Map settings

Strider

In Retrospect
Joined
Jan 7, 2002
Messages
8,984
Okay, time to discuss map settings. We are currently playing an Epic Game, but still need to decide on diffiulty, land type, etc.

We need to discuss the following things:

  • Land Mass %
  • Land Size
  • Land Type
  • Our Civilization
  • Difficulty Level
  • Temperature
  • Age
  • Advanced Options (regicide etc.)
  • Victory Options
 
Ginger_Ale said:
What do you mean we are currently playing an Epic game? Does this include a 5CC?

The polls have received 19 votes (which is the number that almost every other other poll has received). Epic Game received the most support.

The tally stands at this:

Epic Game: 6 points
5cc: 5 points
MTDG: 5 points
 
If we use this system:

Strongly Support = +2
Support, but maybe not my first choice = +1
Neutral = 0
Against, but willing to consider = -1
Strongly Oppose = -2

Then:
5CC: +5
Epic Game: +4
MTDG: +5

You can't just ignore the votes *against*.

Anyway, here are my settings for a 5CC:
Pangea 60% Water
Small/Standard Size Map
Emperor
Random Age/Climate/Temperature
Random Civ (or we can poll it - I don't mind either way).

If we did an Epic game, bump the difficulty up to Demigod.
 
Ginger_Ale said:
If we use this system:

Strongly Support = +2
Support, but maybe not my first choice = +1
Neutral = 0
Against, but willing to consider = -1
Strongly Oppose = -2

Then:
5CC: +5
Epic Game: +4
MTDG: +5

You can't just ignore the votes *against*.

You just can't ignore votes *for*. I'll tally them all up for you, and make it nice and easy.

Epic Game:
8 Votes Strongly For (16 points)
3 Votes Support (3 points)
1 Against (-1 point)
6 Strongly Against (-12 points)

16+3= 19-13= 6

Variant 5cc:
5 votes Strongly for (10 points)
5 votes support (5 points)
1 Neutral (0 points)
2 Against (-2 points)
4 Strongly Against (-8 points)

10+5 = 15-10= 5

MTDG:
5 votes Strongly for (10 points)
3 votes support (3 points)
4 Neutral
4 Against (-4 points)
2 Strongly Against (-4 points)

10+3= 13-8= 5

Solved?
 
Ok, so I was doing it in my head. Why don't we do an official poll? JUST those three options, one vote per person - no multiple choice. Those were to get ideas of what people liked/didn't like. Even those polls are sort of multiple choice. Everyone can vote "strongly support" for each one.
 
Wow GA, you really want it tough don't you?

Harder difficulty may lead to more number crunching. Any one of us can get as hard a game we want on our own, what we can't get is the roleplay and the government simulation. Maybe adversity is what we need, I don't know any more.

If it's 5CC I think we should go with a small map to keep the AI's OCN from being more than 3 times our self-imposed limit. I also think if we start 5CC that doesn't necessarily mean we have to finish it -- if we're losing, would you require a death march ending or would we drop the variant to win?
 
Ginger_Ale said:
Ok, so I was doing it in my head. Why don't we do an official poll? JUST those three options, one vote per person - no multiple choice. Those were to get ideas of what people liked/didn't like. Even those polls are sort of multiple choice. Everyone can vote "strongly support" for each one.

It was fairly close, but this is already the second time I've polled this. The first time I was able to eliminate acouple of options, however if I was to re-poll it a third time I would not beable to. I also would have to use a differant scoring system, and I doubt anyone would vote differantly.

We've got an August 1st deadline to make, and were already slipping behind. I've got a clear majority (although it is a small majority) and I'm going to take it to keep the game moving forward.
 
Ginger_Ale said:
Ok, so I was doing it in my head. Why don't we do an official poll? JUST those three options, one vote per person - no multiple choice. Those were to get ideas of what people liked/didn't like. Even those polls are sort of multiple choice. Everyone can vote "strongly support" for each one.

There is a reason for doing the polls this way, as I suggested. The "strongly against" number are people who will probably leave if we play that kind of game. We risk losing 6 people if we play epic, 4 people if we play 5cc, and 2 people if we play Multi-team.

I'm not trying to say we will definitely lose these people, but there are several who have already declared their position.

However, 20 is probably too few to play multi-team. :(
 
You risk losing me if we do an Epic.

DaveShack: While I do not want it extremely hard, perhaps Monarch would be better. Strider said earlier than making it a 5CC and going down a level would make it *too* easy.

I would rather us have a challenge and lose than have another game where we coast to a preassigned victory. If we can choose a victory before the game starts, rather than follow the game's flow to see where it leads us, the game is too easy.
 
Strider said:
It was fairly close, but this is already the second time I've polled this. The first time I was able to eliminate acouple of options, however if I was to re-poll it a third time I would not beable to. I also would have to use a differant scoring system, and I doubt anyone would vote differantly.

We've got an August 1st deadline to make, and were already slipping behind. I've got a clear majority (although it is a small majority) and I'm going to take it to keep the game moving forward.

With a close vote between three options, you are just going to take the one with the teeny bit more and progress with that? Are you sure this isn't just because you are towards an Epic game? ;)
 
Ginger_Ale said:
With a close vote between three options, you are just going to take the one with the teeny bit more and progress with that? Are you sure this isn't just because you are towards an Epic game? ;)

All I did was tally up the results and act upon them. We set a Aug. 1st deadline, and it's now July 12th. We don't have that much time left to be messing around.

I would *like* to get this game completely finished before we start playing it. I'm not a mod, and I can't influence or change votes.

Edit: Anyway, lets get back to the purpose of this thread. Map settings.
 
Shoudn't we try to do something that least amount of people would leave over? are you really going to do Epic because it has 1 extra point, even though 6 people will probably leave. Why can't we do a compromise between 5CC and Epic, since they got the most support? I said it before, MeteorPunch said it, why not a city-limit variant. i think it is a fair compromise between both options.
 
greekguy said:
Shoudn't we try to do something that least amount of people would leave over? are you really going to do Epic because it has 1 extra point, even though 6 people will probably leave. Why can't we do a compromise between 5CC and Epic, since they got the most support? I said it before, MeteorPunch said it, why not a city-limit variant. i think it is a fair compromise between both options.

I could honestly careless what we do, but I've done my job (as organizer) on this matter already. As of now, this is what were doing. I am moving forward one way or the other, if you guys want to stay behind and fight over it for another week, it's fine by me. It won't be to hard to tack on a limit of 20 cities acouple of weeks from now, as long as it doesn't change much.

However, we discussed this already, and we polled it twice (we actually discussed it twice also). That is already to much.
 
Ginger_Ale said:
With a close vote between three options, you are just going to take the one with the teeny bit more and progress with that? Are you sure this isn't just because you are towards an Epic game? ;)

Making decisions based on razor-thin margins is what the DemoGame is all about. ;) We choose our leaders this way, and make "life or death" decisions for our in-game citizens, why not choose the option with the most points no matter how small the margin?

I support the general idea of what Strider's trying to do, we need to make a decision and move on. We have no idea how many threats to leave are idle threats, nor do we know how many people will be added, or what the silent ones will do. It's a struggle between risky plans with high potential for both gain and loss, vs. a conservative plan which the majority either love or hate.

However, back to the task at hand which is world settings. Last game proves we need settings which don't take options off the table, or at least are compatible with the civ and style of game we play. We played a seafaring civ on a map which turned out to be pangaea, and the roleplay suffered a lot as a result.
 
How about this, since strider says Epic Game won, lets have a vote over where we want to do it...

Question: Do you want to play an epic game for DGVII?
Options:
Yes
No Preference
No
Abstain

Anyway if we play an epic game, I am gonna be out of here
 
I agree with black hole and GA here. And I'm willing to filibuster this one to death if i have to (democrat.. its in my blood)
strider, you cant just automatically assume that.
we need to poll what black hole said. and we never polled making august 1st the start day. you risk loosing a lot of people (myself included) if you appoint yourself dictator of the set up process.
so far you're loosing 3 people if you do an epic game. we're sick and tired of them. it was fun for the first 5. this one got tedious (hence why we killed it with domination). we need something, ANYTHING, other than an epic.

as for map size: wait.
 
Pangea 60% Water
Standard Size Map
Emperor (or Demigod - another thing I don't mind either way).
Random Age/Climate/Temperature
Random Civ (or we can poll it - I don't mind either way).

Those are my settings for an Epic game. If we do an Epic game, I won't run for an office, but I might do an information office, naming office, website...
 
If choosing August 1st as a goal meant skipping options because of opinion polls, then I would have never showed support for it...

edit: Strider the polls were open for 20 hours before you called the winner!!! That is less than a day! There is no way we can make decisions off those polls
 
Back
Top Bottom