Civ4 Demogame IV

I like the multi-team idea, but you'd have to appropriately separate it enough from the normal MTDG. A few ideas that pop into mind immediately.

We play, in essence, as one civilization under one banner. Teams should have their own private forums, but citizens should also be able to move from team to team (although not to often; were need to put a limit on this). We can paint this as moving to a different area of the country. It may also help simulate the miscommunication issues that distance has (not being able to see each others detailed planning).

You nailed it.

What exactly is the goal here? The trend that seems to be developing is just a scaled down MTDG.

Sorry if I'm coming off as a pessimist who just wants the thing to fail, but the entire project just seemed to slip my mind. I think that the DG ought to be an experiment in mock political science first, and a civ competition second. If we wanted only the latter, we have an already-running MTDG available.
 
What about having three teams working under one umbrella, a sort of confederation. This would in effect be three autonomous provinces (3 civs working together). However, these should not share tech and such, but be allied to each other. People could migrate in a time window during a short phase prior to a nomination phase, where they would get participation and voting privileges as well as subforum access privileges for that team alone. This would be a very good way of emulating distance.

We also need to make sure these civs start in roughly the same region, so the politics would for example be how to broker land distribution and such between these teams.
 
Yes, the 3 teams like a confederation, that is allied.
I'm not taking position about migration, but I would like to see the RP posts, as some of them are really beautiful; to that, the human teams must be allied.
So, for game balance the AI teams must also be allied.
Best regards,
 
Maybe everyone should be able to read the other forums, but only citizens of that team could post and vote there? That would handle the problem of having one hand in too many pies at once.
 
Better would be to require anyone posting in a subforum to follow the conventions of that forum. If, as you suggest, most people would really only want to focus on their forte, then it shouldn't be a problem anyway. Someone who wants to be a genuine contributor in more than one place would be an important asset to each area. Someone who attempts sabotage gets a nice vacation.
 
I think that the forums should be open and public to everyone. It is-after all- one nation. I like how Provolution said that you can only emigrate once every two months, and I like the idea that you can't emigrate during an election.
 
Well then, we can run these as open subforums, but only citizens of that civ or team or province that are registered citizens on that team can post and vote there.

However, we may decide to increase the number of barbarians and so on, as well as consider the difficulty level and settings to compensate for the reduced challenge of having three civs working together like this.
 
i'd personally like to see a new demogame myself, i want another demogame to play in after i've done all my work for the day in the civ three demogame.
 
I'm up for a new Civ4 Dgame. Since I no longer have Civ3 my participation in the revival game is limited. Anyone interested can throw some ideas around. I thought we may want to try something new. I don't know if you are familiar with Anacyclosis. It is a political theory from ancient Greece. This thoery led to what is known as...

Polybius' Sequence
Polybius' sequence of anacyclosis proceeds in the following order: 1. Monarchy, 2. Kingship, 3. Tyranny, 4. Aristocracy, 5. Oligarchy, 6. Democracy, and 7. Ochlocracy.

According to the Polybius' elaboration of the theory, the state begins in a form of primitive monarchy. The state will emerge from monarchy under the leadership of an influential and wise king; this represents the emergence of "kingship". Political power will pass by hereditary succession to the children of the king, who will abuse their authority for their own gain; this represents the degeneration of kingship into "tyranny". Some of the more influential and powerful men of the state will grow weary of the abuses of tyrants, and will overthrow them; this represents the ascendancy of "aristocracy" (as well as the end of the "rule by the one" and the beginning of the "rule by the few"). Just as the descendants of kings, however, political influence will pass to the descendants of the aristocrats, and these descendants will begin to abuse their power and influence, as the tyrants before them; this represents the decline of aristocracy and the beginning of "oligarchy". As Polybius explains, the people will by this stage in the political evolution of the state decide to take political matters into their own hands. This point of the cycle sees the emergence of "democracy", as well as the beginning of "rule by the many". In the same way that the descendants of kings and aristocrats abused their political status, so too will the descendants of democrats. Accordingly, democracy degenerates into "ochlocracy", literally, "mob-rule". During ochlocracy, according to Polybius, the people of the state will become corrupted, and will develop a sense of entitlement and will be conditioned to accept the pandering of demagogues. Eventually, the state will be engulfed in chaos, and the competing claims of demagogues will culminate in a single demagogue claiming absolute power, bringing the state full-cirlce back to monarchy.

It may be a tall order to implement this into a Dgame but it would sure be fun!
 
I'm up for a new Civ4 Dgame. Since I no longer have Civ3 my participation in the revival game is limited. Anyone interested can throw some ideas around. I thought we may want to try something new. I don't know if you are familiar with Anacyclosis. It is a political theory from ancient Greece. This thoery led to what is known as...



It may be a tall order to implement this into a Dgame but it would sure be fun!

The only thing is participation. I wouldn't want to play in a game where one person has absolute control most of the game, it is a Demogame.
 
The only thing is participation. I wouldn't want to play in a game where one person has absolute control most of the game, it is a Demogame.

We have had monarchy style governments in past DemoGames. Let me lay out what I have in mind ,this is just off the top of my head to give you an idea where I am coming from.

Monarchy (Rule by one)
The state begins in a form of primitive monarchy. The state will emerge from monarchy under the leadership of an influential and wise king; this represents the emergence of "kingship"
One citizen is named King and he names an heir to the kingdom. Each King rules one turn session until all citizens that want to will have the opportunity to rule the kingdom. The kings would have ministers and possibly governors advising them. Even the most powerful of kings didn't run their entire government themself.
Political power will pass by hereditary succession to the heirs of the king, who will abuse their authority for their own gain; this represents the degeneration of kingship into "tyranny".
The last King would be named the tyrant and since he is last to rule would be given complete authority for his turn session.
Some of the more influential and powerful men of the state will grow weary of the abuses of tyrants, and will overthrow them; this represents the ascendancy of "aristocracy" (as well as the end of the "rule by the one" and the beginning of the "rule by the few").
During the turnsession of the tyrant the citizenry could focus on forming the Aristocracy.

Aristocracy (Rule by the few)
Democracy (Rule by the many)

I am running short on time right now. I still think we can keep the normal Dgame format but add a little flavor with an everchanging government style. This would be good IMO for gameplay as well as RP.
 
already posted in the CivIII deomogame forum. if it gets started, we can get an homepage announcement up when we ask for the old demogame's forums in the archives and the new demogame in question with it's new forums. let's not get ahead of ourselves, tho.
 
I'd prefer just a straight up democracy game. We have tried making the civ4 games more civics oriented, using factions, and adapting the government over time and games of that type have been near total failures.
 
I can live with that DS. We could add a little flavor by going with something like a direct democracy or a constitutional monarchy. Most of the participants will also be playing the Civ3 revival game so maybe something a little different than a standard 3 branch American style government.
 
There's a civ3 demogame going on right now link
 
I can live with that DS. We could add a little flavor by going with something like a direct democracy or a constitutional monarchy. Most of the participants will also be playing the Civ3 revival game so maybe something a little different than a standard 3 branch American style government.

Sounds good to me.
 
Top Bottom