OFFICIAL DISCUSSION: Game-Save (playing the save, turnchats)

[Ginger_Ale]

Unit-Type City Province-Code is fine.

Spearman Epolenep HAI

Keep it short. What is a unit code Provo? And 2 letters for a city code? That's pretty small.

 

[Provolution]

People would like to have named their military units, as some megalomania naming hogs will sit on both city names and province names, and the only thing left is personal city names. At least a military pet is something.

 

[DaveShack]

Let's not go overboard with putting structure in unit names. It might be handy to know where a unit came from if we wanted to have a concept of unit ownership, and important to have the type and update the type when it changes, but beyond that just aim for uniqueness.

 

[Provolution]

I agree with DS, then go for Unit-Type, Unique Unit name and then City, Unit number

 

[GenMarshall]

This should be a good place to place in Provo's min turn limit during a play .

 

[Provolution]

Yeah, we should set guidelines for how many turns we have for each term, maximums and minimums. The DP should ask for a dispensation from these rules if he or she wants to go higher or lower in a quorum majority poll, to assure the players a certain pace.
Laizzes fair turnchat rules is just plain dumb, good instructions should cover most eventualities, a good leader should cover most eventualities ten turns away.

 

[YNCS]

I am against using province and city names in unit identifiers.

First of all, since cities have unique names, using the province as well as the city in a name is just verbage. The city would be sufficent.

Secondly, at least in my games, units often go far away from their originating city. I'll build a worker in city A and then send it elsewhere. By the time that pollution becomes a problem, I'm usually railroaded and an available worker may be sent across the continent to clean up pollution. A worker produced in the city of Arglebargle may never set foot in the Arglebargle city limits after its first turn of existence. We all know that military units go all over the place. The 21st Arglebargle Hussars can get put on a ship and never return to the originating continent.

Thirdly, workers and units are essentially pooled. Mayors and governors will be less likely to think of a specifid worker as "theirs" if the name doesn't relate to a specific city or province.

I suggest that workers be given non-descript names: 1st Laborers, 2nd Laborers, etc. Military units can be given grander names: Bubblehead Dragoons, The Black Watch, 1st Guards, Liebstandarte DaveShack, etc. In either case, the originating city or province not be a regular part of the name. Ships should be given the types of names used by the British Royal Navy: Victory, Invincible, Illustrious, Chock-Full-of-Nuts, etc.

 

[blackheart]

As I said before, what's the point of using city names and provinces? It's ample to put for a garrison as <city name> <unit type> or defender (Fanatikku Spearmen/Garrison/Defender/etc.). Offensive units will usually NOT stay in their home bases, especially in times of war, so what's the point of that? There's no need to confine units to their city of origin.

No one can cover all eventualities in a TC. We shouldn't trudge on even if orders for war were created, we should still STOP. Why? Because it is a major even that needs the input of all citizens, not just government officials. Having a minimum and maximum ties the DPs hands, and the process of getting it removed for one TC is a hassle.

 

[Ashburnham]

No one can cover all eventualities in a TC. We shouldn't trudge on even if orders for war were created, we should still STOP. Why? Because it is a major even that needs the input of all citizens, not just government officials. Having a minimum and maximum ties the DPs hands, and the process of getting it removed for one TC is a hassle.

I disagree. Having a minimum number of turns to be played each week keeps the game from getting stagnant. Keeping the pace of the game going is a good way to keep interest up and allow officials to achieve something significant during their term. The minimum doesn't have to be ridiculous, but something like 5 turns per week isn't too much to expect from a forum full of Civ players.

 

[Provolution]

I second you Ash, you are a grown up man

 

[Ashburnham]

err, yes. Whatever that means.

 

[Provolution]

Just agreeing on the disagreement. Surely we need a minimum turn guarantee per term.
That is the smallest we can ask from a DP.

 

[blackheart]

Just agreeing on the disagreement. Surely we need a minimum turn guarantee per term.
That is the smallest we can ask from a DP.

Yes to minimum, no to maximum. Unless of course a one turn or no turn TC is required (for diplomacy or whatnot).

 

[ravensfire]

So how do you enfore it? What are the penalities? Do we extend the term until it's done? Entend the last turn chat until it's met? Impeach the DP at the end of the term if it's not met?

Folks, this is a not a good idea. It's not something that can be just tossed into the laws and it happens. It's not a bad idea, but it's not one that you can just put in there. It won't work. Think about it.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Cyc]

I agree with Ravensfire. Let each President play to their own style. Otherwise Otherwise we'll need someone that can bend laws like a balloon animal-maker to enforce these rules. And what would be the point of that?

 

[Strider]

I think, as it might have been pointed out before, I have no idea, I stopped when I saw how long Cyc's post was. We should allow the President to chose the DP, wether it be themselves, or if they don't have Conquests someone else. This stays with the tradational, famaliar, style, but allows citizens without Conquest to be the president.

 

[ravensfire]

Game Play Session discussion summary:

• DP is the only person to make non-reversible actions
  • Except peace renegotation
• Process for running game play sessions
• Instructions must be posted
• DP must post saves, and summary
• Instructions can stop play
• DP can stop play

Discussion points:

• On-line vs Off-line?
• When must instructions be posted?
  • DG 5: 1 hour prior
• Can posted instructions be changed? Up 'til when?
  • DG 5: 1 hour prior
• How to determine DP?
  • DG 5: President, then CoC
  • Alt 1: panel of 3, elected
  • Alt 2: panel of anyone interested who passes confirm poll
  • Alt 3: allow Pres to choose DP
• Game Play log
  • How detailed?
  • If on-line chat, is chat log enough?
  • Edited chat log?
• Naming units
  • How to name?
  • Format?
  • Should we rename?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Rik Meleet]

-- On-line vs Off-line? - online, but not neccesarily in a chat
-- When must instructions be posted? - On Tuesdays. Gameplay on Saturday 23:59 GMT . leaves a lot of time between turn and instructions and between instructions and turn to discuss further
-- DG 5: 1 hour prior - see above
-- Can posted instructions be changed? Up 'til when? - Yes - But no later than Friday 23:59 GMT
-- DG 5: 1 hour prior - see above
-- How to determine DP? - Elections for DP-group
-- DG 5: President, then CoC - no
-- Alt 1: panel of 3, elected - Yes
-- Alt 2: panel of anyone interested who passes confirm poll - no
-- Alt 3: allow Pres to choose DP - no
-- Game Play log - yes
-- How detailed? - Similar to a Succession game log.
-- If on-line chat, is chat log enough? - No. It is too cluttered with comments and not filled enough with needed information like screenshots. And barely readable.
-- Edited chat log? - No, unneccesary work if the DP takes notes on a notepad and screenies in paint when playing
-- Naming units - Yes - This adds personalisation and dedication to the game
-- How to name? - Randomly picked from the list of registered citizens who haven't named anything yet. The nominee(s) are picked during the week and have till Friday 23:59 GMT to post their name in a special thread. If no posts are made or too many units are to be named they will be temporarily named by the DP. login - X - cityname-code. For instance: "Rik Meleet - X - Zoj"
-- Format? - Login - personal name - city name-code. For Instance "Rik Meleet - John - Zoj"
-- Should we rename? - Let's stick with the existing city names. Except for "Holwerd" which must be named "Leeuwarden" and "Lauwersoog" which must be named "Nijmegen", if the dutch are in the game.

 

[Black_Hole]

-- On-line vs Off-line? - online, but not neccesarily in a chat
-- When must instructions be posted? - On Tuesdays. Gameplay on Saturday 23:59 GMT . leaves a lot of time between turn and instructions and between instructions and turn to discuss further
-- DG 5: 1 hour prior - see above
-- Can posted instructions be changed? Up 'til when? - Yes - But no later than Friday 23:59 GMT
-- DG 5: 1 hour prior - see above
-- How to determine DP? - Elections for DP-group
-- DG 5: President, then CoC - no
-- Alt 1: panel of 3, elected - Yes
-- Alt 2: panel of anyone interested who passes confirm poll - no
-- Alt 3: allow Pres to choose DP - no
-- Game Play log - yes
-- How detailed? - Similar to a Succession game log.
-- If on-line chat, is chat log enough? - No. It is too cluttered with comments and not filled enough with needed information like screenshots. And barely readable.
-- Edited chat log? - No, unneccesary work if the DP takes notes on a notepad and screenies in paint when playing
-- Naming units - Yes - This adds personalisation and dedication to the game
-- How to name? - Randomly picked from the list of registered citizens who haven't named anything yet. The nominee(s) are picked during the week and have till Friday 23:59 GMT to post their name in a special thread. If no posts are made or too many units are to be named they will be temporarily named by the DP. login - X - cityname-code. For instance: "Rik Meleet - X - Zoj"
-- Format? - Login - personal name - city name-code. For Instance "Rik Meleet - John - Zoj"
-- Should we rename? - Let's stick with the existing city names. Except for "Holwerd" which must be named "Leeuwarden" and "Lauwersoog" which must be named "Nijmegen", if the dutch are in the game.

I agree with all of this except online/offline,
it should be up to the DP to choose whether a particular chat(or all of that Dps chats) are offline or online

 

[DaveShack]

Discussion points:

• On-line vs Off-line?
  On-line, with exceptions for 0-turn special play sessions such as to execute a single trade and then find out what other options are available, investigate cities and report contents, establish embassy and report capital contents, etc. Special sessions would need to be announced 24 hours in advance, with a list of specific actions to be accomplished, and would be cancelled if any citizen objected.
• Can posted instructions be changed? Up 'til when?
  I strongly believe that inaccurate instructions should be allowed to be changed at any point before the actual in-game action for that instruction has been played. Everyone ought to understand what I mean by this, but unfortunately there will be naysayers shouting it down, no matter how logical it is. The infamous incident of the goody hut pop, too close to our undefended capitol comes to mind. It was clearly a case of the military advisor at the time saying "I wrote what in the instructions? "
  The point about others basing their instructions on the ones to be change is valid. Should we just live with the bad instructions to keep to this principle? Under normal circumstances, maybe, but if the result is suicidal then we need to have the ability to reconsider.
• How to determine DP?
  Elect some number, maybe 3 or 5. President schedules the DP rotation.
• Game Play log
  Something along the lines of a SG log. The chat log should be provided.
• Naming units
  Depends on other rules. If provinces or cities get control of some number of the units they produce, then need some way of identifying ownership. If not, then only name early units for easy identification in the log during the point where specific actions matter, and later just units which have significant events in their lives like capturing a city, spawning a leader, etc.
  
  If a unit type is embedded in the name, it must be changed when the unit is upgraded.