 |
How will we play this game?
This poll is closed. |
| PBEM |
   |
6 |
42.86% |
| Real-Time |
   |
8 |
57.14% |
| Total: |
14 voters |
100% |
|
| |
|
|
Darkness' Edge
|
|
How are we going to play this game?
It seems as if some envisaged it would be real-time, whereas some of us, like me, assumed it would be PBEM.
Personally, I think if we go with real-time, we may as well give up now, because we're eliminating so many players, like myself, that live outside North America, and we already have a problem with player numbers.
You have five days.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dell19
|
|
Grantham
Jul 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
Only one person needs to actually play the game and as shown at GC it works well, playing the game in real time with everyone else discussing the moves. It should make the game faster as well.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Darkness' Edge
|
|
It works fine for anyone in North America.
However, it instantly eliminates the participation of anyone else. And in a game with so few members, this is something we cannot afford.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dell19
|
|
Grantham
Jul 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
Its not that hard to arrange a time around 8 GMT so that most people can join the game, and most people wont actually play the game anyway.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
History_Buff
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Jul 2002
time: 22:21
|
|
Corn right, if you dont like the times, dont show. Then post in the forums.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dell19
|
|
Grantham
Jul 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
Come on vote for Real time as it will work, as its already working in a current game and it should lessen the chances of cheating. Also the game should be played every weekend as people are supposed to be discussing and planning during the week. We do not need to play every day since then there would be no discussions.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Darkness' Edge
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dell19
Come on vote for Real time as it will work, as its already working in a current game and it should lessen the chances of cheating. Also the game should be played every weekend as people are supposed to be discussing and planning during the week. We do not need to play every day since then there would be no discussions. |
Of course, this would be an American saying this..
Of course it will work.
If you're American.
I do see the advantages of real-time play, trust me.
But for a global game, such as this, it is simply not possible. It severely limits participation, because it eliminates any chance for the European and Australian/New Zealander players to participate. As of now, the Apolyton team has...perhaps about half of it's minister spots full. We already may not be able to fill all spots, even with just about everyone being a minister. We need everyone we can get.
In the event that Real-Time wins this, we'll find it even harder than we already are to get enough active players. In the event that PBEM does, I'm going to run for first president of our team, and try my damndest to get this thing on the road. But if Real-Time wins, I'll be forced to cease participation in this game, because as an Australian, I can not make any real-time events due to timezones.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DuckOfFlanders
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by CornMaster
Also.....it's nice to note that all the people that have ACTUALLY played a MP Demo game are voting Real Time.
If the flaws you post are REALLY that bad, don't you think we would VOTE PBEM! |
Yes but the GC game is played by a low number of player's.Real time work's for MP Demo game's with a limited number of players ,but it wouldn't be easy for a large number of players ,or i would say it wouldn't be invitable to a large number of players.Especially if you want a Big Multi site Demo game PBEM may be better or more logical.Besides ,The real time version is still a test version ,and i believe the PBEM version should get a chance to be tested to.
The thing is with real time playing is that almost all decission making fall's in the hand's of those actually playing real-time ,since you need to do a large number of turn's at one moment to keep the game within the timeframe ,or you would have to play turn's more freuquently than once in a week.If you will play this game in real time style most player's withought much power or time will find themself's exluded easely ,so that it will never attract many people to join the respected teams.In PBEM style the game will be much more forum based and almost everybody will have the chance to let their voice heard.
So PBEM may be much better since it will be more invitable to a larger mass of players.
And the Multi site MP Demo game should be one of Community's fighting eachother ,not a few sparse player's from every forum.
Last edited by DuckOfFlanders on 20-08-2002 at 21:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DuckOfFlanders
|
|
quote:
I have 15 players on my team. 8 of them only check the forum on the weekends. Because the rest of the time they are working or in school.
Now...if I get the game on Monday, you will let me wait until the weekend to play so I get the input of all the players right? |
Nope ,you will play a number of turn's in the week ,around 5 to 10 in a week at the end of the game ,about 10-20 turn's a week at the beginning of the game.
Due to the fact that you have a special sort of citizin's i would advice you to make forum arrangement's so that the most of the decission's can be made up front and only a limited number of decission's have to be made on a short term.
How these arrangement's look like? Can't tell you yet ,as i have to think about it yet to ,like every demo game system this system must be tested to and change's must be made as it evolve's.I have a number of idea's to make this work ,but must of it will have to be constructed as we move along.
The thing is ,setting up a Real time Multi site demo game will be hard as hell if you have to take into account the different site leader's and gouverment's ,and when you have to make appointment's to get every president playing at the same time ,while the setting up and playing in a Pbem game is just a simple matter of playing the first turn ,saving it and giving it trough to the next player ,and so on... .
Last edited by DuckOfFlanders on 20-08-2002 at 22:28
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dell19
|
|
Grantham
Jul 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
How does PBEM actually allow more people to play? Generally you are only going to have one president anyway. Currently we have a real time game that works and we can quite easily use real time for this game, and remember we only need to agree a time between 3 teams on 2 different sites. All the current Demo games have been real time and don't see the reasons why this needs to be changed.
Anyway this is causing alot of problems yet real time is winning in votes. At GC its 7-2 in favour of RT and here it is 6-6.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Darkness' Edge
|
|
At GC, you have what, fifteen people? It's easy to find something that works for fifteen people. But, with the numbers we have currently, this is going to be more of a "council" game than a democracy game. We desperately need more people, yet you fifteen from GC insist on putting in a system that is going to block many, many people from participating.
PBEM does nothing to allow more Americans to play. But it does a hell of a lot in assisting people from the rest of the world to participate, as it makes timezones no longer an issue.
Yes, you have a real time game, that works, and that's been stated about five times now. But is it really fair to block half the world from participating?
If I remain in the presidential race, I'm likely going to have to be elected unopposed, due to the lack of numbers.
I'm a student, and I'm only available on weekends, and for a couple of hours on weeknights. Do you really want to have to get up in the middle of your night so I can fulfil my role as president?
Or will will play this out, in the much fairer PBEM, so that it can be played whenever we like, and so that no one has to get up in the middle of the night?
quote:
Originally posted by Dell19
How does PBEM actually allow more people to play? Generally you are only going to have one president anyway. Currently we have a real time game that works and we can quite easily use real time for this game, and remember we only need to agree a time between 3 teams on 2 different sites. All the current Demo games have been real time and don't see the reasons why this needs to be changed.
Anyway this is causing alot of problems yet real time is winning in votes. At GC its 7-2 in favour of RT and here it is 6-6. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CornMaster
|
 |
St. John's, Newfoundland
May 2000
time: 01:51
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Darkness' Edge
We desperately need more people, yet you fifteen from GC insist on putting in a system that is going to block many, many people from participating.
|
We have 8 people that will be blocked if we play PBEM. We are just doing what is in our best interest....and what has also been proven to work!
And if you can check the forum once a week YOU ARE participating! If we play PBEM and you can only check one a week you will miss all but one turn! Why is this not getting through to you!!!
You can be president and have someone else play.
Like Sixchan is President of the Evil Empire. However TNT is generally the player. Kundor sometimes plays as well.
Talar is leader of the KoB but Playa has played in his absence.
And I lead the DoB but Dell19 started the last session because I was having internet problem.
PBEM doesn't offer enough time to make decisions. And we can rotate playing times to accomidate nearly all players (of course not all players in the game want to actually play the game)
Last edited by CornMaster on 21-08-2002 at 19:15
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LLAP
|
|
OK. I'm new. I would really like to take part in this discussion, but I hardly understand most of the arguments. They also seem quite polemic.
Can anyone explain slowly and unbiasedly how the game would proceed if played by mail and how if played in realtime? Then I can make up my mind.
Another thing: Are people with accounts at CFC, GC and Apolyton supposed to vote once or thrice?
The CFC thread is here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showt...&threadid=30274
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Talar
|
|
quote:
Yes but it could as well be that some people voted on both poll's ,wich would make it double vote's |
I'll have to admit I voted for Real-time in the poll here at Apolyton. I didn't know at the time this poll was just for Apolyton players.
I think neither method is perfect, but the game is slow enough to play in sessions and would probably be even slower if played by PBEM. I'm not sure the difference in the number of people getting involved would be so big. Whichever style we choose instant decisions will have to be made by a smaller group while other decisions not requiring instant voting could be decided by the whole population.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DuckOfFlanders
|
|
quote:
And if you can check the forum once a week YOU ARE participating! If we play PBEM and you can only check one a week you will miss all but one turn! Why is this not getting through to you!!! |
Sigh
You don't understand how i wanna organize that.
See ,only a very small percentage of the decission's have to be made on a by turn bases ,almost all other decission's in demo games are of effect for a longer period.
See you guys play 30 turn's in one session every week ,and a normal demo game does about 10 turn's every few days.In neither of those system's all decission's can be made in the review period for the next set of turn's.In every session of presidential play there are bound to be some situation's where a president has to make decission's on the spot.But that's probably about 10% of the decission making ,about 90% of it is made trough poll's or in thread's in a review period on forum and applies for a next set of turn's.
But the norm is that turn's are played after a review period with the decission's made in that review period.
But in this system i want to Let the long term decission be polled while turn's are played where the poll's don't applie for thaose turn's played but for the turn's being played in the distant future.Meaning that we queue our decission's before we actually need them ,meaning that people got all the time to make decission's ,even while previous decission's are applied on the game at the same moment.
This mean's that there will be some dicission's that will have to be made by the ruling President/cabinet present on the spot ,but this won't be much more than in a normal demo game.
Ok ,example of the game at play to clarify some stuff.
Here we have a mp demo game that work's on PBem ,we are in let's say 1000bc ,game is played at about 15 turn's/week.That mean's the save game goes around about twice every day trough each forum.We are monday.A new poll is opend for the next thing to build in queue for the city of Antium.Antium is expected to be ready with the construction of it's temple within 10 turn's ,so that will be around friday ,so that's the time the poll will about end.Another poll is almost at it's end ,it's for a wonder to build in the capital city at the completion of it's capital ,the decission to make a wonder has been polled almost a week ago with a poll duration of three day's ,and this poll had a duration of four day's ,the number of day's left before the completion of the coluseum there.Mike's is winning.
Isn't it simple to see that you don't have to poll everything before every turn and that every poll should end before every new turn regardlesly of the timeframe in wich we need to make the decission? No.Almost all decission's are long term ,so they can be easely taken in a period of time inwhere a number of turn's are being played.Only thing's like war decleration's and surprize attack's call for a situation where the pace of playing may be much slower ,since important decission's need to be made and some on a turn by turn bases.But only A very small number of decission's need to be made on a turn by turn bases in a Demo game.
Have i made myself finnaly clear here?
Can't you understand that when we would try to cunstruct a forum organization system around the PBEm style of play that this could be achieved ,and that it could have pro's above realtime playig ,as well as it could have con's ,but that it's pro's may make it more suitable for a multisite demo game?
I mean we constructed the whole demo game concept from scratch ,it's not that hard to construct a system if youre willing to experimet and learn from previous troubles.
I think if we would put or mind's to it toghether and refine and a solid system around the PBEM style of Multi playing democracy game's ,that it would be relatively easy to achieve.
Last edited by DuckOfFlanders on 22-08-2002 at 02:35
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Darkness' Edge
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by CornMaster We have 8 people that will be blocked if we play PBEM. We are just doing what is in our best interest....and what has also been proven to work!
And if you can check the forum once a week YOU ARE participating! If we play PBEM and you can only check one a week you will miss all but one turn! Why is this not getting through to you!!!
You can be president and have someone else play. |
8 people that will be blocked? Pray tell, how?
Nay, I can't be president and have someone else play. The job of the president is to play the game. A vote for real-time robs me of my right to carry office.
Last edited by Darkness' Edge on 22-08-2002 at 06:47
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Darkness' Edge
|
|
thank you, flanders...
i think if we talk this over, we can get a system that works for everyone
rather than rushing into one, and in turn, blocking half of humanity from participating...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CornMaster
|
|
St. John's, Newfoundland
May 2000
time: 01:51
|
|
Lets see if I can break this down one point at a time.
First...we will never attian 15 turns a week. 7 is optimistic. Which means a much slower rate of play.
Second...
quote:
In every session of presidential play there are bound to be some situation's where a president has to make decission's on the spot.But that's probably about 10% of the decission making ,about 90% of it is made trough poll's or in thread's in a review period on forum and applies for a next set of turn's. |
I agree...that why there is little need for other players to attend the sessions. You only need one body to play, everything else is organized through the forum. Like you have already meantioned.
Third...
quote:
Can't you understand that when we would try to cunstruct a forum organization system around the PBEm style of play that this could be achieved ,and that it could have pro's above realtime playig ,as well as it could have con's ,but that it's pro's may make it more suitable for a multisite demo game? |
Why should we have to change our organizational style to suit a game that will equal less turns per week (less efficent). Remove several real-time features like negoiations and proper warfare. And above all, change to a untested system when a working system is in place? If it ain't broke...don't fix it.
If you want to set up a PBEM MP Demo game...go right ahead. And if it works better than real time....then I'll try it. But what your describing works good for Single Player, or one player per team....and we don't have one player per team...we have 10-20 players per team. It changes it dramatically.
Forth...
quote:
I mean we constructed the whole demo game concept from scratch ,it's not that hard to construct a system if youre willing to experimet and learn from previous troubles.
I think if we would put or mind's to it toghether and refine and a solid system around the PBEM style of Multi playing democracy game's ,that it would be relatively easy to achieve. |
The only troubles we have faced are organizing a time to play. And that is because many of the people on our teams didn't want to actually play (or don't have MGE). Every other aspect of the game has been just as good or better than anticipated!
I think we could definitally come up with a good PBEM system, but if wait...it may never happen. And others who don't care will get fed up and leave. We have a working system, people willing to play, we need to shut up and start.
Fifth...
quote:
Nay, I can't be president and have someone else play. The job of the president is to play the game. A vote for real-time robs me of my right to carry office. |
Normally the president of a nation does the thinking and runs the show....and doesn't do the dirty work anyway. Therefore shouldn't play the game.
However....I can't force you to be president. I can only provide you with evidence of a working system. If you don't like it...or your head is too swelled....then so be it. I can't help you.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DuckOfFlanders
|
|
quote:
First...we will never attian 15 turns a week. 7 is optimistic. Which means a much slower rate of play. |
Depend's ,if the vice get the power to actually play when the pres is offline.. .It's an option.
quote:
I agree...that why there is little need for other players to attend the sessions. You only need one body to play, everything else is organized through the forum. Like you have already meantioned. |
I forgot to mention though that this all depend's of the number of actual turn's the president play's in one session.The more turn's you play in one session the more thing's will occur that are out of the scope of previous discussion's.That effectively mean's the more turn's you play in one session the less the general people have a grip on the actuall decissionmaking.
In that sense playing 30 turn's at once in one session look's like a bit to much ,in anycase in such a system a president and possible attending leader's have got more power ,since the game is reliable on them to make all decission's that are out of the scope of the on-forum decission making.This because you can't easely predict what you'll need in those last ten turn's of that 30 turn session.A lot of the general directive's from the forum can be tottaly gotten outdated trough event's in the game.
quote:
Why should we have to change our organizational style to suit a game that will equal less turns per week (less efficent). Remove several real-time features like negoiations and proper warfare. And above all, change to a untested system when a working system is in place? If it ain't broke...don't fix it. |
Well ,because i want this multi site demo game to get on the long term something of real site war proportion's, (withought actual forum war) and i fear that when you will play this real time it will never get the number of player's to achieve this.The real time mp demo game is way more leader oriented ,as they are very important as they make most decission's on the long run.PBEm would be a way more open and relative more transparent system IMO ,so therefore it would be more invatible to more people.The real time mp demo game is more chat based ,and it need's a generalized playing hour on wich only a percentage of people can attend.That and the fact that 30 turn's are played within that session make's that in a PBEM game the forum could be far better organized ,due to the fact that info and screenshot's can be taken from every turn ,so most future event's can be predicted before it's happening.
quote:
I think we could definitally come up with a good PBEM system, but if wait...it may never happen. And others who don't care will get fed up and leave. We have a working system, people willing to play, we need to shut up and start. |
And i say it's always worth the try ,as you know just like me that no system is perfect and experimenting with new system's give's experience about them so that we can use that to further refine that system.That has been the fact with al demo game system's ,and they all worked to a big degree ,but they are never really finished.Constitutional change's are made in every demo game from time to time ,to change certain aspect's to let thing's go smoother in that specific game.
But what i'm talking about is constructing a system that fit's it's purpose.I have been alway's pro real time for youre game at GC ,and i still am.The mp demo game at GC has to stay Real time based. It will eventualy evolve i hope to a refined system of playing a mp demo game real time in a relative short time with a relative small amount of player's on every team (clan if you wish).I to was for an real time demo game when youre game at gc started.But now i think that for the multi site game we may better try to experiment with PBEM.
Sorry Corn that we have to get in a whole argument around this ,and i know i may be a bit to hard headed about this.I certainly don't want this to end up in tarnished relation's.But i feel that i know what i'm doing ,and what's best for the demo game in total.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DuckOfFlanders
|
|
On second hand though maybe you can get me into an agreement to real-time if you would structurize it in 3 meeting's of presidential where they play about 10 turn's every 2 day's opposite to system of playing 30 turn's in a week.That would get my into a consencus since my primary fear is how negative this 30 turn's in one week system can be for the forum attendance and playerbase.A PBem system is the counter of that ,so the consencus is around 10 turn's every 2 day's ,with a construction in place to ensure that 1 man from every team is present with the proper athority to act as the player for that team in the game.
Would that consencus be agreeable to you?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Talar
|
|
If I may interrupt the debate with a question:
I have never played PBEM. How do you know what happened during the other players turns if they for example moved troops through your territory but ended their moves outside the area you can see?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-08-2002 17:33
|