16-05-2003 22:47									#31
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Comrade there are six Fronts if you do not include Armaments and the Economic Ministers:

Marshal (H Tower):
Murmansk (Yop73):
Baltic (Henrik) :
Northwest (The Anzac):
Belorussian (colwyn):
1st Ukranian (Shaka Naldur):
2nd Ukranian (Paul Hanson):
Economic (greeny):
Armaments (curtsibling):

I guess I could go along with the majority opinion on ALL Front Commanders should be on STAVKA, but I will not change my mind that non Front Commanders should be allowed to serve on STAVKA at the pleasure of the Marshall. This is the Marshalls Council of War. He is responsible for the War. If he wants a trusted advisor on that council who is not a Front Commander then that should be his call.

	16-05-2003 23:18									#32
	Got spare money?

Seems good. Any non-front commander can only be included if the Marshall wishes.

	16-05-2003 23:20									#33
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

BTW Comrade your Russian name is quite a mouthfull: PinkyGenovich



I like it!

Last edited by conmcb25 on 16-05-2003 at 23:55

	16-05-2003 23:36									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I for one have been impressed by how quickly this game has gone compared to the Civ2DG.

Why fix what ain't broken? I like the job that our ex-marshall has done, and I'm afraid that this new system will slow things.

	16-05-2003 23:53									#35
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by obiwan18 I for one have been impressed by how quickly this game has gone compared to the Civ2DG. Why fix what ain't broken? I like the job that our ex-marshall has done, and I'm afraid that this new system will slow things.

Simple Comrade to involve more people.

And human nature being what it is if someone has a position then they feel like they have more "loyalty" (maybe that isn't the right word) to the game. And hopefully they will keep coming around and contributing.

I dont think how the game is proceeding will change much. It just formallizes players being able to contribute there opinion. And a lot of guys will think it is cool or whatever to actually be on the Politburo.

It gives them a position, it keeps them interested, it keeps the number of people who want to do this kind of demo game engaged and interested, and hopefully we will have the community to keep doing more of these in the future.

Anyone for "Second Front" after this?

	17-05-2003 00:48									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Why a Politburo, you ask? By marx, aren't we the nation of the worker! We should hear their voice, not that of some marshals and generals! It seems to me that some people are drifting away from the glorious ideas of our comrades Marx and Lenin!

Second front sounds good to me, although I find it in some ways more difficult than Redfront. A new challenge after this thing!

	17-05-2003 01:05									#37
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Second Front-eh-no economy or industrialization. Check out the "Blood Sweat and Tears" thread over in Civ2 Creation.

	17-05-2003 01:21									#38
	Put an end to popups!

is the normal option, which scenario will be play afterwards if not??
but let's finish this before, we'll have plenty of talking afterwards

	17-05-2003 01:27									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by conmcb25 BTW Comrade your Russian name is quite a mouthfull: PinkyGenovich I like it!

Indeed. It has a nice ring, but maybe I should shorten it to Pinknovich. Don't want the workers upsetting me by mispronouncing the name.

	17-05-2003 01:32									#40
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Shaka Naldur is the normal option, which scenario will be play afterwards if not?? but let's finish this before, we'll have plenty of talking afterwards

I agree and its my fault but we probably shouldn't discuss in this thread.

But never fear comrades my future plans are already being incubated!

	17-05-2003 01:48									#41
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Well, seeing as the poll results are currently in favor of the changes and that the campaigning has already begun, I guess I will announce my decision to run for Chief of NKVD. I have some plans for it...

	17-05-2003 02:35									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I guess what I meant to say was not so much communication between STAVKA and the Politburo but interconnectedness and checks-and-balances between the two. Under the current format, front commanders have no way to prevent their dismissal or dismiss the marshal and have no power whatsoever to influence anything. Now the position of the marshal is untouchable on matters of war: whatever he says, goes, no checks. I'm not saying H Tower will abuse this but there should be some precedent. Here are my changes I want to see added before I approve this.

1. a. the marshal cannot rule indefinitely. Politburo will hold sheduled elections to determine the Marshal.
b. the marshal may be removed by popular referendum, the majority of both STAVKA and the Politburo or just a unanimous STAVKA decision.

2. Front commanders/STAVKA appointments must be confirmed by the Politburo just like the US Senate confrims cabinet officials. If the marshal wants to remove a STAVKA member, it must be approved by the Politburo.

Only with these changes will I approve fully of the new government format. Otherwise there seems to be too few checks-and-balances.

	17-05-2003 02:58									#43
	Support Apolyton

Hmmmmm, nothing personnal here OK Anzac but I am getting the impression you are really trying to preserve the power of the STAVKA.

There is a check and balance on the Marshall, he serves at the pleasure of the politburo.

The Politburo puts its trust in a Marshall who they feel will do a great job conducting the war. If it turns out he isn't or he is rashly dismissing good front commanders then the politburo will remove him.

That is his check and balance.

If the Politburo is "out to lunch" so to speak then there is nothing stopping the STAVKA from going around the Marshall to the Politburo and saying hey great leaders of the Rodina when are you going to get rid of this crappy Marshall?

I just dont think the Politburo should approve or disapprove every major decision the Marshall makes.

They can dictate in general terms the conduct of the war and occassionally demand something for political purposes but this Politburo approval of everything is bit extreme IMHO.

Why dont any of the Front Commanders want a strong Marshall? Being somewhat experienced in the Military I can honestly say I would prefer to serve a strong leader vice someone who is asking permission every time he wanst to do something.

Maybe Im missing something here. I have no experience in Demo games other this, so I can claim ignorance but I just dont get it?

	17-05-2003 03:01									#44
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by conmcb25 Hmmmmm, nothing personnal here OK Anzac but I am getting the impression you are really trying to preserve the power of the STAVKA. There is a check and balance on the Marshall, he serves at the pleasure of the politburo. The Politburo puts its trust in a Marshall who they feel will do a great job conducting the war. If it turns out he isn't or he is rashly dismissing good front commanders then the politburo will remove him. That is his check and balance. If the Politburo is "out to lunch" so to speak then there is nothing stopping the STAVKA from going around the Marshall to the Politburo and saying hey great leaders of the Rodina when are you going to get rid of this crappy Marshall? I just dont think the Politburo should approve or disapprove every major decision the Marshall makes. They can dictate in general terms the conduct of the war and occassionally demand something for political purposes but this Politburo approval of everything is bit extreme IMHO. Why dont any of the Front Commanders want a strong Marshall? Being somewhat experienced in the Military I can honestly say I would prefer to serve a strong leader vice someone who is asking permission every time he wanst to do something. Maybe Im missing something here. I have no experience in Demo games other this, so I can claim ignorance but I just dont get it?

And you are more than welcome to vote against this if you so desire, but IMHO a vote against this is a vote against the future of this style of DEMO game. Because you will see me and a lot of the other guys who have been recently posting just disappear. Again Its just MHO but I think you will see that happen.

Edit: Sorry I meant to edit note quote but then I did say I was INFO age Challenged!

	17-05-2003 03:03									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: I just dont think the Politburo should approve or disapprove every major decision the Marshall makes.

I never said that. All I said was the 2 provisions I listed in my above post.

My problem is yes, the power of STAVKA is being eroded. Before STAVKA was a strong efficient body. Now all the power it had is completely gone and given to the marshal and politburo. It seems as though the politburo has swallowed up all the authority STAVKA had. now STAVKA is nothing more than a rubber-stamping advisory committee. Not what I intended

	17-05-2003 03:06									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by conmcb25 a vote against this is a vote against the future of this style of DEMO game. Because you will see me and a lot of the other guys who have been recently posting just disappear.

Why will you leave? Also I don't see how my TWO proposals are a threat to Demo games everywhere

	17-05-2003 03:11									#47
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by The ANZAC I never said that. All I said was the 2 provisions I listed in my above post. My problem is yes, the power of STAVKA is being eroded. Before STAVKA was a strong efficient body. Now all the power it had is completely gone and given to the marshal and politburo. It seems as though the politburo has swallowed up all the authority STAVKA had. now STAVKA is nothing more than a rubber-stamping advisory committee. Not what I intended

Why does Stavka have to have more power than the Marshall?

Should they be playing politics or fighting a war?

If Stavka has nmore power than a Marshall then what do we need him for? Why dont you front commanders just do everything by committee?

By the way before we get farther into this debate and Im being extremely upfront here: Am I missing something here that lets say violates the spirit of a demo game? Again I have no experience in demos other than this one. So if I am please set me straight because I am truely ignorant in how the dynamics of a demo game operates.

If this does somehow do that Ill shut up in a heart beat.

	17-05-2003 03:15									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Well, I just thought the marshal shouldn't have complete free reign to do whatever. I don't think my proposals would make the marshal less powerful than STAVKA and other than what I outlined in my 2 points, STAVKA wouldn't have any other official political powers.

Also, since this is a Demo game, it would make sense to have it slightly less dictator like, but this is just my opinion. Conmcb, I don't think you're hurting the spirit, you're doing fine

	17-05-2003 03:16									#49
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by The ANZAC Why will you leave? Also I don't see how my TWO proposals are a threat to Demo games everywhere

First of all I didn't say Demo games everywhere, I said this type of demo, a scenario based one that appeals to lets say a different group of people than usually play a generic civ demo game.

And Im refering to you voting against the politburo. If we dont get it Im leaving. I have no interest in hanging around the forums and just posting what I think people should do, I want to do something and I believe a lot of the other folks around here who have been recently posting a lot do too. So if it fails I think a lot of the recent interest in this game will fade. And isn't one of our goals to get more people invovled and keep them?

Or is our goal to preserve the power of the STAVKA in the hands of a few?

If its the later thats fine but dont expect a lot of us to stick around.

	17-05-2003 03:19									#50
	Tired of ads?

And my above statement isnt an ultimatum or anything I think its just a fact.

I can entertain an increased role for STAVKA.

But if the politburo wants to remove the Marshall they should be able to. No matter what the STAVKA says.

	17-05-2003 03:22									#51
	Got spare money?

Anzac the other thing to consider is the Marshall is a pretty thankless job. Without some kind of power, again if H Tower gets tired of us we may have a fine time getting another.

Ill tell you one thing with your powerfull STAVKA initiatives I dont think I would like to do it again. (plus you guys would purge me again in a heartbeat )

	17-05-2003 03:24									#52
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by conmcb25 And Im refering to you voting against the politburo. If we dont get it Im leaving. I have no interest in hanging around the forums and just posting what I think people should do, I want to do something and I believe a lot of the other folks around here who have been recently posting a lot do too. So if it fails I think a lot of the recent interest in this game will fade. And isn't one of our goals to get more people invovled and keep them? Or is our goal to preserve the power of the STAVKA in the hands of a few?

WHOA! I NEVER said that I wanted to eliminate the politburo; actually I want a strong one. With STAVKA "Power in the hands of few" you say; then why support a strong marshal which will be power in the hands of even fewer people? I'll repost my two points I want to see incorporated. Once they are I will have no more problems with the govt setup. Those 2 points are my only real grievance against the current govt proposal. I never said I wanted to eliminate/limit the power of the Politburo. That's just a distortion of what I said. So here are my 2 proposals I would hope get adopted:

1. a. the marshal cannot rule indefinitely. Politburo will hold sheduled elections to determine the Marshal.
b. the marshal may be removed by popular referendum, the majority of both STAVKA and the Politburo or just a unanimous STAVKA decision.

2. Front commanders/STAVKA appointments must be confirmed by the Politburo just like the US Senate confrims cabinet officials. If the marshal wants to remove a STAVKA member, it must be approved by the Politburo.

	17-05-2003 03:31									#53
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well you said you were going to vote against unless you had your initiatives incorporated. That is what I was referring too! If I distorted anything my apologizes that was NOT my intent.

Just goes to prove debates such as this are much better in person. We should all be in a pub somewhere drinking and figuring out how to do this!

	17-05-2003 03:36									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I would agree with # 1 if it were worded like this:

1. a. the marshal cannot rule indefinitely. Politburo will hold sheduled elections to determine the Marshal.
b. the marshal may be removed by popular referendum, the majority of the Politburo or a unanimous STAVKA decision. (One of those three)

Again the POLITBURO should be the major force checking the Marshall. (At least IMHO)

	17-05-2003 03:37									#55
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Yeah, it is confusing going back and forth between these posts

Also, I would vote in opposition to this, not because I support the old way, but because I do not like the new idea. Once the new idea suits me, I'll vote for it.

	17-05-2003 03:38									#56
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by conmcb25 I would agree with # 1 if it were worded like this: 1. a. the marshal cannot rule indefinitely. Politburo will hold sheduled elections to determine the Marshal. b. the marshal may be removed by popular referendum, the majority of the Politburo or a unanimous STAVKA decision. (One of those three) Again the POLITBURO should be the major force checking the Marshall. (At least IMHO)

Ok, I agree with those

	17-05-2003 03:42									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Looks to me like the thing to do is vote on ANZACs ammendments, unless anyone would kile to suggest additional ammendments?

Personaly I have no problem with 1. but I don't realy see the need for 2. It could take quite a while for all the Politburo members to vote on each hiring/fireing. I don't mind the Marshal having power: as long as we can kick him our of office easily if we don't agree with him I think point 2. makes the system unnecessarily complicated.

	17-05-2003 03:43									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I can agree to #2 if it is worded like this:

Front commanders/STAVKA appointments must be confirmed by the Politburo just like the US Senate confrims cabinet officials. The Marshall still has the authority to remove a front commander.

I changed the second sentence. Sorry but I just dont think the Marshall should have to ask if he wants to relieve a front commander. Maybe I have just spent too much time in the military but a commander should have the right to remove subordinates. I just can't fathom it any other way and Im talking about the American Military not the Soviet Union (where Im sure your future was much more precarious!)

Think about it if Zhukov wanted you gome you were just gone! Do you really think he got permission to do that every time?

Now maybe Im just trying to be too realistic. And you are being more in a demo game mode.

Hopefully we can meet in the middle here and agree to something!

What do you say ANZAC?

	17-05-2003 03:45									#59
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by The ANZAC 1. a. the marshal cannot rule indefinitely. Politburo will hold sheduled elections to determine the Marshal.

That would be acceptable to me

quote: b. the marshal may be removed by popular referendum, the majority of both STAVKA and the Politburo or just a unanimous STAVKA decision.

I still maintain that it should be only the Politburo who can remove the marshal, a popular referendum I can deal with too.

quote: 2. Front commanders/STAVKA appointments must be confirmed by the Politburo just like the US Senate confrims cabinet officials.

maybe I can see doing this.

quote: If the marshal wants to remove a STAVKA member, it must be approved by the Politburo.

I'm totally against this. If someone is screwing up, or back talking to the marshal about what the marshal has planned to do, he should be gone, no questions asked. If the front commander wants to whine about it afterwards, he can go to the Politburo and complain, maybe they'll listen and ask the Marshal to reconsider. A commander should have control over his subordinates.

	17-05-2003 03:45									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by greeny Looks to me like the thing to do is vote on ANZACs ammendments, unless anyone would kile to suggest additional ammendments? Personaly I have no problem with 1. but I don't realy see the need for 2. It could take quite a while for all the Politburo members to vote on each hiring/fireing. I don't mind the Marshal having power: as long as we can kick him our of office easily if we don't agree with him I think point 2. makes the system unnecessarily complicated.

greeny I think the great ANZAC/ conmcb25 debate is close to closure. lets see what my esteemed opponent has to say about my number two proposal!