Turn 5 handout

[chiefpaco]

There is something about the chats that bothers me. The handing out of turn 5. I am guessing it was started to provide a backup of some sorts and to allow some people to catch up on the game map and such.

However, I have never liked it for the following reasons:
- I think the game should be played by the DP during the turns and by the citizens between the turns. This provides access for the chat citizen group exclusive access to a part of the game I don't feel they should.
- It takes control out of the hands of the DP. Suddenly there could be several people all looking at the game at once and making suggestions.
- It slows down things a lot.
- It opens up a can of controversy on how we should proceed.

I think sometimes it is handed out to get specific feedback on particular points of the game. Say, to get opinions on trade deals or troop movement. However, I think the player could take a bit more responsibility to examine these items themselves, make a judgement, and use the room for any more input, as the current rules allow. The player could use the distribution as a last resort, but I'm not sure I see a specific need.

The one thing it is good for, perhaps, is that overlooked items by the player can get noticed. Perhaps a unique trade deal arrived during that turn. However, what of all the other turns? I recommend the player be as responsible as possible from turns 1-10 to be examining all aspects of the game. They are not only playing by turn instructions, but also a game of Civ. While play styles differ from person to person, I want the player to feel they are playing Civ at the same time.

Did I miss the real reason why it is handed out?

 

[donsig]

Section N, Artilce 3 of the constitution calls for the save to be posted every 5 turns and that is why I have been doing so.

I like the idea of others looking at that save. I think a bit of responsibility as Chiefpaco suggests wouldn't hurt but I don't think we should move towards restricting access to the saves. There are (and have been) times when uploading the save even on odd turns can be of benefit. When the game is haded out for a specific purpose that should not nullify any other info that someone sees.

It is very difficult as designated player to find a proper balance between playing a civ 3 game and playing a demo game. This is not a succession game where I get the save from someone else, play my turns and pass it on. We're supposed to be playing the civ 3 game together (in a sense anyway). Instructions help to determine where this balance lies and I would remind everyone that instructions can be specific or general and that there are appropriate times for either.

Whoever the DP is will have personal biases in how he or she plays the game. In general I think handing out the game is a good thing as it helps to overcome these biases - hopefully for the better of our country!

I would say Chiefpaco's call for responsibility in looking at the save ranks up there with eyrei's calls that we slow down and ensure that important policy decisions in the forum and with Cyc's calls that we slow down on the rule making and changing decisions.

 

[disorganizer]

* every one can look at the in-turn chats. no exclusive access
* whats wrong about people making suggestions?
* not really. it speeds things up, as in complicates situations the DP and chatters may misunderstand each other. a look helps here. you know sometimes words cant explain a situation as good as pictures, so looking at something is better than having it explained (see courses for presentations for more details).
* not really. the controverse will just be there wheter ppl are looking in the save or the DP will post the things he sees, just now he doesnt have to post all things in chat.

ONE THING:
THE GAME IS NEVER HANDED OUT FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN:
a) turn 5 interminnent save
b) the DP leaves and gives over controll to someone else

and it never has been given out for another reason

so wheres your problem with it? we proposed in the beginning saving it every turn, but this was voted against by citizenry.

 

[Cyc]

Personally, I like the save being posted every 5 turns for security reasons. Computers are not that reliable and with thunderstorms and what-have-you, I think there's safety and time saved with the current plan. I believe it does help the DP to have a more informed public during the chat. It is the DP's responsibility how the public input, ( regardless of how informed the public is) is used in decision making. I say let's stay the way we are.

 

[disorganizer]

this was what it was meant for. information was just a side effect the chatters noticed first at the last chat

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by disorganizer
ONE THING:
THE GAME IS NEVER HANDED OUT FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN:
a) turn 5 interminnent save
b) the DP leaves and gives over controll to someone else

and it never has been given out for another reason

Just to clarify, I have uploaded saves that were other than turn 5 saves specifically for the trade department to be able to make trade recomendations.

 

[disorganizer]

? when ?

 

[Chieftess]

I agree with that reason - t-storms. Donsig and I live in the east coast, and that region gets its' share of thunderstorms. (my area more than Donsig's probably).

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by disorganizer
? when ?

I don't recall exactly. May even have been the time I was designated player in term 2. I'd have to go through all the logs to find it and I don't think it owuld even be worth finding.

The point is that the DP should be allowed to post saves when he or she feels input is needed.

 

[disorganizer]

I just didnt know it (or didnt remember it). Its no problem in my opinion, because we ought to playout in public (we could even do application-sharing for chatturns, if we had a good software for it).
The idea of the chat was exactly this, that the DP can get info and input from others and has not to take all decisions himself (like in the civ2-demogame).
In the beginning, it was easy to talk out everything in chat because there was almost nothing we knew. Even in the domino-war days, the situation often got confusing, taking the player and the chatters about 5 minutes to make clear wheare exactly a settler was. And then it showed that it was misplaced and that a ity was built in a wrong place because of that. This would for example have been prevented by our mechanism (which was implemented later).
At the moment, the saveout seems to be only a waste of time, but as situation gets more complex, it will be even more usefull.