How the demogame is going

[Black_Hole]

Well how do you think the demogame is going so far?
Well in my belief we can do alot more to make it better.
We need to stop these petty personaly fights, get over it!
This CC I recently filed has split the demogame in 2, this is not a personal attack against CT, but to show CT that she is being watch, and to always follow the instructions word for word. CT has her excuses(which are somewhat valid), but she could do more. But wait... couldn't we all do more to help this demogame?

So far I have not had much fun in this game, if some of us really try we can make this game fun for all, not just the chat goers but every citizen. This is not a time to point fingers and decided what somone else could do, but to figure out what we could do. The whole DG has gotten heaten up rather quickly over this CC, but I see it forming from awhile ago. These laws are not the best they could be, which is why we need a set of law, not what we have now. But this isnt the whole reason the DG is unfun, it is because people are playing for personal gain and to get back at people, instead of making it fun. We can make it fun be reviving many contests(which i soon plan to try) like best city, best province and that kind of thing.

Thanks all for reading this and feel free to comment(as long as you dont start a huge arguement)

 

[Chieftess]

What makes you think I have some conspiracy to control the game? If I really wanted to do that, I'd ban every one of you. That first paragraph is making me want to close this thread because it's essentially a troll bait.


I've pm'd those who left back in DG4. 25% said they left because of the legal and personal arguments between everyone. Most of the others left because of school.

Sure the ruleset might not be perfect, but the demogame isn't all about being the best bueracracy. Look at the origanal demogame thread in OT from years ago. The origanal idea was to:

1 - Discuss the game and the actions to take.
2 - Poll the options.
3 - The DP carries out those options.

I really don't know what's so hard about that, and we've been doing that (discussions, polls, and turnchats). We used to have the Top 5 city list (in fact, Cyc used to do them), and we had other fun things, but they fell to the wayside. Perhaps the game is just showing signs of age. Maybe it's time to give ourselves a new challenge rather than "build cities aimlessly and try to conquer everyone with cavs").

The other thing I've noticed (started slowly in DG2) is that we're all starting to get paranoid of each other, and forming our own little "groups" (if not said verbaly, it's in ideals).

 

[Black_Hole]

*sigh*
CT that is the last thing i wanted to do, I wanted us to think individually what we could do to make the dg better, i am not trolling.
Sorry about making you think I am trying to throw the CC at you.
Tomorrow I will try and make a complete run down of science, to help people better understand where we are and I encourage all ministers to do that same(many already have though).

Once again I am deeply sorry Chieftess.
Perhaps I stated this wrong:

This CC I recently filed has split the demogame in 2, this is not a personal attack against CT, but to show CT that she is being watch, and to always follow the instructions word for word. CT has her excuses(which are somewhat valid), but she could do more. But wait... couldn't we all do more to help this demogame?

What I meant CT is that everyone is thinking this CC is something to let cyc get mad at you about, and it is not.

 

[Epimethius]

You know what we need? Some good ol' Anaphasine politics!

Seriously, this isn't heating up. I can understand the CC being brought, and I can understand some people being angry about that. But are not, and should not be, very angry. You are all overreacting. Even if CT is found guilty, the People will not give her a stiff fine. And if she is not, then she has learned from her mistake. The event happened in the past, and future efforts should be made to stop it from happening. This CC has encouraged even more efforts in that direction, so I cannot have been that bad of a thing.

Maybe I've been skipping some topics, but I haven't seen much polarization at all. I couldn't care less about Zojiji and the CC.

 

[snipelfritz]

please scroll down slowly while humming the Star Wars theme.

Demogame Episode V
A New Hope

The Peoples of the Kingdom of Japanatica lived in peace and prosparity for a time

The citizens enjoyed themselves in a lighthearted and goodwilled manner

Unfortunately, dissent came over the elders

An Empress came into power. An Empress named Chieftess. Empress Chieftess was downright evil

She was organized, involved, and whats worse, she was even human.

Many of the more experienced and wiser citizens began writing long elaborate speaches

leading to their exit from the Demogame.

But beneath these speaches lay the simple fact that people were throwing hissy fits.

What was once a game had began a twisted system of finger pointing and rivalry.

The future of the Demogame lay in new hands, those of the young and the enthusiastic.

Most of the experienced ones were gone, and now the Demogame faced a crossroads, with one message

"UNLESS some like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not"​

Yeah, well thats what I've got to say right now.

 

[MSTK]

I hope that has a happy ending.

 

[Ashburnham]

Perhaps a newcomer's opinions would be appreciated..

Having been in the DG for a grand total of 1 week, I must say I have noticed the divisions and bickering people speak of. But I've also found an incredibly entertaining concept, that is intended to elevate a game I already enjoy immensely and create an engaging and unique multiplayer experience. There are many people I can think of who have made this game entertaining through the dedication and thought they put into these boards. It's upsetting that a few small events have created such negativity on these boards. I don't have any experience here, so I can't compare this DG to past games, but it certainly seems like I'm not alone in my enjoyment of the game. I urge the older members who've become jaded by recent events to remember why they're here in the first place: to play a game you love with a bunch of other people who love the game just as much.

Once we all remember that, I don't see how bad experiences can follow.

 

[Provolution]

Yeah just hold hands, all new players take over and get out the old sludge and see forwards...

 

[GenMarshall]

I urge the older members who've become jaded by recent events to remember why they're here in the first place: to play a game you love with a bunch of other people who love the game just as much.

Hmm, I can relate to that. I have became jaded once again due to college. I had forgoten why I came in the first place. I remembered just joining the game to have fun and be involved into something important.

 

[Sir Donald III]

Strider made this argument in the CC1 "Discussion" Thread.

First off, we should ban the use of polls in instructions. The leader should post the result of the poll at the time they post the instructions, none of this "per the result of this poll," crap. It causes confusion, espicially in the chance of a tie and the tie being broken shortly afterwards, it makes it much harder on the DP to visit several polls while trying to play the game.

I wish to counter this argument using the experience I have gained in this term.

Given: Under Chieftess, Turnchats are 3 Days and a couple of hours apart (from last one's end to next one's start), with some time for sleeping every other case.

Given: Polls are set to close only at 24-Hour Intervals.

Given: Article G, Section 2, in part:

If no instructions have been posted for an office within 24 hours of the upcoming Turn Chat, the deputy for that office may post the official instructions for the office.

And Given: Polls are usually preceded by a discussion period, preferably 24 Hours

Net Result: I would have to put Options up to a 24 Hour Poll, With only 12 Hours of possible Discussion, plus of minus 6 given the day of the week.

This, in my opinion, is not sufficient time to get the opinions of even the most active, let alone the people who pop in only once a day... and Kami help those who don't show up daily...

Either that, or I would not be able to take into account WOTP at all. :suicide:

Now what's "Fair" and "accomadaitng" about all of that?


Chieftess has her life overseeing networks.
I have my life going to classes and working stock at a supermarket.
I'm sure that the majority of you attend either High School or College, and partake in various extra cirriculars.
And Daveshack is Married! (As are, probably soem of you.) Ladies and Gentlemen, shall we condemn this man for putting his wife in front of the Almighty Demogame?


I guess this is where the actual battle lines are: Between Ministers (and Governors, if they so desire,) who have to gauge the WOTP within a 3 Day timeframe, and a DP who has to go through Window after blasted window trying to compare instructions to polls by which WOTP is gauged. Perhaps "The People" (Meaning all "Citizens" not currently holding office.) represents a third faction, and indeed the core of the problem.


The solutions to this problem are as follows:
A: Post Polls w/o discussion period (and we all know how that turned out...)

B: Post Instructions With NO accounting for WOTP. (Some people actually approve of this one... Personally, I don't...)

Or...
C: Expand the time between Turnchats. Say to like... 5 days (between beginnings).

5 Days would have this sort of a schedule:
Day 1: Initial Reports and Analysis, Ministers decide Issues
Day 2: Discussion of Issues
Days 3 & 4: Polling of individual options
Day 5: Production of Instructions.

As opposed to the current Schedule:
Day 1: Analysis & Discussion
Days 2 & 3: Polling and Instructions

OR the "net result" schedule
Day 1: Analysis AND Discussion
Day 2: Polling
Day 3: Production of Instructions.

Sure, a 5-day schedule will give us only 6 Turnchats. But which would you rather have? 6 well-thought, well-communicated, and well-played TCs, or 10 TCs full of confusion and strife?

This also has a side benefit in that people who want to participate in the RPG have more time to do so.

Anyway, that's the take from one of the "unaccomidating robots" in the Ministries...

 

[Cyc]

I'd be having a great time if certain people would quite breaking the rules. That's what we need in this game is compliance with the rules. If this were done, there would be no bickering. It doesn't matter what recommendations or Laws you come up with, if people ignore them, and do what they want without consideration to others, your new rules or guidelines (whatever tag you're going to put on them) will not work.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I'm enjoying myself very well. But that is because the of the way I play. I was elected Minister of Science in term 1; and I dedicated my whole demogame that month to science. This term I am nothing; so I only comment and advise.
In term 3 I am governor (of Zarnia) thus I fight for the interests of the cities in that province. It's kinda like a RPG; I dedicate myself to what I set out to be.

And I have no enemies in the game; I consider every registered citizen as someone out to have fun. Some I know for a longer period of time (Cyc, Donovan Zoi, CivGeneral, SaaM, CT etc.) and some I've only met recently. But that is no reason to like someone's style better than someone else's.

I don't side in a pro- or anti- camp. On certain issues I agree with a person and on other issues I disagree. There are citizens I disagree with more than I agree with and there are citizens I never agree with, but that doesn't mean I side against them. Just take it as it is; a game played with real people.

We've run into a problem that an instruction was not carried out. We can solve it if we analyse what the bottom-reason is for this. So:

We've run into a problem that an instruction was not carried out.
-> That is: Because the instructions are not always clear
-> That is: Because there are links to multiple polls (which aren't examples of clarity either)
-> That is: Because the time to determine what the instructions should be is short, so short that polls don't end until the start of the TC
-> Because the TC's are quickly following up on eachother

So if we solve the quick following of the TC's the problem which was a result of this is also solved. That means I agree with SD3 about the way the solution should be found (but not neccesarily of his fixxed number of days in the solution).

 

[Ginger_Ale]

To quote Cyc and change some things:

I'd be having a great time if we didn't have all these rules. Why should a person who wants to be deputy have to remember 8 sections in a Constitution and CoL and whatever our laws our? Cyc, I was lurking the end of DG3 and DG4 - what was one of the main reasons people didn't have a lot of fun? Rules...CCs...PIs...whatever they are. Once they start up, they never go away, and people realize the game won't be the same.

I enjoy participating in this game, but I feel that once we get involved in legal issues and not playing the game, the fun disappears. Do you enjoy this legal thing anyone? It takes away from the game - this isn't a model parliament...it's a game.

 

[ravensfire]

To quote Cyc and change some things:

I'd be having a great time if we didn't have all these rules. Why should a person who wants to be deputy have to remember 8 sections in a Constitution and CoL and whatever our laws our? Cyc, I was lurking the end of DG3 and DG4 - what was one of the main reasons people didn't have a lot of fun? Rules...CCs...PIs...whatever they are. Once they start up, they never go away, and people realize the game won't be the same.

I enjoy participating in this game, but I feel that once we get involved in legal issues and not playing the game, the fun disappears. Do you enjoy this legal thing anyone? It takes away from the game - this isn't a model parliament...it's a game.

Actually, yes I do enjoy the "legal thing" - it's a part of the game.

Look, we have a wide range of people participating in this game. To make something like that work, you must have a solid structure that everyone operates within. We have tried detailed rulesets (DG2), sparse rulesets (DG4), insanely detailed rulesets (DG4) and a somewhat detailed ruleset (DG5). Each of these strives to give enough guidance to everyone to let all enjoy the process of playing Civ III as a community.

I don't think any of them have been perfect. I think most of them were too vague in language. Rules for any game should be clearly stated in simple terms. If it's not in the rules, it doesn't count!

In terms of the game - it's the same game, played the same way. The two areas of concern that I have there are: 1) Desire the play the perfect game and 2) Leadership.

The first is pretty simple - there is a strong desire from some to play the absolute perfect game, from their perspective, and to ridicule and comment with contempt any decision that goes against that viewpoint. Continually. Over and over. Get the point? That got old 2 years ago, and it's still going on. You know what - a decision went a different way than you preferred, NOBODY WANTS TO HEAR "I TOLD YOU SO'S". Yes, this ticks me off when anyone does it. Including me. (Go figure - I tick myself off!). Related to this is the obscene focus on speed and time. We're cramming in turns at a faster and faster rate, pressing to get those 10 turns in. Who cares? If we're progressing at a slow pace but everyone is enjoying it, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW SLOW WE GO. Likewise, if people aren't having fun, it doesn't matter how fast the game is.

The second is harder. We elect leaders that are reactive in nature, giving us huge numbers of polls over minutia. Leaders that use polls to circumvent other leaders. I'd love to see leaders that provoke discussions on long-term goals. Example - "What should province XYZ focus on for the next 2 weeks - Infrastructure, Military, Wonders, etc" Think of the discussions from that! Set this long term goal, and use that as the basis for instructions. Leaders also need to start working together. Good grief - our office threads used to be some of the most popular threads out there. Now - dead. Minimal inter-office communication and minimal use by citizens. Here's a shocking concept, when you have a problem or suggestion for a leader, POST IT IN THE OFFICE THREAD. They, after all, are the leader, give them the respect and basic courtesy due the office. Post the idea in their thread, and let them run with it. If they don't, suggest it again or hammer them with it in the next election cycle.

We had the game version chosen for us, and while I understand the reasoning, I think in part it's because of how we do play the game. There is minimal information about the game status available on the forums and updated on a regular basis. That's depressing. I don't want to look at the save. Heck - I don't even have Civ III installed on any machine I have! Shocking, isn't it? I shouldn't have to, assuming, of course, some basic summary information is present. Examples - what wonders are currently being built, by whom, and when did they start. Our military summary is 2 weeks old. What trades do we currently have?

We have had some outstanding office threads in the past - the current Judicial thread is an example of an organized thread with summary information up front and updated. It's darn fancy too, but that's not needed. Think about using screenshots of spreadsheets to organize and display the information.

The instruction clarity issue isn't a new one - consider creating some basic guidelines to help out. First, be detailed. Use screenshots or detailed descriptions. DP's - be aware that if you have a quick turn around, you're gonna have to look at multiple polls. People do like discussions - as the game is currently played, that means discussions and polls. If you don't give enough time for that (figure 4 days minimum - 1 day to review the game, 1-2 to discussion, 1-2 to poll). That speed is also going to mean missed opportunities and bad choices. Too bad. Deal with it. Leaders, try to avoid polls if you can. If you can't, make contingency plans and clearly state your preferences. Personally, the recent CC might have been moot if the leader had clearly stated his preference as a tie-breaker.

Bah - I've gone over my time limit. The game isn't healthy. It's not sick either, but it needs some attention and refocus. There is a core of unhappy people - the leaders of term 3 need to determine if they care about that group. If they do care, they've got to figure out how to address those concerns. I wish 'em luck.

-- Ravensfire

 

[blackheart]

To quote a really old saying

"Give peace a chance."

 

[Ginger_Ale]

Well ravensfire, you can be an exception.

I do see some good things about it, but some times we take it to the extreme...if someone posted instructions 59 minutes before, would someone here say "Read X section of the CoL"...or "those aren't valid"? I bet that someone would - there is a reason for laws, yeah, but I do think simple matters need to be hard.

 

[ravensfire]

Well ravensfire, you can be an exception.

I do see some good things about it, but some times we take it to the extreme...if someone posted instructions 59 minutes before, would someone here say "Read X section of the CoL"...or "those aren't valid"? I bet that someone would - there is a reason for laws, yeah, but I do think simple matters need to be hard.

Thanks!

Agreed, but likewise, do you want people posting instructions mere minutes before the turnchat?

Some time ago I was a DP. Foolish decision, really, but I did it. I started the turn chat usually 30 minutes early to handle all of the pre-turn, reversible stuff to speed things up. Part of the reasoning for that time limit is that. It's also to give citizens at least a small chance to review the instructions as opposed to "stealth" instructions, posted at the last second.

The problem is where do you draw the line - because no matter where you put it, someone will push it, someone will complain. Personally, the 1 hour limit is a nice compromise.

And yes, we have had people in the past post instructions AFTER the turn-chat started, and expect that everything would be followed. As a DP that had to deal with that, it was a complete and utter pain to deal with.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Rik Meleet]

Well, Ravensfire. When I was DP I strictly abide by the rule that instructions should be posted an hour before the TC. That didn't work out either and it certainly didn't stop people from posting past the dead-line. Ignoring instructions that were posted later than T - 1 hour and even me filing an official CC had not the effect I'd hoped for; clear, well thought of and on-time instructions.
If someone has an idea how that can be accomplished; please speak now.

 

[MOTH]

Ginger_Ale and Ravensfire both have excellent points. The constitution also allows for build queues to be done 'offline' (presumably by the DP).

Each governor (and the Domestic Minister in some cases) can easily post in the TCIT when their orders are final so that the DP can get some of the pre-turn done ahead of the turn chat. This would also allow citizens at the start of the TCIT to review the save and could double check that the build queues were entered correctly. Reviewing the pre-turn save after the DP has made the various edits can be cumbersome and slow down the chat. I could also see that a DP that might prefer that the governors send a PM indicating when build queues are final.

In case it helps CT on this one, I have posted at the top of Hairando's TCIT post that my build queues for tonight's TC are final.

 

[ravensfire]

Well, Ravensfire. When I was DP I strictly abide by the rule that instructions should be posted an hour before the TC. That didn't work out either and it certainly didn't stop people from posting past the dead-line. Ignoring instructions that were posted later than T - 1 hour and even me filing an official CC had not the effect I'd hoped for; clear, well thought of and on-time instructions.[/code]
Well do I remember that - and that CC was AFTER repeated begging, pleading and warning. Low point of DG4 was term 1.

If someone has an idea how that can be accomplished; please speak now.[/QUOTE]

I  ........
Maybe ........

Yeah.  The actions (repeatedly) speak loudly on this.

-- Ravensfire