Daghdha
Absent Minded
Not an SG start but a discussion of possible setup that might be called "Indecisive". I've read Arathorn's summary of variants and I guess this is a combo-ish type.
My thought is it would be fun to have two teams assigned to 1 civ. One team, say 3 players, made of compulsive warmongers and one of peaceful builders. Then you have Ukranian elections (i.e. staged) in pre decided intervalls. Could be a whole age or when half of an ages techs are dicoverd. Then the two teams switch ruling the civ. They each have their allowed victory conditions which are consistent with their approach but not with eachother (e.g. Warheads go conquest/dom, Builders space/cult/diplo). If civ loses both teams loses (obviously
).
This could make for an interesting game methinks, but a lot of questions has to be answered if it's going to work.
Letting warmongers start is maybe out of question (early conquest)?
How long btw elections?
How to choose civ so one team doesn't get advantage (com/agri)?
What would be allowed in terms of messing up rival govenments plan (warmongers selling culture, builders disbanding troops)
etc
To some extent last point will take care of itself since IMHO victory is hard if you have a very unbalanced approach, but restrictions would probably be needed.
The combo of VC's are of course optional and some will surely make for a more fun game than others, but the general idea is to have a government that, as in reality, changes every now and then and strive after different goals.
Would one team give up their mission and help the other for the good of the nation?
How would public posting vs. private in-team mailing work and can spreading disinformation be a possible tool?
Will lurkers pop in and advice their kind of team?
Can you pull of a victory when 50% of turns is made by competitors?
Is this a inventive setup after all?
I know most of you out there have more experience of SG's (I'm setting up my first
) than me so you're most welcome to comment on this. Maybe some of you allready have played a similar game? I could try it out by myself but that would be like playing solo chess 
My thought is it would be fun to have two teams assigned to 1 civ. One team, say 3 players, made of compulsive warmongers and one of peaceful builders. Then you have Ukranian elections (i.e. staged) in pre decided intervalls. Could be a whole age or when half of an ages techs are dicoverd. Then the two teams switch ruling the civ. They each have their allowed victory conditions which are consistent with their approach but not with eachother (e.g. Warheads go conquest/dom, Builders space/cult/diplo). If civ loses both teams loses (obviously
).This could make for an interesting game methinks, but a lot of questions has to be answered if it's going to work.
Letting warmongers start is maybe out of question (early conquest)?
How long btw elections?
How to choose civ so one team doesn't get advantage (com/agri)?
What would be allowed in terms of messing up rival govenments plan (warmongers selling culture, builders disbanding troops)
etc
To some extent last point will take care of itself since IMHO victory is hard if you have a very unbalanced approach, but restrictions would probably be needed.
The combo of VC's are of course optional and some will surely make for a more fun game than others, but the general idea is to have a government that, as in reality, changes every now and then and strive after different goals.
Would one team give up their mission and help the other for the good of the nation?
How would public posting vs. private in-team mailing work and can spreading disinformation be a possible tool?
Will lurkers pop in and advice their kind of team?
Can you pull of a victory when 50% of turns is made by competitors?
Is this a inventive setup after all?
I know most of you out there have more experience of SG's (I'm setting up my first
) than me so you're most welcome to comment on this. Maybe some of you allready have played a similar game? I could try it out by myself but that would be like playing solo chess 
