy concept work if the overall teams vote for the, two civ per team, scenario?
Click to expand...
Aivoturso got the spirit of what I was thinking on this one. From the pages of history I see that King Henry the VIII of England (from the House of Tudor) was also King of Ireland, and claimant to the Kingdom of France. How much greater will the achievements of our glorious King be who comes from the nobility of House of Merlot?

Personally I voted No on this Poll because although it works it doesn't work as well with our structure. It means a lot more beauracracy and a lot more things to manage in our inaugural run. I wouldn't go so far as to dictate that everyone in the House of Merlot vote No (I'm not King afterall!), but think it through within our structure and vote as your concious dictates remembering that the more complex the structure the more difficult our task overall. Although all things are possible we want to stack the deck in our favour during our first run.

Hercules90 said:
I have concerns about the restrictions on the post of Administrator: a) not being able to be King. Perhaps we could have a Magna Carta or a rule that the King chooses an Administrator for the duration of his/her reign on a fixed term of office.
Click to expand...
The reason that the Administrator and King are completely detached is for the protection of the membership. One day, maybe this game maybe next game, I will step down as Administrator and I want to leave behind a structure that is self-sustaining and accountable to the membership. What I don't want to see happen is a power lock where an Administrator and King become friends and help each other out, even just a little bit. Sometimes good people help each other out just a little bit quietly without realizing that it hurts other people just a little bit. The idea about the seperation between Administrator and King is that anything that they have to say to each other should be able to be said in Public.

Right now I am filling the roles of "Administrator" and "Founder."
Anyone reading the first post in this thread can appreciate that "Founding" the House of Merlot is a lot of work. During the first bit of the game I hope to finish up the "Founder" bits and launch the House of Merlot with all of the regal pomp and circumstance that a noble house deserves so that you can have fun playing in it. Part of that will involve formalizing the institutions and ceremonies that will become the traditions of our noble house (like the wording of calling for ballots and the whole process around it). The Administrator bit, which can be summed up in the phrase, "making sure everyone who is in the House of Merlot respects those institutions, the monarchy and the establishment," will carry on from there (like making sure people send the ballots correctly, for example).

I hope to continue on in this role for a while into the game as I create the feel, and the regal charters around the House of Merlot which we will be able to use going forward in the games, as well as to make certain that no one slips in to "Democracy" mode - which people tend to like to do - during our formative time... dirty evil Democracy, like a plague, slips in to ones perfectly good total Monarchy! We must resist the evil and let our King prevail!

Lastly, I have no aspirations to be King at this time so the fact that I cannot be King is inconsequential. :) Furthermore, just because I am the most visible person currently does not necessarily make me a good King.

Hercules90 said:
I appreciate that Ash88 has volunteered for the role but that takes a key team member (and founder) out of the court.
Click to expand...
Most importantly, I want to clarify that the Administrator is not out of the Court. As per the first post the Administrator can advise the King in public, give advice to the King in public, speak to the King in Public, etc. The Administrator, if he doesn't like the King, can encourage another to become King and solicit support for that candidate. He can speak to that person in private right up to the moment he is crowned King at the coronation ceremony. The Administrator has a very short list of things he can't do! It is important for all future Administrators to know they are still an important part of the game - otherwise it would be too limiting a role. Check back in the first post to see what the limitations are.

If one can't be King why be in the House of Merlot?
This Question applies to me as Administrator directly as well. The truth is I don't see "King" as the end-all-and-be-all. In fact, some Kings may have to promise so much to so many people that they in essence become figureheads of the nobility (kind of sounds like real life doesn't it?) On the other hand, some Kings may be so overwhelmingly skilled at leadership (or, in our case, Civ4) that the nobility wants them in power at the cost of their own personal gain so that the power of the Kingdom expands. The ebb and flow and political maneuvering of this game, whether we have 1 King through the entire game or a different King every single ballot vote (neither which seems likely to me) is what interests me. The fact is that each noble is involved much more then a "vote" in a poll. Your voice is influential! Embrace your noble blood!

The House of Merlot is a great team if:
  • You are an egomaniac that wants everyone to finally realize how entirely great you are. (Something Something Something Dark Side)
  • You are a maniacal genius who cares nothing for public noteriaty, you want to control the monarch like a puppet.
  • You play on Diety level on huge maps using OCC and win before 500AD regularly (yawn), and adding some live internal politics may make this fun again (if people have the sense to listen to you - the noobs!)
  • You are busy irl and have no idea how much time you will have to play but would be interested in collabarating on some strats.
  • You kind of suck, or maybe you aren't as good as you want to be. Listening in to some multiplayer strat talk may forklift your game big time.
  • You have never played a team game and you want to see how it works - - without any responsibility. Hopefully if you stand in a dark corner and don't make any noise no one will talk to you!
  • The thought of reinventing and participating in the Monarchy is just cool, and/or your psychiatrist sees this as a good step forward away from your LARP group.
  • You are a snob and swirl your red wine vigorously before you play. (We recommend the 1921 Château Pétrus Merlot. We understand it will set you back about $20k but it makes pillaging your enemies towns oh so much more satisfying. <insert snob laughter>)
  • You think King is teh sex.

Supporting the First King
Too often people equate forum activity with skill level in a game and let me say that Private Messages to build support are the framework that truly skilled players need to build real support. So this is the time they can grab power by the sack and go for it by telling people why they are kick ass Civ 4 players and why they should be King!

The first ballot vote is going to be the toughest. There is going to be very little in the way of posts for you to consider who would make a good King. The inclination is going to be to go with the people who are most visible. Maybe this is good? Maybe it is bad? It isn't my place to decide for you, but question it. I would suggest that if we want a successful game people do their homework. Dig into the names of the people that approach you for support. Read their other post on the forum if they are there. Don't support someone simply because they can make you laugh - support them because they would make a good king.

History shows us what happens when the nobility puts a good King on the throne, and when Nobility puts a bad King on the Throne. Which type of will you support?

Being the First King
For those that would consider the Throne let me just say it is never to early to start gaining support. I haven't seen a go date for the game, but I have seen estimates of early April. If you don't gain support and get people involved now a lot of the early sign ups may completely lose interest in this game by the time it rolls around. So get your supporters, get them invested in your plan, and keep them invovled! Build relationships that will last you the entire game. You know what your powers will be - be presumptous maybe? Make promises you can keep? (Maybe make ones you are hoping to keep)? I can't vote for anyone as Administrator but if I could a Kingly promise to name a city Ash88ton would be pretty neat. (If Ash88ton was ever attacked I would be instantly enraged and forever plotting against the aggressors). You have the power to give titles, land... you can also talk about your skills.

The difficult balance you have is that from the get go you want to maintain your rightful and Kingly aura lest you become a slave to the nobility. It's a difficult line to walk!

How does the King get advice?
The system is designed so that 1 person, the King, can take the advice he wants when he wants it and ignore it when he wants to. He can do this freely as often as he wants and the only thing he is accountable for is his success or failure. Lets face it, if a King listened to us 50% of the time, but inevitably he brought about success 100% of the time we would keep him as King! If a King listened to us 100% of the time and brought about success 50% of the time we would quickly overthrow him. With ultimate power comes ultimate responsibilty.

Aivoturso said:
This reminds me that I had a question too. How does team Merlot choose on the civilization?
Click to expand...

It's a good question which I will interject an answer with here, and edit it back into my blog as it will effect how people gain support amongst the other nobility as they gain the Throne.

How does Team Merlot Choose it's civilization?
As in all decisions, it is up to the King.

Without going into all the details of why this is the only way we can do this, why Polls won't make sense, why we can't force a King to play a certain way and then keep him accountable, and why we don't want to have the first decision we make to be a Democratic one.... the overarching Philosophy of the House of Merlot is Total Monarchy. It starts from the get go. Does that rub you the wrong way? It should - you probably don't live in a Total Monarchy in real life.

This underscores again the fact that the nobility needs to take incredible care when choosing a King. Ask Questions of the people that approach you in private messages. If they don't have good answer then discount them - politely! (They may end up being King afterall, you have no idea who will vote for them and you don't want to anger them as they will know you didn't when the results of the vote are published!)

As a contender for the Throne - while you are wagging your silver tongue and speaking of your Glorious empire perhaps you best paint a picture of your 'leet skills in creating the empire as a particular trait/playstyle type and leader possibilities? What are your experiences with this playstyle? Why will this work? Remember to keep a Kingly tone - you aren't begging for a vote you are informing people that you are the god ordained King ready to take your God given place. I wouldn't necessarily hitch your cart to just one leader as other teams may want that leader as well and then your claim looks weak... but you know best!

On the other hand, as the future King, perhaps you will leave it completely up in the air and, once you take the throne, ask for advice from your noble house? Again - your call.

Remember - the House of Merlot is the framework for people like you to have a great game. It provides the accountability and overarching structure and then it gets out of the way. If you keep this principle in mind then there is only one answer to the question of how we choose a civilization. Do we choose by voting? Absolutely - we choose by supporting a Monarch to power that we trust.

Our Would Be "Democratic" Enemies
It is somewhat laughable that some of our Kings enemies, claiming that obsessive polling is the how to make a stable political "Team," hurl odd and confusing insults at our Glorious King. I suppose the best retribution will be to deny those individuals refuge in our glorious Kingdom as we are pillaging their capital. That will be for our Righteous King to decide. Until that fateful time I suppose we should let their ignorance and misunderstanding be their constant companion. Let them fear what they do not understand until our swords teach them more swiftly.

How to Sign Up?
All you need to do is 3 simple steps:
  1. REPLY (Hit "quote" and delete this message if the reply button is missing) in this thread with the words, "LONG LIVE THE KING!"
  2. follow this Link to the Sign Up Thread and respond telling them that you are on Team MERLOT. (A Triumphant "Long Live the King" is probably a good idea as well -- in fact, smattering "Long Live the King" all over the boards is probably a sure fire way of reminding our disgusting enemies that they are all doomed. Also feel free to remind everyone you are of noble blood - and they are not. They appreciate being reminded of that. Trust me.)
  3. Request access to our Forum here.

Long Live his Majesty the King :king:
 
That response answers my concerns.


Long Live The KING :king:

Thanks for the tip about a 'King' contender securing my support. Yes to the town, named after me, but I would also want one of those ' laid out' beach ladies - as a chamber maid you understand- ;)
 
This reminds me that I had a question too. How does team Merlot choose on the civilization? I think this goes a bit beyond to almost any other decision in the game. Since this decision has repercussions, which really cannot be rectified by voting the king out, I think this could use a bit different approach than everything else that comes afterwards. Especially since selection of the first king is more or less random I'd say it's a bit risky to leave the decision completely up to the first king (although good players and teams can win with any civ).

I can think of two alternative solutions (probably others exist as well). First would be plain old voting (kind of boring and un-monarchylike). Second option would be coupling the decision with the election of the first King. So every candidate would nominate the civilization and the vote would go both to the King and to his Country.

Anyway, how would civ selection go?
 
I think the original King will have to campaign based on what Civ everyone wants to play. That will be a key component of the first King's rise to power.

Hard to imagine our first King being able to rise to power while disagreeing with the will of most of the ruling families choice of Civilization/Leader.

On the other hand - if a prospective King is so qualified/charismatic/powerful that people are willing to support him/her despite disagreeing on the Civ choice, then (given the importance of the early game) maybe it's a good thing the King got to pick a Civ that suits their style, rather than the style of the *gag* masses.

King is teh sex!
Long Live the King! :king:
 
I thought the sequence would be:

The team selects civ(s) after discussion but bears strongly in mind, the 'Monarchy' concept we have signed up to. So some leaders would be automatically out of contention (I would assume) but still quite a number of the rest, eligible.

Then, eventually having chosen Civ(s) and been successful, we start the process of selecting a King.

However I am open to the alternative idea of a 'King' candidate making a strong case for specific Civ and arguing for that civ and he/she as Monarch: but there are dangers I think with this combo type offer.
 
Aivoturso said:
This reminds me that I had a question too. How does team Merlot choose on the civilization?
Click to expand...

It's a good question which I will interject an answer with here, and edit it back into my blog as it will effect how people gain support amongst the other nobility as they gain the Throne.

How does Team Merlot Choose it's civilization?

As in all decisions, it is up to the King.

Without going into all the details of why this is the only way we can do this, why Polls won't make sense, why we can't force a King to play a certain way and then keep him accountable, and why we don't want to have the first decision we make to be a Democratic one.... the overarching Philosophy of the House of Merlot is Total Monarchy. It starts from the get go. Does that rub you the wrong way? It should - you probably don't live in a Total Monarchy in real life.

This underscores again the fact that the nobility needs to take incredible care when choosing a King. Ask Questions of the people that approach you in private messages. If they don't have good answer then discount them - politely! (They may end up being King afterall, you have no idea who will vote for them and you don't want to anger them as they will know you didn't!)

As a contender for the Throne - while you are wagging your silver tongue and speaking of your Glorious empire perhaps you best paint a picture of your 'leet skills in creating the empire as a particular trait/playstyle type and leader possibilities? What are your experiences with this playstyle? Why will this work? Remember to keep a Kingly tone - you aren't begging for a vote you are informing people that you are the god ordained King ready to take your God given place. I wouldn't necessarily hitch your cart to just one leader as other teams may want that leader as well and then your claim looks weak... but you know best!

On the other hand, as the future King, perhaps you will leave it completely up in the air and, once you take the throne, ask for advice from your noble house? Again - your call.

Remember - the House of Merlot is the framework for people like you to have a great game. It provides the accountability and overarching structure and then it gets out of the way. If you keep this principle in mind then there is only one answer to the question of how we choose a civilization. Do we choose by voting? Absolutely - we choose by supporting a Monarch to power that we trust.
 
Ok Thanks. Informative explanation of possibilities in the 'Monarchal' scheme of things.
 
DaveMcW said:
Question from the game admin:

How do you decide who the backup turn-player is if the current turn-player misses a turn?
Click to expand...

As in all decisions, it is up to his Majesty the King. One suggestion I humbly made to his Majesty was the appointment of The Chamberlain, outlined in my original post, but I wouldn't presume to speak on behalf of his Majesty in these matters.

I will point out (although I would never participate in such disloyalty!) that the nobles have the ability to overthrow his Majesty at anytime with an 85% vote for cases such as these, and on top of that the Administrator has the ability to call an early succession vote in the case that the King goes AWOL. Both of these powers are discussed in the Administrators section of the original post in this thread.

(There will be a determination to be certain that players are "active" as well so we can be sure that the 85% is attainable - but lets not get bogged down in the Beauracratic details right now - that's what the Administrator is for - everyone just sit back and have fun grabbing the Throne or finding your King!)

In regards to all questions begining with "How do you decide..." except for the rare powers of the Administrator outlined in the original post, whenever the answer can feasibly be that it is up to the King then it will be up to the King.

(Thought of the moment - do we have any female players? Having to go back and Uni-Sex all this "King" talk to include "Queen" as well would be a pain!)
 
ash88 said:
A
(Thought of the moment - do we have any female players? Having to go back and Uni-Sex all this "King" talk to include "Queen" as well would be a pain!)
Click to expand...

(Unfortunately the English language as it is currently used doesn't have a gender-neutral adjective, the closest is 'it' but it implies a lack of gender altogether. So we just use him/his, even if it is implied that it is a unisex modifier, because writing his/her and King/Queen gets old really fast.)
 
We can unisexify the King for example by just saying the Sovereign until we have the results of the first vote. Then we should know whether we have King or Queen. However that does not solve the issue with pronouns. English just unfortunately is a sexist language by default ;)

Long live the Sovereign!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

caketastydelish
Why didn’t I win the game?
Replies
3
Views
341
caketastydelish
caketastydelish
A
  • Poll
[Vote] (7-43) Remove Notification when a City Starts WLTKD
Replies
8
Views
368
CppMaster
CppMaster
Hickman888
Dynamic Modifiers
Replies
2
Views
410
Hickman888
Hickman888
Quintillus
Egypt Announces Renovation of Pyramid of Menkuare at Giza
Replies
11
Views
784
Klaus Hergersheimer
Klaus Hergersheimer
HNation
William of Orange
Replies
5
Views
398
Civinator
Civinator
Top Bottom