The Version for DG5 is Vanilla Civ 3, patch 1.29f. What special things do we want ?

[Bootstoots]

DYP might be interesting, but I'd prefer sticking with vanilla civ or an expansion. I'd rather we not go into mods; I like the game just fine as it is, and it would take us a considerable amount of time to relearn strategy and how to play the game effectively with DYP.

 

[truckingpete]

Well I got an idea!!

How about whatever government we change too, thats how we rule. We have been democracy for all the DGs. When can still call it the DemoGame but if we choose monarchy to rule, we should have king or queen.

Another idea...

I am working on a new form of government called Constitutional Monarchy. Nobody else has made it except those who put it in those mods... I am almost done except one thing. Add the arrow to that tech. I made the Constitutional Monarchy tech an off shoot the Fuedilism tech. I am thinking about changing it to Magnitism or Astronomy. We can use that tech and I could finish it up.

What do you say??

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Well I got an idea!!

How about whatever government we change too, thats how we rule. We have been democracy for all the DGs. When can still call it the DemoGame but if we choose monarchy to rule, we should have king or queen.

I like that idea alot, but I am not sure how it could be implemented.

 

[eyrei]

I like that idea alot, but I am not sure how it could be implemented.

This might be an interesting concept if it were fleshed out some more. We would still have to elect a monarch, as otherwise it would defeat the whole purpose. However, he could still have advisors and such that could, if they formed a strong enough majority, displaced him/her.

Run with it and see what happens...

 

[Rik Meleet]

I don't think it is really a change. Even despots have advisors, only the despot decides to listen or ignore their advice. And the "will of the people" is always ignored. But what's really different about democracy then ? Elected leaders also ignore the "will of the people" in RL.

 

[eyrei]

It would make for an interesting game of politics, as we would set the number of votes required to replace a leader at a very high percentage, and that leader would be replaced by another despot anyway...Those that followed the will of the people to some extent would be more likely to remain in office, but as long as they even pleased a significant minority of the people, it would be very difficult to replace them. Thus, monthly elections would be of the utmost importance, as most likely, the winner would have almost complete control for that month. Of course, to get elected again, he would have to please a large number of the people. Anyway, I think it would be interesting...

 

[truckingpete]

Hmm...I know...

Well we could still have advisors. We could have a Paraliment but that is Constitutional Monarchy....The Paraliment is like a congress but whatever gov we choose, we rule like that...

If we were communism, we the people say that we are the group of the communist government we vote for whice one is better....then he/she is the communist. But it would have advisors to tell what would be good but the Communist gets to choose what to do if he/she doesn't like it. It would change the game a lot but we need a change....

 

[Chieftess]

Well I got an idea!!

How about whatever government we change too, thats how we rule. We have been democracy for all the DGs. When can still call it the DemoGame but if we choose monarchy to rule, we should have king or queen.

Another idea...

I am working on a new form of government called Constitutional Monarchy. Nobody else has made it except those who put it in those mods... I am almost done except one thing. Add the arrow to that tech. I made the Constitutional Monarchy tech an off shoot the Fuedilism tech. I am thinking about changing it to Magnitism or Astronomy. We can use that tech and I could finish it up.

What do you say??

That idea was started by Strider back in DG2 I think. (or maybe as early as DG1, unless I'm thinking of Ehecatl's Game of Therocracy). One of the problems back then was, "Do we change the ruleset everytime we do that?". We'd need pre-defined rulesets for every game if we did that.

 

[Epimethius]

It was also proposed by me a while ago. Dropped because it would be too hard to do.

 

[truckingpete]

We could write something in the Constitution to say how we control everything with each government. So if we go to (gov) we have to do (whatever) and the list would grow. It wouldn't be too hard.

Lets give it a try!!

We only switch govs once in the whole DG...

 

[DaveShack]

Hmm...

If it weren't for the high probability that it would result in lots of international shipping, I'd say lets burn 40 or so CDs of DyP and ship it to the modem users, and then there would be no issues with going ahead and using it.

Buying PC's for the mac users so we could go ahead and play conquests would be a bit out of reach...

 

[DaveShack]

Maybe we could get a GOTM style scenario file which will make vanilla more like PTW and Conquests.

BTW this GOTM scenario already exists at GOTM scenario

 

[Chieftess]

The GOTM *IS* a scenario now... and has been for months. (Even some of the Firaxians called it a "Scenario of the Month" when I was at Firaxis. )

 

[Bootstoots]

Well I got an idea!!

How about whatever government we change too, thats how we rule. We have been democracy for all the DGs. When can still call it the DemoGame but if we choose monarchy to rule, we should have king or queen.

Let's keep this a game of Democracy. It would be a really hard thing to implement, and just imagine the legal disputes caused by government switching (five different rulesets, one for each government, would get confusing). Plus, I rather like the idea of being able to vote on everything, rather than leave it up to a small group of people (one person in despotism).

 

[GenMarshall]

I thought in RL Consitutional Monarchies, the King and Queen were just figure heads of the government like in Modern England.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

How about no modding, but we force ourselves to play an honourable game throughout? This means that we NEVER initiate a war, and cannot ally with more than one nation if war is declared upon us. Also, there should be limits on what we can dupe the AI out of when it comes to tech trades. It seems that as soon we reach the late Middle Ages the AI will shell out just about anything for a decent tech, diminishing their competitive threat in the process.

Wouldn't it be nice to play a game once where we weren't really in control of our destiny? Since the majority wants to play on Monarch or lower, we will have to set our own handicaps and possibly work them into law(a time-based, evolving secondary ruleset based on in-game decisions that donsig has championed for quite some time). Or we just go thru the motions on the way to another predictable Fanatican victory.

What say you, Fanatica?

 

[Rik Meleet]

Handicaps, variants, mods, call it what you want. I agree with it. But it shouldn't make an office non-functional. Example: Always war variant: Foreign affairs and Trade are non-functional quickly.

I think we can gain the most by changing / modding the rules in the editor. But only in a way which lowers the human effectiveness against the AI while not hurting the AI a lot.

random ideas:
- make luxuries appear with techs, for instance with Philosphy. Or perhaps even later: Engineering or perhaps even Economics.
- Make all resources jump around like Iron does.
- Can only form an army if you have 10 cities.
- Barb units: spear and knight.
- Remove cats, cannons, arties and bombers.

- etc.

 

[Rik Meleet]

No thoughts on my proposal ?

 

[Black_Hole]

I had an idea: Always War, check out this thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=90967

 

[Rik Meleet]

Always war is fun and hard, but has a big disadvantage for a DemoGame; the offices of Trade and Foreign affairs have nothing to do.