Official:Game Settings

[classical_hero]

Now as a team we need to know what are your preferred settings for the game.


- Huts: On/Off
- Events: On/Off
- Vassal States: On/Off
- Barbarians: None, Normal, or Raging
- Tech Trading: Normal, No Tech Trading, No Tech Brokering
- Difficulty Level: Low (Noble/Prince), Medium (Monarch/Emperor), High (Immortal/Deity)
- Speed: Quick, Normal, Epic, Marathon

[DaveMcW]

Originally Posted by classical_hero

- Difficulty Level: Low (Noble/Prince), Medium (Monarch/Emperor), High (Immortal/Deity)

You might want to give 2 answers, depending on whether tech trading is on or off.

[BLubmuz]

Originally Posted by classical_hero

Now as a team we need to know what are your preferred settings for the game.


- Huts: On/Off
- Events: On/Off
- Vassal States: On/Off
- Barbarians: None, Normal, or Raging
- Tech Trading: Normal, No Tech Trading, No Tech Brokering
- Difficulty Level: Low (Noble/Prince), Medium (Monarch/Emperor), High (Immortal/Deity)

Usually in a so big competition, every random factor must be left out.
so:
Huts: off
Event: off
vassal states: with only human players, does makes sense to let them on? (probably newbie question)
Barbs: Normal
Tech tr.: Normal
Level: with only human players, does makes sense to choose a level? (probably newbie question #2) If we choose Huts = yes, this can be the only variant affected by difficulty level, along with the barbs spawning. Monarch can be a good option, IMO.

[mgsmuhammad]

Originally Posted by BLubmuz

vassal states: with only human players, does makes sense to let them on? (probably newbie question)
Level: with only human players, does makes sense to choose a level? (probably newbie question #2) If we choose Huts = yes, this can be the only variant affected by difficulty level, along with the barbs spawning. Monarch can be a good option, IMO.

Well, Yes, Vassal states makes sense to leave on, in my mind at least, as it could make the difference to a whole team of people between living on as a cripple or being booted out of the game outright.

And level needs to be chosen, as it has various effects beyond goodie huts and barbarian spawning, like effecting your cities starting health and happiness bonuses (or deficits) which, when you consider the potential growth of a happy/healthy city to an unhappy/unhealthy one, makes quite a large difference to the metagame. And that's just a single city out of your empire, meaning the cumulative influence is nothing short of monumental.

[Earthling]

First, let me clarify I am not speaking for my team here, just a question, and a short example with my own opinion.

Can we vote on settings "dependent" on each other besides the aforementioned tech trading? To use an example from the last Demogame I might prefer a chance to rectify- where we didn't have more extensive procedures to decide settings:

Say, as I prefer myself but if a team wanted to vote such - could a Team vote for Goody Huts ON only if Barbarians are ON? So if other Teams voted for Barbarians OFF then this team wouldn't want Goody Huts ON either.

[maus]

Originally Posted by BLubmuz

Usually in a so big competition, every random factor must be left out.

I agree with this sentiment. Except, raging barbs!

[DaveMcW]

Originally Posted by Earthling

First, let me clarify I am not speaking for my team here, just a question, and a short example with my own opinion.

Can we vote on settings "dependent" on each other besides the aforementioned tech trading? To use an example from the last Demogame I might prefer a chance to rectify- where we didn't have more extensive procedures to decide settings:

Say, as I prefer myself but if a team wanted to vote such - could a Team vote for Goody Huts ON only if Barbarians are ON? So if other Teams voted for Barbarians OFF then this team wouldn't want Goody Huts ON either.

Yes.

BLubmuz & maus, please do not vote in this thread, use your team's forum.

[Lord Parkin]

BLubmuz (and anyone else), this thread is for the six combined team votes to be posted by the official representatives for each team. It's not the thread to post your own personal opinion on what you'd like to see. Come visit your team's private forum and do it there instead.

[Lord Parkin]

I suggest we set a time limit for the team votes on these official polls. For instance, the Double Civs poll should be able to be finished in 48 hours, then the Unrestricted Leaders poll can be finished 24-48 hours after that, and Duplicate Leaders soon after that. Game Settings could be decided in a 48-72 hours, Map Settings decided in a week or so, then at last the teams could make their final decision on Civ(s)/Leader(s) a few days after that, once everything is known about the game/map settings. As soon as the civs are chosen, the map can be made (or finalized), and then the game should be able to begin within a few days. Thoughts?

Basically I'm just worried if we don't set deadlines then this team voting process might drag out longer than necessary.

[Indiansmoke]

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

I suggest we set a time limit for the team votes on these official polls. For instance, the Double Civs poll should be able to be finished in 48 hours, then the Unrestricted Leaders poll can be finished 24-48 hours after that, and Duplicate Leaders soon after that. Game Settings could be decided in a 48-72 hours, Map Settings decided in a week or so, then at last the teams could make their final decision on Civ(s)/Leader(s) a few days after that, once everything is known about the game/map settings. As soon as the civs are chosen, the map can be made (or finalized), and then the game should be able to begin within a few days. Thoughts?

Basically I'm just worried if we don't set deadlines then this team voting process might drag out longer than necessary.

Well team Merlot will need at least another 5 days to get a King so before that we will not have an answer to any of the issues, since everything will be up to the king.

[Sommerswerd]

Most teams probably have polls or threads up about all the settings. I guess the admins could close the polls and call in the results at any time if they want.

BTW I assume Sirius done with their double civs poll since this is being brought up? What is the result?

[Lord Parkin]

Originally Posted by Indiansmoke

Well team Merlot will need at least another 5 days to get a King so before that we will not have an answer to any of the issues, since everything will be up to the king.

Five days? At least? Really?

I'm beginning to see a potential issue with this game, if it takes this long to sort out the internal politics of Merlot every time there's a new king. Maybe I'm speaking too soon, and it'll be fine. But in this particular case at least, we have to wait a week to even think about getting any decisions from Merlot? That's going to slow down the start of this game quite considerably.

Originally Posted by Sommerswerd

BTW I assume Sirius done with their double civs poll since this is being brought up? What is the result?

This is not the double civ poll, and we have not closed our own team poll yet. If you must know, "yes" is currently winning, but not all our members have joined yet and we want to give them a chance to vote. We are a fundamentally democratic team, after all.

[Indiansmoke]

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

Five days? At least? Really?

I'm beginning to see a potential issue with this game, if it takes this long to sort out the internal politics of Merlot every time there's a new king. Maybe I'm speaking too soon, and it'll be fine. But in this particular case at least, we have to wait a week to even think about getting any decisions from Merlot? That's going to slow down the start of this game quite considerably.

Man, we have been discussing this for months and the game will go on for years....and you think 5 days will slow the game down considerably?

This is only for the start of course as the game will not be stopped every time there is a new king procedure.

[Lord Parkin]

Originally Posted by Indiansmoke

Man, we have been discussing this for months and the game will go on for years....and you think 5 days will slow the game down considerably?

It's only been a few days since the private forums were set up though, and only a bit over a week since the announcement on the front page. The team discussions are just getting underway, and the forums are buzzing with activity. It just doesn't strike me as the time to make all the rest of the teams sit around for a week and twiddle their thumbs.

Originally Posted by Indiansmoke

This is only for the start of course as the game will not be stopped every time there is a new king procedure.

Okay, that's good to know at least.

[Irgy]

Can I suggest that if enough teams have voted to create a majority on an issue, we can consider it resolved without having to wait for the rest of the votes? It's looking quite likely that this would give Merlot their 5 days to elect a king while still keeping things moving as well. It could be sped up further by the admins deciding their tiebreaker method, allowing 3 votes to potentially be a majority in some cases.

[Sommerswerd]

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

This is not the double civ poll, and we have not closed our own team poll yet.

Rruuunh But you said...

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

For instance, the Double Civs poll should be able to be finished in 48 hours

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

If you must know, "yes" is currently winning

"If I MUST know"?... Really? When did I say I MUST know? Do I detect a little annoyance? Why?

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

not all our members have joined yet and we want to give them a chance to vote. We are a fundamentally democratic team, after all.

Right, that's what I thought too, but you said...

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

I suggest we set a time limit for the team votes on these official polls. For instance... the Unrestricted Leaders poll can be finished 24-48 hours... Game Settings... 48-72 hours, Map Settings ... a week or so,...

I just am confused by the attempt to impose/suggest all these time limits on other teams, with no regard to the fact that they may not have had time to collect all their members, while simultaneously asserting that ones own team needs to be given a chance to vote... Can you see the contradiction?

Originally Posted by Indiansmoke

Man, we have been discussing this for months and the game will go on for years....and you think 5 days will slow the game down considerably?

Frankly, I agree with Indiansmoke here... AMAZON is in the middle of electing a Captain, and we need time to finish our election as well. I mean..."We are a fundamentally democratic team, after all.".. right? ... I mean isn't Sirius also electing a leader/spokesperson/president or whatever? Or has somebody just appointed themselves dictator for life

[Lord Parkin]

You'll notice we already decided to post our results in the relevant thread. So that's that.

[Sommerswerd]

10-3 in favor of 2 civs? So that's the teams final vote? But Sirius has like 25 people. I thought you said you were trying to wait for everyone? Forgive me I am just a little mixed up here

[Lord Parkin]

I stated quite clearly in the thread that it is the "present" vote. Statistically speaking, it will likely be the same as the final vote.

[HUSch]

We need our own forum to decide the game settings. After that we can vote here. All other is ....