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

DG6: Alternative Government Structure

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game V: Citizens' started by DaveShack, Jan 17, 2005.

  1. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,102
    Location:
    London
    Honestly, if we do not put in a minum number of turns per term, we can basically scrap the idea of strategic planners for a term. You would need minimum 40-60 turns worth to make a long term strategy worth it. And in that time, when the term ends, one elects a new set of strategic planners that will make new strategic plans. With no guaranteed minimums, this strategic plan model will fail. There is a distinct need to forecast

    Donsig wants 60 turn terms for this purpose
    We need to let the Judicary work with calender dates
    We need to allow some flexibility in number of turns per term

    If we want a strategic layer, there is no way around a turn quota, allowing strategic leaders to actually plan some 50 turns ahead, and let the plans be implemented.
    I cannot recommend a system where these plans are vulnerable to the whims of some random urges, lazy/slow DPs or in general a lack of direction. Strategic planning with a tactical layer requires predictability in the number of turns both per term and per turnchat. Good leaders should also cover all conditionalities and eventualities 10 turns ahead, and for strategic leaders 50 turns ahead. If we cannot agree on that, I see no reason to continue this thread. If there is less than 30 turns per term, we really do not need a real strategic layer, as most of it will be defined tactical anyways.

    What worked well Term IV, to a fault, was that we all agreed on war objectives, upgrades and military build quotas. Without such a model, for the military for example, we frankly do not need strategic military planners. I know some players would just take it on the fly on a first come first serve basis as wars jump into our way.
    So it is basically a strategic planning side versus a populist improvization-discuss-poll side.
     
  2. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    For the last time, Provo, HOW WOULD YOU MANDATE THAT MINIMUM?

    How would you "punish" leaders that can't reach it?
    When do you "punish" them?
    What about extenuating circumstances.

    It's not a bad a idea, but totally impractical given a finite time period.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  3. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    provo if you want someone to lots of turns a term vote for someone that will do that... Some people might want a slower pace especially since we will probably be playing emperor where mistakes will kill us
     
  4. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    NO MORE QUOTAS!!!

    No more trying to bind the hands of people. Everyone has their own playing style and certain phases of the game may require a faster or slower pace, let the voters decided that when they choose the president/DP.
     
  5. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,102
    Location:
    London
    Well, then we could scrap the "strategic planning" and go all tactical, since then the system would at least be robust and accountable, and stop turnchats when there is wars.
     
  6. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,102
    Location:
    London
    For operating a set number of turns, we could call for a flexible range, so the DPs knew wht they would get at. Some strategic planners plan 10 turns away, some 50. But frankly, we do not need strategic planners for a 25 turn term. If this is the case, we should go for Donsigs DG3 Constitution, and make new alternative government structures per term, depending on who the elected President is.

    For this to work, the DP need to commit to a range so the strategic committee can plan with the concept of time, game time. If not, I can hardly see strategic planners be successful in anything without the room to develop, discuss and poll plans.
    As soon as the term ends, they may well be replaced.

    Sorry Daveshack, but I think the strategic-tactical layers are running into a meat-grinder.
     
  7. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Let's try an experiment. We've had a lot of theory, time for the practical stuff.

    I need 2-3 people to volunteer to be the "Strategy group" and 2-3 people to volunteer to be the "Tactical group". We'll use the turn chats from DG5 at various points to test this out.

    If you are interested, please note which group you'd like to be in, or no preference.

    Thanks,
    -- Ravensfire
     
  8. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    Doesn't starting from a known position run the risk of second-guessing because we know what the outcome was?

    I'm interested in this concept, not sure if RL will be kind enough.
     
  9. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Not really. In part, it's an intellectual exercise. Everyone also has different ideas of what *should* have been done.

    I want to test out the interaction between the two groups. That difference alone will change things. For the purpose of this test, that the future is known won't matter. For the first attempt, I'm going to grab the Term 1, TC3 save and go from there.

    So, which group do you want, DS. Strategic or Tactical?

    -- Ravensfire
     
  10. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    I've been putting some more thought into this (mostly because I'm actually off the on-call rotation, having been on-call for two freakin' weeks). Assuming we went with something like this, we'd need two documents to make this work because it IS new.

    First, the ruleset. Obvious, but it needs to be there. The second is a FAQ about the process, including some examples. This IS new. There are a lot of questions (see various pages above) that need to be answered. My experiment above is intended to try some of them out, to see how it would actually work, to find some of the issues and work on fixes.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  11. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    Ok, I'll be Strategic. I'll go look and see if I have that save zipped. Probably do.
     
  12. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    Ok, I've got it. You're using the DG5 Term 1 TC3 save to plan for the TC4, which just happend to fall on a Friday the 13th. :) Intentional? :lol:

    BTW, you want me to be Internal, External, or what? I should probably know before we start. ;)
     
  13. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Cyc (and all others interested),

    I've started a thread here to avoid cluttering up this thread.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  14. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    we need to have an official vote on whether people want a traditional governement or a governemnt with tactical/strategic split
     
  15. YNCS

    YNCS Ex-bubblehead

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,098
    Location:
    -4 GMT
    We need a citizens registry before we can have an official vote.
     
  16. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    there has never been a problem of people voting in ratifacation polls that werent interested in the DG
     
  17. Ashburnham

    Ashburnham King

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    827
    I think we should decide how exactly we want out alternative government to work before we force people to vote on whether we should use it or not. Currently, we have 3 possible options for how it would be structured, and everyone else is welcome to post their suggestions. However, at the moment, an official vote would be premature.
     
  18. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    I am currently working on an entire constitution based on DaveShack's structure. But I wont post any of it until I get DaveShack's permission. I am doing this so people know exactly how an alternate government would work.
     

Share This Page