What happens to defeated teams?

[Mudhut]

Well, if we combine this...

Originally posted by Maniac
Destroyed civs should only be able to join their conqueror. Otherwise you have no incentive to try to survive at all costs. A civ in process of defeat would otherwise just try to do as much damage as possible to their conqueror, and then just migrate all to another civ to continue the war.

...with this...

Originally posted by BigFree
If I were only allowed to join a team that conquered mine then as soon as it was apparent that my team would lose, I'd go belly up and 'give' away as much of my civ to that conquering team as I could get away with. I mean if it is going to be my future team why wouldn't I help it out as much as I can while I'm on my death bed.

Because of that, I'd say that you shouldn't be able to join the team that conquered you; that takes away any incentive to go belly up to your conqueror.

..then I'm afraid we're left with a null set. You can't continue, period.

Which is actually fine with me. If you lose, you're out - plenty of other games work that way. If it happened to me, I'd be sad sure, but it's not like there aren't plenty of other games-o-civ to be played. Also, this gives teams the most incentive possible to stay alive at all costs.

They could maybe keep their own forum, and sit around telling glory stories of the good-ol-days. Perhaps (once teams had all made contact of course) the mods could post pictures there to keep them in the loop on how it all played out. That way they could get closure eventually.

Also - and this is slightly off topic - are we allowed to trade maps before Paper?

[Maniac]

Originally posted by BigFree
If I were only allowed to join a team that conquered mine then as soon as it was apparent that my team would lose, I'd go belly up and 'give' away as much of my civ to that conquering team as I could get away with. I mean if it is going to be my future team why wouldn't I help it out as much as I can while I'm on my death bed.

That's actually realistic. You could consider it a form of vassalization.

[notyoueither]

We could always continue with what has been done for... about 4 DGs now.

People can join teams that their team had contact with and who agree to take them.

This has never been an issue that I have seen.

[fed1943]

On other hand, the members of conquered civ may know more about the conquerors than other civs.

It would be unfair if this knowledge was shared by imigration.

Best regards,

[Dave_Shack]

If your team is defeated, you could join the CFC team game.

[Octavian X]

It just doesn't strike me as fair, though, to eliminate players from a game (especially those lurkers among us) who are on a losing team. Maybe we could institute a cooling off period - say ten turns or so - to calm down some emotions and to make immigrant knowledge a little irrelevant to the current game. Otherwise, it a team wants to accept an immigrant, it should be allowed to do so.

[E_T]

If a team is allowed to take in refugees, should it have had contact with that defeated team before the defeat? Or should you be allowed to join any team, dispite contact??

I think that you should be allowed to join another team but I'm uncertain about the contact issue.

And a cooling off period is good, too. But it shouldn't be too long. 10 turns sounds reasonable, as that could be 1 to 3 months, real time, depending on in game speed.

E_T

[Metaliturtle]

Well, it seems to me that a refugee is a highly prized thing, hatred towards a future adversary is always good to add into the war room, and because the refugee will have been at war, they will probably know more information, which they should freely be able to give. I say let the refugees find new homes, it will add an interesting dynamic to the game.

Actually the fact you brought this up makes me think you found an undefended city....

Well, at any rate, I don't think this is something we need to put a rule in place about. Some teams won't take certain people, some will, some people won't join certain teams, others will.

Although thanks for the +1

[E_T]

Originally posted by Metaliturtle
Well, it seems to me that a refugee is a highly prized thing, hatred towards a future adversary is always good to add into the war room, and because the refugee will have been at war, they will probably know more information, which they should freely be able to give. I say let the refugees find new homes, it will add an interesting dynamic to the game.

hence the "cooling off period", to allow some current information to become outdated somewhat.

Actually the fact you brought this up makes me think you found an undefended city....

/me just smiles.....

Well, at any rate, I don't think this is something we need to put a rule in place about. Some teams won't take certain people, some will, some people won't join certain teams, others will.

Although thanks for the +1

Actually, if we don't have some form of rule about this (and discuss this now), then we might have problems about it, later in the game. Better to talk calmly now than to rant later....

E_T

[Metaliturtle]

Well I CALMLY say:

Anyone willing to destroy another's homeland risks the fleeing refugee. These refugees could become guerilla warriors, hindering growth, they could be peaceful during the day but at night give information to the enemy. Refugees are an all around not fun thing, but if you want war then you get refugees.

As to the undefended city, leave the Horde alone, they're not too bad, and you definitely don't want them becoming refugees

[Octavian X]

Speaking personally, I'd like to see a rule in place, impleamented by team vote, soonish. This is the kind of issue that'll ignite the moment defeat becomes inevitable for a team. We could save ourselves a lot of trouble in the long run if we can have the foresight to discuss and decide the issue now, rather than wait for the high emotions that might accompany the refugee question if it were discussed in the aftermath of distruction.

[Kloreep]

Originally posted by Octavian X
Speaking personally, I'd like to see a rule in place, impleamented by team vote, soonish. This is the kind of issue that'll ignite the moment defeat becomes inevitable for a team. We could save ourselves a lot of trouble in the long run if we can have the foresight to discuss and decide the issue now, rather than wait for the high emotions that might accompany the refugee question if it were discussed in the aftermath of distruction.

Agreed.

[snoopy369]

Although I'm impressed with the speed of turns so far, I don't think we need to worry about defeated teams for a few weeks at least and therefore there's no reason to stifle discussion on this important topic quite yet. Let's talk it over for a bit longer before putting it to a vote, I don't think I've seen any evidence that we're close to a decision yet.

[proviisori]

IMO some sort of cooling period would be good.

Originally posted by snoopy369
Let's talk it over for a bit longer before putting it to a vote, I don't think I've seen any evidence that we're close to a decision yet.

Con will be pleased that we have a topic that we can talk to death.

[E_T]

And Poll ad nausium....

E_T