Warrior or Settler

[Comnenus]

Since no one has "officially" brought it up, I will.

At the last tc we stopped playing at t12. Some wanted to go on longer. Some didn't want it to go even that far. The basic reason we stopped was because we are near ready to build a warrior. The question was raised as to whether we wanted to change to a settler, so we stopped so that it could be discussed here.

Well, here's the discussion, a little late, but just as necessary.

I propose that we continue with the warrior. We need to explore north. We still need some info on the south, as well. Even for Diamond City we could possibly make a better decision about where to plop it down.

The downside of this is that if there is a close by civ to the south of us, they could grab the diamonds before us. The question to you is: is it worth the risk? Do we explore or settle?

 

[Provolution]

Since we have so many proponents of making things less than perfect, democratically and slow, and allow time for proper inputs, I would go for the warrior North in order to get those inputs. I would also have put up a poll on this Comnenus. Please do so.

 

[Comnenus]

I would also have put up a poll on this Comnenus. Please do so.

Reason I didn't was because time is short, but if you think it would help the leadership, then consider it done.

 

[Provolution]

Comnenus

There has been so many flaws already. some rectificatin, as will be noted here in writing as evidence for all to see, will be not only forgiven, but saluted. The same ones that rushed the end of the turnchat, are the same ones that did not bring it up for discussion.
Now, that warrior may change our total picture.

 

[Cyc]

Comnenus

The same ones that rushed the end of the turnchat, are the same ones that did not bring it up for discussion.

Ya know, I keep reading how you're against people who use the tactic of mudslinging, but all I read from you is how much you want to punish people for decisions that go against yours. Yes, I called for an end to the chat, as discussed in another thread, I believe 10 turns should be the limit.

You accuse people like DaveShack of making innuendos about unamed people, well I've seen you imply accusations that sound remarkably like they're pointed at me. If you want satisfaction from DS, then just come out and say what you have to say about me, Provolution. Quit dancing around the bush.

 

[FortyJ]

I grok a wrongness in this discussion.

It seems logical to recruit another warrior/scout so we can learn as much as possible about our surroundings. Furthermore, I would support any plan that would involve construction of a granary prior to recruiting a settler so we can maximize our growth potential.

 

[Comnenus]

A poll on this subject is up now.

To vote, please click here.

 

[Cyc]

I grok a wrongness in this discussion.

It seems logical to recruit another warrior/scout so we can learn as much as possible about our surroundings. Furthermore, I would support any plan that would involve construction of a granary prior to recruiting a settler so we can maximize our growth potential.

I think I'll just retire to the Judicial bench. My style of playing just doesn't seem to mesh with the majority here. Sorry if I've caused any problems.

 

[Provolution]

Well, I do not want to dance around the GW Bush. But I do not want to have a flawed Florida style decisionmaking system either. So if we solve the system first, then the more personal frustrations would go over quickly.

Well, I never told Daveshack he made any innuendos about unnamed people, he apologized for bringing my reference to Tao, a too honest person I learnt. Daveshack said he was sorry about that he brought in that name. The innuendos on my person came from non-ministers and non-judicary sources, so you are not part of that.
So basically, you mix two very separate cases.

Cyc, yes, I can see some inconcistencies in procedural and tile planning, which is a geographic/organization processing issue. This is no about you, but about the mixed messages you gave. You ask for time to discussions and not to rush tiurns, but those few extra turns would not have done any harm, just provided us enough mapping data
to have a proper city discussion.

I agree with you in the judiciary arguments, the monarchy, the iron, the view on unfair play in elections, the view on including new players and in general share many views on how to run this game. Yet, personally, I see that we can add 1-5 turns if nothing happens but providing people with more insight into what they discuss.
The less data the more rhetoric we can play, maybe that is what you like on map discussions, to win the argument regardless of the map and the procedure.

For me, the procedure must be fair, and a fair procedure is not magically locked to 10 or 15 turns, but to the fact that people can have meaningful discussions between the forums, and have time to develop qualified polls. Some of us call for two options only, screened by the ministers and presented as two valid options. The same people that states that it is too much work to post a screenie with tilevalues, let ministers grade, comment it and poll it, are also the same people who write dozens of pages in order to
rip peoples proposals apart. That is a positivist versus a negativist thinking.

I will quit references to that turnchat when the Ringi system, or something similar that remedies the lasting problem is in place, and I have no interest in it any longer.
If we ignored the experience and did not improve the system, these conflicts would come back sooner or later. With this system in place, I swear to vote 10 turns with you in the foreseeable future. So Cyc, analyze the data and look on the fair polling procedures, before you argue passionately for a weak city location case.

I know I will be subject to the same, if not worse scrutiny on the foreign affairs side, some citizens already started a concession poll to other cities, a question recycled
from the FA campaign, how many gold are you willing to give before you declare war.
This was taken right from the Domino War cause textbook, and will not be adopted as I campaigned against it, and one of the FA candidates brought it up.

PS I liked the second proposal you had much better.

 

[Black_Hole]

I think I'll just retire to the Judicial bench. My style of playing just doesn't seem to mesh with the majority here. Sorry if I've caused any problems.

dont resign at a time like this, I am still behind you

 

[Black_Hole]

Well, I do not want to dance around the GW Bush. But I do not want to have a flawed Florida style decisionmaking system either. So if we solve the system first, then the more personal frustrations would go over quickly.

Well, I never told Daveshack he made any innuendos about unnamed people, he apologized for bringing my reference to Tao, a too honest person I learnt. Daveshack said he was sorry about that he brought in that name. The innuendos on my person came from non-ministers and non-judicary sources, so you are not part of that.
So basically, you mix two very separate cases.

Cyc, yes, I can see some inconcistencies in procedural and tile planning, which is a geographic/organization processing issue. This is no about you, but about the mixed messages you gave. You ask for time to discussions and not to rush tiurns, but those few extra turns would not have done any harm, just provided us enough mapping data
to have a proper city discussion.

I agree with you in the judiciary arguments, the monarchy, the iron, the view on unfair play in elections, the view on including new players and in general share many views on how to run this game. Yet, personally, I see that we can add 1-5 turns if nothing happens but providing people with more insight into what they discuss.
The less data the more rhetoric we can play, maybe that is what you like on map discussions, to win the argument regardless of the map and the procedure.

For me, the procedure must be fair, and a fair procedure is not magically locked to 10 or 15 turns, but to the fact that people can have meaningful discussions between the forums, and have time to develop qualified polls. Some of us call for two options only, screened by the ministers and presented as two valid options. The same people that states that it is too much work to post a screenie with tilevalues, let ministers grade, comment it and poll it, are also the same people who write dozens of pages in order to
rip peoples proposals apart. That is a positivist versus a negativist thinking.

I will quit references to that turnchat when the Ringi system, or something similar that remedies the lasting problem is in place, and I have no interest in it any longer.
If we ignored the experience and did not improve the system, these conflicts would come back sooner or later. With this system in place, I swear to vote 10 turns with you in the foreseeable future. So Cyc, analyze the data and look on the fair polling procedures, before you argue passionately for a weak city location case.

I know I will be subject to the same, if not worse scrutiny on the foreign affairs side, some citizens already started a concession poll to other cities, a question recycled
from the FA campaign, how many gold are you willing to give before you declare war.
This was taken right from the Domino War cause textbook, and will not be adopted as I campaigned against it, and one of the FA candidates brought it up.

PS I liked the second proposal you had much better.

second proposal as in resigning?

 

[Cyc]

Ok, let me say one thing in regards to your post. Thank you for your thoughts, but..

maybe that is what you like on map discussions, to win the argument regardless of the map and the procedure.

I'm not here to "win arguements". I'm here to help our nation be the best it can be. I not only take full responsibility for everything I say, but give fairly detailed explainations for my choices. If that involves heated debate, so be it. But I do not bully people nor do I intimidate them. I may raise hell occasionally, but that's the nature of the game. I'm glad you like my second city proposal, as waiting around to the birth of Christ to start planting cities is not what I expected here.

 

[Comnenus]

Here is a copy of the closing minutes of the turnchat for those who have not read it yet, and to refresh everyone's memory. I will let each person decide for themselves what it means in regard to what is being posted.

[23:28] <DaveShack> 3 turns. going 2 is dangerous because the warrior could pick up an extra shield from the pending mine
[23:28] <Provolution> well, enough 2 more turns
[23:29] <Noldodan> hmmm... because of the warrior, 1 more turn would be best
[23:29] <Kenshin> why the big push? look how much discussion there was when we had no info?
[23:29] <KCC> where did the warrior move on turn 11, s or sw?
[23:29] <cyc> cyc throws up his hands
[23:29] <DaveShack> move=S
[23:29] <Provolution> Kenshin, some are running out of steam
[23:30] <DaveShack> it's late
[23:30] <Furiey> or early
[23:30] <Noldodan> or very early
[23:30] <Kenshin> or very late
[23:30] <KCC> end now, forums have a lot to discuss
[23:30] <Provolution> check the worker to see when the mine is done
[23:31] <DaveShack> the mine is not an issue
[23:31] <cyc> who's posting the log?
[23:31] <Provolution> well Iwould give the forums more qualified options
[23:31] <cyc> that can be checked from the save provo
[23:31] <Noldodan> 1 more turn, just for exploration
[23:31] <cyc> who's posting the log?
[23:31] <DaveShack> me
[23:32] <DaveShack> and a summary
[23:32] <cyc> good
[23:32] <KCC> im out, i have to get up in 5 hours.
[23:32] * KCC has quit IRC (Quit: )
[23:32] <cyc> someone else should save their log also
[23:32] <DaveShack> I have time enough to hit enter,move the warrior, and save the game
[23:32] <Provolution> good
[23:32] <Noldodan> Crabengwë!
[23:32] <Provolution> until we get that settler decision
[23:33] <cyc> or you could just save now
[23:33] <Provolution> 1 more is good
[23:33] <Kenshin> now is fine too
[23:33] <DaveShack> expansion will reveal a little territory to the N.
[23:34] <cyc> the "1 more turn syndrome
[23:34] <Noldodan> and exploration will... explore... more territory to the south
[23:34] <Provolution> we put several caps already cyc
[23:34] <DaveShack> baby crying... don't worry about syndrome at least for tonight
[23:34] <Kenshin> the classic sign of addiction to CivIII
[23:38] <DaveShack> http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads8/DG5_BC3450_turn12.jpg
[23:38] <Provolution> . last turn, and I will stand for my position
[23:38] <Noldodan> HUZZAH!
[23:38] <Noldodan> break!
[23:39] <Provolution> ?
[23:39] <Noldodan> oooh.... look at all the pretty gems...
[23:39] <DaveShack> saving, uploading
[23:39] <Provolution> that is Kimberley South Africa
[23:39] <Provolution> $$$$$$
[23:39] <DaveShack> DP declares session over
[23:39] <Provolution> nice DDave
[23:39] <Provolution> good go
[23:39] <cyc> Let's lock 'er up an go home
[23:39] <Provolution> yes close

 

[Comnenus]

I think I'll just retire to the Judicial bench. My style of playing just doesn't seem to mesh with the majority here. Sorry if I've caused any problems.

Oh, don't do that. Your opinions are highly valued, even when they don't agree with mine.

 

[Cyc]

I didn't say I was going to resign, I said I would retire to the Judicial Bench, as in mosey on over there and rest my weary arse for a while.

 

[FortyJ]

I think I'll just retire to the Judicial bench. My style of playing just doesn't seem to mesh with the majority here. Sorry if I've caused any problems.

Cyc, my long-time water brother. There is no need to discorporate yourself at this time. Come to the church and soothe your troubles. Waiting is.

 

[Provolution]

Hey Cyc,

Again, we agree 95 %, and I consider you a fair and clean,entertaining, inspiring and the type of debater that add value to this game. Yet, I fail from time to time, my I have been
slugging around with this proposal to tweak it to the majority interest,failing to hit 100 % on the first try. I make mistakes as everyone else. What makes me different in this very unique case, is that I seek to make the system accountable to individuals, so that not only the likes as you, me and some other honest people are held accountable,
but also the rest that jumps up when they smell our blood from a procedural mistake.

Definitively Cyc, you are one of the few statesmen in this game, so keep up the good spirits. Again, the granary idea is ridiculous when we built a city 2 tiles away from the Garden of Eden , so I support you on the settler as we need those 4 diamonds.

However, you must admit, there is a need for improved procedure, as some of us do not trust the existing one. I kept silent in many legal debates, but here I have come to stay. Cities are what defines what the civilization would shape up like, and a flawed procedure here is damaging to the entire Demogame, no question about it.

so before you reject the proposed reform, look into the inherent weakness on how we handled the limited information we have, limited procedures and so on.
Try to find improvements to the design in place of rejecting it and sticking to status quo. Finally, the log tells us that without the extra two turns, we could have had one more, without the two, there would have been no discussion on the four gems city localization, and we might have faced a second round of Compass Polling, which I consider a civilization variety of Russian Roulette with polling overtones.

 

[Bobby Lee]

Here is what I suggest for eliminating your "russian roulette". After the discussion have all sides still standing sum up thier case in a paragraph (maybe 5 to 10 sentences). Then have the person who will be posting the poll put all sides positions and arguements into the thread itself. You then have a complete summary of all sides of the case right at the polling location eliminating people haveing to read through the long (and they are VERY long at times) discussion threads that are generated. This makes more work for those with a strong opinion but if you have an opinion of that strength and of merit you ought to be willing to back it up and see to it that it is heard.

 

[Comnenus]

OK, now to get this discussion back on topic...

The discussion is whether or not to build a warrior or a settler. Thank goodness there's some discussion about it going on in the poll thread.

 

[Provolution]

Well, that is more work than posting the map, 6 tilevalues, 3-5 lines of comments and a grade of 0-100 with two or more options with the pros and cons laid out.
I think you should read about organization management, not just military theory.

And that sides still standing, are we going to stand in lines and shoot with verbal Kentucky Rifles Civil War style until one group of debaters lost faith? Have you ever seen a debater being serviceminded enough to sum up their points?

I already see some people posting printscreens with maps, and I know that these people are more than capable of equipping these with projected tile values and a comment. I just put into system a fraction of the work already put in.