Overriding Strategy: Build an Ancient wonder at all?

[Ashburnham]

Let's take a trip back to Demogame 5...

Once upon a time there was a nation called Japanatica. They had it all; a palace, temples, even Ancient Wonders! But, one thing they didn't have was a Forbidden Palace. This upset the people, so they decided to build it one day. All they had to do was pick the city. How about that one? No, that one! Oh, that one over there! We don't own that city. Well, how about that one then?
They finally sound a suitable place to build the Forbidden Palace--long after the topic was first put forth. But, just as the FP was about to finish...the people changed their minds again! Whoops! The entire project was scrapped, only to begin again in a different city. How about that one...

The morale of the story is: Make a decision and stick with it!! If people want to build a Wonder, let's build it. If not, let's not. But we can't have contradictory polls going up every week, totally changing the strategy of our nation. Personally, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't build an AA Wonder. But, I'm willing to bow to the will of the people, as long as that will doesn't change between every poll. Let's come to a decision, already!

 

[DaveShack]

DS, does this mean that we could abandon our cultural victory strategy based on a simple poll? If so, any specific conditions attached to it?

My opinion is yes we could, just as we can change our minds on any decision. This is not a universally accepted opinion, of course. For it to be valid I would expect there to be supporting discussion, either from existing threads or in a thread dedicated to that purpose, or some other indication that the people have an interest in changing course. It would also need to follow the generally accepted polling standards, in particular have a clear, unbiased question and options which do not force people to vote differently than they want to, along with clearly defined interpretation of the results which don't unjustly advantage or disadvantage any option.

 

[DaveShack]

The morale of the story is: Make a decision and stick with it!! If people want to build a Wonder, let's build it. If not, let's not. But we can't have contradictory polls going up every week, totally changing the strategy of our nation. Personally, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't build an AA Wonder. But, I'm willing to bow to the will of the people, as long as that will doesn't change between every poll. Let's come to a decision, already!

There are really two questions here. Can we change our minds, and should we.

I will always answer the "can we" question with an emphatic yes. To say anything else would be inviting in-game suicide. In the case this poll was aimed at, there was clear evidence that we should change our minds and skip the wonder. There was also strong evidence that a majority wanted to do just that. We're on what appears to be a pangaea map, where the extra movement point will help but it won't make a big difference in the short run during the period when the Lighthouse is really useful. We desperately need military units, and diverting hundreds of shields could make the difference between winning a war for survival or losing.

In every case we have to ask the question should our strategy change based on conditions? If the answer is yes, then we need to be able to let go of the past and move forward with vigor.

 

[Gregski]

To add to that, should we organise regular polls on major long-running issues to identify how people feel about the subject? For instance, we are currently motivated by a 130K cultural win. Once a month we should ask ourselves if that is still the case. My initial vote was for conquest (no specific reason, just thought it would be fun), but happily accepted the cutural path. Perhaps the newly appointed president (btw, since we're supposed to be the English, should be called Prime Minister) could, as a first duty, establish that our key assumtion(s) are still valid.

 

[donsig]

There are really two questions here. Can we change our minds, and should we.

Yes, we can change our minds. In this case we shouldn't.

There is another question though. How do we change our minds? Do we first decide to do something specific and then change our minds with a general sweeping *let's not do any of this sort of thing* poll. NO! If we make a specific decision it should only be changed by asking the same specific question over again.

 

[Furiey]

If we make a specific decision it should only be changed by asking the same specific question over again.

I agree with this, I also believe it should clearly state what has changed in the situation to require a rethink. If nothing has changed we don't want the same question continually reasked until it gets through by polling fatigue.

I disagree though that in this case we should not be able to change our minds, I think enough has changed to require it. So maybe the first question should be: This is what we decided, this is what has changed, does the change justify revisiting this?