Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game III: Citizens' started by Donovan Zoi, Oct 27, 2003.
I would like to vote for Option #2
I'm voting for modifying, with the first thing done being the changing of the PI laws to the DG3 PI laws.
Not so fast Noldodan.
As you will see in this thread, there is talk of judiciary reform that may make the DG3 laws obsolete. We will cross that bridge in due time.
Well, it seems that there is a huge support for modifying the DG2 ruleset. If no-one objects, I would like to open the poll a bit before the 48 hour mark. I wouldn't normally do this, but we have alot of ground to cover in the next month and this issue is key to how we proceed from here.
If no-one objects, I will post this poll around 10pm EST.
and so I say, anything that makes the game start sooner than December 1st. Sometimes I feel like I am ignored in this forums...
I don't think the game starting before December 1st is realistic, amirsan. DG4 won't start until December 1 at the very earliest, and will most likely start on January 1, pending rules and game discussions.
anyways, anything is good for me!
id prefer 12-1, but i guess 1-1 is ok too
That looks cool, post # 1111
Umm... is it too late to stop you fools from trying to modify the DG2 ruleset? If any of you had any sense you would keep the DG3 constitution, spend a little time making the few rules you think are needed and playing DG4.
Thank you, donsig. This fool has been looking for the path I would take if I had any sense. How will I ever repay you.
the DG3 rules do seem pretty good in my opinion.
Yep, all together Fionn, I counted 9 PI's against Chieftess in the first three Demogames. I think that makes her the champ!
You are planning to take 2 MONTHS to plan the next game?
This is the reason the demo games are short on members. You over complicate matters. If it worked in the past then use it. Make some minor changes but make them quick.
Old demo game ---> bish-bash-wallop ---> New demo game
Stop fannying about and get this thing a-going.
I'll be happy with whatever you choose.
I don't know the DG1 or the DG2 ruleset, so I can't give my opinion on them. I think the DG3 ruleset is fine.
A pretty good point if you ask me.
I'd much rather have a good, workable ruleset in two months than a rushed one in one month. However, if the rule and game discussions go faster than expected, I would request that we start on December 1. I also think that we should consider December 15 as a potential starting day, as we won't have absentees from the holidays and by then we should have everything pretty much in place.
Bootstoots, the DG3 constitution is the result of over a year's work on demogame rules. Do you really think you all can improve on that in two months - especially if you're going to go back to the DG2 rules and try to *fix* them?!? We realized before we started DG3 that they weren't worth fixing, that's why we trashed them.
Why not keep the DG3 constitution, make a thread about what *laws* are needed, make threads about each *law* can be discussed and drafted, poll the things, and start the game already!
We realized this game that the relaxed ruleset doesn't work under pressure, so why not go back to the DG2 ruleset as a framework from which we can build our new ruleset, which will become the result of over a year and a half's work on demogame rules. Keep in mind that the bulk of DG3's ruleset will be incorporated in the DG4 one, as stated below.
Why not take the DG2 laws as a framework and fix them as necessary, making additions and subtractions until we have a workable ruleset? The DG2 and DG3 constitutions aren't very different, and the DG3 PI system is probably going to be implemented in DG4 (which is virtually all of the DG3 CoL). If we already have a framework from which to make rules decisions, wouldn't it go along faster than coming up with all new laws from scratch?
I don't understand why some people are stating that the DG3 ruleset didn't work (or didn't work in all situations). Didn't we just finish a game with that ruleset? We had (I think) 1 term of problems, which were identified so we could fix them. So, lets fix them and move on.
One of the main reasons that the DG3 ruleset didn't work is that the DG2 ruleset was essentially what was used for many of our procedural matters. For instance, if a new citizen were to ask why we have elections at the end of every month with a term being a month long and nominations being held on the 24th, elections on the 29th (both at midnight GMT), the best we would be able to answer is "well, that's what we've always done" or "we did it in DG2" or something to that effect. Same thing with the CoC, which isn't even remotely defined in the DG3 ruleset, or deputies, and the list goes on. We should have this codified and I feel that it would be much better to use the system that we have been using de-facto for the most part as a framework, and build from there. We can take out some unnecessary laws there, and patch up some loopholes, add the laws that would prevent a situation like we had in Term 3, and make any other changes that we find necessary. Wouldn't it be better to have a ruleset that codifies everything that we still use from the DG2 ruleset in addition to the changes we need? And what could act as a better framework than the DG2 ruleset itself?
donsig a simple question. why do you want to keep the DG3 ruleset?
Zorven: a good majority of the DG players have either been here from DG1 or DG2's starts so we are used to a certain way of play, as ive stated many many many many times a good majority of us have played with the restrivtiveness of DG1&2's rulesets more than we did in DG3. We all assume that permissive is better but its not. We didnt spend a lick of time (aside from the PI CoL) amending this DG3 ruleset. Not one dang time did we site and decide hey lets change something now instead of waiting to fix it.
The whole purpose of making laws is to do in game, thats what the judiciary was for aside from dismissing PI's we took alot away from the judiciary in interpreteing a constitution. The rules were far vaguer here than past rulesets. This game doesnt function under a permissive ruleset, shoot democracy really doesnt cuz we dont give our president a blank check to just wage wars and do whatever he feels. (cept for Bush). We have only done that during times of war or immenent threat. enough of my rant. altho i will say this one more time so it sinks into the rest of those posting why dont we keep the DG3 Ruleset: Most DG players have played this past game with the restrictive ruleset of DG2 in mind. Why? because it just felt right.
Separate names with a comma.