donsig
Low level intermediary
Good point CT. It just goes to show how schizophrenic the *Will of the People* can be.
Seperating the Departments
- Thread starter Strider
- Start date
@sarevok - I never saw Curufinwe get bored... And, culture can even be in the forums as well. This is, after all, a 'forum game'. Culture can be in charge of history (or heritage threads), and in charge of any roleplay. I don't mean roleplay like DG2 and DG3. I'm talking about the sponteneous roleplay of DG1. (Remember the Asphinxian Banquet? That was probably our best spontenous event. And much of the good roleplay come during wars).
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
It would take someone truly interested to make that department to work out right. That is my main concern: to make sure they can do it, have fun and not get bored.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
It's a major change yes, but it won't effect the game one way or another. IF it pass's we wait untill Term 4 to implement it. They best way then, might have not been the best way now, which is why you make thing's adaptable something this const. lacks.
Donovan Zoi
The Return
Our Constitution is fine, Strider. Some things don't need to be adapted, and those were included in the Constitution.
It's good to see you active here, but you are not addressing any true problems in our ruleset, except for maybe the spot vote discussion.
It's good to see you active here, but you are not addressing any true problems in our ruleset, except for maybe the spot vote discussion.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
Wether I am addressing them or not is a matter of opinion. I believe it is an issue that needs to be addressed, because the way the current departments are set up, both science and culture is being abused.
Very few, if any discussions come up over either of these subjects. Maybe one science discussion, ever, and I've yet to see any threads over culture.
I must say I'm not in favor of separating the departments.
The way it is set up now, all four departments have roughly the same workload and level of importance. I have found that the council of four plan works just fine for this DG, and have yet to see a good reason to reinstitute Culture, Trade, and Science as separate departments. Is there any major flaw in our current four-leader system?
The way it is set up now, all four departments have roughly the same workload and level of importance. I have found that the council of four plan works just fine for this DG, and have yet to see a good reason to reinstitute Culture, Trade, and Science as separate departments. Is there any major flaw in our current four-leader system?
Back when the demogame was conceived, it was supposed to mimic a civ game in that it had 6 advisors.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
Several actual,
1) To few people on the CoC
2) To much of a workload on a few people
3) To much power on the few
Also, some several other bonus's:
1) Allows new, un-experienced players a poistion where they can actually become experienced veterns.
2) Leaves culture and science to do something that will NEVER get done under the current system, watch the AI's science/cultural power.
1) If we really need more people on the CoC, surely including deputies, judiciary members, and governors (or perhaps even "any other citizen" at the bottom of the CoC) would suffice?
2) I haven't noticed the department leaders being stressed out and unable to perform well in their functions any more than in other games.
3) The people are the ones who elect them, and it is only two fewer leaders than the traditional one.
1) We already do elect new players to these positions. For evidence of this, check out the T&T elections, where Rik is beating CT (though Rik isn't a newbie, he's much less of a "big name" candidate than CT is) and the FA elections, where Furiey is ahead of me, despite my having three terms as FA leader for experience (though I do think that Furiey is highly competent).
2) How can you tell that watching the AI's science and cultural power will never be done under our current system? It's not a particularly hard task, and if the domestic leader needs help, s/he could ask the deputy to do that or appoint unofficial department members to fulfill those roles.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
Wrong, it is a hard task, espicially with 13 or more civs you've got to check every turnchat. Also, you misunderstood me, I'm meaning people who don't yet know the full concepts and duties of running a department, but shows protential leadership qualities, this will help them learn what it takes to be a department leader.
Not only that, but creating more departments, creates more poistions (duh), which in turn creates more commintments to the departments, and hold more people to the game itself.
First of all, I'll grant that it could be a hard task, particularly later in the game, but I have seen nothing that convinces me that T&T is incapable of handling routine checks for science trades or that Domestic is incapable of handling culture checks (which don't have to be done every turnchat unless we have a city in danger of flipping). And, as stated before, they could always ask for help from their deputy or other people if they needed it.
Second, regarding new citizens, they can easily find out what it takes to be a department leader by observing one of the departments under our current council of four. All they have to do is observe and try to assist in any of the positions, and perhaps get a deputyship, and within a month or two they will know how to lead that office and will be very electable.
Third, I'm not exactly convinced that the six-department system works any better at retaining people in the DG, given the lack of activity toward the end of DG2 and DG3. Plus, it's not like very many people would be "committed" to any particular department; if there is in fact an advantage in participation levels, it would be a very small one.
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
I have a possible solution that could work out well to "train up" these new people.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
Then tell me, why has T&T failed to do what it is capable of doing? They have also failed in asking the deputy to help them with it. We might have one leader that does it the way it should be done, but they will never make up for the many times it will be ignored by other leaders.
Observing? Tell me, would you rather watch somebody do something to learn, or do it yourself while learning? Not only is "observing" somebody a slow method of learning, but it also does not teach the person what is fit for them. What one leader might think is easier, might be the hardest route for another.
It's natural for partcipation to drop at the end of the DG, there is nothing we can do about it.
T&T may not be living up to its potential because of the leader in the position. However, I think both candidates running can do what the position requires, and I will post in the T&T thread to remind them to check for science trades if necessary.
I have also seen far more new citizens become capable leaders because they were active and observant than because they got elected to a position right off the bat (this worked for DG3 and DG4). So I don't think that there would really be any significant difference as far as that goes whether we have six cabinet leaders or four.
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
the work load however is indeed getting more and more heavy
Just think about the late-middle/industrial era when trade does MOST of its' trading, and when IA has to do more city planning when rails come. (making cities specific to certain needs. i.e., a 60spt city, or a 120spt city).
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
that is a major concern to consider
