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

[Robert]

Voting site for England: http://www.ghccci.org/CIV/England/England_Vote.html

[Robert]

Rating ends TOMORROW!
Roughtly 20 hours left for rating!

Russia, England and Egypt yet have to rate!*

*I didn't receive an update from WarningU2 last 20 hours so perhaps you did vote since my last call. Then pls ignore this.

[Mali (DoC)]

I hope we see the benefits of these free techs later on in the game. In discussions with other civs, we are finding that we have nothing to trade from earlier techs because we already have it all.

[India (DoC)]

You mean the medieval age, right? I think when i get there I will have all the ancient techs so no free tech trade for me

It doesnt need to be you, any four civs get to the medieval age allows the tech trade of the ancient techs for everyone.

I hope we see the benefits of these free techs later on in the game. In discussions with other civs, we are finding that we have nothing to trade from earlier techs because we already have it all.

We will trade the non-essential techs mostly, horseback riding, music etc and it will help some civs not to fall back too much (I think it's a good rule)

[St Jon]

I really do not understand this at all. If I was 6th, IG Power Score, last month would I actually lose points if I failed to move to 5th? I could understand in BtP where there was a base rating for each catagory which was just carried on month per month. I get 6pts for Story, 9pts Diplomacy, 0pts for Military and 9pts for Game Place. You add them together and you get a monthly total and a whole Game Score over the entire length of the Game.

This seems a weird form of algebra which would actually penalise the person in No.1 spot of any catagory as they could never get 'relatively better' than anyone else. Please explain this when you produce the 1st score list so that we might all understand.

[Rasputin]

Yes lets not get into averages etc.

The current voting system is weird enough.

[Robert]

A. St Jon, compare it to a basketbal competition.
Every match teams scores, the team with most scores wins the match. The team that wins most matches wins the competition.

B. Now imagine that there's no 'match winner' but all scores of a team of every match are summed together and the team that made most scores through all games wins.

What I described in 'B' is the current situation. All ratings of all months are summed together. The person who got the most rating points win, not he person who wins most months.

So what do you want, a competition where all scores are just summed together, or where we check from month to month who's the best?
I think that latter is much more interesting. There's no competition anywhere where all scores are summed together and just the team that made most scores wins.

We can also compare it with tennis.
If these are the set results:
set 1 A vs B: 1-6
set 2 A vs B: 1-6
set 3 A vs B: 7-6
set 4 A vs B: 7-6
set 5 A vs B: 7-6

In our current system player B would win (6+6+6+6+6 game wins = 30 game wins for B, 1+1+7+7+7=23 game wins for A)
In he proposed system A wins, b/c he wins 3 sets.
Now the current situation may look like it's more fair.

But in this situation the 5th set actually makes no difference anymore, since even if A would win 6-0, B would still win because he's far ahead of A.

I fear that more examples only make it even more difficult, but please try to understand
Or otherwise just trust us

[Robert]

Rasputin: the current voting system is pure average.
This proposed system is not more or less complex. Please don't stick to it only for reaons of "let's keep it like it is"
I just realised that I made a mistake when I designed it.

[Orb (DoC)]

So lost my head is spinning. Please no more math I can't take this type of torcher.

[St Jon]

I now understand, a bit anyway, better. Each month is treated as though it was alone and in effect you get just a sum of 1-15pis per month as the total winner?

Am I right in this interpretation? If I am then I can well see the logic of it all but all your weirdo algebra just knocked me sideways.

[mzprox]

In my interpretation:
(lets assume only one category for this example)
A, : at the end you sum every monthly score and the winner is the one with the most points

B, : you make a rating in every month then sum those ratings, winner is the one who get the most overall rating.

I dont see what difference does it make, but B seems better.

[Rasputin]

i think a better analagy for voting A or B is this

Our monthly scores are like Football Quarter time or Basketball or any other sport played in Quarters

We have more than 4 Quarters obviosuyl , probalby more liek 20 Sections

But in football it is the fina lscore that matters not who won each of the quarters.

scrores could be.

10-0 first qtr Team A win Qtr 10 to nil
14-6 2nd qtr Team B win Qtr 6 to 4
19-13 3rd qtr Team B win Qtr 7 to 5
24-22 final score team B win Qtr 9 to 5

in your analagy you would prefer TEAM B win for winning 3 of the 4 Qtrs
But i nrelaity Team A wins for the Greater combined score.

Hoep this helps people see that soemtimes the total score is used..

[Rasputin]

My only thought on your rating scale for current game Robert, is that 4 should not be the "Norm"

Everyone should rate on a scale of 1 - 7 for each section.

If the person you rating isoutstanding vote 7 and work back from there to lower performing and NON MET tribes. Any non met tribe or tribe that has not been seen to be involved in diplomacy or war etc should gt a 1 not a 4

but that jsut my Opinion.

[Korea (DoC)]

I am so surprised that not a single trade has occured.

This is already opening a big gap to the lower civs who need to trade to survive.

[Orb (DoC)]

i think a better analagy for voting A or B is this

Our monthly scores are like Football Quarter time or Basketball or any other sport played in Quarters

We have more than 4 Quarters obviosuyl , probalby more liek 20 Sections

But in football it is the fina lscore that matters not who won each of the quarters.

scrores could be.

10-0 first qtr Team A win Qtr 10 to nil
14-6 2nd qtr Team B win Qtr 6 to 4
19-13 3rd qtr Team B win Qtr 7 to 5
24-22 final score team B win Qtr 9 to 5

in your analagy you would prefer TEAM B win for winning 3 of the 4 Qtrs
But i nrelaity Team A wins for the Greater combined score.

Hoep this helps people see that soemtimes the total score is used..

Hmmm replace team A with the Philadelphia Eagles and I totally get it.