Expansion Pack Civs (Part 3): Just one more...

[ranskaldan]

And because of the LoD's page, many polish civ fans learned about poll.

[LoD]

Do you know the difference between "inform and suggest to do sth" and "rally to do sth"?

[ranskaldan]

Ok, you did not 'rally' in the sense of herding everyone to the polls and telling them to vote for Poles or *else*. But the thing is,

a) encouraging Poles who previously aren't in these forums to join
b) thereby raising the proportions of Poles in this forum
c) and thus increasing the votes for Poles

that is unfair.
Why? because by artificially increasing the number of Poles, the proportion of Poles voting here is higher than the proportion of Poles who play civ, simply because non-Apolyton Poles are now joining, while non-Apolyton non-Poles are not.

a fair scenario is:

a) encouraging civ players around the world to join
b) ensuring that the voters in this forum reflect the actual demographics of civ-players
c) increasing the votes for all civs accordingly

[LoD]

In my opinion it was unfair that the Poles were behind the Eskimos. Hence the "manifesto", which has already fullfilled its role and will be modified.

[ranskaldan]

I felt that there was something wrong with the Poles below too, so I voted for them. But there is no glory if a civ is propelled up thru unfair means. There is no glory in finding out that if we gather up a lopsided slice of the civ community, with a disproportionate number of Poles, and ask them to vote, them the Poles are in the top 15.

[lockstep]

IMO, we need to prevent 'strategic voting' for a particular civ. The suggested rule 'You must at least use 120 points' allows for a vote that gives 20 points to the Polish civ and allocates 100 points to 10 civs a la the Bulgarians, Fiji, Quebecois and Swiss (at the moment not even in the top 100). With 40 votes like that, Poland is number one, and the poll isn´t significant anymore. OTOH, it should be allowed to vote for ar least one or two 'also-ran' civs.

Therefore I suggest as additional rule: You must use at least 120 points, and you can allocate these points only to 'top 24' civs (as of Locutus´ last update).

(Note: This rule would allow to assign 40 points to 2 'also-ran'-civs, and the remaining 120 points to 6-14 'top 24' civs, according to the rules stated previously by Locutus.)

(The top 24 civs are (in alphabetical order): Arabs, Assyrians, Australians, Austrians/Austro-Hungarians, Byzantines, Celts, Dutch, Ethiopians/Aksumites, Hebrew/Israelis, Inca, Inuit/Eskimos/Aleutians, Khmer, Koreans, Mali(ans), Maya, Mongols, Phoenicians/Carthaginians, Poles, Polynesians, Portuguese, Sioux/Dakota, Spanish, Turks/Ottomans, Vikings.)

[ranskaldan]

So, the rules rules:

1. You must use at least 120 points to vote for the top 24.
2. You can use an additional 40 points to vote for any civ you like.

But what if someone's top24 civ falls under the number 24 mark?

[lockstep]

To avoid this problem, I enclosed the list of 'top 24' civs as of Locutus´ last update.

[ranskaldan]

Locutus would kill us all... we are making his life horridly difficult. Now he'd have to sort everyone's votes into above-24 and below-24. And these sortings will have to change whenever a civ rises above/below the 24-25 boundary.

[Mankind]

Originally posted by ranskaldan
So, the rules rules:

1. You must use at least 120 points to vote for the top 24.

But what if someone DON't want to vote for other civ becose he WANT exactly THAT ONE civ for godnes sake!

2. You can use an additional 40 points to vote for any civ you like.

So can I give 40 points for 1 civ?

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Mankind
So can I give 40 points for 1 civ?

No, as the other rules (notably 'only 20 points for a single civ') would still be effective.

[orange]

Originally posted by LoD
In my opinion it was unfair that the Poles were behind the Eskimos. Hence the "manifesto", which has already fullfilled its role and will be modified.

Lod - are you saying you recruited a bunch of settlers to sign up and post only "Poles - 20" just so you could overturn something that, is in your mind, unfair? I can't understand much of what you say.

[ranskaldan]

But what if someone DON't want to vote for other civ becose he WANT exactly THAT ONE civ for godnes sake!

we are not going to have ONE civ for an expansion pack. This poll is not about finding out what your favorite civ is. It is about what civs you'd like to be in the expansion or unofficial mod or whatever.

[Fiil]

How about asking Firaxis to make a special Polish edition where you can play Poles - and only Poles!

I'm sure with so many organized civ'ers in Poland, this will be a big success.

Wait a minute... why not make it a game where every organized Polish player can play Poland in multiplayer in the very organized Polish forums. 16 Polish players playing Poland in one game, imagine that!! Sold out in the first week in Poland.

And of course it will all have to be translated into Polish because most Polish players don't speak English!

And maybe it will be a problem for most Polish players to do more than one move in multiplayer because most of them have sooo bad connections. But of course they will still play.

Soon we will see (organized) riots in Poland because not everybody can start their game Poland. Whereafter the Polish government will have to ask Firaxis to remake the world map into one big map of Poland.

The world will be a better (and more organized) place!

[orange]

Originally posted by Fiil
How about asking Firaxis to make a special Polish edition where you can play Poles - and only Poles!

I'm sure with so many organized civ'ers in Poland, this will be a big success.

Wait a minute... why not make it a game where every organized Polish player can play Poland in multiplayer in the very organized Polish forums. 16 Polish players playing Poland in one game, imagine that!! Sold out in the first week in Poland.

If you want to reseach popularity for this idea, Fiil, you could always start a new thread with a...

...poll?

:no one laughs:

...By poll I mean both a questionaire which people answer and a person of "polish" decent...double...meaning...

: pets Mr. Bigglesworth :