Should we realign our states?

Should we realign our states?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 88.9%
  • No

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • Abstain

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    9
  • Poll closed .
not me.... i wanted this since day 1 of the term. I am all for shrinking the government
 
ice2k4 said:
I said no. Although we may have a position or two open, theres no reason to realign. The one or two cities that have no governors are controlled by the MoI anyway.


which is technically against the rules for the DP to follow those instructions
 
robboo said:
which is technically against the rules for the DP to follow those instructions

Well, I don't think that is quite the case. As I understand it, if there are no official instructions (either because the position is vacant and the President hasn't taken up the powers, or the official hasn't posted) then the DP is responsible. The DP can choose the follow the MoI instructions, it's just that they don't have to.
 
right he doesnt have to follow them

/in hindsight... we should have moblized our economy. The governors seemed to dragged this out longer than I had hoped. We wouldnt have a settler sleeping and its potentional problems. Great ending to my demo-game poilitical career.( yep this is it for me, I think...time for the ISDG political career)
 
You're thinking of stopping? Why?
 
MTDG and ISDG.... I will probably be holding 2 offices between those two games. I am just thinking about it. It reallly also depends on other factors external of civ.
 
When I was MoI I posted instructions for cities. They were the instructions the governors had agreed on. I posted them just in case the governors didn't get around to it. Most governors saw that I had already posted the instructions they were going to post, so they didn't bother posting at all. The DP then ignored my instructions because they weren't legal. It is a bad idea to have the MoI posting instructions for cities.
 
robboo said:
/in hindsight... we should have moblized our economy. The governors seemed to dragged this out longer than I had hoped. We wouldnt have a settler sleeping and its potentional problems.

It is a problem where there is no continuation between one officials plans and the next's plans. For example, one pres might be thinking, "we need more commerce infrastructure, but perhaps another 6 units", and the the next pres will come in just viewing a 20% research rate, and focus soley on commerce. It applies to almost every position.

Ok, a mistake was made with Mongolia, and the next mistake was focusing too much on the economy - courthouses, etc (the settler was part of this) - and not building any units, so that Bismark saw us as a juicy target. So, we were punished, but not too badly, and we'll get revenge.. take Berlin, raze Dortmund.. whatever, not my department. But we have a lot of land, a few good cities, a few developing cities, and a couple of dogs (yes I know I govern them :)), and I don't think all is lost, we haven't seen how the ROTW is doing yet. Surely not every game you have won you've led from start to finish?? Part of the fun is overcoming the challenge.

The point - Don't quit, Roboo. The other 2 DGs are only just beginning, and there isn't that much to do yet.
 
Surely we can win (possibly only diplo and score, but hey, a win is a win).
And I agree with Sweet, at least in the MTDG there can't be that much to do.
 
Sweet..IF I dont run its not because we could lose. I just need to cut back on my computer time in addition due to external factors.

I understand what you are saying about consistency between terms but when you are in a war I dont expect to see settlers being produced especially when you are lagging in techs due to your economy.
 
IF so..I stand corrrected..but my point is the same :)

Lets get this validated and then lets work on getting the state realigned before elections. This will help cut a few more positions so hopefully all positions are filled.
 
Top Bottom