The Glory of War - Page 5

korn469 · November 8, 2002, 19:47

Quote:

Also i think King/prince/lord should decide what they want to build. And the Empiror/highking/ruler should be able to override production when the Empire is at war. (maby not in pease times tho.)

but since we are a warmonger team we are likely to virtually always be at war and that would give the emperor quite a bit of power

i don't think the emperor should have the power to overrule a king, but how about this

Gf is emperor and our is in a desperate situation, we need garrisons for the front asap, but i'm being stubborn and i decide instead of building a rifleman i'm going to work on the theory of evolution, so the emperor could call for a vote on the build queue but he has to specify before the vote what they are going to change the build to, in this case it would be a rifleman and then we have the vote, how does that sound?

Donegeal · November 8, 2002, 19:57

Quote:

Originally posted by korn469
i don't think the emperor should have the power to overrule a king...

Why? Do you think it gives the Ruler to much power? Call a vote of No-Con and propose someone else take the throne. Claim an abuse of power and give examples. If the other players agree, the No-Con would go through and the Ruler would be deposed. The No-Con vote is the perfect check of power given to the Ruler. It can be called at anytime for any reason. It will keep any ruler in line.

GhengisFarb™ · November 8, 2002, 19:57

Here's what I'm thinking, there could be a peerage of ranks like:
Elected ranks
Emperor Rex (the elected president)
High King (Faction leader - of a group of High Kings- Saxon, Gaelic, etc)
Minister (Foreign Affairs, Economy, etc.)

Player ranks:
King/Prince
Duke/Count
Baron/Lord

(Two sets with the first being a land owner, the second a non land owner-Merchant Princes, etc)

The Higher rank has more rights. The only way to overide a King's Build Queu is by a majority vote of the King's Coiuncil. A Baron's build queu is simply a suggestion and can be overridden on a whim.

If a player refuses to cooperate for the good of the empire the Nobility can vote to demote him, taking away his power.

JUST a musing.

I have no problem with Donegal being the first leader.

$MiniGame Ideas
Similiar to the Civ3 version only the cities are included. When it starts players will be divided up into racial factions with each faction receiving a city (the Capital is ALWAYS neutral and the resource of the Emperor Rex).

Until the Faction has enough cities for all of its King's the faction will operate as a collective. At the point that it has enough cities, the faction's resources will be divided equally and cities assigned.

PRODUCTION:
Food - food, is consumed by the population of cities.
Shields - builiding supplies, used for construction.
Commerce - trade goods, used as a source of revenue.
Beakers - Enlightment, used to gained Prestige (helps in rise of rank?) - I can't think of a good idea for beakers.

korn469 · November 8, 2002, 19:58

Quote:

You obviously feel strongly about this. Why do you think this? I think a High King/Emperor can make a King do whatever he wants. Afterall, a City-King is a subornate in our game and should be able to be told what to do. He can act on his own until the High King tells him what to do.

if you give the emperor power to change a player's build queue on a whim then that power will probably be abused, also since we are going to be at war so often, an unrestrained emperor will have ample reasons to switch people's builds in the name of national security

we must limit and divide the power of our elected officials as much as possible so that one position doesn't dominate our team and so that there are more total positions available so more people can get involved

tell me why you think the position of emperor must be so powerful?

maybe instead of emperor we should change the name of the position to archduke, and change the name of all of the other elected positions to duke, then call the lower players barons, because that is more how it should operate, a group of powerful lords who have one that is first among them but is still on their same level, then you have a number of other lords who are on a lower level than the first group, but they still aren't completely beholden to the first group

korn469 · November 8, 2002, 20:02

Quote:

The No-Con vote is the perfect check of power given to the Ruler. It can be called at anytime for any reason. It will keep any ruler in line.

it may and it may not, plus there needs to be some safeguards so that it isn't a constant choice between tolerating minor abuses of power or bring down the whole government

Donegeal · November 8, 2002, 20:07

Quote:

Originally posted by korn469
tell me why you think the position of emperor must be so powerful?

As a warmongering State, we need to have a definatetive leader who has the power to direct the war on the fly. If we limit the Ruler, we hamper his ability to lead.

I am not trying to give him a lot of power assuming that I will be the first ruler, I don't want to be (as I am not a warmonger). I am doing it so he has the power available to make changes needed as soon as the situation arises.

Donegeal · November 8, 2002, 20:13

mIRC, Undernet. at #gloryofwar

Edit: RL... chat done...

korn469 · November 8, 2002, 21:08

Quote:

As a warmongering State, we need to have a definatetive leader who has the power to direct the war on the fly. If we limit the Ruler, we hamper his ability to lead.

this is also a democracy game, and as of right now there will be at least 9 other players on our team as well as the emperor...if the emperor is the coach, the quarter back, and the running backs then this isn't going to be that much fun for the other players

i wouldn't have any problems with making the emperor commander in chief and giving him full control of all military units, but he doesn't need to micromanage every little aspect of the game, we need something for the other players to do

here are the powers i think would work for the emperor

*commands all military units
*appoints ministers
*controls the capital
*plays the game
*if a player doesn't send in build orders the emperor can then set the build queue for that player's city that the player can't change without the emperors permission...the build queue goes back to the player's control when that item finishes
*can call for a vote to change any build queue to something the emperor desires
*takes over any city in civil disorder

then divide up the rest of the functions among the ministers and the lords, would that work for you?

GhengisFarb™ · November 8, 2002, 21:23

Quote:

Originally posted by donegeal
Current Members:
1. Donegeal
2. UnOrthOdOx
3. Jdd2007
4. GhengisFarb
5. Aro
6. UberKruX
7. korn469
8. Panzer32
9. =OttomusCeasar=
10. Ennet

Wow, if we could steal Sir Ralph from TTA we'd pretty much have Apolytonia's Joint Chiefs of Staff. Where's Aggie?

Aggie · November 8, 2002, 22:53

I am close to a decison on which team to join it between this one and togas'. Hard decison, this might require the magic coin.

Aggie

Inverse Icarus · November 8, 2002, 23:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Aggie
I am close to a decison on which team to join it between this one and togas'. Hard decison, this might require the magic coin.

Aggie

you mean the loaded one? that always lands on heads? we call heads then,

GhengisFarb™ · November 8, 2002, 23:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Aggie
I am close to a decison on which team to join it between this one and togas'. Hard decison, this might require the magic coin.

Aggie

Come on, Aggie. You know you wanna join this one.

Donegeal · November 9, 2002, 01:32

Just because a person (the Ruler) has a power, doesn't mean he'll use it. I think the fear of pissing people off by using the override power will keep our ruler from using it to often. From my personel stand point (having been a Regional Administrator that was constantly overrode), I would get very upset and would demand reasons why the ruler chose my city and why he switched to what he did. If I was unhappy with his explanation, I would call a no-con vote almost immediately.

Let the Ruler have this power, I don't think he would use it much (Only for settlers, workers and the occasional military unit is all I see, and I don't think I would mind that that much because of the obviously positive impact on the empire and the fact that our units have to come from somewhere. Now if he always used my city for such things and let the other cities be, I would get pissed and call for a No-Con vote.).

UnOrthOdOx · November 9, 2002, 02:01

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
Here's a make-shift attempt at an icon (it sure is hard to make something that looks like anything that small).

It was supposed to be a banner with a crown, I'll try something else...........

looks better than mine made out of good ole Paint...

Donegeal · November 9, 2002, 02:53

Quote:

Originally posted by korn469

it may and it may not, plus there needs to be some safeguards so that it isn't a constant choice between tolerating minor abuses of power or bring down the whole government

That's just it, changing the Ruler doesn't bring down the government. Cities will continue to funtion as normal. The whogeewhatsits' of Internal, Military and Forgien Affairs will continue with out missing a step.

korn469 · November 9, 2002, 08:16

Quote:

Let the Ruler have this power, I don't think he would use it much

if this power if rarely going to be used then why shouldn't it be a vote to enforce the emperor's will instead of hi just doing whatever?

think about it, if the emperor asks a player to change his build and the player doesn't there must be a reason right? the emperor could still call for a vote to change the production and get his way without hurting any feelings, but what i worry is if the emperor can change a build queue at any time they might not even have the curtesy to ask, and they may in fact change the build queue without asking and then inform the king/lord of the city after the turn is over...that is the behavior that worries me, and putting a couple of limits on that behavior will encourage courtesy and diplomacy on the emperor's part, and ever without forcing a change simply by asking and giving a good reason why that should cover 99% of the situations, for that last 1% i say lets make it as fair as possible, and in my opinion that means putting it to a vote

Donegeal · November 9, 2002, 10:16

Quote:

Originally posted by korn469
think about it, if the emperor asks a player to change his build and the player doesn't there must be a reason right? the emperor could still call for a vote to change the production and get his way without hurting any feelings, but what i worry is if the emperor can change a build queue at any time they might not even have the curtesy to ask, and they may in fact change the build queue without asking and then inform the king/lord of the city after the turn is over...that is the behavior that worries me, and putting a couple of limits on that behavior will encourage courtesy and diplomacy on the emperor's part, and ever without forcing a change simply by asking and giving a good reason why that should cover 99% of the situations, for that last 1% i say lets make it as fair as possible, and in my opinion that means putting it to a vote

yessh... you really believe in democracy, don't you?

Why add needless beauracratic red tape to something that should be able to be done anyway? What you are proposing is exteremly inefficent.

Your right, the Ruler would be able to make changes and only tell you afterward. Its his call. Does an Emperor or High King need to ask a Count if he can do something? No. He just does it. The difference between real life feudal system and the system I propose is the No-Con vote. That Count would just have to take the unannounced change in the rear and be happy he's still a Count. With the No-Con, that Count can stand up for himself.

Lets put it another way. Lets say your the Ruler, and I'm a City-King. We are at war and we need Knights or Pike to continue the war efforts. I'm building a Courthouse in my city on the front. You want a Knight. Under my proposal, you make the change for the greater good of the empire. Under your proposal, you ask an underling if you can change something that you see as something needed for the empire (after all, it is the rulers job to guide the empire). I say no. Now you have to go to the polls to see if you can do you job of looking out for the greater good of the empire. Now imagine that its not just me. Imagine if there are four City-Kings who don't want to change. Look at all the red tape and posting that is going to be needed just to do something that you think is plainly obviously for the greater good of the empire, all the while we are losing out on stragety discussion. You are preventing yourself from doing your job.

Now lets look at it from a peaceful situation (or at least no pressing need ). Knowing that overriding a build pisses off City-Kings and could get you thrown out of office (at which time the build could be changed back anyway), would you use the override power?

=OttomusCeasar= · November 9, 2002, 10:56

Quote:

Originally posted by donegeal
Knowing that overriding a build pisses off City-Kings and could get you thrown out of office (at which time the build could be changed back anyway), would you use the override power?

I can think of at least one member in the Civ3 Democracy game that would. There ARE people who ignore rules and the opinion of others, it would be nice to develop a "perfect" system that holds them in check but I'm not sure that's possible.

GF- I think your crown icon is the best so far. (No offense, UnOthOdOx)

Oh, and have we decided on a Civ yet? The Chinese sound okay, but the Scandinavian have an early amphibious unit, and Spain's Conquistidors have an adequate attack value while being able to move SIX TILES in one turn! (I can't get over that, that's a lotta distance)

Ennet · November 9, 2002, 15:13

Ok I think donegal has right in this case the Empiror should be able to override the Kings and change production. Motivation: 1) The Empiror is responsible for the empire and it's he that will lead our armies in battle, it's he who plays it and he will have the best overlook etc. If something is needed fast he must be able to react quick, not having to wait for a lot off polls.
2) If we're going by a feudal system we are going by a feudal system and not some kind of republic, for the fun of the game there might be some restrictions to his poers - yes, but we should go as close to a feudal system we can without spoiling anything.
But if we cant agree then we might just make a poll about it.

Ohh and I think Arabs is quite nice, their UU is fast and cheap..
And yes donegal i think you can tell MarkG you're our leader (lnot necesarry Empiror tho) as you are the founder when it comes to it..

UnOrthOdOx · November 9, 2002, 16:22

Quote:

Originally posted by =OttomusCeasar=

I can think of at least one member in the Civ3 Democracy game that would. There ARE people who ignore rules and the opinion of others, it would be nice to develop a "perfect" system that holds them in check but I'm not sure that's possible.

Hey!!! I never ignored the rules as VP, I just kinda bent them or made new ones to my liking...what, the last four amendments, and one official poll allowing a bending of the executive office were all submitted by me? (Yeah, I know, you may not have been talking about me...at least I hope you werent...)

Quote:

GF- I think your crown icon is the best so far. (No offense, UnOthOdOx)

I agree. And heraldrically (if that is a word...using heralry), it means the devine purpose of bringing rule/truth through might, (or thereabouts crown = divine, colors = military and rule/truth)

=OttomusCeasar= · November 9, 2002, 16:41

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
Hey!!! I never ignored the rules as VP, I just kinda bent them or made new ones to my liking...what, the last four amendments, and one official poll allowing a bending of the executive office were all submitted by me? (Yeah, I know, you may not have been talking about me...at least I hope you werent...)

Wasn't talking about you, but now that you mention it....

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
I agree. And heraldrically (if that is a word...using heralry), it means the devine purpose of bringing rule/truth through might, (or thereabouts crown = divine, colors = military and rule/truth)

Official proposal:

"The Divine mandate to go forth and kick the arse of all other races, who in his infinite wisdom were created our inferiors by the Lord Almighty (a diety yet to be established), to teach them with our superior intellect and inspire them to (although its impossible) attempt to attain our most glorious level of perfection."

Oops, forgot the last bit:

"with all humility."

Donegeal · November 9, 2002, 17:59

Quote:

Originally posted by =OttomusCeasar=
"The Divine mandate to go forth and kick the arse of all other races, who in his infinite wisdom were created our inferiors by the Lord Almighty (a diety yet to be established), to teach them with our superior intellect and inspire them to (although its impossible) attempt to attain our most glorious level of perfection."

I

this! I would almost say go with the bannor and crown right now but I/m still waiting for Aro's Icon (should have it by Monday).
About the "with all humility" thing... screw it. Kill'em All

Donegeal · November 9, 2002, 18:09

Quote:

Originally posted by =OttomusCeasar=
I can think of at least one member in the Civ3 Democracy game that would. There ARE people who ignore rules and the opinion of others, it would be nice to develop a "perfect" system that holds them in check but I'm not sure that's possible.

Ok, say that this person ended up in power and was our Ruler. Now he goes about changing builds and queues without telling people. What happens? The City-Kings get pissed call for a No-Con vote and dispose of him. The Kings may all now change their builds and Queues back to what they had. Problem solved. I honestly think the abuse of power will most likely come from the City-King side. Threatening the Emperor and whogeewhatsits Ministers with No-Con votes if they do anything that isn't wanted. I guess the agrument against that will be the fact that just because a No-Con was called, doesn't mean that the government official will get deposed. Agruments will get hashed out in the No-Con thread.

Ennet · November 9, 2002, 18:16

We should have a chat on mIRC i think. Apolyton server #gloryofwar tomorrow 13:00 CEST (CEST = GMT + 1) or any other time.. for thoose of you who can make it, it would be nice to have a chat

EDIT: Should our team name be "The Glory of War" or we going to have another one? If so, what? Any suggesions?

Donegeal · November 9, 2002, 18:36

No fair! I was just going to post a time schedual!

One vote for 1200 GMT (

I think most of the team is in the states and that might be a bit early for some).

1400 GMT (8 AM CST, this gets my vote)
1500 GMT
1600 GMT
1700 GMT
1800 GMT
1900 GMT
2000 GMT

1200 GMT is too early for me (still at work), but 1400 on might be doable. Just remember that I usually go to sleep when I get home from work.

These are just suggestions, put out a different time that will work for each of you and will try to get one that works for most.

Ennet · November 9, 2002, 18:38

ok 14:00GMT is fine by me

GhengisFarb™ · November 9, 2002, 21:49

Quote:

Originally posted by =OttomusCeasar=
"The Divine mandate to go forth and kick the arse of all other races, who in his infinite wisdom were created our inferiors by the Lord Almighty (a diety yet to be established), to teach them with our superior intellect and inspire them to (although its impossible) attempt to attain our most glorious level of perfection."

Oops, forgot the last bit:

"with all humility."

Heck, I don't want to try making another icon now.

So we're talking at 8:00 am CST?

Donegeal · November 10, 2002, 03:00

Yes, 8:00 AM Central Standard Time. I think there might only be three people there....

I will send out PM's to all team members.

By the way, has anyone seen Panzer? You think that Panzer would be easy to find, but I guess its like that joke: Did you see the elephant hiding in the tree? No? Pretty good spot, huh?

Server: Apolyton.net
Room:#civ3gloryofwar

If the PM I sent you said something different, umm... sorry. This post is the correct location.

Aro · November 10, 2002, 07:55

I'll be absent for one month.

See details here. I'm working on the logo, and tomorrow I'll post it to donegeal or in this thrad. You can put me out of the team, if you want to, because I'll have any use for a long time...

Ennet · November 10, 2002, 09:11

too bad, but i guess this game will go on for some time tho..