Civ4 Democracy Game Discussion

[Beta]

If you are interested - sign up

here .

The purpose of this thread is to start some discussion about the game.

We will need to sort out:

1. timing
2. admins
3. number of teams
4. picking civs
5. what the world looks like

and a very key point IMHO...

6. team balance.

My initial thoughts, and I'm sure there will be lots of discussion regarding 1-5, and everyone chip in as thoughts come to them, but for now, as teams start to coalesce, I would really like to discuss #6. But first 1 thru 5.

1. timing .. probably as soon as enough folks have the game (and we know that won't be long) and a bit of time to get to know the game/

2. admins - I think we have all learned that have a strong admin team is critical

3. Number of teams - six or thereabouts seems to be a number that works, but someone more familiar with civ4 could advise.

4. Picking civs - first come first serve - or I suggest we wait until the teams are formed - and then the admins can randomly assign 1st through nth choice.

5. the world - NOT continents. That breaks the early game down into 2 or 3 minigames, and seriously limits alliance and diplomacy in th early game. More on this later.

6 . Team balance....and what I really think we need to discuss now as teams start to form...

In addition to to the wide range of experience and talents of the members on this site, there is now a critical factor which delineates some players from the others - and that is whether you have been involved in the development and/or testing of Civ4. This clearly would give those players an edge in game mechanics, as they will be familiar with them, and will have had numerous hours of play/test time.

For the sake of a balanced game, I would like to suggest that the members with such experince consider spearding themselves out amonst the teams, as opposed to concentrating in one or two teams. Not only will this ensure a more balanced - and hopefully therefore more enjoyable game - but it will also allow for the sharing of the knowledge and experinece that has been gained by some members with the wider community, thus strenthening Apolyton's overall ability. Because, as we all know, the next inter-site game will not be far behind.

I would like to know how others feel about this, and I would especially like to hear from some of the testers. Maybe I am over-rating the advantage of having been a tester.

[Ennet]

A "Great Plains" Map would be cool for a MP game.. That could bring in some tense diplomacy.. Some more fertile civs in the middle with some slower growing but resource rich teams on the edges.
It would be cool if someone wanted to make one of theese threads for a SP Demo game. If anyone besides me feel intressted in that at all.. count me in btw, i'd like to join in on any peacefull trading team

[Ennet]

Oh and what length will the game be? Epic would be cool for a MP game, but might work better when Pitboss servers arrive, as PBEMs tend to take quite a while either way.

[Locutus]

Repost from the other thread:

It would seem wise to start discussing the settings etc only [when Civ4 is released], because by that time you'll have a fair idea of how many people are actually interested in participating and at least some people will have had a chance to play Civ4 a few times, so they'll have some idea of which settings are most interesting/suited for a DG (and also if the game is stable enough to allow a DG to run problem-free). Based on the current list, I don't think it would be wise to run an MP game: just 15 sign-ups with quite a few of those provisional or with only limited time to participate. Might be better to start an SP game first (then again, that would depend on how many people sign up between now and release day). That would also give full disclosure into the runnings of the game, which would give everyone a good opportunity to learn Civ4 (and the concept of a Democracy Game as we'll likely have many newbies joining the community around/after release day).

[Ninot]

Re: Civ4 Democracy Game Discussion

Originally posted by Locutus
It would seem wise to start discussing the settings etc only [when Civ4 is released]

I respectfully disagree. As I said in my previous thread (which you disparaged ) a fun and unique Democracy game experience could be had if we start one up a week or so after the game is released. Very few will have winning strategies, and it will be a collective learning experience unlike what people would experience should we start months later.

Originally posted by Beta

3. Number of teams - six or thereabouts seems to be a number that works, but someone more familiar with civ4 could advise.

As I said in the sign up thread, I am hoping for a single player, not team, demo game. Maybe we can have 1 of each, I dont know. But I think we must have a discussion before we decide it is either.

[Locutus]

Re: Re: Civ4 Democracy Game Discussion

Originally posted by Ninot what people would experience should we start months later.

I'm not talking about months, I'm talking about weeks at most. But you'll have to wait until ~mid-November before starting the game anyway, or you'll exclude non-Americans from participating. That would give us 2-3 weeks discuss the settings.

[Ninot]

Mid november seems fair.

But to set up a workable constitution, elections, voting for a civ, all that sort of stuff, might be worth discussion now. Noone needs the game to decide that stuff.

[Locutus]

Of course i'm not going to forbid you to discuss the settings but let's be conservative about anything that depends on the number of players involved while we don't know how many are interested in participating. If you set up a constitution that requires 7 Ministers and 5 judges but you only have 20 participants, you're asking for trouble...

[Ninot]

agreed. I also understand that too many threads on this topic would be quite poluting to the forum when there is so much discussion about the game itself goin on.

[conmcb25]

Re: Civ4 Democracy Game Discussion

Originally posted by Beta
The purpose of this thread is to start some discussion about the game.

We will need to sort out:


4. picking civs

I think for an SP game we have to have some idea of how we want to play the first one

Primarily builder? or warmonger?

After that we look at which CIV's have attributes that corropsond with those play styles and go from there.

JUST MHO

[Jon Shafer]

It'll be a lot easier to drum up participants once the game is actually released, so in that sense Locutus has a point in waiting a bit.

[Ninot]

Re: Re: Civ4 Democracy Game Discussion

Originally posted by conmcb25


I think for an SP game we have to have some idea of how we want to play the first one

Primarily builder? or warmonger?

After that we look at which CIV's have attributes that corropsond with those play styles and go from there.

JUST MHO

Maybe pick a civ that is balanced? So that the whole game isn't just geared towards 1 style. That way we can discover both sides of the game.

[Locutus]

Since the game is supposedly much more builder-friendly, I'd be partial to a builder-oriented game, to allow everyone get acquainted with Religion, Great People, Health, the new Maintenance system, etc. Then again, Ninot's suggestion isn't bad either.

[Beta]

Getting the discussion going now is fine, IMO. It is going to happen anyway. Just thought I would drag it here rather than the sign up thread.

And I think you may have missed the point of #6 folks.

Locutus, if demogame experience has taught us anything, it is that momentum builds quickly once a game idea is born, and this was a pretty natural birth as it is.

And teams are already starting to form, as is the norm. If all the testers end up on one team, or two, we may have a serious game imbalance.

There - leave the thread as solely that issue if you are hung up on the timing matter.

So - Locutus - what is YOUR view on the matter of team balance?

[conmcb25]

Beat we are a bunch of steps ahead of the game, I think they are primarily talking SP Demo Game here.

Maybe we ought to launch a team demogame thread.