Is there any interest in an IntersiteDG

[TheOverseer714]

SG seems to need more help, so I will do SG.

 

[Cyc]

Welcome back, TO.

 

[Cyc]

The SC style can work, although that team will probably have to nominate someone to deal with inter team diplomacy or it would get very confusing for the other teams being contacted by different people all the time. Not everyone wants to go through all the voting that comes with a DG style game and may just prefer to discuss and come to a consensus. Saying that, 3 players will leave the team very shorthanded so we really need more on that team.

I agree with Furiey that the SC/SG style can work, but that a consistant contact person will have to be chosen to relay all communications from other teams to his teammates. Otherwise, someone else on the team may ignore a treaty or trade deal, etc.

It appears now that, with MoffJ and TO checking in, the toals are DG - 10 and SG - 4. Realistically, those numbers may translate to 7 - 3. But maybe not. Shall we call this a starting point? Or would you like some more time to recruit for the SC/SG?

 

[CommandoBob]

Could we get an announcement about this on the CivFanatics main site, where perhaps more people will see it?

 

[Cyc]

I'll work on that CB. I believe DaveShack can push that onto the front page for us.

 

[Memento]

Just consider: you, templar, I. Larkin and myself, that would be the perfect "GOTM veteran" team. Should be fun.

Memento, Chamnix: you can't leave your fellow GOTM buddies standing in the rain...! Gebt Euch einen Ruck...

Ok, du hast mich.
Aber nicht meckern wenn ich mal keine Zeit habe.

 

[Lanzelot]

Ok, du hast mich.
Aber nicht meckern wenn ich mal keine Zeit habe.

 

[Lanzelot]

Wellcome Overseer!! You are a desperately needed strengthening of the SG team!

Ok, and after Memento change his mind, the score is now 5 - 9:

(List moved to page 8 now...)

I think, with these 5 players the team SG is "operable". I know each of the fellow contestants personally, I. Larkin and myself have fought "back-to-back" in SGOTM14, TheOverseer and myself are veterans from the SGFN-08 succession game. I'm sure that this team can go through fire.
If someone else still wants to switch to SG, it would of cause be a welcome improvement, but I don't think it's necessary. We've had size-5 teams in the SGOTM, and it worked perfectly.

However, the idea of having a designated person for the communication with the other teams sounds good. I guess that will just be the job of the team captain.

Justanick: just think of our team as a kind of "Solonic" democracy...

 

[Lanzelot]

So now let's create the map and get started...

 

[justanick]

I don't say SC-Team won't work. It just does not fit the idea of the DG. As far as i know the wide mayority of the german players are still thinking there will be a normal DG(meaning Multi-Team-DG as you are calling it here).

How many total players are your 2 teams now sporting, justanick? Can you supply a list of names?

There are no teams. There are approximately 20 players willing to join or found teams as soon as it is time to found teams.

First there is the need to determine settings, rules und referees. As soon as this process is finished on both "sides" the teams can be founded. As time goes by referees will cancels teams till there are 2 for each forum left.

This is the classic procedure when starting a DG. But as I see you have started some kind of teamfoundation altough ruleset, the way of organisation und mapsettings are not determined yet.
This should be done first. Afterwards all players can publish suggestions of future teams*. Typically there will by more suggestions then teams that finally take part in the game. So depending on how many players provisional joined teams referees will cancels suggested teams and the players of canceled team can joins remaining teams till there are only 2 teams left on each side.

* Here is an example from DG6: http://www.civforum.de/showthread.php?t=59957

 

[Masqurin]

Yeah, I think it's better to form teams after the rules, useable civs and the mapsettings are set.

 

[Cyc]

Ok, we are working on our end of the deal. Let's get this show on the road. The poll results can pretty much be used for CFC opinion (if enough people vote....). The polls will end next Wednesday, I believe. If CivForums can bring their rules, useable civs and the mapsettings to a head by then, we can negotiate then. Who will make the map?

 

[Cyc]

Come people. We need everyone to vote. No need to wait till the last second. It only takes a few clicks. Let us know how you feel about these topics now, so they can be discussed.

 

[I. Larkin]

Yeah, I think it's better to form teams after the rules, useable civs and the mapsettings are set.

I think nothing wrong to do things in parallel. But we may "finalize" rules first and "finalize" teams after that.
About "rulset" still can not understand what is the difference between DG is SG . Have no experience of DG and without that it is hard to imagine "procedure". For me making decision by voting looks ridicules. May be just "for me".

 

[justanick]

Who will make the map?

Furiey and me.
The map will be a random map changed to some special amount towards fairness. The "exact" amount needs to be discussed first.

 

[justanick]

I think nothing wrong to do things in parallel.

I do.
Team suggestions depend on ruleset and map settings. It also improves the clearness. If you are bored you may think about a Team suggestion made by you. This typically needs some kind of creativity.

 

[metatron]

[...]

 

[Cyc]

I think nothing wrong to do things in parallel. But we may "finalize" rules first and "finalize" teams after that.
About "rulset" still can not understand what is the difference between DG is SG . Have no experience of DG and without that it is hard to imagine "procedure". For me making decision by voting looks ridicules. May be just "for me".

I agree with doing things in parallel and "finalizing" afterwards.

The ruleset are basic rules that will apply to all teams, regardless of their playing style. Playing style is the only difference between an SG and a DG. In the SG, a team member takes control of the save and is responsible for all moves and actions during the 10 turns that he has contol. Then he reports what he has done to the rest of the team. He may or may not take the advise of his team mates. Everytime the save comes to his team, the then active player takes the save, plays it, and passes it on to the next team. He does this for 10 turns (or whatever amount of turns the SG team decides is appropriate), and then the active control is passed on to the next player for ten turns. This happens until all the players on the SG team have had active control of the save. I'm sure you understand how this works.

In a DG, the save still only gets played by one player (chosen by the DG team), but the strategy and the individual moves can be discussed by the entire team. Discussions about many aspects of the game can happen in real time with the game. In fact, the turn can even be played in a chatroom, where other team mates can join in and make suggestions, give advice, etc. But it's call a Democracy Game because the team members are deemed citizens of the nation and can all help determine the course of the nation's history. The President (also called the Designated Player (DP) ) takes all the suggestions/advice/demands/whatever from the discussions and plays the turn, then passes it onto the next team. This "President" can be voted out of office at anytime. Normally, elections are held monthly for the position, and if the team so chooses, other positions can be electable (Military Advisor, Domestic Advisor, etc). But this may not be a requirement. Your worry about polling everything is a bit off-base. Someone may decide to poll an important decision quickly to get a concrete concensus, or even a loose projection, but not EVERY decision is polled. Just when someone deems it necessary.

Has this helped?

 

[Cyc]

I do.
Team suggestions depend on ruleset and map settings. It also improves the clearness. If you are bored you may think about a Team suggestion made by you. This typically needs some kind of creativity.

justanick, I think that CivForum's way of processing the start of a DG may be a little too stringent for us country-folk here at CFC. We don't have a problem with the way you want to get your game together, but we have found that merging operations and procedures seamlessly brings us to the results we need. It may not look as orthadox as some, but we get there none the less.

Do you think you'll be ready for negotiations next Wednesday?

 

[Cyc]

Welcome metatron, glad to see you. Hope everything works well with your new name.

Are you really thinking about playing for CFC instead of CivForums? Will we have the option of taking you out back and shooting you as a Spy? Just kidding....