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

[Rome (DoC)]

How have we somehow got two Voula the Great's?

There is a good reason for that, but I can't explain

[Orb (DoC)]

I agree 100% with Ozzy I say we just stop showing where everyone is and how someone voted and just play. When this is all over should be when the scores are revealed not now. Thats just my opinion.

[OzzyKP]

IMHO people should just stop belly-aching about the ratings and enjoy the game.

[St Jon]

How have we somehow got two Voula the Great's?

[Arabia (DoC)]

Perhaps a way with dealing with widely varied ratings is to eliminate the lowest and highest scores when assembling the ratings?

[Robert]

[Robert]

Rasputin, if you see an argument you want to jump into it, no matter if you should or should not. For the sake of keeping this argument clean, your rating is not part of the dispute here, so don't throw fuel on the fire.

Ottoman, I've looked at your attitude ratings, there's nothing wrong with it.
One civ gave you an '1', but this civ also gave to a number of others 1's and 2's (and 5's and 6's.)
You did also get 5's and a 6 from other civs. It's just that in the end your rating was slightly the lowest. (3.93, which almost equals to '4', which is avg)

We can't debate the reasons for how people rate till the end. Everyone has it's reasons, and reasons may be good, some may be bad. We'll never solve that. The idea is that in the end it should work out.

Perhaps we should therefore reconsider our vote to award points per month instead of per year. Maybe we should indeed after all look at the avg over the entire game, and not per month.

I'm sorry, I don't know the answer.

[Rasputin]

realising i will yet again be hammered for offering my opinion i do it follishlyagain anyway,

IMHO...

Story votes are for content and style not quantity.


Attitude is about being involved. And to be involved you have to post a reasonable amount of time. That is one of the things that make this game difffernet from other MP styles. DIPLO is not just and ABREVIATIon for DIPLOMACY. It is a style of the game where storys from in the game are posted. To harldy not post a story is to ME, removing a big part of the game.

So, for what its worth, that is how i vote.

[Robert]

The problem with making it public is that our votes may become political.
Right now I know that many civs are displeased with the ratings they got.
I don't see how we can solve this. I hope that civs will continue to play and enjoy themelves, even if they got low rates.

And please consider your rates very well, especially low rates.
Next version of the rate-system has a free text field.
Civs can there fill out why they voted how they voted. (of course not every detail)

I'll publish those comments.
I hope that'll help.

Does everybody agree to continue this way, or shall we try to figure out another way to vote? We can also fall back on the avg-rating system where the final score is the avg of all months together. That'll give more chances to compensate very bad or very good months.

I'm not going to make it a vote yet. Just asking, what do you all want.

[Ottoman Empire (DoC)]

@Ottoman: most probably indeed b/c some thought that writing few stories equals to low attitude. I think that the story-category is the perfect category to deal with that, not the attitude category.

Right, and as I said, I can accept a low scoring for the story mode but that's what the story category is for.

So...too bad for me? I've only had dealings with 4 other civs thus far and all have been friendly (of course there are disagreements but they haven't gotten nasty or anything!) so how is this explained?

Anyways, RP, I'm not directing this towards you at all, you're doing a great job of organizing this game and it's lots of fun.

This just leaves a bad taste in my mouth as I feel I'm losing points for no reason! If you voted me very low please let me know why so I can improve, I would be glad to explain any vote I've made.

Maybe we should make the votes public so that people can't hide behind anonymity and ruin the fun for others? You have every right to score someone low but there should be some justification I think.

Thoughts?

[Robert]

@Ottoman: most probably indeed b/c some thought that writing few stories equals to low attitude. I think that the story-category is the perfect category to deal with that, not the attitude category.

[Egypt (DoC)]

There has been a break of the anon rule by yet another player.

I saw it too...

[Ottoman Empire (DoC)]

I don't understand how I got the lowest attitude rating???

I know I don't write a lot of stories but I can't fathom why I would be rated so low for attitude...have I said anything negative at all in my posts even???

[Orb (DoC)]

There has been a break of the anon rule by yet another player.

[Persia (DoC)]

Thanks for the charts, RP!
Thanks all for the story votes! Makes me feel proud!
I do miss the military vote. I got the lowest diplo rate, maybe because I waged war, but there's no military vote to compensate me. Now peacemongers may get high votes and warmongers low votes. That doesn't feel ok.

But I'm ok whatever is decided. I like the game and the stories most anyway.