Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
I really like the development of this thread, the chat junta of Chieftess may change into a doctrinal game for those attending the forums only. I think Moth, Blackheart and classical hero here have all very valid points. We need governmentally based doctrines, where each candidate in an election can maximum present two doctrines, so people know what policy they actually vote for.
I want an utter death to popularity contests and old veterans tapping each others back in apprecation of past favors from past demogames and old conflicts between so-called senior players that overshadow real game choices. If I wanted a game with old sluggers feasting it out in the threads, I would rather watch a crappy American reality show with quarreling C-celebrities. I also heard several players referring to themselves as a "DG aristocracy" covering each others backs out of solidarity of past experiences from previous games. Merit should be based on doctrinal cohesion, strategic thinking and ability to present solid long term options ahead of elections.
Not "I would like to play in that office, since I never tried it" or "I like NICK XXXXX because he/she was around from DG1" or "I owe this and this to this person so vote NICK YYYY" and finally "That is a cool nick, vote for NICK ZZZZ, oh yeah".
I just saw the film "Team America - world police", and follow the US elections in the media, so I am not unknown to this superficial political subculture.
For Demogame purposes, the players must have REAL strategic options, not worship a funky person with a funky nick with funky privileges and a funky DG past alone.
If these players cannot write their long term goals and let people part in the implementation and discussion, that is not leadership, but nepotism and opportunism.
So, go for a doctrinal solution, so the best writers, presenters and map makers giving real options can come to the limelight. Those arguing ONE TRUTH, is only undermining the democratic potential of the game, and you may know where I am hinting at.
I want an utter death to popularity contests and old veterans tapping each others back in apprecation of past favors from past demogames and old conflicts between so-called senior players that overshadow real game choices. If I wanted a game with old sluggers feasting it out in the threads, I would rather watch a crappy American reality show with quarreling C-celebrities. I also heard several players referring to themselves as a "DG aristocracy" covering each others backs out of solidarity of past experiences from previous games. Merit should be based on doctrinal cohesion, strategic thinking and ability to present solid long term options ahead of elections.
Not "I would like to play in that office, since I never tried it" or "I like NICK XXXXX because he/she was around from DG1" or "I owe this and this to this person so vote NICK YYYY" and finally "That is a cool nick, vote for NICK ZZZZ, oh yeah".
I just saw the film "Team America - world police", and follow the US elections in the media, so I am not unknown to this superficial political subculture.
For Demogame purposes, the players must have REAL strategic options, not worship a funky person with a funky nick with funky privileges and a funky DG past alone.
If these players cannot write their long term goals and let people part in the implementation and discussion, that is not leadership, but nepotism and opportunism.
So, go for a doctrinal solution, so the best writers, presenters and map makers giving real options can come to the limelight. Those arguing ONE TRUTH, is only undermining the democratic potential of the game, and you may know where I am hinting at.
