24-06-2004 17:04									#1
	What background story will we use for ACDG3? Enter the AD-FREE zone

What background story should we use for ACDG3 in your opinion?
The original Departure from Earth story?
Or a self-written one by Kody (departure from Chiron?)?

	24-06-2004 17:11									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Yeah the one I'm writing includes the departure from Chiron.

	24-06-2004 19:53									#3
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Is the first post in the beginning and the end an abstract of what you are writing now or is it the actual story?

	24-06-2004 20:09									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

It is a sample what he is writing.

	24-06-2004 20:17									#5
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I asked the question because that post seemed not to have many details. I just wanted to know if he plans to expand it, or if he simply plans to use it and make the latter actual game stories more detailed.

	24-06-2004 20:17									#6
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

That's just the prologue. I'm hoping to continue story threads onwards from there.

	24-06-2004 20:24									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Thanks Kody. That's exactly my question.

	24-06-2004 21:01									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

The selfwritten one...

	24-06-2004 21:25									#9
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I'm cool with the self-written one.

	25-06-2004 03:05									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I voted for the original story. I explained my reason here:

quote: Originally posted by obstructor No need to edit the poll. However my way , I prefered the restart story, with us travelling to Chiron, but it seemed that majority was for some sort of continuation story, with us leaving for the next Planet.

I think many people don't have a really strong opinion about that matter, and their opinion could be swayed if you present your case in favour of the original story clearly.
Personally I'm too in favour of using the original story. I don't see at all what benefits a rewritten background story has, while it does have many drawbacks: having to explain again how all tech was lost, having to rewrite the entire background of our factions and our own character (eg I perfectly like the original origins of Santiago and the Spartans), having to deal with the issue that we were probably all members of an ACDG2 faction before we left Chiron, etcetera, etcetera...

Edit: Some other difficulties are how to explain we have Pravin Lal of the United Nations as a faction while the UN seemed pretty dead on Chiron, and how we again have Hive, UoP and Angel factions which also existed on Chiron before. It's just that IMHO no matter how good the background story would be rewritten (and I'm certain Kody would/will do a good job) there will still be too many unlikely plot holes that make suspension of disbelief too difficult.

	25-06-2004 03:44									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

to Maniac's reasons for the original story.

Basically, having the exact same factions, minus Cycon, Pirates, and Believers, and plus Peacekeepers, Morgan, and Gaians, doesn't really make sense for a successor mission to the second ACDG. Why did University get restarted again after it was absorbed by CyCon? Why did the former University leader join the Morganites? Why for that matter would I end up in the Data Angels, if the University were still alive and kicking? Not to mention Maniac's point about the Peacekeepers.

Things are a lot more plausible if we assume that this DG is simply a restart of the original SMAC story. It's easy enough to replace Miriam with Roze in that story -- one CP blew up, after all -- in this case, it happened to have been Miriam's. Or maybe, since Miriam was against mutiny in the first place, she ended up with Lal. In any case, there are a lot more plausible stories to tell based on the original SMAC story, than there are based off of a new mission after the events of the second DG.

	25-06-2004 04:38									#12
	Tired of ads?

I didn't think of the factions as the same factions from the old unity story. I see it as the factions reformed from the basic ideologies. This also adds the benefit that factions can choose to modify their ideology if they see fit.

With respect to why I wanted to try a new story. The old story has been done a million times. I think the old story is restrictive in the way story threads can develop and I felt nobody would be interested in seeing one of the old story thread rehashed again. Also I don't want to beholden to Michel Ely's story and have people start complaining, but that's not how it's supposed to be.

I guess there might be less plot holes by sticking to the original story, but I think it would be less fun for everyone and I wouldn't be motivated to write very much at all.

I also was hoping that other people could contribute characters and if they do the plot holes will come out like nothing you've seen. It's easier to patch up those kinds of plot holes when you're not restricted by another version of events. With my experiences when writing the IC stories in the Hive, it's far better to bend over backwards to accomodate other people's plot holes then throw someone's work back at them saying it doesn't fit in.

Hence, I'm not really concerned about plot holes. Rather I want to have an interesting prologue that would encourage people to participate in writing.

	25-06-2004 04:53									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Kody, does your self-written story imply a link to ACDG2? If so, those of us who have no clue what happened there are at a significant disadvantage.

Moreover, I’m concerned of the significant discontinuity in assuming that a ‘united’ humanity from ACDG2 (or whereover) would be in the same situation when landing on Chiron 2. It makes no sense to me.

For me the backstory of the original SMAC is what made the ever-changing storyline meaningful. I cared what happened to Dee, was horrified when Lal turned out to be a hypocrite, and winced as Miriam once again declared vendetta against me for my heathen ways. Change the backstory and you shear out the legs of the tragedy of Unity, the destruction of Earth, and the SMAC characters, for me at least.

The joy of SMAC/X is that the backstory is the beginning, and each new game is a new chance to have the world evolve. True, the basis is the same, but it forms the ideological underpinning to what is happening and why. I don’t view the backstory as shackles so much as the foundation from which the later storyline evolves.

I see no problem using the original storyline, and then deviating based on what the various factions do or do not do. That way the story tells itself from a common beginning, and there is no need to tell conflicting and self-serving pre-histories that stretch credibility and sow confusion.

Hydro

	25-06-2004 05:10									#14
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: If so, those of us who have no clue what happened there are at a significant disadvantage.

There's a small link to the ACDG2, but nothing really more than that. Some people might decided to reference their old personalities, but others won't.

quote: Moreover, I’m concerned of the significant discontinuity in assuming that a ‘united’ humanity from ACDG2 (or whereover) would be in the same situation when landing on Chiron 2. It makes no sense to me.

Not united.

quote: For me the backstory of the original SMAC is what made the ever-changing storyline meaningful. I cared what happened to Dee, was horrified when Lal turned out to be a hypocrite, and winced as Miriam once again declared vendetta against me for my heathen ways. Change the backstory and you shear out the legs of the tragedy of Unity, the destruction of Earth, and the SMAC characters, for me at least.

Well I never actually got that, but I admit I didn't enjoy Michael Ely's story which describes the coming to Chiron.

quote: The joy of SMAC/X is that the backstory is the beginning, and each new game is a new chance to have the world evolve. True, the basis is the same, but it forms the ideological underpinning to what is happening and why. I don’t view the backstory as shackles so much as the foundation from which the later storyline evolves. I see no problem using the original storyline, and then deviating based on what the various factions do or do not do. That way the story tells itself from a common beginning, and there is no need to tell conflicting and self-serving pre-histories that stretch credibility and sow confusion.

Okay then.

I wasn't planning on telling much pre-history, actually that short segement is it for pre-history, since the more pre-history you give the more likely someone will write something contridicting.

	25-06-2004 10:57									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I'm winning the poll, but I don't have much faith in this particular poll.

So perhaps this needs to be discussed properly. It's a write-in only kind of poll.
http://www.apolyton.com/forums/show...threadid=117441

You see the backstory is the least of what I'm concerned about. If anyone is interested I would like to hear everyone's two cents. If you agree with things previously said please state so.