PBEM/MP Mod: A Call to Modders!

[snoopy369]

Honestly I suggest you make decisions like that - you have more experience than me, postcount aside

But yes, i think start-of-thread polls are not as good as thought-out discussions - i should not use that word (poll) when i don't mean it.

What do you mean about panels - were there individual panels on each topic, or one main panel that decided the topics to discuss, or what? I wasn't in 'Poly at the start of AU or even particularly near it (i think it was on AU 4 or something when I started, in april) so I'm not familiar with the AU startup...

[Rommel2D]

I don't know about the start-up either, but only 7 people actually have votes that count on any AU proposals. Anybody can comment in the thread, but I believe 4 'yes' votes are required to 'pass' a modification.

[snoopy369]

Hmm... not sure if I like that or not. On one hand, it's more likely to ensure "quality" votes - but on the other hand it implies anyone else is not capable of helping make decisions Benign oligarchy, or democracy? Hard choice ...

[punkbass2000]

I think it might be best to have polls in threads anyway, but maybe not make them binding.

EDIT: And if you're really bent on this whole 'Democracy' concept, you could have more of a "Senate" than a "Panel". Perhaps five members that, unanimously and only unanimously, veto a public poll. You could even have them be voted in, if you're really committed to this.

[snoopy369]

I think polls would be too ... influential, if we didn't intend for people to all be able to vote, and/or want more discussion, first. AU has done that successfully.

Hmm, how about this: A select number (not fixed, but determined by activity - those very active get a vote once the rest, or say 2/3 of the rest, say they deserve one) get votes, and the "people" get ONE vote. So, if 5 of us are on the "senate" or whatever, then there are 6 votes - the People and 5 others, with the People's vote breaking a tie... The People's vote would be determined by ... a Poll, done AFTER the initial discussion was completed.

Too complicated?

[Rommel2D]

I'll have to reflect on that one, but the total votes should be odd- if the "people's" vote is a tie-breaker it would be for a 4 or 6 person panel.

BTW- I think we'll also need a snappy abbreviation to work under. Something like APS (Apolyton Postal Service)...

[snoopy369]

nah, i meant if there is a tie, the People get an extra .1 votes or something - like in a betting scheme, a line of +3 1/2... so the People get only 1 vote, but if it's an even (including them) number, the People's vote would count slightly more to break ties.

SO, 5 people + The People, tied 3/3 for/against, but the People voted Against - it goes against... 3/3.1

[Moonbars]

Keep it simple guys... I would suggest the AU panel system. that's works very well.

OK, so somebody said about the SoZ..
OK, so somebody said about Cav ..
(let's go AU and reduce attacks by one!, and add "heavy cav" at nationalism at original stats)
OK, so sombody said about moving the diplomacy techs..

My suggestion is: Add amphibious assault to more units, this opens up a serious amount of stategy for the human, we might even build a navy!

[Rcoutme2]

As for the specific determination to the final decisions...I would suggest that if you are tied 3:3, it is likely that the idea is either not workable, or that 3 people are not good modifiers.

[punkbass2000]

I would like to make it clear that, IMO, we're not making additions that are unnecessary, like giving units amphibious assault, etc. We're fixing things that are "broken", like cav.
Again, RaR can give you plenty of amphibious assault units. There's been talk in the C3C forum of starting up a RaR PBEM and I'm going to start a thread for it when I get in chancwe, sometime within the next six hours, for anyone who's interested. IF the demand is high enough, I'm sure we can start two or more games.

[snoopy369]

I'd not be averse to adding a couple of small changes that would make PBEMs more fun (like amphib units), but perhaps making them in an "alternate" mod. There are definitely somethings that are small changes that could easily be done.

That said, my idea is closer to Punkbass', for the general mod. (And I'm not sure I agree that Cav are broken - but we'll get to that argument later )

Rcoutme, I strongly disagree. The fact of a tie does not mean any such thing! Perhaps it means we should work on it a little bit more - I might prefer to have a 60% or 66% majority, for example, to pass any changes, so to require the change be a popular one - but ultimately whatever percentage you require, there will occasionally be changes voted on that will barely meet or barely not meet the requirement.
Just because not everyone agrees on something does not mean that any one group of people are "better" modders or whatnot - I believe that you can honestly disagree on what is better. (For example, Cavalry- again, better left for later.)

Okay. For now, I propose we have a Panel system, with 5 people being the "Voters", with the option to add up to two more people if such people make themselves known and are very active, and 4 of the 5 vote to add them. Rommel, Punkbass, for now I nominate the two of you as Panel Members. (I'm not sure who else voted to be "very active" - but it will be made clear in time.) I'm going to stick to a few requirements for Panel members - must be very active, post regularly on every active question (or suggest that it be closed), and be NICE to each other. I reserve the right for the Panel to kick anyone off with a 66% majority (that means 4 out of 5 or 5 out of 7) who violates either of these rules (both vague on purpose - I want it to be hard to kick someone off, unless it's clear to the rest of us that person's inactive and/or mean). I'm going to extend membership to the Panel to 2 more people who are active PBEMers and who are willing to be active participants, assuming a 2/3 vote or better for each person among the 3 of us.

I intend to start a few threads with some of the ideas I see here - whether I agree or not - shortly, and any Panel Member may start their own thread with any topic that comes to their mind. I'll start a new thread with information on how to do so. If this takes off, we can ask Mark to give us our own subforum, like AU has, so to separate these into their own forum and easily see them...

[punkbass2000]

...erm, I voted for "Somewhat involved"...

[Moonbars]

Originally posted by punkbass2000
I would like to make it clear that, IMO, we're not making additions that are unnecessary, like giving units amphibious assault, etc. We're fixing things that are "broken", like cav.

Subjective! In all the PBEMS I have been involved in, naval units have been an expensive waste of time.

I think that naval power is not represented very well in PBEMS (or single player). We can't do much about this in SP as the AI cannot adapt, but in PBEM.. We should look at ways to increase the importance of navies, if nothing else this will give the races with naval UUs a better chance, and add a lot of depth and strategy options to the player. You say we are fixing things that are broken, I say so am I!

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Moonbars


Subjective! In all the PBEMS I have been involved in, naval units have been an expensive waste of time.

I think that naval power is not represented very well in PBEMS (or single player). We can't do much about this in SP as the AI cannot adapt, but in PBEM.. We should look at ways to increase the importance of navies, if nothing else this will give the races with naval UUs a better chance, and add a lot of depth and strategy options to the player. You say we are fixing things that are broken, I say so am I!

Quite true, Moonbars. I think you should make this suggestion, will add a general thread for naval consideration. I'm not sure if more amphibious units would fall under "fix" or "enhance" , but it's worthy of consideration, and if you can convince a few more of us, it's worth it

Moon, did you vote "very involved", as in do you want to be a candidate for the Panel?

Punkbass, I couldn't tell from your response (and can't see individual votes, silly) - but you've been more involved than most so far, and are a veteran PBEMer as well as being very knowledgeable of AU if I am not mistaken (thus considerably valuable to us). Do you not want to be a part of the Panel - if not, I'm happy to replace you, but we're happy to have you as well ...

[punkbass2000]

I wouldn't mind being on, though I don't know that I'd be very useful. I know little about modding and generally lack foresight in what rule changes will affect, etc.