Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game VI: Polls' started by Strider, Jul 8, 2005.
Please vote for the option that best represents your view of us playing a 5cc.
Strongly Oppose for the following reasons:
Utterly Boring and won't bring anything to the game
Likely to drop partcipation in the game
Upsets planning and creates more problems for the game
All other pass attempts at a demogame playing any variant has failed (from severe drops in partcipation).
No experience in dealing with variants
Strongly Support. This will help for RPGing and will require less micromangement.
I'd rather do a multi-team demogame, but would prefer this over an epic.
I think this might be interesting. I said I'd support it, but perhaps an epic with high difficulty would be better. I'm not sure, but I'd be willing to try this out if it wins in the polling.
Singing and Dancing for a Five City Challenge!
Will invigorate the SPDG
Easy for new players to understand the situation and meaningfully contribute
5 City Mayors means more decisions made at a local level
More local positions than national positions! (excluding Judiciary)
RPG opportunities more focused, hence more appealing
Scale of game, hence the time frame, shorter. Easier to keep people involved.
Highly doubt it, 5CC's are played to be challenging, not fun or invigorating. Have we really suck so low that we must bow to a mode that will bring us nothing but strife and agitation? It will not invigorate anything, and my posting this is proof enough of that. It would do nothing, but bring our troubles more allies. If this will invigorate the Demogame, then tell me why, so many of those stories you may find in the Story & Tales section that does the exact same thing, get so little attention? Why then, have Succession Games hardly ever use 5CC as a limit?
I've answered both of those questions myself, and you don't have to look far to find those answers. The concept of 5CC is failing in every othere aspect of Civ3, so why should we believe that it will work here?
I highly doubt it, with only five cities, there will be almost nothing to contribute to. Before newer players gained fame by governing far-off provinces, or posting insight ideas that we can do in-game. With less cities, they will be unable to do such, and will be unable to contribute.
People want power, the ability to effect things. With more local poistions, they will not have that power. Governing one city will be boring, and to most will not be much more than an annoyance after work.
How so? How will they be more focused, when we still have the whole world before us? If you not remember, some of the best Roleplaying stories in DG history actually never took place within our nation.
Your logic is illogical. With less cities, we will not be as powerful. So the game will take longer, rather than shorter. Do you really thing the game will be shorter with 5 cities, than it will be with 20?
As I have said many times already. A 5CC will destroy this game, all of the pillars it stands upon are black and twisted. It's suppose to invigorate Roleplaying, and the game itself? How will it do such, when no one outside of this game wants to play a 5CC? Kids may sit upon a floor, using there imaginations to play alone, but we may not.
We have no experience in organizing or dealing with variants. I believe I am the only one who have actually played many of them, and look how strongly I oppose the idea of playing one again.
We must think abou the future of this game. All other types of games have bored of 5cc's, and most players do not wish to play one. Any calls of a 5cc bringing us more partcipation, are just as true as the calls last game of the new constitution bringing us more partcipation.
They say that it will bring more roleplaying to the game, yet I can prove that an Epic game can cause lots of roleplaying. What do they have to offer as proof to you? Nothing, not even the Demogames of other sites.
On that topic, all of the other Civilization sites that have attempted a variant of any type have fallen apart. Do we really want to repeat there mistakes?
If we use that skeptical attitude towards everything, Strider, nothing will get done.
Understand that the lower the difficulty, the shorter the game. I have done a 1CC Conquest on Regent - they are very quick, and doable. A 5CC on Regent or Monarch wouldn't take too much time, especially on a small map with a good civ.
5CCs aren't used in many SGs anymore because they have been done there, for the most part. However, we as a demogame have NEVER done a 5CC. It doesn't matter if Stories and Tales doesn't get a lot of attention. It matters how this demogame progresses. (PS: For an extra challenge, find me a few 5CC Stories in the S&T forum).
Newbies got attention by governing corrupt provinces? Never seen this happen. With less cities, more focus is on each city, pushing it to the max, and it gets maximum attention.
This is 100% pure speculation. WE HAVE NEVER DONE THIS IN A DEMOGAME! How do you know? Governing one city in a 5CC is governing 20% of the cities! As a mayor of a city, you will compete with other cities to make yours the most productive and useful - roleplaying along the way.
Roleplaying will be more focused as there are only 5 cities, all are important, have little corruption, and are a big part of our empire. I saw roleplay this demogame for Oxford. Why? It was a core city. I didn't see any roleplaying for some far-off corrupt city in jungle and marsh. The less cities, the more focus on each. Mayors will want their city to be the best, and citizens can decide which city to live in, why, etc.
Perhaps you didn't know I was a part of this demogame. Imagine that - other people have done variants too!
More people play Epic games than 5CC. What's more appealing in an announcement:
For the 7th straight time, the demogame will be attempting an Epic game. If you haven't played an Epic game, join us!
For the first time in demogame history at CFC, we will try a variant: a 5CC. Come control a city and compete with the others to be most useful today!
Strider: You started a thread about lack of participation, and how to increase it. Do you think doing something repetitive for the 7th straight time will increase participation?
You seem not to understand anything about what varying difficulty levels do to the game. Making a 5cc AND lowering the difficulty level will make the game far to easy, and were lose partcipation faster than the start of the game gained it. A 5cc does not equal one differance in difficulty level, as you seem to think so.
SGs are the exact same concept as the demogame, you play a game of Civ3 in a team environment. The only thing we did was not limit the amount of people that can join, and added a mock government. Nonetheless, it is still the same concept.
What ever happened to stopping the number crunching, and trying to get more roleplay? I thought that was the whole idea behind this proposal. I've been in this game sense the start, sorry to break it to you, but that's how it worked. Not so much this game, because we didn't make very many provinces.
It's been attempted before, do you really think this is the ONLY demogame in the entire world? There are many others, and they've already tried almost everything. Alot of the smaller Civ3 sites turned to mods and variants fairly early, in an attempt to gain partcipation from it. As I've said before, they all failed horribly.
Wrong again, the roleplay in Oxford was hardly anything. I wouldn't even really call it roleplay, as it was more boring to read, than exciting. Tell me, how our are cities going to make roleplay more exciting? Also, for that matter, we have core cities in a normal game also. Could someone not focus on those core cities anyway? Hell, if you want you an choose 5 core cities to focus on! I highly doubt it will do any good. I personally, don't want our entire roleplaying to be based around bickering over what city is the best. Nay, in the past, in these so called "glory" days so many people call back to, roleplaying never took place in the core cities.
Everything a 5cc does for us, an Epic game does better.
Finally you are correct. An Epic game does eliminate participation better.
Okay, for that matter, whose up for playing a Rome: Total War demogame? You know, we've played Civ3 for so long now, it's just so boring. Were not going to get anything out of being repetitive like this.
Actually, now that I think of it, lets make a brand new constitution also. This old one is getting so repetitive.
Why do I think this will work better than anything else? For the same reason were taking the old constitution back. It's more familiar, someone who has never played in the Demogame or played a 5cc will have nothing to take as a basis. They will have no point of reference, no knowaledge to build off of. Using a normal Epic game will allow us to ease the tension in joining the demogame.
As I've said before, our problems are not in the type of game we play. It's in how it's managed and ran. We do nothing to aid in newer players into the game. We don't even have anything to introduce them into the game.
With an Epic game, the right threads in the right places, and a few attention grabbers I can almost double the size of this game. Afterall, I've done it before.
This is because there basically are no "new" players to Civ3 that show up at our demogame doors. We have a FAQ, they are welcome to post, there is a Union for Newbies!
There are more regulars than newbies - you can't play a game for the speculatory few newbies that might show up with no knowledge of Civ3 - you play it for the majority that DO know how to play it.
Using your logic, why don't we go to Chieftan? That way, newbies to Civ3 won't have to start in a difficulty level where they have, direct quote, "no point of reference, no point of knowledge to build off of".
If we could've doubled the size of this game, why didn't we do it this game? Just because a few threads were in the "wrong" place?
Incorrect. 5CC's are played to be different. Are they challenging? Yes. Shock! Amazement! But, at the core, they are different from a normal game, and THAT'S why they are played.
Look at the evidence, Strider, the DG is not going stale. It is. We have fewer and fewer players each time because we do the same old thing, over and over. Good grief - we didn't have a President elected in the last term of the game. Why - because it was boring.
Incorrect. Newer players have never gained fame by governing far-off provinces because there is nothing to do in corrupt, incapable provinces that are ignored. They gain it as you correctly pointed out the second time in posting insightful comments. With 5 cities, discussions are more focused, providing more opportunities for new players to contribute. They aren't overwhelmed by the sheer scope of the game.
Incorrect. Examine the number of contested elections - that along invalidates your point.
People want to have fun, to contribute. That takes time, and the monstrously large provinces of the past SG killed that. 1 city, 5 positions gives everyone, not just those with hours of free time per day, a chance to contribute, to feel a part of the game.
Some of the stories, indeed, probably THE best thread took place in ONE city. I refer you to Cyc's thread. Easily, the best thread I've seen. For an story drivern RPG to maintain viabilty, it must have a solid, defined base. 5 cities, all competeting against each other while still fighting the world as a whole is an appealing base to work from.
Incorrect. Indeed, you prove yourself wrong with one of your own points - "No Experience". A 5CC game will move faster by the simple reason that we will be able to play more turns per sitting than we could with a larger civ. The massive time demands large civs put on the designated player simply aren't there. There aren't the massive numbers of workers. You don't micromanage 50 cities each turn.
Strider, you're wrong about the 5CC. Part of it is that you don't like change. You'd rather see something stagnate, wither and die instead of trying something new, something to invigorate what's old.
You state that an Epic game will have "lots of roleplaying". Where has it been? The evidence along proves that statement false. It hasn't happened in quite some time - why would it come back now?
I am thinking about the future of this game. I'm looking to a bright future, where we try new thing to BE the first to make it work. A future where we are willing to take a risk, to create the next big thing.
Where's your vision? The past isn't good enough, Strider. Look at the where we're going, and recognize that the road isn't getting better.
I'm not basing everything I'm saying on my own words. I have a pretty good way to draw attention to the demogame forums, and unlike many on here I don't ignore the "whos online" list. The past couple of days, I've seen several names I did not recognize looking the forums. The ones I saw I sent PM's to, asking them what they thought of the game, and if they need my aid in understanding it.
The majority said that they didn't understand what it was (the demogame). Acouple others said they were scared away because it seemed weird and not Civ3.
I've not come up with ideas out of thin air, thinking they will work. I've based everything I've said on several differant "studies" I've been doing (didn't really think of them as studies before).
I am not coming before you with nothing to support my ideas or my goals. I am not asking you to bow down to my will, I am asking you to trust me on this matter. I've not sat idly, attempting to start arguements. Trust me, I've done my research and I've made logical conclusions based on that research.
I like my idea of a limited-cities game better, but prefer 5CC to standard epic.
What the hell? The DG is not going stale, it is? Your actually wrong about the fewer and fewer players thing. We had the most players in DG2, and then it dropped off in DG3. Why is that? Well, one thing happened about that time. Donovan_Zoi has been preaching this for awhile now, and well I'm going to listen to him on it. Shaitan left the game, that's what happened. We are not losing partcipation because it's boring, how the hell will it be boring to someone who has never played a demogame before?
We are losing partcipation because we lack strong leadership.
Wrong, taking that my second comment was the only right one. Vetern players are sure to contribute 'insightful comments' faster (and with more knowaledge of the demogame and current situtation) than newer players. If we make the scope of the game smaller, than we tighten there ability to contribute.
The president is not a powerful poistion, actually the most powerful ones (Judiciary) were contested and filled. The more powerful departments were also contested. Other than that, your just saying what you think it will do.
To who? If you don't remember, all of the people who have made these powerful RPG's are no longer here. It takes more than an appealing base, it takes creative talent to make something that people like. Cyc is gone, Ehecatl is gone, Veera is gone, Falcon is gone, who do you want to make these RPG's? If you want me to do it, your doing it the wrong way.
You still have to plan things out, things will happen faster inside of the game. Turnchats will also likely be shorter, but I doubt we will play more turns. The game will move just as fast as it always did.
I don't like change? Yet, here I sit, attempting to change everything. The forum organization, the constitution, and the game.
It's been stomped and destroyed the pass couple of games. Don't worry however, as I said in my above post, I've not sat idly and watch it get destroyed. I have a pretty good plan to increase Roleplaying in an Epic game.
You weren't far off on the contribute part you said above, but my plan was to allow them plenty of oppertunity to contribute to Roleplaying. First thing we need to do is increase friendly competition, I've yet to send any of these ideas to Daveshack, as I promised, because he hasn't got back to me on some of the other things I've thrown at him.
I actually looked at what was good with Roleplaying in 5cc and stole acouple of things. The roleplaying for a 5cc game will be based mostly on city vs city. Well, I've decided to twist this more into a province vs province standpoint.
Province vs Province will be a much more in-depth experience. Imagine an expedition to be the first to scale the highest tops in the land of Middle-Earth. Maybe even the citizens in a city, fighting to be a part of another province? The possibilities are much less limiting, and it allows for a more in-depth RPG.
Okay, enough about that, and onto how I'm going to do it.
Well, first things first, give citizens who are a part of ??? province more control over a governors instructions and give those who are not part (of the same province) little to no control. I'm still experimenting with ways to do that, so give me alittle more planning time.
Although to make Roleplaying work, the citizens must feel a loyality to the province (something you seem to think will happen automatically with a 5cc). Well, to create more loyality, I just planned on asking (privately) several differant people to join differant provinces and then just stampede "We have the Great Library here, and a rich Aztec culture. (or things along like that)" I also planned on asking them to start up citizen groups that is devoted to furthering that province, etc. There is much, much more, but I don't really want to say them at this moment.
There are several more things that I plan on doing (or attempting), that have alot to do with Roleplay. I'm a huge RPG fan, anything from video games to pen and paper games. I've spent most of my life playing RPG's (I've memorized the D&D, World of Darkness, and Shadowrun systems). I've been busy for awhile trying to find ways to incorporate some of the best RPG elements into the Demogame.
I'll post them all in there own seperate thread in a few days (has no one noticed the absense of any thread dealing with roleplay?). I just don't have them all done. I'm just asking for alittle bit of trust on this, I'm on a short schedule and I have to get these polls up before I can post my own ideas that can sway them.
Im going to change my vote to "Against, but willing to consider"
I ran for External Consul twice and won 2 uncontested races. IMO External is the most powerful position besides President and Judiciary. Where are you drawing this conclusion?
Strider, you mentioned that variants such as 5CC have killed participation in DG's at smaller sites. However, for all we know, those smaller sites wouldn't have been able to sustain a DG for a significant period of time anyway (with the attrition rate that these games typically have, they wouldn't last very long). Do you know of any situation that happened at a large site (Apolyton for instance), or are they all from smaller sites?
Also, I tend to think that city vs. city could be far more intense and in-depth than province vs. province. We've tried the latter before, and I don't recall any friendly competition between governors since I joined (late DG2). In intense competition between cities, this could be far more interesting and open to roleplay, old roleplayers or not. It would also make the city entry in the citizen registry have much more meaning. Additionally, I wouldn't be at all surprised if one city would allow for much better micromanagement than a province of c. 7 cities (among a succession of provinces) would. Also, if anybody's worried about the lack of contested elections, we could strike out much of the executive branch and all of the governors except five. The Domestic office would be changed or perhaps even eliminated, the Cultural ministry could be completely wiped out (the governors could easily take care of culture in their lone city), and some of the things like Trade and Foreign Affairs could be handled by one ministry. Also, the turnchat times would be reduced (no managing 50+ cities at the endgame), thus making the post of President less time-consuming and allowing more people to fill the role toward the end.
You know, I think seeing the arguments against it are making me support a 5CC even more. I left this game for a while in part because it got fairly boring and repetitive once I was at it for a year. Let's be different in a challenging way this time.
after listening to the arguments I would like to change my vote to strongly support
BTW after looking at CG's post this is what the vote total looks like
Strongly for 6
Somewhat for 4
Willing to consider:2
Strongly against 3
Separate names with a comma.