How do you feel about starting a new Warlords Team DG?

[Locutus]

Originally posted by E_T
I mean that it's a real addiction for me and that If it was real (like AA is for alcoholics) that I would be a member....

E_T

I was jokingly implying that it does in fact exist, I go to meetings at my local chapter every Tuesday!

[E_T]

I know, but there are people who don't. I had even quit for about 1 year, just because it was becoming a huge obsession and I was also getting massively burned out. It was a factor (one of many) in my Partner of 8.5 years and I to break up.

I don't really want that to happen to anyone.

E_T

[Metaliturtle]

Heres how I see it:

A lot of the people who want this game were SPDG people who've realized that the SPDG is won.

The people forming the Warlords game are willing to put forth the time for it 1v1 cutthroat style.

Some people (like me) are involved in all of the DGs, but would like to be more active participants, but analysis (like mine) just doesn't stack up to the pros (like Blake) who may be on our team.

This game creates new teams, meaning all kinds of new and different ways to run a team as well as an ability to swap notes among DGers because of the melding of old team divisions.

A Warlords game allows (lazy) players (like me) to not have to keep two discs handy for standard Civvin'.

More CIV = Better because Less CIV = Worse

Current DG teams don't actively recruit members very often, it is hard for a newbie to determine what a DG is at all, not to mention whether or not they want to join a team.

Finally, people who don't have/don't want to have Warlords will still play (you guessed it) the original DG.

[Maniac]

A DG shouldn't have more than four teams, and should be played at small map size at most, with some AIs thrown in. Anything bigger will cause the game to be slow and inactive.

[CerberusIV]

I want this to happen. Right now the "I don't want it in case it slows down the DG I am in" option seems to be winning. Not a surprise given the poll is in this forum. But just stop and think for a second before you deliver a kneejerk reaction and try and kill this "threat" off.

A cutthroat Warlords Team DG will only have an adverse effect on other DG's if -

a) it takes away new recruits from those games - well, how many new recruits are you getting anyway?

b) some of the players in existing games abandon them - in which case how committed were they?

c) some players in existing games burn out by taking on too many DG's - there have been warnings posted in this thread and it's THEIR choice, not yours. If you don't trust your fellow DG'ers not to overcommit you're not showing them much respect.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
I want this to happen. Right now the "I don't want it in case it slows down the DG I am in" option seems to be winning.

Actually, it's not. It got 5-6 votes in the first 2 hours or so but has been stable ever since, suggesting that that might be all the opposition there is (but we'll see about that in a week or so). If the 20 people who signed up for the DG in the other thread would vote here they would dominate the poll. But then they do have to vote: if they don't that's a signal to us that either they don't care very much or they're very, very slow in responding, both signs that this game would never really get off the ground anyway.

[James]

I would have voted, but this style of game has now been set up already for those that want to play.

http://www.civgaming.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=81

[conmcb25]

Paddy all Im saying is that if we have too many demo games going, none of them will have the input necessary to be "good demo games", as others have mentioned, folks will burn out and not participate and then all you have essentially ia another PBEM in an overglorified forum

With that being said, if you guys have some type of smaller theme demogame in mind, that would take less players, then more power to you. Im just worried the game we are in will get diluted, thats all, no finger pointing intended. Good luck

[Paddy]

Originally posted by conmcb25
Paddy all Im saying is that if we have too many demo games going, none of them will have the input necessary to be "good demo games", as others have mentioned, folks will burn out and not participate and then all you have essentially ia another PBEM in an overglorified forum

With that being said, if you guys have some type of smaller theme demogame in mind, that would take less players, then more power to you. Im just worried the game we are in will get diluted, thats all, no finger pointing intended. Good luck

I got one pub with 3 bars downstairs and 2 bars upstairs

then in the other pub we only got one long bar

different pubs

in different locations

yet we see the same people at both pubs occasionally

now should I only have one bar in each pub?

would not want to wear them out walking between now struth they need the exercise and the perve

long and the short of it, it's a game

and we will have fun

[RobWorham]

Now that's an analogy!!!

[Beta]

Originally posted by Paddy the Scot


I got one pub with 3 bars downstairs and 2 bars upstairs

then in the other pub we only got one long bar

different pubs

in different locations

yet we see the same people at both pubs occasionally

now should I only have one bar in each pub?

But if you had three pubs, one with one bar upstairs and two down, the second with a long bar ustairs and a short one down, and the third with a long winding staircase to an outside patio :

1. where would the cheapest beer be?

2. where would be your best chance of getting a 'date' for the night?

[N35t0r]

And:

3. How many beers would I need to buy to make the trip from Argentina worwhile?

[Chuckman]

Originally posted by James
I would have voted, but this style of game has now been set up already for those that want to play.

http://www.civgaming.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=81

This poll and conversation may be moot considering the above link.

I have voted in favor of a forum for the Warlords game here at Apolyton.

What little time I have for these activities I devote to the C4SPDG. Once that game is complete I may or may not focus on another game.

10 of the 19 people that had signed up for the Warlords game I have seen spend significant time in the C4SPDG at one time or another. I respect them for that. If their passion lies in a Warlords game they will have one. I hope it is here at Apolyton.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Paddy the Scot


I got one pub with 3 bars downstairs and 2 bars upstairs

then in the other pub we only got one long bar

different pubs

in different locations

yet we see the same people at both pubs occasionally

now should I only have one bar in each pub?

would not want to wear them out walking between now struth they need the exercise and the perve

long and the short of it, it's a game

and we will have fun

Maybe Ill stop by one of the bars and have a pint or three

Is miccofl still active over there? I haven't talked to him in ages.

Anyway good luck with your game

[notyoueither]

Let them play.

I have to say that some of the arguments against don't sit well with me. I can see the point of not wanting to stifle existing projects on the site, but I can't agree with the solution. I would say that the advent of new expansions and entire new releases and other entirely different games does far more to reduce interest in existing games than the existence of other, newer civ demo games (within reason).

Furthermore, the prospect of smaller, dedicated teams that meet for a shorter game intrigues me. It could be the start of a new sort of game that could bring and hold civers far more effectively than the next 'let's include Canada as a civ' thread.

Imagine a number of 'teams' who come together for shorter contests. Say Blood Oath Horde challenged Gathering Storm to a 1v1. Why couldn't GS play that game while engaged in a larger epic contest with 7 other teams?

There could be some gripping contests here.

I think it would be good for the players, for this site, and for the game. So let it be so.