Debate on the rules

[Juliennew]

Here is a poll to determine the rules we want for the game.
I didn't include the victory conditions as I think we will enable them all. I also didn't include Ironman and accelerated start.
In my opinion, we should enable blind research as the ideological debate will be funniest. The con of this rule is that the science advisor will be quite useless.
What do you think ?

[Nubclear]

Re: Debate on the rules

Faction Respawn.

/Edit: No offense, but this poll is quite useless. I mean, what if you dont want the thing to be enabled? There is no "No Cooperative Victory" etc option, so...is anything with a vote something we enable?

[DeathByTheSword]

if we choose blind research we have to look at what the science minister can do besides research maybe change name and melt it with something else?

[DeathByTheSword]

i think the commissioner makes the rules and he can use this as a refer....or do we use standerd rules? (that is with blind research)

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
i think the commissioner makes the rules and he can use this as a refer....or do we use standerd rules? (that is with blind research)

Well whats the point of a democracy game when all we do is elect a commissioner? In the civ3 demo game, we poll for the choices.

I think we should do a repoll with "NO" options.

Its a demo game for the people, by the people! (Sorry, couldnt resist )

[MrWhereItsAt]

There shouldn't have been a problem, Tass. The poll tells you how many ppl voted (it should), and you can see what proportion of the total voted for each option. But I think ppl are voting as if this was a one-option poll, since there are only a few choices with more than one vote. We perhaps need to do this again now...

[DeathByTheSword]

ok but then again we have to make a poll with standerd rules or custom rules but I do not understand it real well what U mean so please make the poll.

[Juliennew]

I don't think this poll should be official, it is lonly for debating of the rules we want for this game. Did you see that it is a multiple choices poll Tassadar ?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
There shouldn't have been a problem, Tass. The poll tells you how many ppl voted (it should), and you can see what proportion of the total voted for each option

So we only enable what gets the majority? What if we want Blind Research AND Cooperative Victory? I agre, I think we should do this again.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Juliennew
I don't think this poll should be official, it is lonly for debating of the rules we want for this game. Did you see that it is a multiple choices poll Tassadar ?

Yes I did, but what if someone does not want cooperative victory? They can't vote for a "NO COOPERATIVE VICTORY", and since its almost inventiable that everything will get at least one vote.....how many votes will be required in order to enable it?



(Just a small smiley to lighten up the mood )

[DeathByTheSword]

aha no i get the point with the NO part

[MrWhereItsAt]

Correction to my above post: it isn't going to work like I thought it would.... for some reason I voted for a few options, and my one vote for many options turns into 5 votes. I'm sure in another multi-option poll I saw (namely civman's Bill of Rights from the Civ3 game) that you could tell exactly how many ppl voted in total.

Looks like we DO have to start again. Sorry Juliennew, them's the breaks.

EDIT: Hey WAIT! It says 4 voters now!

[Kassiopeia]

IMO instead of rushing with polling we should debate issues and then try to reach a consensus of what to poll.

[Juliennew]

I think we should do a repoll with "NO" options.

If you don't vote for a rule, I think it means "no". And we can see if a rule is popular or not by the percentage of the people who voted for it.
I also did it because I don't know the standard rules and never play with it.

[DeathByTheSword]

you could say you need 2/3 of the votes for a role thats 66.667%or 50% right down the middle just a idea