1BC Civ Forums / Civilization IV Discussion / 1BC CivIV BTS Multi Team Battle / Town Square / Dgame Archive / 1BC DGame at 1BC / Latest Posts

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:44:42 GMT

[quote]I just see all kinds of issues in the game's future of dragging down because so many people have to agree and wheel-and-deal just to get anything done with the dispersion of so much responsibility.[/quote]

-The way I devised the system excludes almost any form of buerauchratic slow down of the game.

-The Emperor can do whatever he wants to, though he would most likely need help to do this. The many titles that he can grant people and his control over a city and an army gives him plenty of power to do things himself, though.
-The Senate will be ruled by a simple majority voting. 4-5 votes means the 5 vote side wins. Senators can own land and gain more land, thereby gaining more votes. This means that Senators will want to gain more land, thereby gaining more power to get their suggestions through.
-Governors have almost complete control over their cities which means that there'll be little slow down here.
-The Tribune is also ruled by a simple majority voting.

-The new feature of gaining land is what drives the Emperor Game. If you can start off as Governor, gain land, appoint yourself Senator and influence the senate and so on people will be more involved over time as they can gain more and more over time.

[quote]Then the others are left scrambling to fulfill that person's responsibilities that they took on.[/quote]

-The Emperor's ability to appoint Promagistrates to fill vacant positions means that this will be avoidable most times. Also, most positions are expendable, meaning it doesn't halt the game if someone's away for some time.

[quote]There is some fun in working with others in small nuances within the game, but let's face it, there's generally one broad path to victory that veterans of the game know and we all tend to follow...albeit with some minor variations at certain points. So just to play a game together gets tedious...especially considering the time frame involved.[/quote]

-That's why I've added alot of new inscentives, such as land ownership amongst other things. Also, since cIV has just come out there won't be too many veterans..... hopefully. The much more dynamic features in cIV, as opposed to Civ III, will also make the game a bit less predictable I hope.

-The two citizenships, Plebian and Patrician are there so that if you are removed from your position you don't start from scratch, so to speak.

---------------------------------------------

-I'm looking for some comments to the mechanics of my setup if anyone has anything.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

HistoryDude — Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:24:12 GMT

[quote]The weak point of any previous DGame is that it's appeal fades over time and that is due to the fact that noone benefits from being President or Minister over a long period of time.[/quote]

Just popped over to catch up on this progress and I have to say I respectfully disagree with this statement, Roadkill, which is why I'm not particularly in favor of this Emporer system. This is an impressive system and sounds uber cool, but there are two reasons that DGames fail over time. One is because they're so administratively cumbersome. I fear this system is overly complex and quite weighty. I just see all kinds of issues in the game's future of dragging down because so many people have to agree and wheel-and-deal just to get anything done with the dispersion of so much responsibility. And the other main reason DGames stall is that people are just busy in real life. If we had a nickel for all the people who went gung-ho, guns blazing into a DGame and then just watch them drop the ball a short time later or fizzle out, we'd all be rich. Then the others are left scrambling to fulfill that person's responsibilities that they took on. Its not that they're slackers (although that could be it, too), but they have other things they have to do in life. The less positions you have to rely on, the better.

Some one made a comment about how the game itself is not necessarily the fun part...but what goes on around it. I have to agree. I can simply play the game on my own. There is some fun in working with others in small nuances within the game, but let's face it, there's generally one broad path to victory that veterans of the game know and we all tend to follow...albeit with some minor variations at certain points. So just to play a game together gets tedious...especially considering the time frame involved. The fun part comes in all the role play activities and commaraderie while engaged in anything from politics, to the newspapers, to the businesses, to the sports leagues, etc! That's the appeal of the DGames to me, at least.

Having said all that, I won't be up for joining a cIV DGame until well into January when I've had some time to play the game myself (won't get it until Christmas). And until I'm able to play it, I can't offer any suggestion on how to style a government based on the uniqueness of cIV gameplay, other than to advise....Keep It Simple!

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:50:33 GMT

[quote]I think the idea of senators (owning) military units is not relevant. I think it would be better to give the senate power as a whole to sign a declaration of war at the emporers request allowing him to mobilize.[/quote]

-If the Senate owns a large portion of the military forces the Emperor will be more reliant on them.

[quote]
Lets say the emporer declares war on a neighbor and half the senate approves. Under the (owning) policy they could hold out there units legally, seriously limiting our ability to wage war. Since most likely no ones ever going to do that anyway its really either way well irrelevant. I think maybe having a Senate Military Committee that decides on things like; next unit to be built, where forces should be stationed, ect..., may be a good job for the senate (militarily).[/quote]

-I didn't quite understand this example but I'll comment on what I can. A individual Senator does not own a unit. All units granted a senator from a governor is under Senate jurisdiction, not a Senator.
-The ability to gain land makes Senators want to wage war more often. Since land ownership increases a Senators votes the Senate will likely want to claim more land to gain more power.
-I've been involved in multiple DGames and one thing I've noticed is the fact that having too many institutions makes for a poor game(As do too few). A military Committee would just complicate things, make it more dull and slow down the game.

[quote]As far as Governors (owning) military units I think it would be good to have a militia garrison in each city that the emporer can not mobilize without permission from the Governor. This gives each city the power to defend itself.[/quote]

-The entire point of this setup that I've created is to dilute powerbases. The way the Governor position is now will give Governors more of a say. If you all of a sudden restrict positions too much and place intermediaries it will hurt the game. Positions must be to some point autonomous in a sense, not requiring any outside power to move along.

[quote]I also think the citizenry should elect Governors, Senators and the Emporer, then let these officials appoint their ministers (or whatever we want to call them).[/quote]

-No, no, no. If Citizens and citizens alone elect officials then everything just becomes pointless. The reason why I don't want citizens to have much of a say in the matter is because in the end it's those who hold power who are important. If none of them have to rely on each other then there's no point. The weak point of any previous DGame is that it's appeal fades over time and that is due to the fact that noone benefits from being President or Minister over a long period of time. Senators and Governors can hold land and their power can grow through time and this will only help to strengthen the appeal of the game, especially for the participants.

[quote]When the game starts all citizens are with the first settler. Once the Capital is established an Emporer is elected by the citizenry and all Citizens live in the Capital city. As we expand the Emporer appoints interum Governors. Citizens can move to any city they choose at any time unless they hold a high office. Only citizens within a city can vote on local elections, etc.. There's more depth to this idea but I want to see if you guys think it's a good idea first.[/quote]

-First, the logistics of this would be too complicated. There would not be any inscentive to move either. The general idea would be to vague and unmanagable. The person playing a citizen would not feel in touch with the game and it would in the end fail. This may seem harsh but it's the truth. I've explored such an idea myself several times.

-----------------------------------------

-My setup is designed to have continous appeal for those involved due to the prospect of gain, to support both a large and small number of people, decentralize power and create internal rivalry.

-The Quaestor title can be granted to an unlimited amount of people, as can the Praetor title and Senator position. The Emperor and Magister Equitum positions can only be held by one person at a time, as can the Princeps Senatus. The Censor title has a limited term and there can only be two censors at on time. The Promagistrate title is there in case someone unexpectedly disappears and someone needs to take their place. The Consul title can be held by only one person at a time.

-Titles are added to give the Emperor more leverage, the Senators hold power through land, Governors ultimately decide what should be produced and the Tribune is the institution that holds them all in a leash, through the Emperor. I've been constantly playing with the different positions, titles and everything else to make sure it works well and I'm sure I'm getting close. All that is needed is some tweaking as to certain particulars that will be solved once everything else is in place.

-I appreciate the feedback.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Warlord — Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:18:36 GMT

I think these ideas are very good and would like to add a couple arguments.

I think the idea of senators (owning) military units is not relevant. I think it would be better to give the senate power as a whole to sign a declaration of war at the emporers request allowing him to mobilize.

EXAMPLE= Lets say the emporer declares war on a neighbor and half the senate approves. Under the (owning) policy they could hold out there units legally, seriously limiting our ability to wage war. Since most likely no ones ever going to do that anyway its really either way well irrelevant. I think maybe having a Senate Military Committee that decides on things like; next unit to be built, where forces should be stationed, ect..., may be a good job for the senate (militarily).

As far as Governors (owning) military units I think it would be good to have a militia garrison in each city that the emporer can not mobilize without permission from the Governor. This gives each city the power to defend itself.

I also think the citizenry should elect Governors, Senators and the Emporer, then let these officials appoint their ministers (or whatever we want to call them). I have an idea for citizens to have a hometown so you guys let me know what you think:

When the game starts all citizens are with the first settler. Once the Capital is established an Emporer is elected by the citizenry and all Citizens live in the Capital city. As we expand the Emporer appoints interum Governors. Citizens can move to any city they choose at any time unless they hold a high office. Only citizens within a city can vote on local elections, etc.. There's more depth to this idea but I want to see if you guys think it's a good idea first.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Mon, 21 Nov 2005 06:14:10 GMT

1BC Civilization IV DGame

Revised Edition

Additions:
Tribune
Titles
Citizens
Votes
Elections

Revised:
Tribute
Institutions
Positions
Senator
Emperor

----------------------------------------
Positions
----------------------------------------

[u]Governor[/u]
The Governor controls one city. He controls production and citizens, as well as the units trained in that city.

The Military units controlled by the Governor are Militia. The Governor can use these units for defense or grant them to the Emperor(Temporarily or Permanently) for use in a Campaign.

The Governor must pay tribute to Senator who owns the land his city is located on.

A Governor, through the Governate, can bring forward a Vote of No Confidence towards a Senator to the Tribune.

[u]Senator[/u]
The Senator owns a land area. Any Governor who's city is loacted inside the Senator's land area must pay tribute to him.

A Senator can own Military units. The units owned by Senators are called the Senatorial Army. The Senate can use these units for defense or grant them to the Emperor(Temporarily) for use in a Campaign.

The Senate must pay tribute to the Tribune.

The Senate elect the Emperor and can bring forward a Vote of No Confidence towards him to the Tribune.

[u]Emperor[/u]
The Emperor is the Caesar and High Commander of the Army. The Emperor controls the Capitol and production, citizens and units trained in that city.

The Emperor, being the High Commander of the Army, is the only one who can start and end a Campaign.

The Emperor elects Governors and grants titles. He also divides gained land amongst those who can lay claim to it.

----------------------------------------
Titles
----------------------------------------

[u]Quaestor[/u]
An honorary title that can be granted to a Plebian by the Emperor. A person who holds this title is part of the Tribune, the assembly that elects and removes Senators from their position, act as the court and control the constitution.

[u]Consul[/u]
An honorary title that can be granted to a Patrician by the Emperor. A person who holds this title has a vote in the Senate.

[u]Praetor[/u]
An honorary title that can be granted to a Patrician by the Emperor. A person who holds this title is part of the Tribune, the assembly that elects and removes Senators from their positions, act as the court and control the constitution. A Praetor can admit proposals in the Tribune.

[u]Censor[/u]
An honorary title that can be granted to a Patrician and a Plebian by the Tribune and Citizens. A person who holds this title is part of the Tribune, the assembly that elects and removes Senators from their position, act as the court and control the constitution. The position can be held for 10 turns and the Censors(Two Censors) control the Tribune.

[u]Promagistrate[/u]
The Promagistrate is a temporary title that can be granted to a person by the Emperor. A person who holds this title temporarily siezes control of a city where a Governor is not present. A new Promagistrate must be elected every 4 turns.

[u]Princeps Senatus[/u]
The Princeps Senatus is the leader of the Senate and is granted to a member of the Senate by the Senators. Th Princeps Senatus has limited Veto rights and has an extra vote due to his position.

[u]Magister Equitum[/u]
The Magister Equitum is the Junior Emperor. He assumes power if the Emperor is not present or if he has been removed from his position. The Magister Equitum acts as Emperor when the Emperor is away or between the removal of an Emperor and the election of a new Emperor.

----------------------------------------
Citizens
----------------------------------------

[u]Plebians[/u]
Any new citizen is a Plebian. A Plebian can become a Quaestor, Censor, Governor or Senator.

[u]Patricians[/u]
A Patrician is a citizen who has served as Censor, Governor or Senator. He can become Quaestor, Consul, Praetor, Censor, Senator or Emperor.

----------------------------------------
Institutions
----------------------------------------

[u]Tribune[/u]
The Tribune is an assembly made up of Quaestors, Praetors and Censors. They form the legal body of the Empire, writing laws, deciding on impeachments and election and removal or Senators. The Tribune also sponsors Imperial Campaigns and rushing of city production, and decide the amount used on Research and Entertainment.

[u]Senate[/u]
The Senate is an assembly made up of Senators and Consuls. They form the body that decides internal and external policies. They also control workers.

[u]Governate[/u]
The Governate is an assembly made up of Governors. They form the body that controls cities and their production.

[u]Imperative[/u]
The Imperative, i.e the Emperor is the ruling body of the nation. Only the Emperor can start and end Campaigns. He also divides gained land and elects and removes Governors.

----------------------------------------
Land
----------------------------------------

Land is represented by the tiles in which the Civilization IV map is divided.

When land is gained through peaceful expansion(Settling a new city or cultural expansion) the Emperor elects a Governor to control that city. Depending on how much land was gained it is either granted to neighbouring Senators or a new Senator is instated(Elected by the Tribune).

When land is gained through conquest the land is divided by participation. The Governors and Senators that had armies participating have a claim on the land gained. Land gained by a person is proportional to how many units he contributed.

Example: 10 units in the army. The Senator contributed 2. The Senator claims 20%. If the gain was ten tiles he will receive 2 tiles.

Governors and Senators can gain land. The Senator simply controls the new land as he has the rest. The Governor must grant a senator temporary control of the land. If the Governor is demoted(Not re-elected, retires) he can name himself Senator of the land he holds.

The Emperor cannot gain land but once demoted(Not re-elected, retires) he is granted land or control of a city and can choose to be either a Governor or a Senator.

Land can be traded amongst Senators and Governors at will for any reason(Tribute, support, etc.).

----------------------------------------
Votes
----------------------------------------

[u]Senate[/u]
In the Senate each Senator has one default vote. With the exception of the Consul no other person can vote in the Senate. The Emperor has limited Veto rights but has no voting rights.

Each senator once elected is offered a 9 tile land area. A Senator who holds 10 tiles has two votes, while a Senator who holds 15 tiles has three votes and so on.

[u]Tribune[/u]
The Tribune is made up of two Censors, Quaestors and Praetors.

The two Censors are elected every ten turns and no person can be elected to times in a row. One Censor is elected by the Tribune, while the other is elected by Citizens. The Censors are the Supreme Judges, have two votes each and can veto any proposal as long as both Censors agree. One Censor must be a Plebian and one must be a Patrician.

The Quaestors are Plebian citizens that have been accepted into the Tribune. The Quaestor only has the right to vote in the Tribune and is the lowest title in the tribune.

The Praetors are Patrician citizens that have been accepted into the Tribune. The Praetor has the right to vote on and to admit a proposal.

The Emperor has no Veto Rights but has one vote.

Governate
The Governate is made up of the Governors.

The Emperor has no Veto rights and no voting rights.

Governors have one vote each.

----------------------------------------
Elections
----------------------------------------

[u]Governor[/u]
A Governor is elected by the Emperor. The Governor holds his position until he is removed by the Emperor or retires.

[u]Senator[/u]
A Senator is elected by the Tribune. A Senator holds his position until a Vote of No Confidence towards him is successful, the Tribune removes him or he retires.

[u]Emperor[/u]
An Emperor is elected by the Senate. An Emperor holds his position until a Vote of No Confidence towards him is successful or he retires. Only Patricians can be elected Emperor.

[u]Quaestor[/u]
A Plebian can be elected Quaestor by the Emperor. The Questor holds his position until the Emperor removes him or he retires.

[u]Praetor[/u]
A Patrician can be elected Quaestor by the Emperor. The Praetor holds his position until the Emperor removes him or he retires.

[u]Consul[/u]
A Patrician can be elected Consul by the Emperor. The Patrician holds his position until the Emperor removes him or he retires.

[u]Censor[/u]
There are at all times two Censors. One Patrician can be elected by the Tribune and one Plebian can be elected by the Citizens. Each Censor can hold his position for 10 turns. Being elected Censor two times in a row is not allowed.

[u]Princeps Senatus[/u]
The Princeps Senatus is elected by the Senate. He holds his position for 10 turns.

[u]Promagistrate[/u]
A Promagistrate can be elected by the Emperor. He holds his position for 4 turns.Being elected Promagistrate of a city two times in a row is not allowed.

[u]Magister Equitum[/u]
A Magister Equitum can be elected by the Emperor, but must be accepted by the Senate. He holds his position until the Emperor removes him, the Emperor is removed or retires, or he retires.

----------------------------------------
Tribute
----------------------------------------

[u]Governors[/u]
All Governors must pay tribute to the Senator who owns the land their city is located on.

Tribute may come in the form of Gold, Units and/or Land.

[u]Senators[/u]
The Senate must pay tribute to the Tribune.

Tribute may come in the form of Gold.

----------------------------------------
******************************
----------------------------------------

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Mon, 21 Nov 2005 02:40:44 GMT

[quote]How is the Senate supposed to get a military?[/quote]

-The Senators attain soldiers through tribute, land trade and so on. The thing with the Senators is that their soldiers form the Senatorial Army, and this as a whole is usually much larger than any other army. This means that the Emperor will most likely speak to the Senate in order to get their support for a Campaign(War, basically). The partition of the army into Militia, Senatorial Army and Imperial Guard means that power is spread out and people need each other. I'm working on a more detailed tribute system.

[quote]The beginning of the game. This is the time when I percieve the government will have the most time working itself out.[/quote]

-Yes, I saw this as an issue early on but I'm content to ignore it actually. As with any new civilization they do not have everything ready once they start and I though that the imperative could be replaced by some sort of Tibal council until the second or third city is built(I'm thinking of cutting Imperial cities to one). A council of 5 people for example who decide what to do until the civilization is large enough to implement the Imperative.

[quote]wouldn't it give the emperor position more attraction to have him play the game, especially when he controls offensive Campaigns?[/quote]

-Yes, that's one thing I'll change. When I first implemented the Game Master it was for a completely different design but as the design changed the Game Master didn't. But yes, the Emperor can play the game. I would recommend a Scribe though. A person with asisstants writing reports and so on for the Government and people.

[quote]One thing i dont like about it though is that either the election or the tribute system, not both, need to be reversed.[/quote]

-I'm trying to "tweak" the system so that no position is overwhelmingly powerful. As with the Game Master the current election system was intended for another system but just stuck with the new design.

[quote]Theres really no need to be nice to who they elect as theres no rewards if they do unless it goes through another position first.[/quote]

-The basis of the tribute system is that the Senators control the workers, meaning only they can build improvements on the land which they own. I don't think I added this in the most recent version due to the fact that I'm currently trying to find some system that could "make" the Governors train Workers.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Mr. G — Mon, 21 Nov 2005 02:02:27 GMT

Crap, I can't leave this well enough alone. I've gotten to thinking about Roadkill's government enough to think that it would work given the chance in the DGame. So, I think it would be wise to open up a convention, or at the very least start some new threads, to discuss and fine-tune the different sections of the proposal that need revision.

You might say that this is a bit too early to get started. Hopefully, the majority of the patches will come out by the New Year, making it a good aim for the start of a DGame. That makes a little over a month, probably still a bit excessive, but getting it started right is the most important thing in a DGame. Also, what with all the holidays and vacations in Nov/Dec, it's going to be a distracted month for anyone interested. Better to get discussion moving when we have time then when we don't.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Mr. G — Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:00:24 GMT

A thought just occured to me. Not to add anything to the discussion, but if we do choose to implement this system Roadkill has come up with, I think it would be fitting to use Rome as our civ, regardless of whatever bonuses they have.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

isufan2006 — Sun, 20 Nov 2005 20:52:12 GMT

Roadkills ideas sound good so far. One thing i dont like about it though is that either the election or the tribute system, not both, need to be reversed. The way its writen right now Governors have to pay the people they elect. It would seem that some governors would replace the senators every turn so they dont have to pay as much. Theres really no need to be nice to who they elect as theres no rewards if they do unless it goes through another position first. If the tribute took like 20% of a cities income and that went to the emperor for what ever he saw fit. The emperor would then give tribute to the senators for their cooperation and to keep the emperor in office. The senators in turn would give tribute to the govenors or whatever needs they had. Governors would use the tribute they recive to pay for their units or special projects in their city. This way we could maybe get some sort of economy that trickles down to everybody in the game. We also could have a portion of cities incomes go to a national treasury for use only in emergencies and trade with other civs. The amount that goes from the cities to the emperor and treasury could be changed by the senate. Just my thoughts anyway.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Mr. G — Sun, 20 Nov 2005 19:15:56 GMT

Thanks a lot for getting this up, the idea certainly has some promise, and the more I think about it, the more I like it. This system opens up positions of lesser work, the Governors (or shall I start calling it the Governate :D) while still keeping my favorite system of government, the Senate. It is, as you said, a while from finishing, but I think it a great starting point.

There are some issues that are apparent to me reading through it quickly. (1) How is the Senate supposed to get a military? Through city production, the Governors get their Militia and and the Emperor his Guards. The Militia can be used for invasions, but those units are still essentially the Governor's. The only thing I can figure is the Militia can be given to the Senators as tribute, but that is not specifically spelled out. In fact, the whole tribute system needs to be defined, questions such as how much, what portion, if it is up to the discretion of the tributor need to be answered. Okay (2) The beginning of the game. This is the time when I percieve the government will have the most time working itself out. There will be a shortage of positions with only one city and not alot of land, and hopefully a greater amount of interest because of the start of the game. We need to figure out a good way to keep positions open to divide the work and keep the game moving without needless bureaucracy. Perhaps it would work to have a set number of seats for Senators that will recieve land as the empire expands. I don't know. Finally (3) wouldn't it give the emperor position more attraction to have him play the game, especially when he controls offensive Campaigns? I would change the Game Master into more of a records keeper/supreme court type of role, recording who controls what and how much land one is entitled to and things of that nature. And as good of an idea the notary position is, the one who actually plays the turns is in the best position to write reports.

Hopefully this gets some discussion going. :)

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Sun, 20 Nov 2005 11:42:48 GMT

Revised Edition.

1BC Civilization IV DGame

----------------------------------------
The Game
----------------------------------------

[u]Game Master[/u]

The Game Master is a person unaffiliated with the game itself(Preferrably a Moderator). He plays the game turns based on the instructions of the players.

He has no influence on the game itself.

[u]Notary[/u]

The Notary writes reports for each turn of the game. His position is meant to make the game more accessible to people that do not own Civilization IV and to make it easier for Government Officials to get an overview of the state of the Nation.

He may have as many assistants as he wishes to help him write his reports.

He has no influence on the game itself.

----------------------------------------
Governmental Positions
----------------------------------------

The Government consists of three institutions; The Governate, The Senate and the Imperative.

---

The Governate is the assembly of Governors.

Governors control cities. A Governor can only control one city. He controls production and citizens, as well as the units trained in that city.

The Military units controlled by the Governor are Militia. The Governor can use these units for defense or grant them to the Emperor(Temporarily or Permanently) for use in a Campaign.

The Governor must pay tribute to Senators who own the land he is working.

The Governors elect Senators.

---

The Senate is the assembly of Senators.

Senators control an area of land(Example: 10 tiles). The Governor(s) working the tiles that a Senator owns must pay tribute to him.

A Senator can own Military units. The units owned by Senators are called the Senatorial Army. The Senate can use these units for defense or grant them to the Emperor(Temporarily) for use in a Campaign.

The Senate must pay tribute to the Emperor.

The Senate elect the Emperor.

---

The Imperative is the Imperial body, i.e the Nation and the Emperor.

The Emperor owns two cities. He controls production and citizens, as well as the units produced in those cities.

The Emperor is High Commander of the Army and controls all armies involved in a Campaign. He has an army of his own, the Imperial Guard.

The Emperor elects Governors and divides the land taken by expansion.

----------------------------------------
Land
----------------------------------------

Land is represented by the tiles in which the Civilization IV map is divided.

When land is gained through peaceful expansion(Settling a new city or cultural expansion) the Emperor elects a Governor to control that city. Depending on how much land was gained it is either granted to neighbouring Senators or a new Senator is instated(Elected by the Governors on that land).

When land is gained through conquest the land is divided by participation. The Governors and Senators that had armies participating have a claim on the land gained. Land gained by a person is proportional to how many units he contributed.

Example: 10 units in the army. The Senator contributed 2. The Senator claims 20%. If the gain was ten tiles he will receive 2 tiles.

Governors and Senators can gain land. The Senator simply controls the new land as he has the rest. The Governor must grant a senator temporary control of the land. If the Governor is demoted(Not re-elected, retires) he can name himself Senator of the land he holds.

The Emperor cannot gain land but once demoted(Not re-elected, retires) he is granted land or control of a city and can choose to be either a Governor or a Senator.

Land can be traded amongst Senators and Governors at will for any reason(Tribute, support, etc.).

----------------------------------------
Gold
----------------------------------------

Governors gain gold through their cities. The gold earned is owned by the Governors(Except for tribute to the Senate). The gold accumulated in the State Treasury is mostly controlled by Governors, with a small amount controlled by the Senate and Emperor.

***

----------------------------------------
Government
----------------------------------------

The Senate rules over internal and external affairs. They decide what civics to implement, what to research, etc. The Senate also elect the Emperor.

The Emperor is High Commander of the Army and only he can start and end Campaigns. The Emperor can start a Campaign by asking for Senate and/or Governate support. Only the Senate can grant the Emperor use of the Senatorial Army and only indivdual Governors can grant the use of their Militia units. The Emperor also divides gained land. The Emperor elects Governors.

The Governors control their cities. They elect Senators that control the area in which their citizens work.

----------------------------------------
***
----------------------------------------

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Sun, 20 Nov 2005 08:58:56 GMT

-Okay, I've just made a prototype governmental system. It's faaar from finished yet but it'll give you some idea.

----------EDIT----------

DGame document added. Attatchment.
Land Gain document added. Attatchment.

[u]1BC Civilization IV DGame[/u]

----------------------------------------
The Game
----------------------------------------

[u]Game Master[/u]

The Game Master is a person unaffiliated with the game itself(Preferrably a Moderator). He plays the game turns based on the instructions of the players.

He has no influence on the game itself.

[u]Notary[/u]

The Notary writes reports for each turn of the game. His position is meant to make the game more accessible to people that do not own Civilization IV and to make it easier for Government Officials to get an overview of the state of the Nation.

He may have as many assistants as he wishes to help him write his reports.

He has no influence on the game itself.

----------------------------------------
Governmental Positions
----------------------------------------

[u]Governor[/u]

A Vassal that controls a city. Everything that the city produces is controlled by that Governor.

All the gold income that the city produces is owned by the Governor. However, the Governor must pay an annual tribute to the Senate to keep his position. How much he grants the senate is up to him.

The military units trained by a city are also controlled by the Governor. Though the Emperor is the High General of the Army he does not control the units produced outside his sphere of influence(Two cities).

The Governor can at his own will permanently or temporarily grant the Emperor use of his units. This gives the Governor some claim to the lands gained through whatever conflict the units are used in.

The Governor(s) residing inside a Senatorial land area elect the Senator for that area.

A Governor position is up for election every 5/10 turns. There is no term limit for a Governor.

[u]Senator[/u]

A Lord of an area of land(Example: 10x10 Tiles). He controls what improvements are built within his land area and the Governors residing inside that area must pay an annual tribute to him/the senate.

The Senator is part of the Senate, which controls internal politics(Civics, Research, etc.) as well as external relations.

The Senate elects the Emperor.

A Senatorial position is up for election every 5/10 turns. There is no term limit for a Governor.

[u]Emperor[/u]

The Ruler of the Nation. He controls the National Army.

The Emperor controls two cities, their land area and the production of those cities.

The Emperor can wage war on other Nations. Though the best way to do so is by gaining the support of the Senate he can also ignore them and gain the support from the Governors.

The Emperor elects Governors.

The Imperial position is up for election every 5/10/15 turns.

Assistants

Any Governor/Senator/Emperor can attain the services of an assistant. Though an assistant has no direct influence on the game he can try to influence his employer.

----------------------------------------
Citizens
----------------------------------------

The Citizens of the DGame are all possible candidates for a Government Position. All they have to do is sign up for an election.

----------------------------------------

Notepad Attatchment Updated

----------EDIT----------

-Basically, the government will be made up of Governors, Senators and the Emperor.

The Emperor controls the two first cities while the rest are governed by Governors. He controls the armies given to him by the Governors. The Emperor elects Governors.

The Senators are the legislative body of the nation. They convene in the senate to pass laws and make decisions(Civics and the likes). The individual senators also control a land area(Example: 10x10 tiles) and everything inside that area, except for cities. Though the Governors control the cities the Senators control the work force(Workers) and therefore what improvements to build in that area. The Senate elects the Emperor.

The Governor controls a city. Everything that the city produces is his, from GP to units(Excluding Workers and Settlers). The income that the city contributes to the State treasury is controlled by that Governor(Example: The City produces 3 GP to the state treasury. The Governor controls that Gold, not the state). The Governors within a land area elect the Senator to control that area.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Sun, 20 Nov 2005 06:35:00 GMT

-So, any progress?

-I have been thinking a bit about a DGame for cIV and I think that it would be great if we could diverge somewhat from past DGames. I have no idea how to implement this but bare with me.

-The main problem that I see in any -Game is that it focuses on playing a game, nothing else. There is no internal bickering or "civil wars". No fight for power and so I think that any interest in such -Games is doomed to lose interest in the end. If the game was to focus more on what [b]we[/b] do, not the game itself, I would find it much more interesting. A game in which relvolutions, internal struggle to attain power and various political intrigue was rife would most likely insure a lasting interest in the game. As stated earlier I have no idea how to implement this but I'll look into some way of doing so.

-I also agree with von Clausewitz about getting this show on the road. It's been a bit quiet as of late and that is disturbing. Though I have not gotten a hold of cIV yet(And probably won't until January when I build my PC) I will make myself available to anyone who's interested in getting this up and running so that we can start planning.

EDIT: Another problem with the -Games is that the game is predictable. I felt that way in the Civ III DGames at least. No matter how much we try to see different venues there is always a "best path" to winning the game. To me this is a problem as the game loses momentum. I'm not sure how it works in cIV but if it's like Civ III in that respect then it will probably feel like watching a replay.

EDIT: Some type of "score system" for people involved would be great. I'll get back to you on it.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

von Clausewitz — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 02:17:10 GMT

i wouldn't want to be a part of a logistics discussion. beyond the 'is it possible?' question, it would be difficult to determine the number of sub-forums without a constitution to guide it. if this senate system is to be implemented, it could have several subforums so that each senate committee would have a place to discuss matters. a single 'senate' forum would get swamped with threads from the seperate committees alongside the senate voting threads.

perhaps its not to early to start a constitutional convention thread? the discussion may help the logistical issues, and the logistical issues may help shape the constitution.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

mongoose201 — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 18:46:40 GMT

[quote]Well put, Warlord. Now, is anything going to happen (Sean, kring, etc.)?[/quote]

Patience, grasshopper.... :)

We are still a couple months away from enough people having the game, I would think. Perhaps after the holidays. In either case, the logistics of a possible Dgame are being discussed.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Mr. G — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 16:44:51 GMT

[quote][b]Warlord (11/14/2005)[/b][hr]Maybe religous parties were a bad idea, but I think with the vast avenues of technologies, civics, etc. that we would need a good way for debating the paths we choose. Of course with a Senatorial committee system our leaders would plead their cases and take it to a vote. So I guess the best thing would be to let these things emerge as the game begins and progresses.[/quote]

Well put, Warlord. Now, is anything going to happen (Sean, kring, etc.)?

I think it would be nice touch to expand the Senate's influence to governing the other 'daily life' part of the dgame, that way, the senators can make rules addressing the formation of political parties, and other things that might come up during the course of any dgame. Not nessacary, but it would certainly would make the senate positions more desirable.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Warlord — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 17:51:50 GMT

Maybe religous parties were a bad idea, but I think with the vast avenues of technologies, civics, etc. that we would need a good way for debating the paths we choose. Of course with a Senatorial committee system our leaders would plead their cases and take it to a vote. So I guess the best thing would be to let these things emerge as the game begins and progresses.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

USA F-15 — Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:32:04 GMT

[quote]I don't think religion will be a big factor in a DGame. Yes religion is in the game, but its almost automatic particularly if your nation is the founder of a religion (or religions). The religions are staggered pretty well on the tree as well, so I doubt we'd see Buddists and Taoists debating over which should be the state religion or what temple gets built in a city. Every type of temple should be built, and usually the first religion that reaches the capitol will be dominate and become the state religion. There may be extreme cases, but extreme cases tend to be minimized in a DGame setting.

I think that one [/quote]

Anyway id gladly play! however i think it would be really fun if we had that, if and only if no one took it personally...

And how can you have a democratic system without political parties?

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Mr. G — Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:39:31 GMT

[quote][b]Locus Coeruleus (11/8/2005)[/b][hr]George Washington strongly opposed the formation of political parties! He was very wise! The D-game should follow his lead![/quote]

Blindly? ;)

Political parties are a eventuality, true they might be more boarder than before but I bet they will form again. What we must ask ourselves is if, in our DGame environment, they do more good than bad. The parties have the potential to keep the game moving by themselves, just by the virtue of compeition between parties keeping interest levels up. However, if the benefits measure less than the harm of a bit of bickering (I like to call it intelligent debate), then certainly we should throw it out. But I think that nessescity should guide the formation of political parties in a cIV DGame, not a Constitutionally-manadated restriction.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Roadkill — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 20:20:28 GMT

-just click the DGame link in my signature and you'll be taken to the DGame at Civilized. You can find alot of information there.

EDIT: There are several government types used in DGames and the DGame represented at Civilized is not in any way the type that is to be used, though it is a good and effective type, especially for the low member count DGames.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

scotsman67 — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 20:01:05 GMT

why not use corporations as political parties? that seems a fair reflection of politics these days:D as i should be getting Civ IV soon, i'd be interested in playing. is there a faq or something i can look at to explain everything?

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

psweetman1590 — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:16:54 GMT

[quote]George Washington strongly opposed the formation of political parties! He was very wise! The D-game should follow his lead!
[/quote]

Indeed, all America should follow his lead. Political parties are more evil than they're worth!

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

cleopatra143 — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 05:15:00 GMT

The political parties was the coolest part about the dgame LOL

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Locus Coeruleus — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 22:47:17 GMT

George Washington strongly opposed the formation of political parties! He was very wise! The D-game should follow his lead!

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

von Clausewitz — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 21:55:32 GMT

I don't think religion will be a big factor in a DGame. Yes religion is in the game, but its almost automatic particularly if your nation is the founder of a religion (or religions). The religions are staggered pretty well on the tree as well, so I doubt we'd see Buddists and Taoists debating over which should be the state religion or what temple gets built in a city. Every type of temple should be built, and usually the first religion that reaches the capitol will be dominate and become the state religion. There may be extreme cases, but extreme cases tend to be minimized in a DGame setting.

I think that one area that will factor in, and may become a basis for political discussions is the different civics. In that sense religion may enter the political realm. I think there would be cause for debate among Organized Religion vs Theocracy vs Pacifism vs Free Religion vs Paganism more then we would see debate among Buddism vs Judaism vs Confucianism vs Islam vs Christianity vs Taoism vs Hinduism. Unfortunatly such changes will be few and far between, but it shouldn't stop those that favor a different civic from debating the merits of thier prefered civic.

As far as political parties, I don't really see a place for broad ideology based parties. A party that declares a prefered civic for all five catergories (such as Universal Suffrage, Free Speech, Emancipation, Free Market, Free Religion) will potentialy alienate prospective members that may agree with 4 but disagree with the fifth (such as an Enviromentalist that otherwise agrees with the previous example). If political parties do form up, they will either be generic or embrace one specific civic from one catergory (possibly a combination from 2 catergories). Just the number of civic combinations will either deter political parties from forming at all, or dilute them so much they have minimal effect with several citizens joining several to represent all of thier favorite civics, or the parties will be generic non-ideology based.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Warlord — Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:43:36 GMT

[quote][b]jerm (11/5/2005)[/b][hr]I would like to see religion take a more active role in the Dgame. Now that it is a part of the game, why not have some influence in the government? Religions could posibly be like political parties for a while and as the game moves on, it could morph into a less active role. Just an idea. I'd play even before I had the game in a role playing capacity.[/quote]

Great idea! The game also gives you an in depth chart of where the different religions rank in your civilization. This could be a deciding factor for which party is in control. Then once a state religion is decided on by the citizens the parties would begin to lose there influence. Paving the way for political parties.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

jerm — Sat, 05 Nov 2005 12:09:56 GMT

I would like to see religion take a more active role in the Dgame. Now that it is a part of the game, why not have some influence in the government? Religions could posibly be like political parties for a while and as the game moves on, it could morph into a less active role. Just an idea. I'd play even before I had the game in a role playing capacity.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Warlord — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 22:05:15 GMT

[quote]As far as set up goes, there was some good ideas that would experiement with different concepts (Roadkill's emperor game, what have you). But in my mind, the simpliest way, and perhaps most democractic, would be to go back to the Sentorial system with Executive and Legislative branches as well. However, it need not be exactly the same as before, I think a committee system with chairman leading the different sections would work a lot better than the departmental system, provided there is enough participation in the Senate to begin with. I'm pretty sure that won't be a problem if it's hosted here.[/quote]

I agree, with the new tech tree and complex religous and cultural aspects there will be alot of diversity and the need for elected officials will be much greater than on the civ3 dgames.

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

cleopatra143 — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 18:36:10 GMT

The first one was really fun, I would partake!

RE: 1BC DGame at 1BC

Portugal — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 17:46:35 GMT

If there was a cIV D-game I would take part in it. :cool:

1BC DGame at 1BC

Mr. G — Thu, 03 Nov 2005 01:17:40 GMT

What's this now? A forum for democracy games?! Shall I take this to mean (eventually) 1bigcommunity will host another DGame?!! Oh, be still my heart. :P

There was some discussion at the old boards, can't seem to find the thread now. As most will not be recieving the game until Christmas, there's really no reason to start a DGame until then, perhaps even wait until the New Year. But it doesn't hurt to get it on people's minds, especially when there is an empty forum about it.

As far as set up goes, there was some good ideas that would experiement with different concepts (Roadkill's emperor game, what have you). But in my mind, the simpliest way, and perhaps most democractic, would be to go back to the Sentorial system with Executive and Legislative branches as well. However, it need not be exactly the same as before, I think a committee system with chairman leading the different sections would work a lot better than the departmental system, provided there is enough participation in the Senate to begin with. I'm pretty sure that won't be a problem if it's hosted here.

Anyway, I was just looking for some confirmation from the higher-ups that a 1BC DGame is more than a possibility.