Unnoficiat Poll - What do you want to play in the next DG?

[Aro]

So... What do you wanna play, folks?
This poll is absolutelly non-official.

Options:

1- Vanilla Civ3, patched 1.29
2- Vanilla PTW
3- Double your Pleasure mod
4- Apolyton University mod
5- Any version, with the GengisFarb suggestion (2~3 civs playing factions of the same Democracy (specify)
6- I don't care, lets play banana.

[Aro]

Well, I voted Vanilla PTW, just to keep it simple.

[Donegeal]

Although I would like to play a DyP mod, I have to talk about some of the negetives of it.

1) The city view screen makes no sense. Every city receives a pyramid in the city view screen but its called a forge.

2) The mod still has some work that needs to be done. There are missing or incorrect entries in the civilopedia and there may be other little inconsistancies as well. To keep up with all these go here.

I am going to contact Kal-el, the designer of the Mod to let him know that we are considering this and for him to add some input about his Mod.

[lmtoops]

I need to know more about the mods. Just a general explaination about the differences so I can make an informed decision.

[joncnunn]

Option #2 with the latest PTW 1.21f patch.

As for which civ: Any civ that's neither Industrious nor Religious, thus maximizing the difference in civs. Perhaps Commerical should be avoided as well simply because our multiplayer game is playing a Commercial civ.

[Sheik]

I voted vanilla PTW but I want to change my vote to the GengisFarb suggestion.

[Shiber]

Vote DyP. It'll really make the next game much more interesting, and a lot less like this one (which would certainly increase the interest in our community and the number of active players).
Link: DyP homepage.

[Kal-el]

about the 2 DyP "negatives" brought up by Donegal:

The City Screen is messed up, no doubt about it. The City Screen is set up for the first 65 improvements in the editor and we rearranged the buildings in alpha order to make things easier on the player. The only way to fix it would be to figure out what buildings go where, change those, and then you would only get the first 65 of the 175 improvements to show up anyway. We concluded it just wasn't enough bang for your buck.

As for the Civilopedia, well, we are working on it. We were burning through Civilopedia editors at a fairly rapid pace, but recently they have all rejoined the team and we now have five people working together on the civilopedia so we expect to have that situation fixed soon.

I would be very interested in following the progression of a DyP Democracy Game.

[Beta]

Another vanilla civ SPDG, but we handicap ourselves. We take one of the worst civs possible - Greece would be appropriate and add flavor to the game. And we crank up the difficulty level one notch. And either go pangaea or archipelago. The continent set-up in the current game has meant that we have essentially won the game without much inter-action with a number of the civs in the game (ie on the other landmasses).

[Shiber]

Pangaea is convenient... but Archipelago means lots of interesting sea maneuvers, and essentially a lot more naval warfare, which opens up a whole new aspect of war that we have had few chances to experience in the current game. My vote would be for Pangaea.
As for what we want to play - a DyP demogame would be a helluva lot more interesting than a plain flavor demogame. Just think of all the possibilities, and how much fun we can have in DyP... plus, consider that this would spark up a lot of attention and we'd have many more participants than ever.

[Togas]

Can someone please post in this thread the Ghengis Farb suggestion?

--Togas

[Aro]

Togas, this is what I found:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
I would still like to play a PTW Democracy version where our democracy was 2-3 different civs, and it was all out in the open. Each "team" would simply be a political faction.

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

I guess, it would certainly allow for alot of roleplay as you could actively work at underminng the other faction(s) while calling them all sorts of names.

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
I was thinking we should have rules to determine when a player should die off and be replaced by an heir/descendant. If three I was contemplating a Merchant Class, a Military Order, and a Religious Sect.

[Togas]

Very interesting ... perhaps this idea needs more discussion.

Clearly we should win such a game where we outnumber our AI opponents 3 to 1, and we may be forced to play at Diety to have a challange. But it would be fun to see who takes power in what "faction" and how the different factions work together or against each other.

I'd like to see more discussion on this idea.

--Togas

[joncnunn]

This map looked like a Pangena too me.

Even on a tiny map, sometimes when you select Pangena, one of the civs starts on a much smaller landmass than the others. The larger the map, the more likely this is to occur.

In a contiental huge map, we'd probably get something like 7 or 8 civs on the larger landmass, 6 or 7 on the slightly smaller landmass, and the remainders on other landmasses.

On an archepello huge map, there would probably be a 1 or 2 landmasses that start with multiple players, most landmasses with a single player, and some sizable landmasses that nevertheless don't have a starting player.

This game is also on Emperor level; moving up the difficulty level one notch would move us to Diety.

Originally posted by BetaHound
Another vanilla civ SPDG, but we handicap ourselves. We take one of the worst civs possible - Greece would be appropriate and add flavor to the game. And we crank up the difficulty level one notch. And either go pangaea or archipelago. The continent set-up in the current game has meant that we have essentially won the game without much inter-action with a number of the civs in the game (ie on the other landmasses).

[joncnunn]

On DYP, 175 buildings would seem to make Civ III too much work to be fun to me.