Democracy vs. Dictatorship

[Locutus]

1. Our community is probably too small to have more than 1 demo game. Let's first see if 1 demo team can succeed (if several people step out to become despots, that already makes it a lot harder to keep the rest of the team going).

2. Intelligence and contra-intelligence would far too much invite to break the rules of this site. I and certainly Markos and Dan would not be too happy with that.

[finch7]

I know it was my idea. but if it results in the game becoming online only then I'll be against it.

How do ctp2 demo games with multiple democratic (human) civs stop spying on each other without the game being online only?

Also I noticed some regular and v. experienced people volunteering for the despots. Do we want that much of a challenge for the fiest game?

[lunger75]

How 'bout we keep it simple to begin with,
then if the demo game proves popular we
can get innovative with the next one.
Assuming there is a next one.

[Frozzy]

I'm going to be open and honest. Unless you can get another 25 people into this game, then you will not get this game off the ground. You need 20 per team AT LEAST to get a good PBEM DG.

If you all want a PBEM, fine by me. This game will not get off the ground.

You need a lot of people for a DG. And to be honest, there are only about 5 of us with any DG experiance.

Get fancy with the next one when everyone has DG experiance. Add to that, there are around 5-7 of this community who have no MP experiance. Let this be their opputunity to learn from the CtP vets, like Birdy, Quinns, BunnyXpert and Locutus.

If you don't know what you're doing, or don't have the experiance, you'll get no-where.

We can mod the AI. There are worse AIs than CtP, yet they've gone ahead Single Player and have made it an utter success. The Civ II DG is on it's second game, and they're still having heaps of fun with it.

You won't all agree with my views, but those are my views and I hope you all take the time to read them and maybe accept them.

[Frozzy]

Originally posted by Locutus
2. Intelligence and contra-intelligence would far too much invite to break the rules of this site. I and certainly Markos and Dan would not be too happy with that.

This would break the DL rule of the site. And the spam rule. And the common sense rule. And the...

Basically, we'd all get an all-expenses paid trip to Markos' toaster.

[geoffrey arnold]

I agree with Frozzy I love that new name

[quinns]

Alright. I'm with Frozzy, Locutus, and H Tower then, because they know DG. I vote for: no despots, toughest a/i possible, and online game. I don't want to split this game up.

[Frozzy]

I vote for: ONE TEAM, toughest a/i possible.

With the size of our community, if you have 2 teams:

YOU WILL FAIL.

I am honest. Online can only happen at certain times. What If I'm the leader of Team A, and Locutus is the leader of team B? We can't play because of our time difference.

PBEM = SLOW!

Monkey1, the first CtP PBEM game on Poly is still around, and we're no where near finishing. All except one person have been replaced. Thats 8 people.

Try getting 2 communities of people to all agree on one goal. We'll still be playing this in 2009.


We either play single player, or we die.

Your choice.

[TheBirdMan]

Originally posted by Frozzy
I vote for: ONE TEAM, toughest a/i possible.

....

Try getting 2 communities of people to all agree on one goal. We'll still be playing this in 2009.


We either play single player, or we die.

Your choice.

Then I think you misunderstood.

1 community (the democracy) and one or two single human players (the dictators). Rest AIs.

[J Bytheway]

Originally posted by Frozzy
PBEM = SLOW!

I'm not sure what I think of this idea, but I will say that PBEM would not actually be nearly so slow as you might think. Assuming that the despots are online at the same time as the turn chat, and there are only 1 or 2 of them, they will have both played and sent the turn by the time the discussion has finished. I've played PBEM games (with 2 players) at 5 mins per turn before, and I'm sure the first CTP2 turnchat went slower than that.

You just have to ensure that the despots are dedicated enough to be around for every turnchat, or they get switched to AI control.

[checkMate]

I think I am with J. Batheway here. The Despots we have heard from are ..... well responsible Despots. They would be able to show up for PBEM (or on-line) turnchat. But I'm not sure what the advantage of PBEM vs on-line is. Seems to be about the same any way if it was scheduled.

[J Bytheway]

If you plan to play with a mod, PBEM is much more stable (online games with mods do wierd things), and also it's easier to occupy oneself between your turns (and it would be a pretty slow turn rate for an online game). OTOH online allows people to progress with their civs during the other turns, and would probably be faster over all.

The main reason not to play online, however, is that some people cannot, and this would preclude their election as president.

[Locutus]

Good points, J.

Although, after having given this idea some more thought, I agree with Frozzy that it would probably be best to do a tried-and-true SP game first and only start with experimental things in the second game...

[Andrew29229]

I vote a simple SP game with the hardest AI possible. Maybe, later, we could do a PBEM DG with another community?

[TheBirdMan]

I will not be a reason to endless discussions - so I (try to) keep quiet and watch.

After all, I have never participated in any democracy games before.