A Democracy game?

[knowltok]

My thought on the roleplaying is that regional governors would put the interest of their region first. Maybe in the game it would more sense for city A to build the pyramids, but the gov wants an aquaduct. Presidents and cabinents might be warlike, even if the situation doesn't call for war. If an AI demands tribute it may be the best decision to give it, but roleplaying our pride may not allow it.

Things like that. It would likely detract from our score, but add to our enjoyment. I'm personally not getting into a year+ long game to see what kind of score we get.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

Things like that. It would likely detract from our score, but add to our enjoyment. I'm personally not getting into a year+ long game to see what kind of score we get.

Tottaly agree with that.I'm playing this for the internal politic's and rivilaries.The score still matter's ,but big part of the fun come's out of the political experiment.

 

[LKendter]

Tottaly agree with that. I'm playing this for the internal politic's and rivilaries. The score still matter's ,but big part of the fun come's out of the political experiment.

Agree. However, we should be a lower difficulty level. Hate to go through all of this work, and find out we lost in 3000BC.


With the scope of the game, there MUST be a plan to recover from dropouts. I have Civ3 succession games running for just weeks and have lost players

SUGGESTION: Start some polls, to start deciding some of the core issues.

 

[LKendter]

I will apply for the role of City Govenor, provided this is a Civ3 game. With 4 cities, I know I can micromanage them well

Another tought - A standard time when the next turn will complete. It should always be around the same time, or voting, etc will get to difficult.

I think I saw someone make a comment -
Get our own forum.
I think each turn will generate a few new threads for the politican part.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

Get our own forum.

In light of that ,read this; (posted on page 1 of this thread by Cornmaster)

Oh...well I was talking to TF last night. He said this weekend he could create an exclusive forum for this game. Under either Civ 2 Stories or Civ 3 Stories and Tales. Now, the signup sheet would be in the Stories forum, so people can post here to sign up. The the Democracy game will be in the sub forum and only members of the game will have the right to post and vote in polls etc... But everyone will be able to read the forum!!

So cheer! the forum will be soon created.

 

[.:KNAS:.]

just so i know, im in the diplomacy dept. right?

lets say we start as the yanks, then the first few turns we at the diplo office has nothing to do, right? and lets say the zulus contacts u berfore u have any time to do anything(post here that is) and demands like 50 gold are u going to leave the game running and post a poll or sumhin, or are u gonna decide by urself?

 

[Cyrai]

I'm in, but ONLY for Civ III, as I don't have the second. I've got ideas to contribute as well.

Each voter could be assigned to a city. Voters would vote on what their city would build, among all other nation-wide decisions. We may need voters to cover more than one city.

A governor should be assigned to maybe 4 cities. The governor would hold polls related to those cities, mostly about what to build. If a decision is made, the governor reports it to the City Manager/President. The President can act based on those decisions, or ignore them as he sees fit.

Each city should get its own thread in the forums, where business relating to that city will be discussed. A Presidential Announcement thread should also be created, involving things such as wars. In case of a war, the President might post an announcement, saying what units he wants cities to create. That holds the possibility of creating some strife in wartime among the citizens, making things more realistic and interesting. Of course, it could also end up being more trouble than it's worth.

If governors do get cities, it would be their job to get the save periodically and post the current details of the city (size, screenshot, and improvements mostly) in the city thread, so voters/citizens would be able to see what's going on in their city.

What do you all think?

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by .:KNAS:.
just so i know, im in the diplomacy dept. right?

You have to ask Hippo.
Department heads pick their deputies for the first term.

If he chooses someone else then you can run in 30 days.

I also changed the term length which is now 30 days instead of 21. We don't want to be switching leaders all the time.

Not sure about which version to play yet. The cabinet is going to vote. Taking in account the votes in the other topic and the points raised by posters. It's leaning toward Civ 2 though. 3 of the 8 members have made up their minds about Civ 2. The other 5 are undecided.

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by Cyrai
Each voter could be assigned to a city. Voters would vote on what their city would build, among all other nation-wide decisions. We may need voters to cover more than one city.

Each voter is a member of the nation. Not of the city. All players can vote in every poll on every topic. The City Planner leader MAY want to assign people to cities if the need arises, but that's at his descression only....and will not be written as a rule.

A governor should be assigned to maybe 4 cities. The governor would hold polls related to those cities, mostly about what to build. If a decision is made, the governor reports it to the City Manager/President.

This is the same idea as above....and is more likely that the City Planner Leader will assign 4-5 cities to people who volunteer. And reporting to the City Planner Leader is a good idea! Or maybe the Deputy, who could report to the leader. That's a good idea!

The President can act based on those decisions, or ignore them as he sees fit.

That's grounds for impeachment! The President can not ingore what has been approved by the people or put forward by the Department Leaders. (Of course...no one would impeach the Pres. for every little mistake, but constant disregard for the people will warnt such an act.

Each city should get its own thread in the forums, where business relating to that city will be discussed.

That's a little overkill.

A Presidential Announcement thread should also be created, involving things such as wars. In case of a war, the President might post an announcement, saying what units he wants cities to create. That holds the possibility of creating some strife in wartime among the citizens, making things more realistic and interesting. Of course, it could also end up being more trouble than it's worth.

The Presidential announcement thread is a good idea! Locked except for Presidential posts! Good idea there.

 

[knowltok]

More thoughts: If you are going to do elections every 30 days, why not just do them monthly. Less to keep track of that way, I think. If we start in the middle of december (I hope) we could alternatively just use the 15th. Imagine, getting elected and paid on the same day!

I can see some interesting discussions going on over the allocation of development units (Settlers, engineers. workers, etc.) One city builds them, another city benefits from them....

Any thoughts on a rule banning playing ahead? Impossible to enforce, but then again, so is the replay rule on the GOTM.

 

[redtom]

I'll join

 

[Poto]

Count me in
I'll play either version. Although I would lean to Civ III - More options.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

Ok ,some more thought's of me to:

That's grounds for impeachment! The President can not ingore what has been approved by the people or put forward by the Department Leaders. (Of course...no one would impeach the Pres. for every little mistake, but constant disregard for the people will warnt such an act.

Another possible option in this.A president maybe could ,only if he's strongly against a decission ,warn his people that he will leave the presidentcy and quit the job because he's (moraly? . ) against the inforcement of such an act. (I surely won't be the first to do it ) In that case maybe his goverment could fall too ,although that's something else.What to do in that case? New elections or tempory rule by information leader?

Another something.Maybe some of us could in the long run dicede to join a party.Just so they can meet people with comman idea's.Some people may be warmonger's ,while other's extremely peacefull ,other's then again somewhere in between those extreme's.Leaders could appoint deputy's among their own party member's.And party members may decide to go vote a comman voting option.member's of a party can appoint a chairman.And put him at front of their voting list.And certain party's may help voting for the same voting options.Creating Coalition's.
Party's should have to have their own talking space.
warmonger's may aim for a position as millitary leader ,or even as "City planner leader".Because it is in their interrest

The city planning leader is a guy with big Swing.He's very important for the power of the other leader's.He decide's how much unit's or impovement's certain leaders get.How much unit's or barracks/ports/walls/airports/fortresses/airbasses does the millitary leader get.How much library's/universities/scietist's goes to the science leader.How much carravan's/marketplaces/banks/stock exchange's/roads does the trade leader get?
As to that ,since we may be going for a system with gouverners in it.We may want to run a somewhat Decentralized goverment.Adjusting the power of the city planning leader somewhat ,Also making it possible for certain party's to hold a stronghold for their agenda's.
The decission's that are being made at the city maneging level may be heavily influenced by lobbying by certain interrest groups.

We may consider special thread's for member's of a particular fraction or responsabilety's ,that are not readable by other normal viewers.The discussion and agreement's sould not be viewable by other people.In fact ,all information should be distributed by the information officer.
Diplomatic discussion's between party's may need their own space to. As to multiplayer democratic game's ,the diplomacy office would need their own space too.

Founder's of new party's will be the first chairman's of their party's.to be abointed every 30 turn's ,but replacable by the party members?
I hierby , Ducky TheDuckOfFlanders announce the birth of the Central-Left wing party (any suggestion for a name ,i suggest Allright!)We believe in a progressive and exspansive nation.War is an option ,but not mandatory.Pacifism is for wussies.

Lol it's like creating a mini power world. :crazyeyes

 

[Cyrai]

Maybe this is just me, but I don't think that anyone would take it so far as to get involved in parties to do certain things. The game is too abstract to get involved with the parties. I mean, the voters wouldn't care much if some of the cities don't have temples, or if there aren't enough libraries.

That is actually kinda like my idea that I was talking about earlier, the one where you assign voters to cities to live in. That way, the voters would have some interest in the campaign besides how it will play out. The way the game is getting set up, it's becoming a rather large beauracracy, in which individual voters might have very little effect.

There is much talk about different people's agendas and how that might influence the game. "Living" in a city would give every voter something to care about. And if there are political parties, they could influence the common voter by promising improvements to the different cities along with how they are goign to run the country.

I don't know, the idea is just something that I think would make the game more interesting for everyone , rather than just the people in the positions of power.

 

[jumbo2002]

I'm in also!
I'd prefer Civ3, but would play Civ2 if others prefer.

I'll start off as a voter/citizen soldier/peon, and make any moves for power later.

 

[spycatcher34]

Ok then as head of the City dept. I wish to ask knowitok to be my deputy.

Also adamsj, im sure i can find a place for you in my administration ( as stated eriler i plan to use your idea on city/regianol governers.

 

[Apollo]

I don't like the political party idea. Having to assign myself to one system of beliefs in real life is bad enough. I'm sure that as the game progresses people will find themselves agreeing more often with some people rather than others, but I don't think we should create any formal organizations for this.

As for governers, I don't think we need them. Depending on how the game turns out we made need to divide up the City Planer position a bit, but for now I think the cities should all be controlled by the general majority.

I had an idea about times that after reading it looks like Ikendter already mentioned. It could get difficult for the President to complete the turn if they don't have all the information from the advisors. Now if an advisor lives in California, say they get home from work or school, and send off their decisions to the President at 6PM, that would be 3AM the next day for the President if they live in Europe. This probably wouldn't work. Each president should pick a time in Greenwich time that is the latest they will take information from their advisors. With each new president in a different part of the world and having a different daily schedule they will all probably want a different time for this once they are elected.

 

[CornMaster]

I can see the benefit of citizens belonging to Cities....but not a party system. Not enough people or issues to have a party platform.

But votes could be influenced by the city which we live. Of course.....all cabinet members will be relocated to the Capital and the beginning of their term. And has the option to move again afterward.

 

[spycatcher34]

Originally posted by Apollo

As for governers, I don't think we need them. Depending on how the game turns out we made need to divide up the City Planer position a bit, but for now I think the cities should all be controlled by the general majority.

Ah but i dont think you fully understand. Thge governers would have know real power they just look after their city(ies) to make sure they arent starving and are producing at a reasonable rate.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

I had an idea about times that after reading it looks like Ikendter already mentioned. It could get difficult for the President to complete the turn if they don't have all the information from the advisors.

Well me for starters has the benifit of having 2 computers in lan.1 computer can run the game and the other i use to post if neccesary ,besides i guess you can Alt-Tab and post if you wan't to.The end-turn is an important moment of the day.Enemy movement takes part on the end of the turn ,thus has to be reported.City productions and scientific goals can be planned ahead.

I have a suggestion.What if the leaders pass the .sav game through? The Diplomatic leader ends the turn ,because diplomatic leader must be there if diplomatic interraction takes place.If a screen pops up about which advance to go to ,he pick's the tech that the science leader and group has chosen ,if a poppup come's that an improvement has been constructed ,he pick's the improvement that the city planning office leader has chosen (but we count on the office to build quie's) Finally he undertake's diplomatic action's if nessicary. He passes that info over to the Expansion Leader ,that does the exploring and settling.Along with new info of explored areas and settled city's ,He passes that info over to the information leader with the save game,that makes a sumeration what has happened in that turn for the other department's.The information leader passes the save game to the City planning leader ,that manage's the city's ,it's passed over to the tade leader ,that create's trade route's and controls traders , he passes it to the millitary leader ,for troop movement.finaly once again to the information officer ,and the straith to the president for review and possible actions.I/he will pass the game to the diplomatic leader again for ending the turn.

Or Any Other System ,it can't be to hard.Time zone's ,we can manage it but it will need some flexibilety.