 |
What Kind Of Game Shall We Play?
This poll is closed. |
| 1A. One city til "X" Year - YES |
   |
3 |
60.00% |
| 1A. One city til "X" Year - NO |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 1B. If one city, expand at 500 AD |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 1B. If one city, expand at 1000 AD |
   |
0 |
0% |
| 1B. If one city, expand at 1250 AD |
   |
0 |
0% |
| 1B. If one city, expand at 1500 AD |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 2. Home Island Tiles = 1 |
   |
0 |
0% |
| 2. Home Island Tiles = 3 |
   |
1 |
20.00% |
| 2. Home Island Tiles = 5 |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 3. Nearest distance to any land - 5 Tiles |
   |
0 |
0% |
| 3. Nearest distance to any land - 6 Tiles |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 3. Nearest distance to any land - 7 Tiles |
   |
1 |
20.00% |
| 4. Bloodlust Game - YES |
   |
3 |
60.00% |
| 4. Bloodlust Game - NO |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 5. Ironclads - YES |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 5. Ironclads - NO |
   |
3 |
60.00% |
| 6. Trade - YES |
   |
3 |
60.00% |
| 6. Trade - NO |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 7. Diplomats - YES |
   |
1 |
20.00% |
| 7. Diplomats - NO |
   |
4 |
80.00% |
| 8. Spies - YES |
   |
3 |
60.00% |
| 8. Spies - NO |
   |
2 |
40.00% |
| 9. Spotless Reputation - YES |
   |
4 |
80.00% |
| 9. Spotless Reputation - NO |
   |
1 |
20.00% |
| Total: |
5 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
rjmatsleepers
|
|
I have also voted, but I expect to be a member of the peanut gallery rather than a candidate for high office.
RJM at Sleeper's
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Six Thousand Year Old Man
|
 |
Ad Rock
Aug 2000 time: 00:32
|
|
I'm more in favour of changing how the game is played, rather than the parameters of the game itself.
For example... it makes no sense that we have elections when we don't even know Republic or Demo. Monarchies don't have elections! It also makes no sense that an established democratic regime would hold a revolution of its own volition - who overthrows themselves?
[my vision]
Monthly elections should only be held when we are in Republic/Demo. In all other cases, power should be held until someone else is sufficiently fed up to post a poll (the nearest we can come to a power struggle) saying "So-and-so (demagogue, witch doctor, SMC) should be replaced by me" - and that poll would reflect the ouster or non-ouster of the incumbent.
Polls in authoritarian governments would be replaced by discussion threads, with the loudest getting the attention of the current demagogue/SMC/whoever. And that loud person might well be able to overthrow the incumbent (by a power struggle resolved by polling, of course), should the incumbent not listen.
Once we learn a new (representative) government tech, that should trigger an election. Once we switch to a representative government, we'd hold elections and polls as we have always done. However... if some would-be demagogue feels we should switch to Fundy... he can always post a poll to do so, and oust the current government. Since a real-world democracy or republic would never switch to communism or fundy without a revolution, a seated representative government would have to resign, if the will of the people called for fundy or commie.
[/vision]
Maybe I'm crazy , but that seems fun, and less structured than the current system is - what with all the uncontested elections and all.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ben Kenobi
|
 |
McGregornobi!
Oct 2002 time: 21:32
|
|
Well, I did hold a turnchat, and only one citizen showed up, even though I offered the save. I just don't see sufficient demand to give the save to everyone, and some real dangers in cheating to discover events far beyond what we ought to know.
Secondly, since our ministers are going to be devoting more of their time to the game, they ought to be rewarded for their sacrifice, with access to the save.
Finally, I have striven to be more inclusive within the bounds of precedent to make the game more open to the citizens, in my screenshots, log and turnchat. Further suggestions beyond giving the save would be most welcome, ideas how we can encourage the participation of citizens, in providing them more information.
I suppose we could call this increasing the transparency of our government.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
cavebear
|
 |
of the Pleistocene
Oct 1999 time: 00:32
|
|
I'd be willing to try a new format, and have the game available to all, if it increased participation. If the voting in the latest poll is any indication, people are bored with our regular style of playing. So, let's change it, as an experiment at least.
So the first person chosen to lead will be in charge through Despotism or until overthrown by a coup (poll). We will have government appropriate titles (in Despotism, none). Monarchy could have something like Master of Arms (War), Grand Vizier (Foriegn Affairs), Alchemist (Science), Chieftain (City-Planner/Expansion), and Guild-Master (Trade).
The Moderator conducts elections when they are held (for Representative governments). When we choose to change governments, the previous leader is out. Republic has a Consul to lead and Senators to serve. Democracy has a President and Secretaries. Fundie has a High Priest and Protectors. Communism has a Premier and Secretariats.
We should also have restrictions on ourselves, or the game will be too easy.
Sound good?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Six Thousand Year Old Man
|
 |
Ad Rock
Aug 2000 time: 00:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by duke o' york
STYOM, what do you mean that the loudest in discussion would hold sway? Does that mean that if I were to go into the chatroom and type IN CAPITALS then I'd be ostracised for being rude, but would also see my ideas put into practice? 
Maybe the monarch or despot could refuse to allow revolutions and remain in power for the entire game, maybe declaring himself the High Priest if he fancied some fundamentalist fun?
To allow everyone a say, then I'd prefer it if those taking part were viewed as advisors to the person playing the game and then the next "president" (for want of a better name) is chosen from their number. This is the system as it is really, but maybe when we're in a despotism they could be called thanes or something more appropriate than ministers.
Otherwise the system works and is more inclusive than what you're proposing. Of course, when we're in any non-representative government then the "president" will have absolute veto powers and can ignore what he's advised to do as much as he likes. |
Loudest was a figure of speech. But someone who posts a lot of ideas will probably be listened to more than someone who doesn't post much at all. Assuming all of his ideas aren't bad , the more prolific poster might be able to lead a 'coup' (via poll) - and who better to run the nation than someone with a lot of ideas and the time to post them? 
Obviously we would need to play fair... if someone is ousted in a coup, they should give up the save.
I'm not sure if a save is needed for all... people seem to have plenty of ideas and a good grasp of the game without it. Either way, I'm easy.
I'm surprised that the idea is gathering steam. I probably won't be able to join in much, but it could be a fun concept... it might generate more interest in the game, too. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
comte_umanov
|
|
i ll be in, even that i could not check the dg every 24 hours, but i once want to participate in a dg from the beginning.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32. Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|