Historian Moonlights As PPL Recruiter

[-Jrabbit]

(-Jrabbit steps to the microphoone)
(ahem) Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, esteemed Cabinet members, and ppl of our democratic Monarchy --

I bring a report from the field. While tipping a few with Ming last night, he mentioned that Democracy Game organizers had asked him for recruitment threads on various forums, and that he had refused. "That game is dying!" he chortled, "and if it can't stand on its own, it deserves to die! Besides, they already have two old threads sitting out there. If they're to lazy to find them and bump them to the top, that's their problem."

(He also said that he could take over any AI civ in our game and thrash us with it. "That's what leadership by committee will get you!" he said.)

Noting the pathetic numbers of voters in recent polls, your loyal Historian took umbrage (which was lying conveniently on the table) and went into the field. The dead thread were located on the Civ2 General and Apolyton Community forums, and have been bumped to the top with return links.


All hail the glory of the United Minds of Apolytonia, long may we wave!

* (-Jrabbit leaves the podium, hoping no one notices that there's still no history thread) *

[cavebear]

Feel free to explain to Mr. Ming that the point is not whether a focussed individual could play a better game, but whether a committee (of the whole and part) can play a *successful* one.

I don't doubt that the average player could defeat a Democracy game group (especcially in the first attempts. But that is not the point of the effort.

I suspect that the very first ICS game, SSC game, or any other system was successful the first time tried.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Err, good Jrabbit.

But I'm sure the ppl will not long go unaware of your omission - and when they notice there will be pain! (or perhaps indifference. The ppl are fickle bastards.)

[Hywel Dda]

I am disappointed with Ming (whom I normally greatly respect). Speaking for myself, this has added an interesting new angle to a game with which I was otherwise become a bit bored. And it was well timed, too, catching the fallout from those disenchanted with CivIII.

If the rulers and Mods of Apolyton had any sense, they would respond to the fall in numbers by helping to promote the game further - what is it that they say on the Home Page?

dedicated to the continued storage and retrieval of the most comprehensive collection of Civilization-related material on the Internet

That's a manifesto for killing new ways of playing the game before they've had a chance, is it? Perhaps that quote should be moved to the CivFanatics page...

-JRabbit: Well bumped! Now about that history...

[cavebear]

Hmm... Wouldn't it be interesting to have one human player contesting (with an unknown Civ) against a Dermocracy Civ (equally unknown), along with several AI's. I'm not sure how the game would be managed, but the *idea* is intriguing...

[Hywel Dda]

cavebear: The idea of playing against someone where you don't know whether it's a single person, a commitee of people, or a machine, is nothing new. It's existed since long before the days of computers:

Chess players have played by mail (using paper, ink and stamps, that is) since the year dot, and according to my chess-playing friends, the uncertainty as to exactly who or what you were playing has been made much use of.

So how would the game be managed? Well it's a play-by-(e)mail game, is the simple answer.

And yes, it would be very interesting indeed, but the single player would win, IMHO, if they had any experience of MP games, so I wouldn't take Ming on on this one if I were you: democracies argue too much, and machines are just crap!

But that has nothing to do with whether the Democracy game should survive - that's to do with how much fun it is, *not* who's the better player.

BTW - Most of us only communicate with Ming via this bulletin board, PM's and e-mails. This begs the question: is he a single person, a commitee, or a machine? Answers on a postcard...

[cavebear]

Originally posted by Hywel Dda
Chess players have played by mail (using paper, ink and stamps, that is) since the year dot, and according to my chess-playing friends, the uncertainty as to exactly who or what you were playing has been made much use of.

Yeah, I've played that way. It always seemed to me that I was playing against a group (can you tell I usually lost?).

So how would the game be managed? Well it's a play-by-(e)mail game, is the simple answer.

Perfect, PBEM would have to be the way it could work! Great idea. Never tried that, so it didn't occur to me.

And yes, it would be very interesting indeed, but the single player would win, IMHO, if they had any experience of MP games, so I wouldn't take Ming on on this one if I were you: democracies argue too much, and machines are just crap!

Ah, but Ming (for example) wouldn't know who the Democracy Civ was either and could get quite a nasty surprise. But I agree with you in general. It would be hard to disguise and the focussed player would have the advantage.

But that has nothing to do with whether the Democracy game should survive - that's to do with how much fun it is, *not* who's the better player.

Agreed.