The Dance of Civilizations [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread Pt1]

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Can't let out my identity now can I RP

another double-bluff

[Orb (DoC)]

Let's discuss this completely OOC.

I'll think about it. Can't let out my identity now can I RP

[Robert]

Let's discuss this completely OOC.

[Orb (DoC)]

It wouldn't change much except it would take less time to freely trade.

[mzprox]

I think there is no need to give out vouchers this early. What could be done it change the free tech trade requirements from 4 civs advancing to the next age to 2.

I like the voucher system and the thing I suggested wouldnt give away too many vouchers early. The last civ in case it used up all its vouchers would get a tech in every 1-2 month.. there is no such a civ yet but it wouldn't make it much stronger, just compensate a bit.
I wouldnt mind changing the free trade requirements to 2 civs, but it wouldnt change too much.

[Orb (DoC)]

I think there is no need to give out vouchers this early. What could be done it change the free tech trade requirements from 4 civs advancing to the next age to 2.

[mzprox]

I have a suggestion.
I think we should make the game more balanced by helping those civs who are not doing very well for whatever reason (bad start, less experience in civ etc). The idea is to give them vouchers based on ingame score position.

I think the system should work like this:
At the end of every month each civ get some points based on position: the first place get 1, the second place gets 2 then 3 and so on till 15. Then these points could be spent on vouchers, I'm not sure about the "price" yet, I'm thinking about 15-30/voucher.
Now there is something which complicates this system: it favors those who haven't spend their vouchers yet (because they are relatively lower in position). To balance this I'd make the actual points after each month:
points based on position -minus-the number of vouchers the civ still has. (negative scores taken as 0s)
I think it makes sense if you think about it.
examples:
1st place, 6 vouchers left: 1-6=-5 ->0 points
5th place, 5 vouchers left: 5-5=0 ->0 points
7th place, 0 voucher left: 7-0=7 -> 7 points
15 place, 8 voucher left: 15-8=7 ->7 points

comments:
In this example the 7th and 15th gets the same points, however if the 15th would had spent their vouchers He could be in better position.
So should someone spend or keep their vouchers to get the most benefit?
I think this system actually doesnt affect the decision too much since both way have advantages and disadvantages as well.

Spending the vouchers, so you may have the technologies to advance your civ _now_ and don't fall back too much (this way you get more point because you have less voucher)

Keeping the vouchers so you can get better (more advanced) technologies later, (this way you may get more point because you may be lower in position)


So what do you think? Do you agree that we sould give some kind of help to those who are not on the top? what do you think about this suggestion? any other idea?

[Byzantium (DoC)]

lol keep shouting Persia - one day people will believe you!

[Persia (DoC)]

Since Persia NEVER HAD ANY DEALING WITH BYZANTIUM BEFORE, Persia doesn't care if Byzantium moves already.

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Technically I am still at war with Russia. However, now as we have shortened the timer, its not possible for me to wait for him to play first. So I will take my turn now, unless someone shouts very soon. There will not be any offensive move.

[Korea (DoC)]

some one was right

[Robert]

Britannia is right. Only civstats was down. Everything is fine again.
We're back at an 11h (12h effectively) turn-timer.

edit: not Britannia is right but England.

[Orb (DoC)]

oh ok

[England (DoC)]

Only civstats is down, because i was able to log on and take my turn.

[Orb (DoC)]

Game down Game down