Multi-team demogame idea

If we do a Tiny Map, 1 vs 1 (no AI's) then the game won't be boringly long and we can keep interest fairly easily.

 

Also it will do us a lot of good if we had both teams share the same TC. That way both can do their turns at the same time. One team does their turn, pass the save to the next team. Saves a lot of time instead of 1 turn a day.

 

I doubt were even have TC's, it'll take far to much time. Most likely the elected team captain will just play the save.

 

TC?

no, we need three teams for a game that will last untill december, when we will make the civ IV ISDG III.

 

So far we have 9 signed up, which is two teams of 4-5 people, three teams of 3, or four teams of 2+.

Now how should we decide how many teams, and handle team signups?

Since the objective was to practice human v human skills including diplomacy and reading the situation, if we could somehow get 4 teams to allow for some alliance building that would be cool. Can't practice diplomacy with fewer than 3 teams of course. If we focus mostly on strategy and tactics then even 2 teams is good enough.

 

I like the idea of four teams. Once we get this game going and have a front page announcement, I forsee participation skyrocketing.

 

So far 3 teams is looking good. However, if more join, we will need to do a round robin draft selection

 

Yup, should help. I'll join this.

I would really like to have TC's where 10 turns or so are played. True PBEM will take forever. Just imagine: with 3-4 teams you can do probably 1 turn per week....

Quite indifferent about the Honor system. We could have public forums for fun exchanges, and private forums for sensitive discussions. Privacy could be enforced or by honor code. The (S)GOTM police (AlanH, Ainwood) claim that they can detect peeking in restricted forums...

 

Four teams equals one turn per week? Heck, in the Intersite Democracy Game, with five teams, we often got two. I suggest that we start randomly dividing people into four teams and begin discussing rules/game parameters.

 

Ok, maybe I'm underestimating - I have no experience with these things.
Instead of a random division it might be good to have at least 1 experienced Multiplayer-DG player per team.

 

Well, here's the sign-up list thus far (ten brave souls ). The bolded ones are people who I remember being very active in the ISDG:

*DaveShack - ISDG Experience
*Ginger_Ale - ISDG Experience (if I recall correctly)
*Black_Hole - ISDG Experience
*classical_hero - ISDG Experience
*CivGeneral - ISDG Experience
*Emp.Napoleon - ISDG Experience
*Double Stack - ISDG Experience
*Strider - ISDG Experience (if I recall correctly)
*RegentMan - ISDG Experience
*Zyxy

I hope I got the ISDG experience/bolding correct. Let me know if I've failed otherwise.

 

Maybe if we could have an ad on the front page. I think that there are many people (like myself) who don't like the regular demo game, so do not hang around the demogame forums. But those people may like a multi-team demo game.

I like three teams, but four would be better. Maybe if we can spread the word to other civ forums (particularly the ones who were defeated in the primaries) we can get more people.

 

I was one of the orginal admins for the ISDG (the conquests one), before FortyJ.

 

keep it at 2 teams... we need as many people as possible on each team... I think we should also advertise this in the single player demogame forum

 

But two teams means war is a certainty. Four teams allows diplomacy to florish.

@Strider - Sorry. Didn't know.

 

We should have each teams have equal amount of people .

 

This might get interest if posted in the succession game forum...very skilled players over there, watch out!

 

if we have 4 teams, we really need a high participation level, very high

 

Perhaps we should all put this thread into our sig so that it draws attention. We need to get the word out about this. The more people the better. So far it seems that those who have singed up have been part of the ISDG structure before. We need to get recuiting people.

 

Again, this is overselling. No need to advertise a half-made vision that is surely going to turn sour. We will see the same "veterans" insist on revisiting their dogma from past demogames, and we will see a new flawed half-made consitution where the main drafter will exclude sound inputs and assure some short term fame and glory. I am glad I joined CGN for the intersite finals, since it is a culture to my liking. There, the moderator and king is the same person, a bit undemocratic, but much much more fair and transparent, and no hidden agendas. I would say that the democracy there is much better and more functional, and you got some leeway in airing your views, popular or impopular. I just had to say this. It is culture that is the problem, not the structure. With a better culture, the structure would find itself.