1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Team 1 *SPOILER*

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Multi-site Demo Game' started by DaveShack, Jul 16, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Warlord Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,385
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    I'd be willing to vote for Iroquois, Sumeria, and Carthage in that order. I've seen each of those civs mentioned in this thread, the former two by multiple people, and if agricultural is quite important, it would make sense to list the two agricultural ones at the top.

    As for team name, we could be Team Doughnut, as Oct suggested. Perhaps our nation name could be "Doughnutia" or something similar. Unless somebody has a better team name suggestion. ;)
     
  2. gert-janl

    gert-janl Alive!!!

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    511
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    And another new team-member reporting for duty!

    I would favor a more organised democracy than previously proposed. I think it´s much more effective if you have 1 turnplayer for a certain number of consecutive turns. This doesn´t mean that someone is less equal than others, someone just has more responsibility. Plus, you can judge the Turnplayer at the end of his term by (not) re-electing him.
    I would say to give the president the authority to be representative to the UN, if he wants to. This gives the clearest picture of our team to the others, and the clearest picture of the others to our team.

    Team Doughnut sounds fine. I´m ok with that. I´m ok with the countries as well (Iro/Sum/Car)
     
  3. Ginger_Ale

    Ginger_Ale Lurker Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    8,802
    Location:
    Red Sox Nation
  4. WarDance

    WarDance Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    473
    Location:
    The Fire Dances
    And to quote Homer Simpson: "Is there anything doughnuts can't do?"

    Team Doughnut is fine with me.
     
  5. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Warlord Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,385
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    Why would it be much more effective to have only one turnplayer? If we allow everybody to play the save, that would most certainly be faster, as the first person who saw it could play and send it on without further ado. There may be the potential that we could end up with a bad turn-player, but I'd say it is fairly unlikely that somebody who wasn't very good at the game would attempt to play anyway. Even if that did happen, he would probably be told what he'd done wrong by the other players, making that person a better civ player. And the will of the people must be followed under this system as well; any instructions that the people have given (via discussion and polling) would have to be carried out.

    As for equality, this system would make everybody as equal as is possible to make them. You mentioned that the officials have the same amount of power, but more responsibility. However, isn't "more responsibility" just a different way of phrasing "more power"? It seems that the responsibility they gain comes from the fact that they have more power. Under the standard system, the citizens do have the power to elect the president and advisors, but once they're elected, the people don't have the type of direct power that this variant would allow for. They can vote in polls and voice their opinions in discussions, but the final decisions are down to the President and the officials who can instruct him. In this system, we effectively make everybody the President and the advisors, simply by virtue of their being citizens.

    Additionally, I think we'll have just the right number of people to make this a reality. A group of (approximately) 6-10 active citizens would make discussion and voting quite possible, while at the same time, it should be small enough that this system wouldn't be at all chaotic. To my knowledge, this is a completely new idea, and I think it'd be quite interesting if we were the first to carry it out and figure out where it went. All the other demogames at this site (including the multi-player ones) have involved a president, x number of advisors, and usually governors and a judiciary. I think this system can work under these conditions, and we really should give it a shot to see where it goes.
     
  6. zyxy

    zyxy Warmongering Fool

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    3,390
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Team Doughnut is fine. As long as I don't have to eat one.

    List of civs (in this order):
    1. Iroquois
    2. Celts
    3. Persia
    4. Vikings
    5. Sumer

    Iroquois and Celts have good UU's, usable until mid MA at least, so landing on another continent is possible. Both are agricultural. Celts have two serious drawbacks: they are religious and their UU needs iron.
    Persia also has a good UU (but needs iron as well). Scientific and Industrious is a decent trait combo.
    Viking UU is very strong and needs no resources, but arrives late and is expensive. Seafaring and militaristic is a nice combo. Main drawback is: you have to survive the AA somehow.
    Sumer is a mixed bag IMO. Nice traits, and the UU can be effective in early pillaging missions. But with a continents map, early warfare is not so likely. And I don't like defender UU's.

    Another mixed bag is Carthage. It's UU is essentially an expensive hoplite, and I think Greece or Sumer would be a better choice if we want to play defensive. Carthages traits (seafaring+industrious) are quite OK though (but the same is true for Greece).
     
  7. Kiech

    Kiech Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2002
    Messages:
    987
    Hi checking in!

    Doughnuts sounds great! We should name all our towns after some flavor of a doughnut.

    I think Maya actually have the strongest traits with Agr and Ind, they grow very quickly. I don't really care for the UU (javalin 2/2 archer w/enslave wo/defensive shot) though, since i seem to be rather unlucky with them.

    As for who gets to actually play the turn, I think it should be whoever can get it out to the next team quickly, as long as they follow whatever plan we have made up. Any kind of decisions that have to be made though, such as war, wonders, trading deals, etc., should be decided as a group.

    I think we should setup a government kinda like Civ. It won't mean much early on, but once we start getting multiple cities it will. Think of these as committes and you can be in multiple groups.
    Group F1 would gauge growth, terrain improvements and schedule production - they dont pick the builds, just what the order is.
    Group F2 works out trade deals and trade routes, including exploration, expansion, and trade buildings.
    Group F3 Deals with our military, who to upgrade and where to defend or attack. They decide where barracks and military buildings go.
    Group F4 works out treaties and spying
    Group F5 does the happiness and culture work. This includes assigning specialists and deciding who needs temples or culture buildings.
    Group F6 Works on where to put libraries, picks the best course for science and trys to min/max our output.
    Whoever plays is King for the Day.
    Our leader keeps everyone in order and makes sure the turn gets played.
    This way we can keep up a plan of what needs to be done in some kind of order.
     
  8. Zorn

    Zorn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    I would like to play with the inclusion of AIs. I am probably alone with this intention, so it`s just for the protocol.
    Map size:as big as possible.
    SoZ: yes / no ivory / AC
    SGL: no
    Barbs: Raging, why not
    Difficulty: Emperor
    A/C/T: 4/normal/temperate
    Landform: This is the only thing I really care about. Continents with 4 parties are pretty lame. Will be 2 on each, seperated from the rest for a long time.
    Archipel would be cool. 70% water.
    Civ: Depending on the landform, no? We might want to be seafaring if it would be archi. Even on conti it could be usefull. Against humans, the seas are important and contested.
    0.3.3: No. Refugees bring their knowledge with them. Wars have been won by this in rl, so why not here too?
     
  9. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Warlord Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,385
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    To all members: be sure to join the Team 1 group in your User CP in order to get access to the private forum.
     
  10. Rik Meleet

    Rik Meleet Top predator Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Messages:
    11,977
    Location:
    Nijmegen Netherlands
    Moderator Action: Thread closed; moved to DG 7 forum
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page