Repoll: Difficulty Level?

[Shattered]

Looking back in the archives I see that we played DG2 on prince level. We won that game very easily -- the difficulty was with keeping people in the game due to unnecessary fighting over rules and polls.

There is one thing about this post that I find a little disconcerning. Civ 3 is a different game than civ 4. To compare difficulties on these two games is like me comparing half life to half life 2. Sure, they are from the same franchise, but half life 2 has more content and a harder premise than half life. The same works for civ. Civ 3 has the same concept as the new one, but there is so much in civ4 that older versions of civ cant even stand up to. I think everyone needs to admit that we don't really know what were doing in civ 4 BTS when i comes down to it. I would much rather try something easy first, and if its sooooooo ridculously easy that we lose gamers because of it, then I shall stand corrected and at fault. Yet, even on low difficulties, BTS is just more strategicly played than vannila civ. We need a difficulty that allows anyone to implement their ideas without custom tailoring them to the difficulty.

 

[DaveShack]

On this or another poll I will support what the people do, as long as it's not biased or otherwise unfair. I'm not planning to act either way, that is for someone else to do if they feel strongly enough about it.

@Provolution

This means I'm neither promoting nor discouraging another poll. Nor have I ever been promoting (or discouraging) repeat polling in general. What I have been saying is that the people are free to stick with an old decision or choose a new direction based on current events, when current events change people's perceptions.

 

[Seidrik_The_Gray]

Seems to me like there's plenty of interest in playing at Monarch then. That' in the middle of these two extremes. All in favor, say aye!

 

[Methos]

Ok, in the essence of fairness, I will create a poll with all the difficulty levels as options. I'll have it up in a little bit.

 

[Methos]

Ok, in the essence of fairness, I will create a poll with all the difficulty levels as options. I'll have it up in a little bit.

Scratch that for the moment. One thing I worry about is too many re-pollings are going to hurt the game. So the question is, do we want to keep repolling this, or accept this one? Even though this poll favors my desire, IMO it isn't valid. Yet at the same time I don't want to constantly be repolling this, or anything for that matter. Nor do I want to discuss the same arguments and points over multiple polls.

So do we want to keep this one, keep the other one, repoll it, or what?

 

[Shattered]

I think we need a repoll, plain and simple. We either take the results of the first poll, or repoll the first poll completely.

 

[DaveShack]

Include it in the faction platforms?

Enough people say they want monarch to put the outcome of this poll in doubt. I agree it fails one of the core principles of polling, that all reasonable options must be included. If it had been a runoff between top options in a previous poll this would not be an issue, but that is obviously not the case.

The traditional view is that a poll which fails to produce an outcome, either because of a tie or because of structural difficulties with the poll, is a no-decision. No decision would mean that a previous valid poll prevails unless something valid overturns it.

I honestly don't care what the level is, which is why I'm not planning to post a repoll. What I do care about is keeping it fun either way it goes.

 

[dutchfire]

The first DG was started right after had been released. There was no experienced pool of players to call upon. My guess is that a series of poor decisions were made in the early game that came back to roost in the mid game. In the second DG (also on prince), the game became easily winnable despite a number of poor decisions in the mid game.

True, give a bunch of former civIII players a game of civ4 on a decent difficulty level, and they'll crash the economy. Which is exactly what happened. (Though, to be honest, the start was rather terrible too).

Poor decisions in the mid game? You mean like crashing our economy?

There is one thing about this post that I find a little disconcerning. Civ 3 is a different game than civ 4. To compare difficulties on these two games is like me comparing half life to half life 2. Sure, they are from the same franchise, but half life 2 has more content and a harder premise than half life. The same works for civ. Civ 3 has the same concept as the new one, but there is so much in civ4 that older versions of civ cant even stand up to. I think everyone needs to admit that we don't really know what were doing in civ 4 BTS when i comes down to it. I would much rather try something easy first, and if its sooooooo ridculously easy that we lose gamers because of it, then I shall stand corrected and at fault. Yet, even on low difficulties, BTS is just more strategicly played than vannila civ. We need a difficulty that allows anyone to implement their ideas without custom tailoring them to the difficulty.

Dave is talking about the civ4 DG

 

[Shattered]

I agree with DS here. I say accept the valid polls results which resulted in Prince, or if there really are enough objections, repoll it.


[EDIT] I don't agree with having polls in the hands of factions. Polls are a core concept in this game, so they should be in the core rules.

 

[DaveShack]

Dave is talking about the civ4 DG

I was confused by that rebuttal too, but then realized it was really saying that Civ4 and BTS are different enough games that the levels are not as easy to compare to each other as the levels in Civ3 and C3C were. I have to agree with this, there are more ways to get handed your head in BTS, if you ignore espionage, the AP, and corporations if the game gets that far.

 

[Seidrik_The_Gray]

Seidrik glances up from his pint, scrubs the muck from his eyes and looks to the council chamber windows. The sun has long since set, and in fact, the moon appears ready to retire itself.

"How long have I been asleep?" He wonders.

Looking around the room, he sees three men still discussing the latest poll results, the horns of their discourse and logic locked in a battle that appears to have no resolution in sight. They've woven a weave of thick trees and brambles where no master woodsman could find his way. Bemusedly, Seidrik spies others, who are in various stages of repose, and some appear to have fallen asleep with their mouths open in the expectation of uttering a position of their own.

Marvelling at the finer points of the discussion, Seidrik smiles to himself and leaves, looking for a nice hammok and dreams with better looking components to them...

 

[Diamondeye]

Hmm. As Dave says, any citizen can start a new poll, so if you think a runoff with Monarch as an option would work, you have the power to start one.
My vote will still be thrown at emperor though, even if I am a Prince player normally.

I kinda liked the argument presented on page 2 (dont remember by who) that states this situation as two camps. Might I illustrate further by a metaphore, against the mid-camps alternative of Monarch?
If a public poll shows that about half of the people in your city does not like salad at all, and the other half loves salad so much they dont anything else, you are not going to profit by putting "some" salad in your burgers. You are going to profit by choosing either alternative, not by finding some sort of middle way.
I know the metaphore is kinda bad but I think it illustrates the point fine. I'd rather have 56% happy players than, like, 15% happy and 70% content players, but maybe that's just me...

 

[Provolution]

Hmm. As Dave says, any citizen can start a new poll, so if you think a runoff with Monarch as an option would work, you have the power to start one.
My vote will still be thrown at emperor though, even if I am a Prince player normally.

I kinda liked the argument presented on page 2 (dont remember by who) that states this situation as two camps. Might I illustrate further by a metaphore, against the mid-camps alternative of Monarch?
If a public poll shows that about half of the people in your city does not like salad at all, and the other half loves salad so much they dont anything else, you are not going to profit by putting "some" salad in your burgers. You are going to profit by choosing either alternative, not by finding some sort of middle way.
I know the metaphore is kinda bad but I think it illustrates the point fine. I'd rather have 56% happy players than, like, 15% happy and 70% content players, but maybe that's just me...

Well, there will be no burger, mate. So prepare for accepting what the house initially had to offer, the offer the majority subscribed to, before someone requested an illegitimate repoll.

 

[Ballazic]

Repoll!!! We need a repoll

 

[ravensfire]

Repolling is perfectly valid when new information comes to light, a significant number of people ask for it or circumstances change. Until actions are taken, no poll should be viewed as absolute and final. The mere fact the results of this poll are so different shows that YES, a repoll was warranted here.

I'd LOVE to see a game without repolling as Provo demands. It would be quite ugly, as anyone who thinks it through will understand.

-- Ravensfire

 

[DaveShack]

... before someone requested an illegitimate repoll.

There was nothing illegitimate about requesting a repoll. Hindsight showed the repoll missed something which cast its result in doubt, but repoll requests in the face of new information are always legitimate. You still don't seem to realize that this principle is not subject to change.

 

[Provolution]

Repolling is perfectly valid when new information comes to light, a significant number of people ask for it or circumstances change. Until actions are taken, no poll should be viewed as absolute and final. The mere fact the results of this poll are so different shows that YES, a repoll was warranted here.

I'd LOVE to see a game without repolling as Provo demands. It would be quite ugly, as anyone who thinks it through will understand.

-- Ravensfire

Ravensfire, you have not even seen my proposal on how I see polling could be done differently, you are just conjuring up demons to brand me, nothing else.

I want repolling, but not done by the methods some of you just sponsored and made evident with this latest piece of evidence, promoted and protected - because it came from your own. You are the ones considering 22-3 (biggest and smallest option) a repoll, I am not, so you are in the wrong here, not me.

You are merely trolling me as usual, without any consequence, protected as you are in here. But see, we have now learnt how to manage around it.
Moderator Action: What RF posted was not a troll. This isn't either, but it's darn close to PDMA. - Dave

We will reassess some of the metagame rules later, when this has been settled, and people will see that there should be opportunities for repoll, not just as extremely liberal, manipulated and slack as they have been so far.

 

[croxis]

People! Its a GAME! Stop being cranky!

 

[dutchfire]

Love & Peace people

 

[Diamondeye]

Agree with Daveshack on Provo's comment. If 50% of the community finds the "unneccessary" option worth it, I don't think it should be considered unneccessary.

That said, you are welcome to start a new repoll with all the options available again, even if its going a step back considering game start time.