Democracy Game. What Version Of Civ?

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

WOW this poll is close. It's 50/50 at this moment ,what wil win? Tadadada.Democracy is fun ,especially if youre voters don't get out of the issue ,then i'll have to decide .Strange thing though those 44 vote's considering the players eerrr.(fraud?)
Good thing a forum is coming underway.

 

[goodyhut]

It is looking like there will be TWO games, one for Civ 2 and one for Civ 3. I am still only interested in participating in the Civ III one but I will follow the other one as well.

 

[Pggar]

I voted civ3 because I think i've played enough of civ2. However, the multiplayer with restricted threads sounds like another great idea.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Why don't we just have 2 games for this - one for Civ2 and one for Civ3? Ppl who don't have Civ3 won't really understand bout Civ3 until they get the game and play it for awhile while those who got Civ3 won't really want to go back and play Civ2 much. And some ppl can go for both.

 

[duke o' york]

Originally posted by TheDuckOfFlanders
Not if restriction's are placed of wich player can read wich topic's/thread's.We would need a whole system for that but if we ever come to such a game i think it must possible to implement.

And the easy way to get around this is simply not to register when you enter the site and then read the other team's thread. If, as I hope, this little experiment will be available for general viewing by visitors to the site then splitting the game in half and not allowing visitors to read either would be very unfair. It would be of no interest to those who weren't already taking part and completely inaccessible to those who were interested. If you want to have a democratic multi game then form two enormous tribes and communicate solely by PM or e-mail so that the opposition can't spy on you. After the game is finished, each side would post the records of their respective reigns.

 

[knowltok]

Only potential problem I can see with two games is that a game of this nature will require a lot of energy to sustain. A few key people will keep it going over the months ahead. It may be spreading things too thin to have two at once. Then again, maybe there is enough energy...

 

[Endureth]

I don't have Civ 2, only Civ 3. A friend is going to loan me CTP in a couple days though. If Civ 2 wins the vote then you'll have to move me from Trade Leader to a regular citizen as all my votes will be based on what I read in the posts and screenshots posted, whith Civ 3 I could take a more active role.

Plus Civ 3 will be patched by the time this game starts.

Endureth

 

[knowltok]

Perhaps we need a more defined poll.

Those that only have Civ2
Those that have both and lean toward Civ2
" " " " " " Civ3
Those that only have Civ3

I leave it up to the Illustrious Duck of Flanders.

 

[goodyhut]

Originally posted by knowltok
Only potential problem I can see with two games is that a game of this nature will require a lot of energy to sustain. A few key people will keep it going over the months ahead. It may be spreading things too thin to have two at once. Then again, maybe there is enough energy...

hmmm, good point. I think if there are 2 games, then nobody should be allowed to be on the council of both games.

 

[.:KNAS:.]

Originally posted by knowltok
Perhaps we need a more defined poll.

Those that only have Civ2
Those that have both and lean toward Civ2
" " " " " " Civ3
Those that only have Civ3

I leave it up to the Illustrious Duck of Flanders.

i think thats a real good idea

 

[animepornstar]

come on, civ2 is too easy. we will win even how terrible our government works.

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by animepornstar
come on, civ2 is too easy. we will win even how terrible our government works.

I don't know why your so confident.

The Vice President has never won a game past King before.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

I leave it up to the Illustrious Duck of Flanders.

i think thats a real good idea

yes ,inpower youre president 26 v.s 26 vote's for now :crazyeyes

come on, civ2 is too easy. we will win even how terrible our government works.

I don't know if all our voter's are so competent though. that's no problem though ,it will give some extra suspense ,and i guess a lot of people will maybe learn something out of the experience.

I have won in Diety sometimes, but mostly in preferable posistion's.Big world map (= plenty of space to expand into ,and having knowledge of the uncharted terrain's ,that sort o' stuff)

But we schould still play this on the diety level though.if we have trouble's ,we have 50 minds to come up with solid proposal.

 

[.:KNAS:.]

Those that only have Civ2
Those that have both and lean toward Civ2
" " " " " " Civ3
Those that only have Civ3

THAT was the good idea, the voting thing

 

[dreadhead7]

Hmmm. Should have read this before pm'ing TF. Personally, I don't care which one we play, as I have both.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

that is giving youre vote to the majority. knowing the tempory result could be a tight vote.

 

[allan]

I too have never won a CivII game past king level, so a CivII deity game would still be quite a challenge for me. If I ever got elected president for such a game, know that I'd be relying especially heavily on my staff for advice....

 

[allan]

Knight-Dragon: "You just need to learn how to place your cities better."

I know how to place cities VERY well (in CivII anyway--the specials pattern is pretty simple). If there's ONE thing I'm any good at, it is that....

"Plus there's the second capital. Just no more productive global empires (which I wasn't fond of anyway)."

I've read in the new CivIII forums about the corruption problem, that plagues even democracies, even with the Forbidden Palace, once they get to even controlling half the area one normally goes for in CivII. Is this exaggerated? I mean, they were talking ALL BUT ONE SHIELD/ARROW type of corruption under DEMOCRACY (I take it democracies are no longer immune to corruption)! That's very obviously a bug....

Plus "global empires" is the way I play on higher levels--that seems to be the only way to beat the AI at a space race (if they have all the techs), who can somehow miraculously build one spaceship part (even modules) per city per turn, in 10-20 shield cities even, without spending any gold (and I know they aren't accumulating freights to build them with either). I spy on them, and believe me, they cheat.... So the player must have a huge enough empire to match the level of space production of even a ten-city AI.... This is on king level and higher of course, when I played prince I could win with a nice compact empire....

Besides though, expansion and conquest are FUN, especially in late game....

(BTW, another reason I haven't got CivIII yet is that I hear there is no real scenario editor yet. I seem to recall a better scenario editor than CivII MGE's was promised for CivIII--must be for a later version though.... Of course lack of a scenario editor wouldn't affect the play of this "democracy game", but I want one for other things I may do.)

 

[amadeus]

Woah, I just cast the 58th vote (now it is directly split 50-50)

I voted for Civ2, myself.

 

[Eli]

Maybe we should have two games? One for Civ2 and one for Civ3?