DaveShack said:
Part of the point of electing strategic and tactical separately is to eliminate the problem of how to select a deputy.
How about this, if the strategic or tactical position remains open after the election, the other one for the same role appoints someone?
Another option is to allow the same person to hold both the strategic and tactical positions for the same office.
I would personally prefer just using the tradational structure, but giving the deputies more "codified," duties.
IE: The Military Deputy is incharge of national defense.
This is also not what I'd call a compromise. It does not fix any of the reasons why I opposed the Alternative Government in the first place. As I'm pretty sure there is going to be some people asking what these are, despite my several posts inside of the alternative government structure, I'll list them here:
* The alternative government does what? Give two people with equal power the right to officially step on eachothers toes? Long-term planning, and short-term planning doesn't do much to sum up anything. I'm seriously hoping that the Alternatives Article E. is just a rough draft of sometype.
* So... our strategic officials plan ahead for what? We have several people who's whole job is to create a plan that can be rendered obsolete by a declaration of war or many other events for that matter. Long-term planning is a must for Culture, Science, and some of Domestic. However, with Military, Foreign Affairs, and the rest it is pointless.
* It is a new government structure. So what does that mean you ask? That means it has not been tested, not only is it new to the new demogamers, but it's new to the older ones also. So only about 3 or 4 people will truely understand it at the start of the demogame, so helping newer players will be a fairly interesting.
* More elected poistions, now this would be a good idea, if we weren't already having problems filling elected poistions. Now many people seem to think that this is how the demogame should be, however, what it should be and what it is is not exactly the same thing and frankly they won't work together.
* More bureaucracy = more fun. Well, we all wish that anyway, because then we'd all be looking for to tax season.
* As I said above, it is untested, and I'll go more deeply into this right now (imagine someone taking a screwdriver to a heart). Now how many of you have ever beta tested a game? Well, if you ever have then I'm sure your know exactly what I'm talking about here. You put the CD in the game crashes... you restart... play for 5 minutes... and it crashes. Now think of this constitution as a beta test for a video game (which is pretty much is), pretty fun right? Not really, heck it would be the equivalent of releasing a video game to the public without a beta test.
* We all know that the Judiciary is inefficient, undemocratic, and overall the best piece of crap we can come up with (We also all know that I haven't liked the concept of the Judiciary sense it was introduced to the demogame). Well, if we were to use this alternative government, I guarantee that there is going to be sometype of toe-stepping. Now, this "toe-stepping" of course goes to the Judiciary to decide on. Now, while our Judiciary spends 3 or 4 days fighting over who has the right to step on the others toes, we have a game to play.
* I spent my time learning how to play this game already, and I have no intention to spend even more time learning how to play the same game. Now, to those of you who currently hates me for ripping into there idea. You must ask yourself, "This is his opinion, not anyone else's." Well, sorry to break it to you, but you better do your best to try and please me, because frankly I'm your loudest opposition, and with a split this close between tradationa/alternative one switch can kill you.