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

[Korea (DoC)]

----------------------------

Rule change suggestion 1:
01. Anonymous play (all players will receive an anonymous apolyton account, like "Greece (DoC)" which they will use for diplomacy (post and PM) and story telling (posts). The players behind the civs won't (immediately) be revealed. When players login to the game they must write down an anonymous name to keep their true identity hidden.
It is not allowed to reveal anybodies anonymous identity or to speak about these identities in private or public. During the game people may get more and more clues, but still keep their mouth shut.

Punishment for breaking this rule: losing 25% of the Fair Play Rating (for the entire game) per violation. (reason for punishment: no way to undo such a violation, unless someone finds a way to purge the info from our brains)

Rule change suggestion: Remove the bold part from the rule.

Rule should remain but only be enforceds when the anon is broken delieberatly not by posting etc, but by meeting up and discussing the game. nah jsut kidding , ABSTAIN


----------------------------

Rule change suggestion 2:

03. Civilizations that are at war or want to declare war have to observe the turn order which is set the turn before the war starts.
Thus: no double moves during wartime or when declaring war. Players are free to agree on a new turn order if all involved parties agree and this new turn order is published in the organization thread and all involved parties publish their agreement there as well. Every player gets at most 24h to make his war moves. The host will pause the game if the turn is about to advance in 1 hour while any player involved in the war did not have a chance to play his turn.

When 24h have past the player just missed his turn. If the 2nd player in the turn order misses his turn he'll be first in the turn order from that moment on.

Rule change suggestion: Remove the bold parts from the rule.

Abstain
----------------------------

Rule change suggestion 3:

4c. All tech trades must be reported in the Tech/Units trade thread. For '4a trades', only the 'giver(s)' must be reported. For '4b trades*' the explicit deal must be reported. For '4b trades' the 4 civs that are supposed to have advanced into the next age must be listed along with the trade report.

*4b trades = free trades of old techs

Rule change suggestion: Remove the bold parts from the rule

i tihnk we should report al ltrade deals... whether it costs vouchers or not it is a good way of exploring what is happeneing in game

----------------------------

Rule change suggestion 4:

6. Subs will always put '(sub)' behind their name when they login to the game. (ie. 'Emperor Augustus (sub)') tmp subbing for allies is allowed. Tmp subbing, for civs that lost their player completely till a perm sub has been found, is only allowed for civs that are not closely involved with the civ they wil sub for. (no neighbours, no enemies, no allies).
If a civ won't be played for 10 turns in a row or 20 out of 25 turns, a a perm sub will be looked for. Civs like this won't be annihilated.

Rule change suggestion: Remove the bold part from the rule.

nee dto oidnetify in game and in posts that it is a sub and who the sub is... shoudl be no anon for subs..

----------------------------

Rule change suggestion 5:

11. When the game has started rules can only be changed if 66% of the players agree.

Rule change suggestion; change rule into:

11. When the game has started rules can only be changed if 66% of not-abstaining players agree. All players who do not vote within 48 hours after the vote has started automaticly abstain.

YES .

[St Jon]

ENOUGH!!! I can't take this abuse anymore! As an English teacher in training allow me to point out your spelling which has now become beyond anything possibly unintentional! Are you writing these posts in a panic on a laptop in a car escaping from the police? Are you always late for a space shuttle launch? Or do you just drop down your hands on your keyboard in an uncontrolled diarrhea-inflicted-bowel-like movement?

Basic spellchecking and punctuation is about RESPECT FOR THE READER!

Out of ten words, you've managed to misspell 4. That's more than a third. The use of "me" does not function as "my". I know you Aussies say it, but it's not right to WRITE it! Imagine if everyone wrote with an accent!! We have agreed upon a standard for easy communication. If you are unable to communicate, please, SHUT UP! Since I've asked nicely before and been told that you can't be bothered, I am now telling you not nicely.

I had always thought Raz was just severely dyslexic rather than either lazy or rude. The abysmal grammar is different and should need attention as there is no excuse for it from someone who has English as their first language.

Still, I cannot see the point in shouting about it as having lived to 68 without cause to address these problems I would very much doubt that you will change him now. He does make an effort with IG posts so best to leave it there.

In truth, the perennial use of TEH rather THE on gaming forums annoys me far more than anything that Raz might type as that is no accident, or inability to use the English language, just pure affectation. I really do wish people would stop it.

[Persia (DoC)]

I do as a matter of fact support Byzantium with his comments on 1 & 4.

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Yes to 2, 3, 5

1 and 4 I want to support, but not in the form they are written.

Yes 1 needs altering since we don't want to apply that penalty without thought. But we should still keep the sense that there can be penalty applied if someone decides just not to bother at all. As inca said, mistakes are one thing, but my difficulty with the rule change as proposed is that is seems to imply that if someone just decides they will post from now on under their real name, nothing would happen. I think that is wrong, we do want everyone on-side with using the game identities.

4. The rule was created for good reason, which was that in BtP there were some awkward moments when people thought they were fighing two opponents, trying to get one to agree peace while leaving the war with the other, only to realise afterwards that they were both bieng controlled by the same person since they were subbing for the other one. That kind of thing, or even the possibility of that kind of thing, is a problem. So I think we do need transparency on subs however we do it - or at least transparency if someone in game is subbing for someone else.

[Toni]

Thanks CS!

[Robert]

Next turn is 11h timer.

[England (DoC)]

Are we going back to the 11hr timer?

[Mali (DoC)]

well, as a minor nation I have to say that it is serious flaw in this game that there have formed 3-4 large blocs which have existed all game. that the large powers have in effect put their flag on other nations and consider any attack upon them to be attack on themselves. It makes playing a minor nation absolutely pointless. minor nations can do nothing to change their position, as they can't challenge the big nations (shown in the 5 small vs england war, russia vs persia), and they can't fight amongst themselves for land. so we're just tagging along for the ride, but have no hope of making any changes.

And this is different from the real world how? Not everyone can be a super power.

[Robert]

@Ozzy: yes, I'm sorry. That's what I intended to say with post 2120 but during writing the post I apparently forgot to make that clear

[OzzyKP]

Yes, if the players would vote that the top-5 should not be able to receive techs freely, then we should prevent that they would get some missing techs using the vote 1 changes, before the vote 2 application.

That makes sense. But I believe the voters voted down that new rule. So does that mean we can trade freely now?

[Korea (DoC)]

mister lizard ,

will do what i can but i make no promises.

life is a rush for me , have way too many things to get done.

if that casues you to not read my posts that is my loss.

thmklyou for putting me in palce once again

[Robert]

Your English is clearly pretty good, LzPrst, but your math skills are definitely terrible
4 out of 6 is 2/3rd (which is indeed more then a third )
But the message consists of 10 words (excluding 'grrrrr').
Out of those 10 words, 5 are misspelled. That's 50%
Not counting the out of place punctuations and missing capitals of course.

---------

Anyway, LzPrst is right, please try a bit to write good English.
It's not a problem to make mistakes, but at least try.

LzPrst, please refrain from posting "SHUT UP" like lines. (6 capitals too much in a 8 characters phrase )

[LzPrst]

ozzy blodoy repsond to me messages.... grrrrr

posted in sotry too,.,

ENOUGH!!! I can't take this abuse anymore! As an English teacher in training allow me to point out your spelling which has now become beyond anything possibly unintentional! Are you writing these posts in a panic on a laptop in a car escaping from the police? Are you always late for a space shuttle launch? Or do you just drop down your hands on your keyboard in an uncontrolled diarrhea-inflicted-bowel-like movement?

Basic spellchecking and punctuation is about RESPECT FOR THE READER!

Out of ten words, you've managed to misspell 4. That's more than a third. The use of "me" does not function as "my". I know you Aussies say it, but it's not right to WRITE it! Imagine if everyone wrote with an accent!! We have agreed upon a standard for easy communication. If you are unable to communicate, please, SHUT UP! Since I've asked nicely before and been told that you can't be bothered, I am now telling you not nicely.

[Robert]

Rule change Vote Status (full vote details here)

Rule 1
yes: 5
no: 1

rule 2
yes:6
no: 0

rule 3
yes: 5
no: 1

rule 4
yes:6
no: 0

rule 5
yes:6
no: 0

[Inca (DoC)]

there is very big diference between player we guess and players who make mistakes from players who accept playing and break rule just that they do not like rule. I know 3 players from mistakes on log in as real name. That is innocent error and I near do it except was blocked by other person from joing.

If rule just be changed at will then why have any rule. same as if player does legal thing turn 50 but rule change on turn 100 makes it illegal thing. Not right punishing that player for breaking rule that is not there on turn 50. Same thing other way round so reason i vote no.