1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

5BCC Specifics

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game VI: Polls' started by greekguy, Jul 10, 2005.

?

How many cities should we be allowed to capture?

Poll closed Jul 14, 2005.
  1. 1 city per rival civ

    14.3%
  2. 2 cities per rival civ

    21.4%
  3. rival capital cities only

    21.4%
  4. cities with wonders- no limit to this one

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Other

    28.6%
  6. Abstain

    14.3%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    Huh? The 5CC supporters want something different than epic and different that what we've done for 6 demogames now. The only way we can give them what they want is to play something other than an epic -- i.e. put limits on the game.

    Definitions:

    Epic game A game of Civ which is played using a combination of the standard rule choices available on the normal starting screen.

    Modification A game which is played using rules which were modified from the standard rule choices.

    Variant A game which is played using standard rule choices, but with self-imposed behavioral limitations such as never being able to make peace (and thus not trading) or limiting the civilization's growth.

    To be not an epic and satisfy the 5CC camp, we have to either modify the game rules or set limits on ourselves.
     
  2. greekguy

    greekguy Missed the Boat

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Messages:
    4,386
    Location:
    New Jersey, USA
    ok, i'm starting to agree with DS, this poll was not designed well. so, DS you're free to redo this poll in the way you described in an earlier post.
     
  3. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    It's not the game that's getting repetitive, it's us. We choose to hit the domination limit almost every game, and that's not going to change with a 5cc. All a 5cc is doing is setting up a limit for ourselves, just to hold it back 2 turnchats longer. In the end, nothing is going to change, unless we change ourselves.
     
  4. Ginger_Ale

    Ginger_Ale Lurker Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    8,802
    Location:
    Red Sox Nation
    Please tell me how you intend to hit the domination limit with a 5CC.

    The reason we also go to the domination is because we don't set limits!! With a 5CC, we are setting rules for ourselves, so we can't win by domination. Last game, we had no such rules, so we were free to do whatever we wanted.
     
  5. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Rules that I doubt were follow for very long. This is a democracy, and a 5cc doesn't make us do anything. If the minister charged with placing settlers decides to place a 6th city, with majority support, there is nothing anyone can do about it.

    If you really want to do a 5cc, then elect officials that will do it. This is neither the place, nor the time.
     
  6. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    but we would add an article to the constitution at the end, so CCs would be flying if the domestic minister tried that
     
  7. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    So, your not only limiting the game, your limiting democracy also? :rolleyes:

    Great plan...
     
  8. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Sure, we do it all the time. What do you think we're doing in every part of this process? :rolleyes:

    -- Ravensfire
     
  9. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Creating a government, or a democracy to be more precise. How does adding a article in the constitution, saying we can only build 5 cities, help us create a government? :rolleyes:

    Eh, mind the undertow.
     
  10. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Government, at its basics, is the overlay of restrictions on chaos. What do you think our current ruleset does? It restricts the actions the participants in a Demogame can make.

    We're looking at another restriction - how's it different than our current restrictions?

    It's not.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  11. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Sense when has any of the current articles of the constitution, decide on what we can or can not do inside of the game? The only article that tells us that we can't do something inside of the game, says that no one except the DP can play the save. :rolleyes:

    It is an entire differant matter, and does not belong. We have one article that limits our in-games actions as a necessity, there is no need for anymore.
     
  12. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Cool - so anyone can play the save, right?

    Or post instructions, right?

    Or be Governor when they want, right?

    Or have 3 month terms, because they want to, right?

    Vacancies can be filled by anyone, ignoring the deputy, right?

    The list goes on, and on. Just read through the Constitution and the Code of Laws.

    Strider, those are ALL restrictions on a democracy. All of them. That IS what government is - a set of restrictions that a group agrees to follow. Complaining about restrictions being part of the law, when that's what the law DOES is nonsensical.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  13. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    You don't listen do you? Everything you mentioned was restrictions placed on the game of democracy (well, everything except one). They are not restrictions placed on the game of Civ3 we play.

    Find one instance, except the one I've mentioned already, that limits what we can do inside of Civ3.
     
  14. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    You're both wrong -- and you're both right. :eek:

    Ravensfire's argument is that all rules are created equal. From the "real people outside the game" point of view, this is correct. From the "we're acting like people who are inside the game" point of view it is incorrect. We don't put details about what happens inside the game in the "outside the game constitution".

    Strider's argument is that we have never codified the actual game playing conditions as part of the rules. This is historically correct, and it is very logical to say that it's a bad thing to put the actual in-game decisions in the out of game rules. This position is very transparent however, in that one way to make sure we have a hard time following a limited city variant is to exclude it from the rules. This is a self-serving position, or at least biased towards one side of the debate.

    What we really need is to satisfy both sides on the subject of rules to control the variant. I'll give a quickie outline of a way to do this -- this is not the first time I've posted the same idea, maybe it will catch this time.

    Leave the constitution and code of laws outside the game where they belong. Add a new body of law which is the inside the game law, and make this law easy to pass but very difficult to overturn, in the same way that we handle constitutional amendments. The will of the people would follow a hierarchy -- in game law is the strongest, then opinion polls, then results of discussions, then leader's perogative.

    The beauty of following my proposal is that we can pass a Constitution and CoL which is neutral on the subject of 5BC implementation, and make the final decisions on self-imposed limits during the game when we know whether conditions are favorable for a 5BC and when more than a dozen or so die-hards are actually present to make their opinions known.
     
  15. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Strider - you don't understand, do you? They are ALL restrictions on the game we play because this IS a game of democracy that uses Civ 3 as a focus point.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  16. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Still limits what we can do in Civ3. This is a compromise, how? :rolleyes:
     
  17. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    So, you came up empty-handed, eh? Go figure.
     
  18. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    DS,

    Quick comment - DG2 there was a law about altering forest - National Forest Act, I think. Could have been more, but that's just off the top of my head.

    Honestly, I'd like to see a simple poll to decide this, once and for all. Strider didn't want to do it, I'd like to see the next person to coordinate everything try it. Either a 2 option poll (Epic and associated variants, 5CC and associated variants) or a 3 option poll (Epic, Built City variant, 5CC).

    We had a large poll, but never polled the top options head to head. Rather, we had this odd dual poll thing with no clear understanding of the process. To be honest, it did bring in the idea of a Built City limitation, which has some interesting options. A great deal of debate and animosity could have been spared by polling this right the first time. Let's do that now.

    Then, we really need to put some of those decisions into the ruleset. Why SHOULDN'T we do that? Why shouldn't we nail down that THIS is how we doing things? We decided, last DG, to make it a culture win, to plan for that from the start. And at the end, we wimped out as a nation. I didn't consider that a win, because we couldn't bother to hold ourselves to our word.

    So this time, whatever we decide, put it down in writing, and hold people to it.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  19. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Trying to find your logic is always difficult.

    I'll try again to explain it to you.

    This is a game about the process of Democracy. It's about how we, as people, try to create a structure to cooperatively play a single player game - Civ 3 in this case. The rules we put into place, all of them, restrict and limit in some way the decisions and actions we, as citizens, make.

    That's what this is about.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  20. GenMarshall

    GenMarshall Night Elven Ghost Agent

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    42,907
    Location:
    Versailles City, Vekta, United Terran Systems
    Ill be willing to post a poll. Though before I do, are the three options the final options to be included in the poll?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page