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

Apostolic Palace - FAQ

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by didact, Sep 20, 2007.

  1. Bhruic

    Bhruic Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,457
    I'm not sure that makes your point. Effectively what it seems to come down to is an argument that abstain is good because you'll be less mad at a player that votes abstain? How players "feel" doesn't seem to be a good basis for game policy decisions. And in your example, the player who voted "abstain" had the exact same effect on your victory as the people who voted "no". If the effect is the same, what's the point in different terminology?

    Really, there is no "yes/no" when it comes down to voting for victory. The victory vote is "A/B". That is, you are voting for something. So it makes sense to have an abstain, because you might not wish to vote for either. It's a "none of the above" type vote.

    Bh
     
  2. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,316

    It sounds nice but I think it would be too complicated, from a player perspective

    as it is now... for Every vote besides 'Leader' and 'Diplo victory' Any civ can Veto it, so for the UN/AP to do anything you need unanimous consent. so diplomacy is Definitely included there

    The issue with the other two... 'Leader' isn't as important.. since its a simple measure of power.

    As for the 'Diplo Victory', (well I have a slightly more complicated method of allowing IT to get vetoed) but as a simple measure, simply saying you must Also have X% of civs voting for you As well as the population vote seems like it would be simple enough. (although it might slightly abuse the colony/vassal mechanic, although if vassals merely couldn't vote for your Opponent it might be better.. allow them to abstain.)

    Of course the Real change needed is to allow all those voting for a DiploVictory to Get a Diplo victory (it should act like a mass Permanent Alliance of everyione who Voted For the Winner.)
     
  3. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    Oh God,

    they do not have the same effect at all, and they have different diplomatic acception as well. In my proposed voting system:
    effect of NO: it is a veto. It can effectively prevent the resolution to pass if the count of Yes vs No is in favor of No.
    effect of Abstain: it is NOT a veto and only has an effect AFTER the count of Yes vs No.

    If there are 6 players and one votes Yes and 5 Abstain, the resolution WILL pass if that Yes has the quorum. If one player votes Yes and 5 vote No, the quorum won't even be checked and the resolution will fail. An added value of Abstain vs No is in the first case, if the Yes doesn't have the quorum and the resolution fails (if it passes the game will end), there CAN (ie: they need to be PROGRAMMED) be different diplomatic reactions toward an abstain or a no vote. This is a game mechanic and how the player "feels" (this includes the AI) is indeed important for game policy decisions, such as signing or not open borders, declaring wars or alliances, etc. How can you possibly think that these 2 votes are the same in effect in my proposal is beyond me, perhaps you keep thinking along the terms of how it currently works, but I proposed a different approach exactly because we are saying that the way it works is kinda broken.
     
  4. Bhruic

    Bhruic Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,457
    Yes, I'm well aware of what you are proposing. But again, there is no realistic case where someone would choose to vote "abstain" for a victory condition. Therefore there is no point in having "abstain" as an option - it serves no purpose. Simply have it a "yes"/"no" question, and require both a majority of the total votes, and a majority of voting memebers.

    Bh
     
  5. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    I gave you more than one realistic case, I don't want to enter a loop where I repeat the same things over and over, and anyways Firaxis will fix it as they see fit not as we propose so who cares.
     
  6. Bhruic

    Bhruic Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,457
    Ok, I see you missed the point of my previous post - I disagree that you gave any "realistic case". Your examples were, imo, not something that would ever happen in a real game.

    Well, a couple different responses come to mind. For one thing, Firaxis already believes they have "fixed" it with the new patch, although I'd disagree. For another, if they did decide that their fix was inadequate, it's certainly likely that they'd be interested in soliciting other opinions. And finally, even if Firaxis isn't interested in making such a change doesn't mean that other people might not want to modify their own game to implement it. So there are plenty of reasons to "care".

    Bh
     
  7. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    I played MP games where what I described happened, that's why I described it, heh. And about the AI, it's just a matter of script.
     
  8. CivAgamemnon

    CivAgamemnon King

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    813
    Location:
    Earth. Unfortunately.
    I have to say, reading this thread has certainly helped my understanding of the AP, and given me some good ideas. Thanks for the input, all. :goodjob:
     
  9. _alphaBeta_

    _alphaBeta_ King

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2005
    Messages:
    976
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    This is 3.13 question.

    Does anyone know if the patch change of: "Can't vote on a winner if one team already has all the votes necessary to win" affects regular resolutions in addition to the diplomatic win?

    I'm currently playing a game where I declared war on a non-member. It's been dozens of turns, and as resident, I still can't try to pass the war declaration resolution. The only thing that keeps happening is voting for resident.

    Couple points:

    1. I'm the only full member.
    2. I have something like 60 votes myself while everyone else has something small like 14 votes.

    Given point #2, I could simply pass the war declaration resolution myself. That got me thinking that perhaps you can't pass any resolution just by yourself. Or maybe another full member needs to be present (but that doesn't make sense in the later game when no one is really running a religion).

    I should be seeing some votes I think. I should be getting to chose resolutions to have all members declare war on another member as stated in the civlopedia.

    One nice thing is that full members get twice the votes as members. Makes things interesting.
     
  10. MrFrodo

    MrFrodo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2002
    Messages:
    167
    I win via AP often. It basically makes it so you need to take out less other civs. In my previous game, everyone had the AP religion, I was the only one still running it as a state religion. I had two rivals left, Hep was a friend and clearly going for a Cultural victory, her 3rd city was at 30k culture, so I was going to have to take one of her culture cities out soon or loose. The other was Shaka, enemies of both of us, had a lot of troops, but of low tech. I beelined to tank, declared war on Shaka, got Hep to help and got him to capitulate to me. Next AP election his votes put me over Hep and I win. Never had to take out Hep's culture city.

    In my current game, Catherine and I are big Hindu's and Friendly (+7 just from both having Hinduism as our religion). She discovered it and I built the AP. My civ seperates Catherine from the other civs on the continent and those civs don't have Hinduism yet. So all I need to do is:

    1) Attack Catherine and force her to Capitulate so I get her votes, we are about equal in votes and she is obviously only going to vote for herself :p
    2) spread one Hindu city to the other two civs to allow Diplomatic Victory.

    Diplomatic Victory for me.

    I haven't updated to the 3.13 patch yet, but this would be OK even with the patch change since I'm getting two sources of votes. But to be honest, it feels like a cheap victory.

    It might even be possible to change religions, use espionage to force Catherine to new temporary reoligion, switch back to Hinduism. Spread it to the last two civs. Then I will be the only option for leader and if Cetherine still likes me enough she will vote for me.

    I'll probably run custom games with no Diplo Victory in the future so I don't feel like I'm taking advantage of the AP mechanics.
     
  11. Naismith

    Naismith Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    438
    From what I've seen, I believe only the diplo victory resolution will be affected.

    My last game before installing 3.13, I had all the votes necessary to vote myself an AP diplo victory. In addition, I had a vassal that would have to vote for me. I was at war with another Civ. A dialog came up that gave me the option of voting for the diplo win, or "stop the war against" me.

    After installing 3.13, I loaded a save game from just before I got the above options. After playing a turn, I only got the option to "stop the war against" me.

    My tentative conclusions:

    1) Non-diplo win resolutions will come up as usual. Of course, I'm assuming all non-diplo win resolutions will be treated the same in this regard.

    2) The diplo win resolution will not come up if you have all the necessary votes, even if you have other Civ(s) willing to vote for you. I'm assuming it doesn't act any differently if the Civ(s) that are willing to vote for you are vassals or non-vassals.

    I could very easily be wrong.
     

Share This Page