Private Forums?

[Metaliturtle]

I'm pretty sure the teams are more or less set for the C4DG, what's the happenings with private forums, are there any?

[Beta]

I think a little more time to let the teams and the public forum "shake out" would be a good thing. The game start is still a ways out.

We will also likely need to split this forum into two - one for MP and one for SP.

[binTravkin]

I think we will be ready to set Private forums by the end of november (when everyone who really wants has his cIV).

[conmcb25]

I agree let the teams shake out till the end of the month, and then ask MarkG forums.

[Jon Miller]

it takes some time to do things, I Think we should ask for forums at least a week before the end of the month

JM

[OPD]

No need to for private forums yet.

A month before the game starts at most would be best. If you get forums now you'll just have to change them if a team dies out or changes or if a new team wants to play. You don't even know how many teams there are going to be yet....

[binTravkin]

We already agreed - by the end of november we will know how many and which teams there will be and if we want to start next year, then starting private forums shortly before Xmas is very good idea - ppl will be enjoying their holidays and discussing strategies.

[Jon Miller]

well, I think it would take at least a month from forums to game start

also, I would like to start before the end of Dec (which is a bit earlier then many.. but now would be about time for forums then)

maybe we should do this:
summarize teams
finalize teams who are playing
give private forums

with a goal of private forums by the end of the month

Mark is the one who will start up the forums.. so we are not the only ones responsible for things, we might ask for private forums Nov30, and then won't get them until Dec30

JM

[OPD]

Nah, wait at least a month before doing anything at all.

Then see what teams are around, just cos a team says it's set to play now doesn't mean it'll still be around in a few months time. Also you'd expect at least 2-3 more teams will be started, there are loads of people who'd be interested in a game like this who haven't been heard from yet.

Then you need to look at the teams and how many members each has and decide how many teams will be playing. For ptwdg2 it was 5 but for this game I'd say a team would have to have at least 10 members to be considered a serious team, otherwise you end up with teams with just one guy who plays the save as if it were a pbem.

[binTravkin]

I'd say a team would have to have at least 10 members to be considered a serious team

AC team qualifies!
..and is expected to grow to double the number during the next month.

[Jon Miller]

Vox started with 5

I would say that 5 is fine

JM

[Jon Miller]

I know that I personally would prefer not too many more then 10

JM

[Krill]

there should be no upper limit on the amount of people in a team...but there should be a lower limit.

i've played a demogame where there were only two members on my team. While playing the game and making decisions was really easy, the players burn out way too easily.

Replacements are needed, and as such, I would suggest that 10 players is the absolute minimum.

[Beta]

Originally posted by Krill
there should be no upper limit on the amount of people in a team...but there should be a lower limit.

i've played a demogame where there were only two members on my team. While playing the game and making decisions was really easy, the players burn out way too easily.

Replacements are needed, and as such, I would suggest that 10 players is the absolute minimum.

I would argue against that. Vox played the first ptwdg with a core of 5 players and other than the noob mistakes we made , the team was functional and timely.

I don't think there is one set formula that works. Nor one team size. Each team is different, as are the team dynamics. That is one of the additional points of interest in a demo game IMHO.

[Golden Bear]

It seems to me that, looking from the outside since I used to be associated with a large team, that the folks on the 2 and 1 person teams may have missed a lot in the game. Part of the demo fun seems to be harassing each other about how the turn is going to go and fun stuff like that - that makes it a demo game.

I believe that I am supporting Krill on this.

Perhaps a lower threshold of ~5 people on a team would be good? We know that one-half to three-quarters of the team tunes out fairly quickly.

Upper limit should be pretty much open... but I think lower should have a limit.

CB