FA poll: Our actions when meeting new neighbours

[Paalikles]

What is your opinion:
When meeting a new neighbour, should the FA department halt the play?

This policy would only have effect till all civs are met

Our opinion:
Assuming the Deputy Moron understands the Head Moron, we wish to halt the play whenever we meet new people. The benefit of this is that we (all branches) can analyze and evaluate trade deals, possible foreign policy, future settlement plans, military actions etc.

But also, this would delay the progress of the game.

-->Untill otherwhise noticed, consider this an unofficial poll

Edit: this poll will be running untill it is replaced with the official poll when things are discussed


(Note: This initiative was by the FA Deputy, and all mistakes here rests upon his shoulders. Please PM me if there is something lacking from this poll)

 

[Rik Meleet]

Meeting a new civ is an important part of the game, which opens up (or closes) many possibilities. The DP has to search for the brake-pedal when that happens. But not neccesarily immediately !!!. If such an event occurs it's up to the DP to decide, after checking the situation (trade possibilities, location, techs etc). whether to continue the game for a limited amount of turns or to "take it to the forum".

An example is the meeting of the Babylonians. They had no good deals; their location was unknown and we'd get a new tech in 2 turns. It was folly to stop immediatley. No harm was done in waiting for Maths to come around.

I don't mind stopping a play, but I do mind stopping a play by definition. In this case we would have stopped when 2 turns later maths was discovered. So instead of a 7 turn play we'd have a 5 turn and a 2 turn, in which nothing would fundamentaly change.

P.S. the time the poll will remain opened is missing

 

[donsig]

This poll should have had some discussion first.

This poll should include an *other* option.

I would have voted *other*. The game play session should be halted at the DP's discretion. (Note to President: DP's discretion means just that - it does not mean asking those at the *chat* what they think should be done.)

 

[Paalikles]

Woops - I thought about posting 4 options, where 1 was other

Given the current options, I advice all who wish to vote "other" to vote no.

Also - look at this discussion thread:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=76558

 

[TerminalMan90]

I agree with Rik on this one. We have a leader. That leader is supposedly a good player. There are situations where a stop in chat is required and there are others where a stop is not necessary. The DP is also accountable to the Citizenry. If his judgement is in error, he/she will suffer the consiquences later through CC's and other nastnessesessessees.

Our leaders should NOT be puppets of the rules.

Unofficially, I vote other but as there is no other, I vote No

 

[Will_518]

no need to stress the nastnessesessessees, we should make you the head of judiciary, you got my vote.

I vote NO, 'cos what are our elected official supposed to do? sit on their backs all day reading forum posts, or getting on with the game? A turn chat is only 20 turns (am i right?), it's not that much, we can discuss the new opportunities after a few turns. It's not gonna make a major difference, I believe our president is (or should be) a good player.

 

[Sarevok]

not really, dont need to.

 

[RoddyVR]

i thought a turn chat was 10 turns.

and i voted yes. mostly cause i'm of the opinion that the turn chats should be 1 turn long. so any excuse to stop the turn chat is a good one as far as i'm concerned.

 

[ravensfire]

Nope!

Now, if we meet neighbors that are fairly close, that represent a threat, or have some very interesting trade possibilities, then we should consider stopping the chat.

I think that instructions giving such leeway to the DP are preferrable to the "Stop the chat" absolutes. To give a recent example, we met the Babs, yet continued the chat to complete Math. Reasoning: having Math opens up significant trade opportunities for us.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

I voted NO.

The DP should use their discretion. That's why we elect a President.

 

[Bootstoots]

I abstain. I think that the chat should be halted only if we discover a potential thread or trading partner. Under ordinary circumstances, it is not essential to stop the chat for new contacts.

 

[Chieftess]

I almost voted abstain, but selected no for several reasons:

1 - We know we're going to meet another civ a few turns later (i.e., we see a border).

2 - There's no trades to make.

3 - We're researching something within 5 turns that could be a trade item.