Suggestion for next elections:

[Juize]

Uhm, since Trade & Diplomacy leader aren't those most active leader places,
could those be put together?

(put together? Agh I'm tired I can't toolk engrish kill me plz)
Well, yes you know what I mean, there is Trade & Diplomacy leader,
and Dep. Trade/Dipl. leader. Any chance? It's quite boring, you know.

 

[Dell19]

For now we could group them together but later in the game they will have more to do so then they can have separate roles again.

 

[CornMaster]

Well...I've thought about the same thing...grouping them together...but not because of low activity. Basically the only thing the trade leader can do is suggest changes in the tax rate (or Caravan Trading) of which neither has been done. We could change Diplomacy and Trade into Department of the Interior. Through in the Science too....and have 2 people run the whole thing. With one deputy.

So Science/Trade/Diplomacy = Department of Interior. 2 Leaders, 1 Deputy (if necessary)

What do we think of that?

(If anyone agrees or has a better solution please post it...I'll create a poll later.)

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Well, this President sees the trade leader as someone who will advise on what commodity to produce, where to send it for best profit, and to comment on the economy, as improvements are made, their cost must be taken into account, also the trade advisor must request transport and export for caravans, and recomend when new ones should be produced.

 

[Sixchan]

I'm not very good at the economy. And I tend to end up in war with other civs no matter what I do. I'm happy running Science by myself.

 

[Apollo]

If we hope to get an empire where there are tons of caravans/freights going around each turn to make us money and aid in research then the Trade Leader will have a lot to do. He will have to check all the different supply and demand of our cities and our allies' cities, direct our caravans/freights, and promote trade-related production. For now this position is not very demanding, but it will be at a later stage in the game. As for Science and Diplomacy Leaders, neither of these ever become too demanding, but then they aren't really related to each other and wouldn't make much sense being grouped as one.

 

[Pellaken]

my suggestions:

no trade deputy untill caravans are invented

when at war, we add a 2nd military deputy, called the "chief general" or some other other rank, who is appointed by the prez or mil leader, and stays on during the war. for example: if we are at war with the zulu's a chief general is appointed, if we then go to war with the actecs, an other chief general is appointed. if the wat with the zulu's ends, the chief general incharge of the zulu's then resigns. etc...

eliminate diplomacy deputy untill we have 3 contatcs

include the POSSIBILITY to create a 2nd expansion deputy of the other 2 feel they are swamped, mostley for early-mid-game

keep Science as is

City Planning deputy should be removed, instead, the govoners should all serve as joint deputy's. that way, the more cities we get, the more deputy's we get to deal with the more cities.


like any of this?


here's an example of the way I see the workload. {see pic}

military and diplomacy fluxuates cause you are eathir at war or peace. etc...

city planning is the most work, but its supplimented with govonors

 

[CornMaster]

Some of those are good ideas Pellaken...but they complicate matters like 100 fold.

My idea would simplify everything....your ideas, while may help organization.....would always look at a schedule to see what happens next, instead of playing the game.

It's obvious that no one likes my idea....and they have defined the Trade leader position better than I.

And in conclusion.....Rock and Role Rulez.

*cough*




Roll I mean......

 

[ACM]

Quoting Pellaken:

City Planning deputy should be removed, instead, the govoners should all serve as joint deputy's. that way, the more cities we get, the more deputy's we get to deal with the more cities.

I agree with this. We should leave the rest as it is.

 

[Pellaken]

my suggestions:
Old ideas in red
Refiend ideas in blue

no trade deputy untill caravans are invented
no change to trade {keep it as it is today}

when at war, we add a 2nd military deputy, called the "chief general" or some other other rank, who is appointed by the prez or mil leader, and stays on during the war. for example: if we are at war with the zulu's a chief general is appointed, if we then go to war with the actecs, an other chief general is appointed. if the wat with the zulu's ends, the chief general incharge of the zulu's then resigns. etc...
we should have 1 permanent position of General. appointed by the military leader to stragatise in the event of war.

eliminate diplomacy deputy untill we have 3 contatcs
no change to diplomacy

include the POSSIBILITY to create a 2nd expansion deputy of the other 2 feel they are swamped, mostley for early-mid-game
no change to expansion

keep Science as is
no change to science

City Planning deputy should be removed, instead, the govoners should all serve as joint deputy's. that way, the more cities we get, the more deputy's we get to deal with the more cities.
City Planning deputy should NOT be removed, BUT, the govoners should all be given more power.

also, CMaster, I think your way is more confusing and complex. 2 leaders of a bi-department? why not just make a joint deputy? I like all my new ways, they are simple, and there are only 2 changes. I will explain:

our military leader has a tough job. he has to make polls about things that are so abstract. therefore, a player, who is not nessacarley the most likable and would therefore get elected, but perhaps is the most militant, should be able to make military strageties for attacks on enemies.

our city planner has the toughest job of all. govoners are a great idea, but they should be given more power over what happesn in thier province. eventually, we will have, I hope, 20-40 cities. will we really fill the forum with 40 polls each with 10+ options? that will get tedious and boring to me. therefore, general polls should be made as things get advanced, where you can vote on the direction the province should take, and say some things you want to, but in general the govoner decides whats built where. an example would be:
poll, what direction should we take: temples, barracks, trade+{things that make trade increase}, money+ science+
an example reply would be:
we should build barracks, except in cityville, where we should build a ___

so, what do yall think?

 

[H Tower]

under most of these definitions, shouldn't the trade advisor be posting polls on what kind of commodities will be traded? isn't that hard to do without knowing who demands what? sounds pretty hard to do...

 

[jomey]

I agree with H Tower:
When we get to the stage where we have hundreds of caravans in production it will become a nightmare as to where each city is and what their demands are.. It's hard enough playing it solo but to try and poll every caravan:crazyeyes

 

[animepornstar]

how about end the game when we get industrialization or explosives?

 

[jomey]

how about end the game when we get industrialization or explosives?

Talk about controversial

 

[Sixchan]

Hey pell, your graph is wrong! After espionage, the Science Minister has to make polls on what to steal. In diplomatic relations, the Science Minister should be helping the diplomacy minister decide on tech trading.