 |
| |
|
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999
time: 00:23
|
|
donegeal
quote:
Why add needless beauracratic red tape to something that should be able to be done anyway? What you are proposing is exteremly inefficent |
the democracy games are extremely inefficent to begin with, every single group decision and every single vote is time consuming and wasteful compared to letting one person make all of the choices, but since we all want to do this and not a normal pbem we are saying screw efficency, lets have fun making choices as a team
quote:
Your right, the Ruler would be able to make changes and only tell you afterward. Its his call. Does an Emperor or High King need to ask a Count if he can do something? |
to counter that, you could assassinate or rebel against an emperor in real life, but real life and this game have little in common
quote:
The difference between real life feudal system and the system I propose is the No-Con vote. That Count would just have to take the unannounced change in the rear and be happy he's still a Count. With the No-Con, that Count can stand up for himself.
|
haha, in real life feudal systems there is no central authority, the king was usually the most powerful lord but not always, the kings that had the level of power you're proposing either came before or after the feudal age in the west
the emperor's of rome, the kings of france shortly before the revolution, the czars of russia, those were the ones that could do whatever they thought was best, but none of those are an example of a feudal system
quote:
Lets put it another way. Lets say your the Ruler, and I'm a City-King. We are at war and we need Knights or Pike to continue the war efforts. I'm building a Courthouse in my city on the front. You want a Knight. Under my proposal, you make the change for the greater good of the empire. Under your proposal, you ask an underling if you can change something that you see as something needed for the empire (after all, it is the rulers job to guide the empire) |
well for starters we will get probably at least three days with the old save game to plot out our future moves and then we'll have a full day with the save to make the move, so the team leader will have time to consult with his teammates about builds, and if we aren't discussing strategy as a team then why are we playing a team game?
quote:
I say no. Now you have to go to the polls to see if you can do you job of looking out for the greater good of the empire. Now imagine that its not just me. Imagine if there are four City-Kings who don't want to change. Look at all the red tape and posting that is going to be needed just to do something that you think is plainly obviously for the greater good of the empire, |
if you are overriding almost half of the team then under your system they are going to call a no-contest vote on you, and once again unless this is the most dire of situations requiring a split second decision (of which i think there probably won't be any in a pbem game) no one person should decide for the team what is best for the good of the empire
quote:
Now lets look at it from a peaceful situation (or at least no pressing need ). Knowing that overriding a build pisses off City-Kings and could get you thrown out of office (at which time the build could be changed back anyway), would you use the override power? |
first thing you might not get thrown out of office, and then if the next emperor abuses his power in the exact same way just on different people perhaps then the no-con vote was pointless and basically you don't choose between liberty or freedom you choose which player is going to change your build queue...basically if the emperors do it enough they will essentially take the power to set the build queue from the kings and get it for themselves, so unless we put in some checks and balances we might as well just go ahead and say the emperor decides build queues
again, i think the emperor is just one person on the team and their opinion shouldn't count any more than anyone elses, and to me the more power any one player has in relation to the rest of the team, the less reason the rest of the team has to play the game
|
|
| |
|
|
|
UnOrthOdOx
|
 |
Hello....
Jun 2002
time: 22:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GhengisFarb
So, it looks like we'll be playing the "C Civ" (I'm lazy and don't want to keep typing Celts)
What faction names are we going with this civ? |
well, two would be the easiest. this is from some very minor research:
"Celtic is broken into two groups, Gaelic and Brythonic. Gaelic encompasses Ireland, Scotland, and Manx (Isle of Man). Brythonic includes Cumbrian, Welsh, Cornish, and Breton (France)."
We could also choose a few of those subgroups: Irish, Scottish, Welsh, etc.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GhengisFarb
|
 |
I want my HAMBURGERS!!
May 2002
time: 23:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
well, two would be the easiest. this is from some very minor research:
"Celtic is broken into two groups, Gaelic and Brythonic. Gaelic encompasses Ireland, Scotland, and Manx (Isle of Man). Brythonic includes Cumbrian, Welsh, Cornish, and Breton (France)."
We could also choose a few of those subgroups: Irish, Scottish, Welsh, etc. |
I'm thinking 3-5 subgroups. You did get today's memo on this discussion, did you not, UnOrthO?
quote:
Originally posted by UberKruX
i have to pick a realistic one?  no kruxidians?
oh well. i call Gaelic (or Irish) depending on how you break it up. |
I see nothing wrong with making them up.
How about the Ghengals?
Did you get the memo?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-11-2002 19:51
THE GLORY OF WAR 
|