...Totally made me chuckle.Temi wrote:Isn't meddling and having an effect on where you are living a sort of noble right?
Can we petition to have this added to "help noble rights"? >.>
The End of the Regency
I agree. I think we are muddling really three different issues:Zeita wrote:Could I respectfully suggest that a new thread is started solely to discuss the mechanisms and other details around the council (which I agree, is a good thing) and that we put the talk about the Court aside for now, pending the meeting?
Refocusing the game on local politics
The New City Council and tools around that
The Future of the Court Gild.
Only cocktails should be muddled.
Starting a new thread summarizing everything before it seems a bit of a big deal. Let me just try to refocus this thread. Here's the proposal:
ICly, the story is being developed as a plot right now. OOCly, here's what we plan to do to game structure:
1. The City Council is comprised of all non-covert GLs and all active nobles. (What happens to Court is being discussed elsewhere)
2. City Council Members (ie GLs and nobles) will be able to 'vote' for a city metric with an IC action that they're taking that period.
3. The metric that garners the most votes that week will go up by a large amount. The two runner up metrics will also go up by a smaller amount, and the least voted for or one-to-three random metrics will go down in line with the upward swing on those metrics that got the votes.
4. All city metrics will be supplied with impacts on the game. We are working out what those impacts are and intend to have them in play by the time this system comes into play.
5. Once per month, the staff will roll on one of the three lowest metrics to kick out a city event. For example, if health is low, perhaps there will be an attack of dysentery in Southside. If infrastructure is low, a section of the sewers under Church Street might collapse. If defense is low, some brigands might set up a toll booth on the road outside of the west gate, etc, etc.
6. A new role will be set up that is ALSO on the city council, the Sensechal. This role is open to any player in the game and has a six-month term limit. To achieve it, you need to put your hand in and go through the bid system to get elected (we think bids will work better if the pool of people is the whole game). If elected, you get: 1) a command that tells you what the current voting status of council members is so that you can coordinate and affect the vote prior to it being tallied and finalized, 2) a sweet stipend of silver, and 3) a posh office in the Palace or Town Hall (maybe both). <-- we acknowledge this role may not work out. If it does not, we will remove it.
Additional notes thus far:
- Start weekly, probably end up fortnightly
- Metrics will have a % chance to go up out of vote order to reduce voting block impact, but that chance will be constrained to be generally in line with the overall power of the vote.
- Yes, the events staff expect to run are monthly and local based off the city metrics.
- No one's asked anything about the Seneschal. I'm surprised.
- Suggestions for city metric impacts would be *awesome*, in particular around religion and class relations
- We're considering if other players should be able to use IP to 'sway the vote'.
ICly, the story is being developed as a plot right now. OOCly, here's what we plan to do to game structure:
1. The City Council is comprised of all non-covert GLs and all active nobles. (What happens to Court is being discussed elsewhere)
2. City Council Members (ie GLs and nobles) will be able to 'vote' for a city metric with an IC action that they're taking that period.
3. The metric that garners the most votes that week will go up by a large amount. The two runner up metrics will also go up by a smaller amount, and the least voted for or one-to-three random metrics will go down in line with the upward swing on those metrics that got the votes.
4. All city metrics will be supplied with impacts on the game. We are working out what those impacts are and intend to have them in play by the time this system comes into play.
5. Once per month, the staff will roll on one of the three lowest metrics to kick out a city event. For example, if health is low, perhaps there will be an attack of dysentery in Southside. If infrastructure is low, a section of the sewers under Church Street might collapse. If defense is low, some brigands might set up a toll booth on the road outside of the west gate, etc, etc.
6. A new role will be set up that is ALSO on the city council, the Sensechal. This role is open to any player in the game and has a six-month term limit. To achieve it, you need to put your hand in and go through the bid system to get elected (we think bids will work better if the pool of people is the whole game). If elected, you get: 1) a command that tells you what the current voting status of council members is so that you can coordinate and affect the vote prior to it being tallied and finalized, 2) a sweet stipend of silver, and 3) a posh office in the Palace or Town Hall (maybe both). <-- we acknowledge this role may not work out. If it does not, we will remove it.
Additional notes thus far:
- Start weekly, probably end up fortnightly
- Metrics will have a % chance to go up out of vote order to reduce voting block impact, but that chance will be constrained to be generally in line with the overall power of the vote.
- Yes, the events staff expect to run are monthly and local based off the city metrics.
- No one's asked anything about the Seneschal. I'm surprised.
- Suggestions for city metric impacts would be *awesome*, in particular around religion and class relations
- We're considering if other players should be able to use IP to 'sway the vote'.
The "voting" specification for review and feedback:
Code: Select all
Syntax: city support <metric> <reason>
city subvert <metric> <reason>
When a player who eligible to vote in the City Council types 'city support|subvert <metric> <reason>', they are ICly saying that at the end of the voting cycle, their "vote" is to improve or damage a specific metric. When tallying, their reason will be auto-cnoted.
At the end of the city metric period (city metric period may change, but should start as one week), the game will tally the metric votes. Support votes are worth 1 point, and subvert votes are worth -1 point.
The first step once the points are tallied is to place them in order:
City Metric Focus:
1. Lawfulness : ( 61%) Average 4 points
2. Morale : ( 84%) Excellent 3 points
3. Religion : ( 55%) Ordinary 3 points
4. Economics : ( 62%) Average 1 points
5. Defense : ( 46%) Substandard 1 points
6. Health : ( 45%) Substandard 1 points
7. Infrastructure : ( 65%) Average 0 points
8. Class Relations : ( 34%) Challenged 0 points
9. Race Relations : ( 33%) Challenged -1 points
Tied City Metrics will randomly order the tied items.
Once the list is in order, randomly check if the top item will swap with the second item (this allows minorities to sometimes get a word in edgewise with luck). To do this check, divide the number of points in the top list item by
the total number of votes (invert negatives). This will say the % of people who voted for the top item. Roll 1d100, and if it is above the % of people who voted, swap item #1 and item #2.
Once the list is in order, the top city metric gets +20 points. If this takes the value above 100, the number will be set to 100, and the spillover assigned to the next item in the list.
The second item in the list will get +10 points + spillover. If this takes the value above 100, set the metric to 100 and assign the spillover to the next item in the list.
The third item in the list will get +5 points, + spillover. If this takes the value above 100, set the metric to 100, and assign the spillover all of the way down.
We will resolve the bonuses from voting first.
Next, we will resolve all of the negatives from the bottom ranking Metric to the top. So, the 9th item in the list gets -20 points, and if this takes the value below 0, set it to 0 and 'spillover' the negative flow to the item above it in the list.
The second item from the bottom (rank 8) will get -10 - spillover, the third item -5 - spillover and so on until we're done passing the changes up the list.
NOTES:
- Auto cnotes should happen when the vote is tallied.
- Votes can be changed numerous times during the period, it only
matters what the vote is set on when the tally happens.
- Covert GLs can vote too, they're just not thematically or ICly
on the City Council.
- Players in jail are not eligible to vote.Thanks for the refocus.
I have a question on the shift of the metrics: is the overall level always going to balance? ie, with 9 metrics listed, will there always be a pool of 450 points (assuming we start with a base of 0), or can outside influence through plots, reduce or raise that total? I like the idea of metrics having impact on code things and the generation of 'events'. A 20 point shift per week is a lot and I'd probably suggest more gradual shifts. I'd probably cut it by half or more.
I'd probably change the name away from Seneschal, as if positions are grandfathered or if Court remains, we will already have an existing Seneschal. Is there a reason not to use the term Mayor? Alderman may be another viable title. Will members that naturally sit on the Council be eligible to stand for this position? I would assume so.
With regards to guildleaders, would it be a vote per guild, or one each for the primary and secondary leaders? I'd lean towards the latter.
I'd certainly like to see all players involve themselves in this, even if they don't have the same heavy sway as a sitting member of the council.
I have a question on the shift of the metrics: is the overall level always going to balance? ie, with 9 metrics listed, will there always be a pool of 450 points (assuming we start with a base of 0), or can outside influence through plots, reduce or raise that total? I like the idea of metrics having impact on code things and the generation of 'events'. A 20 point shift per week is a lot and I'd probably suggest more gradual shifts. I'd probably cut it by half or more.
I'd probably change the name away from Seneschal, as if positions are grandfathered or if Court remains, we will already have an existing Seneschal. Is there a reason not to use the term Mayor? Alderman may be another viable title. Will members that naturally sit on the Council be eligible to stand for this position? I would assume so.
With regards to guildleaders, would it be a vote per guild, or one each for the primary and secondary leaders? I'd lean towards the latter.
I'd certainly like to see all players involve themselves in this, even if they don't have the same heavy sway as a sitting member of the council.
-
BattleJenkins
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 5:00 pm
One thing I worry about is that the choice of which metric support is always going to be fairly obvious - that is, whichever one needs the most attention - and that, generally speaking, the levels will be kept in more or less ideal equilibrium, with any imbalance only ever coming from deliberate troublemakers, or from major plots / events - which is the major cause of their shifting already. I do think that a crucial component of this system should be that choosing which metric to focus on should be, at least some of the time, a difficult choice.
-
Applesauce
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:13 pm
This is what I'm unclear on. From the original post: "The City Council is comprised of all non-covert GLs and all active nobles." What is Court right now, if not "all active nobles"?Takta wrote:... So it's true we could keep Court and the Council both, but ...
I know there's a lot of other new stuff going on like metric effects and the Seneschal role, but people have voiced concern about Court "going away" and I'm not sure how it is, other than just being called Council. You're not deleting the nobles, just now they'll be on the Council instead of at Court, right?
Since I don't see any way for non-GL-and-non-nobles to have a direct vote, though obviously people can organize stuff within their guilds to try to influence their GLs, I'm just trying to understand what people think is the problem. Again, I do not and have never had a noble on TI:L so I may just be confused about the current state of stuff.
Yes, I used the unfortunate terminology of 'Court would be dissolved and restructured into the City Council' or something. No, court isn't going away. "Court" with a capital C is in question as a code structure and how that'd work going forward. The issue there is people who are in the guild who are not titled who might lose out from their current roles and functions within Court. This is a topic for Saturday.
With regards to non-GL and non-nobles, I raised that potentially they could purchase a vote with IP. One person responded positively to it as a side topic to their main post. What does everyone else think?
Also, please read and respond to this post "viewtopic.php?f=8&t=972&p=8491#p8491"
With regards to non-GL and non-nobles, I raised that potentially they could purchase a vote with IP. One person responded positively to it as a side topic to their main post. What does everyone else think?
Also, please read and respond to this post "viewtopic.php?f=8&t=972&p=8491#p8491"
I think that would be interesting--sort of a delegates and super delegates sort of thing? 
I was thinking about class tension as a part of the system beyond the outlined mechanics; maybe some effects should effect the ruling class differently; maybe they are buffered to an extent. There's room for disjoint between the priorities of the council as opposed to those of the people, for ruling with self-interest and disregard, and then there's the court of popular opinion on the other side. I think there might be something there that isn't IP buying votes--maybe it is that Public Opinion is its own metric which cannot be directly voted for by council which non-council members use, that has its own effects at different levels.
Too convoluted?
I was thinking about class tension as a part of the system beyond the outlined mechanics; maybe some effects should effect the ruling class differently; maybe they are buffered to an extent. There's room for disjoint between the priorities of the council as opposed to those of the people, for ruling with self-interest and disregard, and then there's the court of popular opinion on the other side. I think there might be something there that isn't IP buying votes--maybe it is that Public Opinion is its own metric which cannot be directly voted for by council which non-council members use, that has its own effects at different levels.
Too convoluted?
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests