Our Start

[classical_hero]

The problem is that we can play a bit of psychological warfare with some ouf our naming and thus make it a ploy to other teams.

 

[BCLG100]

We could but we still should be thinking of this as a new game with nothing else happening, theres nothing wrong with say not trusting 'whatever team' because of what they did previously but we cant go around treating this game the same as the civ 3 one, i think the demogame itself is quite a good example of that right now.

 

[RegentMan]

Behold Fortaleza:

One of CBR's early cities. We were CBR's southern neighbor, and we attempted to negotiate a peace with them. One was put in place, but it didn't remain. After several insults by the slimey northernors, CFC invaded CBR. We were hoping to take them out with the help of the other continent, but CDZ and CGN decided to take a weak team to the finals, so they sided with CBR and 50+ mounted warriors and 50+ gallic swords landed in our core. Naturally, our cities fell in huge clumps to the invaders.

Our last city was chosen as our stronghold. But it was obvious we wouldn't hold out for long. CFC had quite a few galleys left over, so we planned to settle a one-tile island inside CBR territory and hold out to marines. However, such actions were debated and we decided to take one of CBR's cities instead; Fortaleza.

With a settler in our cargo, the capture of out last city reduced CFC to what our ancestors had practiced for so long: a band of wandering nomads. We landed and prepared to capture the villiage full of stench and filth:

Then a cunning plan came about: why not sail our settler into the lake, then abandon Fortaleza? It is still one of the best civ-plans I've heard of, a perfect compromise of settling on an island and going out with honor. We took Fortaleza, captured some CBR workers, then sailed into the lake, abandoning Fortaleza after our safe arrival. CBR soon caught on, however. They rebuilt the city one tile northwest, and trebuchet fire began hitting our galleys. With the game obviously soon over, we weren't going to let the trechorous CBR eliminate us. So CFC disbanded all galleys, including our settler-filled one. The game was over for CFC.

Some heavy bashing took place at the UN (including CFC-bashing and admin-bashing). In response, Donovan Zoi, who played the first and the last turns of the game, posted this (the renaming units part refers to CGN-renamed units; we'd get banned for posting the actual names on the forum):

In case anyone was wondering, the selection of CGN targets before our demise was intentional. We at CFC have no gripe with CDZ, knowing that conquest is their instinctual domain and was therefore expected.

However, when the cultural example of greatness in our world (CGN) decides to go along for the ride and elects to instill psychological warfare on its enemy through the renaming of units, we just had to take the parting shot. We at CFC are neither *****s nor morons, and do not appreciate the inference. It is important to remember, even in the heat of battle, that you are playing this game with actual people.

All in all, a great and memorable game. And from the ashes settling in Lake Fortaleza, CFC shall one day rise again.

Ever since I read that last sentence on April 30, 2005, I had a desire to name CFC's next capital Lake Fortaleza. It puts a nice closure on the whole situation, both role-playing and history-wise.

The problem with naming it lake forteza or whatever is that some of us are on different civ3 ISDG teams

That makes no difference whatsoever. Lake Fortaleza is round one, reveiled in a now public forum.

Why not draw from previous games? It's CFC culture. Something that everyone seems to have forgotten; our capitol is never named after Thunderfall.

- Fanatazuma
- Shen Ling

That's why I support Lake Fortaleza for our capital, our first city since our defeat last time. It shows the other teams "Hey, CFC's back! We have risen from the ashes and are ready to kick some ass." Even if they don't instantly get it, we will know what it means. And that's all that matters.

 

[robboo]

I strongly urge we do not use this name. IT will reopen past memories. While we may have a secret desire to kill CBR and others..we too may want to keep a weak team around till the next game.

MAYBE rename the city as an anagram of the name you want. OR better yet..when we take a CBR city then use the name. That will be more of the rising from the ashes. You dont want to remind them of the manuver especially if it didnt garner you any support in the UNa nd casued bad feelings.

I wasnt in the Civ 3 game and if this one turns into paying back old scores...why have a foriegn office.... our enemies and friends are set.

This is starting to make me regret my signing up here..I dont want to relive/replay the Civ 3 game. I dont want to go thru the same BS that going on in the other demogame where newbies never get tehinside jokes and arent as respected as someone who "has been here for XX number of demogames". This is a new game. Bury those preconcieved thoughts and histories...and lets go write a new history.

 

[RegentMan]

I can see your point, and for the most part, I agree with it. However, I don't see why we should abolish all past references. Naming our capital Lake Fortaleza isn't a hardcore "veteran" demogame reference. It's simply a nice little "Heh" from the past.

I wasnt in the Civ 3 game and if this one turns into paying back old scores...why have a foriegn office.... our enemies and friends are set.

Our enemies are not set. We just have to prepare what their the likely response will be. I probably will advocate peace between us and our first neighbor, be it GWT, CBR, or GCA. However, if it is GCA, we need to be ready to jump into military production at anytime, as past demogames have shown they are war hawks. We'd be fools not to remember the past. And some sites, such as COG, are completely new rivals. We will write a new history this time around.

But again, I hope to not lose you, nor anyone else. I hope the ISDG is a nice break from the single player demogame, as many here (myself included) don't actively participate in the single player version. References to the past are going to come up, not necessarily at every corner, but they are going to come up. It will be the same in the Civ V ISDG; references to this game will come up there.

 

[BCLG100]

I am quite firmly against naming a city from the past simply because it 'was' a city in the past, sure if the name had some value to us right now i'd go for it but really i see no need to re-open the civ 3 ISDG in the civ 4 ISDG.

You say that allies are not set in stone but you already accuse that brazillian team of being trecherous bastards (something i agree with totally), so that is one avenue we wont go down.

Obviously lake forteza would be a good idea if there was a lake about but there isnt so just what is the point???

 

[RegentMan]

I am quite firmly against naming a city from the past simply because it 'was' a city in the past, sure if the name had some value to us right now i'd go for it but really i see no need to re-open the civ 3 ISDG in the civ 4 ISDG.

But it does have value to us. We as a team are arising from the ashes, and what more fitting name than the lake that swallowed us? Why are we afraid of bringing a tidbit or two from the past? I doubt any of the other teams would even get the reference. And if CBR noticed the name, who cares? I've seen the word "the" used before, but I won't get crap for using it twice in this sentence.

You say that allies are not set in stone but you already accuse that brazillian team of being trecherous bastards (something i agree with totally), so that is one avenue we wont go down.

I never used the word bastard, but I do think of them as trecherous. I'm simply going off of what I remember of them. They twist deals around until it benefits them the most. That's what they did in the past. That's what we'll have to keep in mind upon running into them. Could they have changed? Of course. We won't know until we chat with them.

Obviously lake forteza would be a good idea if there was a lake about but there isnt so just what is the point???

The point is symbolic. There are no waterfalls about either, so why Thunder Falls?

 

[BCLG100]

But it does have value to us. We as a team are arising from the ashes, and what more fitting name than the lake that swallowed us? Why are we afraid of bringing a tidbit or two from the past? I doubt any of the other teams would even get the reference. And if CBR noticed the name, who cares? I've seen the word "the" used before, but I won't get crap for using it twice in this sentence.

But we're not, there are a few vets from the previous ISDG but their are lots of new faces, sure name the 3/4/5 cities after that but why should this isdg be so attached to the last one?


Well im not that bothered about whether we names it Thunderfalls just it appeared a few people wanted to name it that and no-one was really strongly opposed to it, obviously not the case with Lake Forteza.

 

[RegentMan]

I'm not trying to make it so attached to the last one. I just thought it would be a nice connection; completes a circle.

If we do go with the Thunderfall name, then I'd like to see it Thunder Falls. Although are we going to rename the "leader" Thunderfall? If we are, then I would rather have a different name for the capital.

 

[azzaman333]

Its a town name...

 

[RegentMan]

Its a town name...

Indeed it is. And with such debate, it's obviously a very heated issue. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[BCLG100]

Well then perhaps if we capture it CBR's capital could be renamed.

I dont mind how we name it, i used to like the old way we did it in the demogame with the prez getting first dibs on what the city is called (maybe a little bit because i am prez right now).

 

[robboo]

I prefer naming towns that have a significances to their roll/geography. Naming a town "lake" makes me want to go look a for lakes on the map.

 

[Emp.Napoleon]

Well then perhaps if we capture it CBR's capital could be renamed.

No, we will rename their Capital JokerDF

 

[Sweetacshon]

Whats in a name? For my part, I'd like to see new names used, not being part of previous isdgs, but I really wouldn't mind that much going the other way except that it might tip the brazilians off that we (or at least some of us) remember the last one and will be targeting them. I am happy enough to beat them to a bloody pulp, even if you didn't give me an extra reason, but we shouldn't let them know about it.

 

[croxis]

Considering the history behind that name I rather like Lake Forteza, but then again I understand something that most of you do not -- what its like to be part of a group that is larger than ones self. After 9 years of the marching arts I learned that people come, and go, sometimes there is a period of great growth in the group with new faces, but its still the same group. I went and saw my old high school's show (been out of there for 4 years now, wow) and they were still doing traditions that were started when I was there and even before I came in. It may not have meant much to the incoming freshman, but over time it will.

The multi site demo games seems to keep around the same groups of people. The members may change, but they inherit the experience and stories of those who came before them. To ignore them in a childish pout is a tactical error as well as, for the lack of a better phrase, a spiritual one. Yes, this is a new game with some new members, no different than me learning a new show every year, but its still the same group, the same team.

Welcome to the family.

 

[ybbor]

Hey, why not Fortaleza backwards? Azelatrof (I'd pronounce it azz-al-AT-rof).

I don't think we should name it Fortaleza. First off, the move seemed kinda cheap. Second, we'd gain more fun from having a good game without UN-drama and teams that respect us than we would get from the temporary boost of pride from naming our first city.

 

[Sweetacshon]

...but then again I understand something that most of you do not -- what its like to be part of a group that is larger than ones self.

To ignore them in a childish pout is a tactical error as well as, for the lack of a better phrase, a spiritual one.

Sorry, my friend, but that is patronising, and a little offensive. We all understand the history, as well told by RM, but that doesn't mean we are being childish in wanting a new name. There certainly is no tactical or spiritual errors involved, just a desire for a fresh start. We will remember and learn from history, but won't be limited by it.

 

[robboo]

I like it backwards. I also suggested an anagram. The people that know what the name means will still get their pride adn histroy form the name. The others....we can tell them after we sever their heads from their bodies.

We do NOT want to make it seem we are holding a grudge. I agree with ybbor...I dont know if I would take pride in that move. I rather not be reminded of defeat, start fresh.

sweet..couldnt agree more

 

[RegentMan]

The turn is here:

Both BAT and CBR have settled. Have we agreed where to settle?