Another Civ III MTDG?

[Kickbooti]

I'd be fine with a team of people who want to win but somehow never can

Then you may have a future in pro sports...

 

[RegentMan]

Are we sure that we want to move forward with a "Team Captain" outline? I'm not the biggest fan of it. How do you define a person as a "good" player? A "good" diplomat?

Robi D brought up the MTDG, and he's right. A few groups from here stayed together, but everyone is on a new team regardless. I think getting a sign-up going, then Ginger and myself randomizing everyone into five teams is the way to go.

 

[Black_Hole]

I completely agree with Robi D and Regentman, some people like to stay on their previous teams, others want to change, so everyone could have it their way if we have signups.. Plus if we do add another team (I still think 4 teams would be better), it would slightly mixup teams as it did in the Civ4 MTDG

 

[Ansar]

Just make four teams. Team A, Team B, Team C, and Team D.

Ask people which team they want to be on or if they would rather be put into any team (random).

After teams are set, tell teams to name their team something. (Ex. Team A changing its name to Team K.I.S.S.)

And then the rest, such as assigning civs.

 

[RegentMan]

It sounds like we need to poll the number of teams.

Poll is here.

 

[Whomp]

Are we sure that we want to move forward with a "Team Captain" outline? I'm not the biggest fan of it. How do you define a person as a "good" player? A "good" diplomat?

Robi D brought up the MTDG, and he's right. A few groups from here stayed together, but everyone is on a new team regardless. I think getting a sign-up going, then Ginger and myself randomizing everyone into five teams is the way to go.

All I ask is that you break up the best players. If you want me to tell you who they are I will. I think some players proved their interest in diplomacy in the last game and quite skillful to boot. That's a position that's a little more subjective but the player skills are very much quantifiable.

 

[RickFGS]

How about setting a date for this MTDM to start and then we make all the arragements to meet the deadline?

I sugest 15 November. Giving us a lot od days for team sort out and map making.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

How about setting a date for this MTDM to start and then we make all the arragements to meet the deadline?

I sugest 15 November. Giving us a lot od days for team sort out and map making.

November 15th is cutting it very close...I'm not a big fan of deadlines. I'm not even going to try to estimate one, but I imagine by the end of November we'll be in good shape.

 

[gmaharriet]

I have a somewhat different suggestion for allocating/assigning some team members.

I was on Team KISS and pretty active in posting, BUT not either a good player or diplomat. My position could be best described as a "cheerleader", which comes very close to lurker. I played one single turn with my friends walking me through it on MSN...no independent actions from me on that one.

Why not omit lurkers from the team member totals if you're trying to make them approximately even numerically. I know who I want for team mates, but I don't want to take up a spot that could be better filled with a good player/diplomat. So, couldn't the players who intend to be genuinely active be put on teams, and then allow those who just want to be sociable join whichever team they like without making the numbers appear lopsided? Keep the two types as separate counts.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

 

[CommandoBob]

Consider three categories of players:

The Decison-Makers: The gameplayer and the diplomats, mostly.

The Decison-Helpers: Provide answers to certain, specific question the Decison Makers may have, like invasion plans. Sometimes a sounding board, but not always.

The Decision-Less: Want to be involved but for some reason cannot be Decison Makers or Decison Helpers.

I fell into the third category in MTDG1. I joined late; the pecking order was already established; my game play was not strong enough to be much of a help; and my time was limited with RL constraints.

If those who sign up for MTDG2 indicate what category of team player they were in MTDG1 and what category they want to be in MTDG2, that might help in team allocation.

 

[fe3333au]

It's getting too complicated ... I consider myself a Decison Helper and became a strong diplomat by default (and having time) although i vetoed some diplomacy options I basically followed the team's thought on issues (even on occasion when I personally disagreed sometimes).

I think leave it upto RegentMan and Ginger Ale ... they would be well aware of who is active and in what capacity as they have viewed the whole game from the beginning.

If one team is getting too strong they can place a hold on new members as they sort-of did in our previous game.

KISS being split is a given, so maybe that team can divide themselves evenly and fairly. Perhaps these two new teams would be the first to have a cap placed on them until the other teams caught up in numbers and 'experience'.

 

[BCLG100]

i see no reason to just let other teams go where they will, even if the whole of KISS stayed together (Which i dont think they all will) you've seen in our threads the majority of decision making was only done by a few people so the numbers were just to scare you all

 

[Whomp]

Here's the only thing I feel is critical.
I'm not familiar with some players game but I think deity/Sid level players should be separated. So far in this thread we've seen Wotan, Niklas, Chamnix, the grumpys, Killercane and Tim Bentley post in this thread. I think they all fall into this category.

Can we at least get a sense of what level people play at?
I consider myself to be a DG/Deity level player and have PBEM experience.

 

[BCLG100]

im a beyond sid player......

realistically i dont play c3c anymore so my skills can hardly be considered v good

when i did i was emporer/level above emporer (What was that?)

 

[Tubby Rower]

demi-god. Which is where I would place myself

 

[CommandoBob]

monarch/emperor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Sid Collector: Bring out yer Sid.
[bangs a pan]
The Sid Collector: Bring out yer Sid.
[a man puts a body on the cart]
Large Man with Sid Player: Here's one.
The Sid Collector: That'll be ninepence.
The Sid Player That Claims It Isn't: I'm not Sid.
The Sid Collector: What?
Large Man with Sid Player: Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Sid Player That Claims It Isn't: I'm not Sid.
The Sid Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not Sid.
Large Man with Sid Player: Yes he is.
The Sid Player That Claims It Isn't: I'm not.
The Sid Collector: He isn't.
Large Man with Sid Player: Well, he will be soon, he's very good.
The Sid Player That Claims It Isn't: I'm at Chieftain.
Large Man with Sid Player: No you're not, you'll be stone Sid in a moment.

 

[General_W]

Large Man with Sid Player: Well, he will be soon, he's very good.
The Sid Player That Claims It Isn't: I'm at Chieftain.
Large Man with Sid Player: No you're not, you'll be stone Sid in a moment.

That's priceless!

I'm ok with strategy – but I'm only a marginal C3C player. I think Monarch/Emperor level.
(Monarch is below Emperor, right? If not – then whatever that level below Emperor is!)

Don't know if it matters, since I plan to mainly lurk anyway.

 

[zyxy]

Great idea! I'm in for another.

Play skills: DG
Diplo skills: none
PBEM skills: none, except for brief period during MTDG1
Favorite government: SG-style
Shunned government: anything that involves elaborate rule sets

Hey, CB! Very funny

 

[peter grimes]

Who are these notorious Grumpies I keep hearing about?

Is it Bede et alia?

 

[RickFGS]

I´m chieftain level. Only played Civ once and was killed by barbarians, darn those guys are really good.