CIV4 PBEM Enhanced

[Great_Scott]

I think the rules are being very well managed so far and they work as a kind of constitution for all the civs, but, like in real life, I think that each civ could shape their own "constitutions" with proposals, and the existing rules would be the startup constitution (that of course can be maintained till the end).
I would say that a 2/3 of votes with 1 vote per advisor would approve a change.
What do you think Great Scott?
That could really make a mess in bad organized civs but would be more fun for the better ones and it could help you in the task of managing the improvement of the rules for the next game.
I hope I'm not building up entropy, but since things are calm...

A tough call. However... if your above idea was in place, then this game would be no different from Multi-Team Democracy. I want this game to be different, in that it does have a structure, a simple (simple if people are active and vote when required) structure... but with the added twist of real-life politics (personal gain vs. the gain of your civ) and espionage (double agents in other civs).

Therefore, the system of voting & terms must stay in place.

 

[Great_Scott]

This is a PM I sent him that he ignored. Oh well.

Sorry realn, with xmas/new years and starting up this game, I've been a bit bogged down. As for your ideas, I like them, but I feel my ideas are different from yours and would prefer to stick to them... even if it does fail... This is my idea of an interesting way to play Civ, I hope it works.. and I at least want to stick my original vision, go with it.. and see how it goes.

Yours in quite interesting too.. perhaps you should re-submit openings for it and see how many you get it.

As for the website... in terms of the voting, I think we definately need a website to run this...

We'd need a rules section, a news section for annoucements, wars & their outcomes, election results and so on.

The above could be implemented into this website quite easily, but what we'd really need is private forums, for each Civ... if we had simple polls here each we'd need to vote, firstly others would be able to view everything the Civ decided on, from Civics, to Elections, to what they built. Secondly, with the voting, outsiders may come in and vote, to confuse things.

Definately, definately, need a website for this.

 

[Great_Scott]

BTW, who gets to decide exactly where units move in war and what not?

Also, will we be able to give some sort of speech to argue why we should be elected? Also, how often are elections? How will communication take place? Can you choose your second, third and fourth choices for running? For example, I want to be leader the most, but if I can't have that I'd like to be the cultural advisor. Is there any way I could do that?

For unit movment, see my post on page 4 where i quoted a big bunch of suggestions from Sigma, I address the issue there.

And yes, we will be able to make speechs, election campaigns and what not. Communication will take place, hopefully with a separate website which will have dedicated, private sections for each Civ to discuss, enroll to vote and vote on everything....

As for the elections.. it works like this. 1st round of each election, people may register for a position. There will be a short timeframe for this... where people will 'vote' for their preferred position. When that closes, the results are posted, and the members must then vote for who they want in each position... for example, if player 1 & 2 register for 'Leader', 3 registers for Vice Leader, well when the voting has to take place, all players but 1 & 2, must vote for either player 1 & 2, for Leader. Since Player 3 is the only candidate for Vice Leader, he wins by default. Right, now just say Player 1 wins the election and becomes Leader... then there is another round, if and only if there are positions where there were no candidates. So if no-one registered for Cultural Advisor, Player 2 and all other members not in a Top 10 position can register to for that round 2 election.

 

[Great_Scott]

Well i'm officially back from the silly season, 3 more players in, so we're cruising towards having enough numbers.

4 Civs... might be a good number for the first game.

 

[shday]

Regarding unit movement:

Good question. The reason I've not said anything, is while I've already thought about it... I've not made up my mind yet! Here's the thing... I think with units, only 2 advisors count... Leader & Military. I've tossed a few scenarios about.. and the best I've come up with is this..

Leader, Vice Leader & Military decide the designation of a unit once it is created. For example, a City produce a unit, and the 3 decide whether the unit is for defense, attack, exploration, border patrol.... it seems to make sense.. if the Leader & Vice Leader both swing one way, and the Military another, well then naturally the Military advisor should have no say.

Once the unit is out in the field, carrying out orders, it's up to the military entirely.

Unit promotions, again, entirely up to the Military. Makes sense.

Certain units, like the worker and work boat, should probably not be moved by the Military advisor.

 

[vra379971]

I'm VERY interested here!

BTW, If you haven't solved your situation, I see no reason why you couldn't split a Civ into two via WorldBuilder. I'm pretty sure you can reassign cities to another Civ.

EDIT: Ok....I lied. It's doable, BUT you'd have to delete the city, and replace it AND rebuild it exactly as it was before. It isn't hard, just time consuming.

 

[shday]

Note:- ... the total number of votes for each decision [are] all odd, so there's always a majority.

This implies that all Big 10 members would participate in every vote. Although this would be nice,it would slow things down too much. There should be a time limit on vote submission. If there is a tie after that, the responsible advisor would make the final call.

 

[nrseven]

as you prolly need more members: I'm in!!
being a backbencher is no problem for me, it would give me some time to get to understand the game.

 

[Abdukrahman]

Well i'm officially back from the silly season, 3 more players in, so we're cruising towards having enough numbers.

4 Civs... might be a good number for the first game.

Of course, I'm assuming more people could join after it starts up?

 

[Great_Scott]

Of course, I'm assuming more people could join after it starts up?

Of course.

 

[Great_Scott]

Regarding unit movement:



Certain units, like the worker and work boat, should probably not be moved by the Military advisor.

Good point.

 

[Great_Scott]

I'm VERY interested here!

BTW, If you haven't solved your situation, I see no reason why you couldn't split a Civ into two via WorldBuilder. I'm pretty sure you can reassign cities to another Civ.

EDIT: Ok....I lied. It's doable, BUT you'd have to delete the city, and replace it AND rebuild it exactly as it was before. It isn't hard, just time consuming.

Excellent. I really wanted the possiblity of Civil War!

 

[vra379971]

Excellent. I really wanted the possiblity of Civil War!

No... That idea was actually HORRIBLE! I had a brainwave while doing dishes...

Say you have X city owned by English>Civil War> You mod the map to add ONE American city somewhere. Doesn't even have to be good, just one somewhere. Then, you donate all the cities you want to them in regular play, then enter worldbuilder and delete the little city you made before.

And, I have yet to test it, but it should be easy to do

 

[Abdukrahman]

Don't forget to add nrseven to the list.

 

[facehuger]

yes, a civil war would be an interesting option.....great idea...

 

[Jeppson]

count me in to

 

[Great_Scott]

Regarding unit movement:

Certain units, like the worker and work boat, should probably not be moved by the Military advisor.

Unit Movement, as stated before stays the same, except for the following units. (Note- these units are under FULL control from their corresponding Advisors)

Missionary: Religious Advisor
Worker/Fast Worker/Work Boat: Infrastructure Advisor
Settler: Leader

 

[Great_Scott]

No... That idea was actually HORRIBLE! I had a brainwave while doing dishes...

Say you have X city owned by English>Civil War> You mod the map to add ONE American city somewhere. Doesn't even have to be good, just one somewhere. Then, you donate all the cities you want to them in regular play, then enter worldbuilder and delete the little city you made before.

And, I have yet to test it, but it should be easy to do

Unless I got alot of disapproval on this, it's staying in! What better way to have the classic 'personal gain vs. civilisation gain'

Also, I think I know what you're on about with the world builder. However, I'm at work, but I'll test it tonight... If we start with 4 Civs... then sometime down the track, one (or more?) of those Civs breaks into a Civil War... can we add another Civ mid-game?

If not... then I may have the solution. I may have to load up the game myself, to get the random terrain thing happening... then map edit it, to make a few islands down, say, on the arctics poles... then place their starting locations there... then have to play their turns continously (literally by doing stuff all), until one of them is needed for a civil war.

 

[Great_Scott]

count me in to

Wow, the dust of the silly season has settled, and we've now got 28 players. At this rate we'll be starting very shortly.

 

[vra379971]

Yup, we can add Civs mid game...=)

I think anyway, I'll go see.