Game difficulty

Not another repoll, forget the past, embrace a new future, choose your difficulty

Open until Mar 26 to account for weekend holiday.

Rule one: No one enters my house with weapons Please leave them in the barrel by the front door, and recieve a script from Daryl my rather brutish looking friend. Pour man only understands one thing...pulverising on command. His diet consists of raw meet, sometimes out of my cellar...and sometimes from...alternative sources...

Rule two: This poll will be public and involve all choices, and I pray to whatever gods we each individually worship or curse or ignore that we can just do this in peace.

Rule three: All we, as a community ask you to consider is the information testily debated in the following polls, however, do not comment on those debates, nor add to them, should they not be locked yet already.

Rule four: Excercise respect and decorum or you shall be visited by Daryl. He looks hungry to me...

Here in lie the bloody and defiled corpses of this scrum:
Original poll
Final runoff (Bwahahahaha)
Repoll (Rated X-for extreme violence and disturbing mental anguish)

Simply vote for whichever level you feel will be most appropriate, given the information provided in previous polls, such as your comfort level, where you want to play as a team, and what you want from the experience. I believe that said statement is as vanilla as it can get, no bias there whatsoever, but I am only human. (Raises forceshield, casts multi-dimensional wards, and casts invisibility.)

Thanks kwarrior for taking the initiative on this. We were getting nowhere in the other threads (myself included). I'm going to think long and hard on this one...

voted. .

Thank you both.

Voted, I am happy with this motion, and will keep the peace.

Provolution said:

Voted, I am happy with this motion, and will keep the peace.

Click to expand...

Yes, as I tell my son almost every night, "Tomorrow will be a better day."

I do want you all to know that I appreciate why previous events occured, and I mean no offense with the dramatic metaphors and enuendos mentioned in the OP, I just think everything has been said, so let's just "...get 'er done!"

A man with a large club enters, and scans the room for signs of conflict. Finding none, he walks over to the covered basket and drops his marker through a slit in the lid. Satisfied that his duty to the tribe is done yet again, he moves to a corner of the room and waits.

Voted 10CHARS.

As of now, votes are:
Noble: 0
Prince: 3
Monarch: 10
Emperor: 4

I would like a security clause as a result for the pressure for higher difficulty levels. If we die prematurely (I have gametested monarch with present settings, a lot of challenging things happens), I would like to restart the game with the same settings we agreed on but difficulty level, which should be lowered down to "Prince" level, and not have another round with rule discussions.

The way Prince level has been pushed around here, makes it deserve a second chance with unaltered game rules and settings, in case the Civ-experts here made a wrong assessment. (This to make sure this was not a misinformed decision or based on bad intentions).

I vote that we will be more successful than some fear. However, in the event of an unlikely and tragic demise, I would support restarting with Prince level.

I support Provo's idea. Just in case.

Provo's idea is something that isn't even needed to be discussed. I'm sorry, but IMO it's just another way to undermine the whole game or bring negativity. Think about this, if this game goes sour do you (in the general sense) honestly think that difficulty will be the only factor we'll want to reconsider? No, I'm betting there will be quite a few options.

There's no need for this discussion and I find it odd that it was even brought up. This type of discussion is expected in faction politics, not game discussion.

His line of discussion is faction politicking

I don't fully agree with the idea, but to a certain extent it could work. In order to appease both sides of the argument, why not pass this clause, but set a certain in-game year or meta-game term that it is valid for. (I.e. by 1AD the clause is no longer valid, or once we finish the second term it becomes void.)

ice2k4 said:

I don't fully agree with the idea, but to a certain extent it could work. In order to appease both sides of the argument, why not pass this clause, but set a certain in-game year or meta-game term that it is valid for. (I.e. by 1AD the clause is no longer valid, or once we finish the second term it becomes void.)

Click to expand...

Sounds great to me! BTW, it's just a game!

Methos said:

Provo's idea is something that isn't even needed to be discussed. I'm sorry, but IMO it's just another way to undermine the whole game or bring negativity. Think about this, if this game goes sour do you (in the general sense) honestly think that difficulty will be the only factor we'll want to reconsider? No, I'm betting there will be quite a few options.

There's no need for this discussion and I find it odd that it was even brought up. This type of discussion is expected in faction politics, not game discussion.

Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with Faction discusssion, this is a metagame discussion. I want the core rules untouched and retry on Prince. It was in particular your argument for Emperor that pushed the level up one to Monarch (from Prince). This was one of the points we discussed when we wanted Faction above traditional ruleset, and if we can agree on retrying the game if we seem to lose within 1 AD due to too high difficulty level, please let us do so.

I do not see this as an extension of HOF and GOTM games, but a totally different thing. So please respect that view. We can even vote over this difficulty level issue insurance.

Methos said:

Provo's idea is something that isn't even needed to be discussed. I'm sorry, but IMO it's just another way to undermine the whole game or bring negativity. Think about this, if this game goes sour do you (in the general sense) honestly think that difficulty will be the only factor we'll want to reconsider? No, I'm betting there will be quite a few options.

There's no need for this discussion and I find it odd that it was even brought up. This type of discussion is expected in faction politics, not game discussion.

Click to expand...

Agreed. If we fail, we fail. *shrug* We look back at what happened, decide what worked and what didn't and start a new game.

The Tribal Council Faction, however, does not believe that we will fail, and consider such discussions before we even start as somewhat defeatist! Thus, we will focus on our success as a nation!

-- Ravensfire

Provolution said:

please let us do so.

I do not see this as an extension of HOF
<...snip...>
So please respect that view.

Click to expand...

Interesting how your argument for you case is to make it appear that I'm abusing mod powers to get my way. I'm merely a player here, just like everyone else. Feel free to counter statements/arguments I've made, but please don't steer the argument in a direction that ¹⁾ I don't do and ²⁾ that isn't based on the discussion at hand. I mean no disrespect Provo and I apologize if it sounds that way.

ravensfire said:

The Tribal Council Faction, however, does not believe that we will fail, and consider such discussions before we even start as somewhat defeatist! Thus, we will focus on our success as a nation!

-- Ravensfire

Click to expand...

Well said

This is Demogame 3 after all...so there were two games prior to this, and many of you stayed on to try again, albeit with some additional rules or differences that the community thought were needed as a result of your prior experience. I'm confident that Demogame 4 would occur at some point in the future, but I don't support an "insurance policy" except in the case that we would not need to debate rules and such again.

Further, Provo, there are excellent players in our community. I consider myself to be a good player, but there are people I am already learning of as a result of joining this demogame whom I would gladly learn from. Monarch is not that much harder than Prince really.

We all apreciate the power of positive thought and the expectation of victory. Many more of us can't wait to kick this excellent idea off and have some fun with it all.

Methos said:

Interesting how your argument for you case is to make it appear that I'm abusing mod powers to get my way. I'm merely a player here, just like everyone else. Feel free to counter statements/arguments I've made, but please don't steer the argument in a direction that ¹⁾ I don't do and ²⁾ that isn't based on the discussion at hand. I mean no disrespect Provo and I apologize if it sounds that way.

Click to expand...

I did not even hint at the Mod power issue here, merely that this is a different game from GOTM and HOF, and has nothing to do with moderation at all. It is against forum rules to discuss moderator actions - I am not even going there.

However, it is perfectly legitimate to point out that this game is different from the HOF and GOTM games, where gameplay is the core, as well as the esoteric terminology that you need to be an expert of Civ to understand or to stay on these forums for a while to comprehend.

I have countered the argument of difficulty, and also made it clear that metagame mechanisms like difficulty belongs in the core rules, not in the faction platforms. We need to all agree on difficulty, not make it a partisan issue for factions. The entire idea of factions was to produce a system where in-game ideas met, not metagame politicking thrived.