BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Development => Topic started by: Charles on August 19, 2011, 01:41:23 AM
-
I have come across the problem of wanting to be able to see what each person has voted, but not wanting to have the last person who votes be able to decide the result if the referendum is close.
There are many optional settings to referendums. Would it be possible to have the option of making a referendum open or closed referendum. A closed referendum would be exactly the way it is now. An open referendum would simply list those who voted each in the results.
-
I think the point of the voting system is that is anonymous, so I don't believe this stands much chance... Although it would make voting a lot more interesting. ;)
-
Before the referendum system existed, Riombara used to hold votes on most issues of importance.
Everyone would send their vote to the Judge—it could be private or public, at the discretion of the individual noble.
This could be used to achieve what you want.
-
I would like exactly the opposite though: votes where only the result is shared, and not the vote quantities. E.g unanimous, passed, rejected or absolute tie.
-
or do it the old dodgy madina way
lord collects vote of his knights and then decide how he votes his votes. then bung it up to the duke.. who then bungs it up to the judge (or some such) all done manually.. and most never bothered.. XD
-
I personally would like to see open votes an option for both game generated referendums and those initiated by players. For example, I could see a republic choosing a representative system of voting but wanting the vote to be open so as to hold the senators accountable. Or not. More choice is a good thing in my mind. I am curious to know how many historical democracies or republics kept the votes of it's representatives private... I am betting that there were few of them.
-
I would like to see more voting options altogether. Things like Prestige voting in particular would be good. Options for different styles of Open voting would be interesting, too. More ways for realms to differentiate themselves are always good, I think.
-
I would like to see more voting options altogether. Things like Prestige voting in particular would be good. Options for different styles of Open voting would be interesting, too. More ways for realms to differentiate themselves are always good, I think.
We used to have prestige voting--what happened to it? That was before I started, but I think it was on the wiki and/or help page for years.
-
Prestige voting disappeared when the new Referendum voting system was put into place. I've always considered this one of the few downsides of the Referendum system, which I otherwise think is much superior to the old system.
-
Prestige voting disappeared when the new Referendum voting system was put into place. I've always considered this one of the few downsides of the Referendum system, which I otherwise think is much superior to the old system.
Would it really be that hard to bring back? The system already looks capable of weighting votes on some variables (like number of vassals).
-
More options sounds like a great idea. I had never thought of the prestige voting. Choices are a good thing, you could also choose who would get to see the results, perhaps just making the results available to the person starting the referendum, council, lords, etc.
-
More options sounds like a great idea. I had never thought of the prestige voting. Choices are a good thing, you could also choose who would get to see the results, perhaps just making the results available to the person starting the referendum, council, lords, etc.
I would like a system that sets weight according to the number of men you (or your region or duchy) command. :P
-
According to CS! That would be quite realistic actually. Especially if you count the apparent CS after modifications.
-
I would like a system that sets weight according to the number of men you (or your region or duchy) command. :P
Isn't that called "Rebellion voting"?
-
Isn't that called "Rebellion voting"?
Yes, but institutionalized. 8)
-
I would like to see more voting options altogether. Things like Prestige voting in particular would be good. Options for different styles of Open voting would be interesting, too. More ways for realms to differentiate themselves are always good, I think.
I disagree. A system that rewards people who play BM the longest is just going to alienate new players and reward those who just do lots of battles... not necessarily anything else... how boring.
I like Chenier's idea about voting based on unit size, that would be quite cool and I also support public voting.
-
Things like Prestige voting in particular would be good.
I disagree. A system that rewards people who play BM the longest is just going to alienate new players and reward those who just do lots of battles... not necessarily anything else... how boring.
Prestige by itself does not guarantee "long term player". I have characters that are nowhere near the top of the list in prestige, simply because the characters themselves are newer. And there are plenty of short-term players who gain prestige quickly, due to being active in wars. Given how easy it is to gain prestige into the mid 20's, and how hard it is to get much past the low 40's, prestige is actually one of the few things in the game where older families don't have much, if any, advantage over new families. (Assuming that you discount the really old characters who gained craptons of prestige under the old prestige rules.) And prestige voting would also make unique items much more valuable. A few mid-prestige characters who make a concerted effort to gain several unique items to influence an election could easily outvote and oust some of those old farts. Overall, I think prestige voting would contribute to removing the entrenched old timer phenomenon.
And what's wrong with characters who are in lots of battles? Isn't that what this game is about? Isn't the lack of battles one of the things that quite a few forum users are lamenting as the cause of the player-base decline? I say we should be *rewarding* players who's characters engage in lots of battles. And if that means giving them more voting power, so they get into power, and reward us with more battles, then so be it. Down with the pacifists! >:(
I like Chenier's idea about voting based on unit size, that would be quite cool ...
Yeah, because a "100-man infantry unit" just screams "new player" a lot louder than "old family with rich duke", right?
-
Yeah, because a "100-man infantry unit" just screams "new player" a lot louder than "old family with rich duke", right?
;D
Gotta agree that prestige voting is more newbie friendly, not to mention that we used to have it.
Mind you, not all government systems need to favor newbies, else we'd have nothing but equal voting all around. Voting for lords only, for example, is quite elitist. Especially if it's representative, since those dukes usually have the most knights as well and therefore get the most votes.
But diversity is the spice of life.
-
Perhaps a system that grants more votes to the characters that have been a part of the realm longest. Could prove interesting.
-
Perhaps a system that grants more votes to the characters that have been a part of the realm longest. Could prove interesting.
In the old chinese curse sense of the word?
-
In the old chinese curse sense of the word?
Most systems are elitist in a way or another, so while I dislike the idea of actually using such a system, I wouldn't go making a big deal out of it either. After all, any election is still better than an appointment. And the most elitist form of voting you could ever imagine is already available: ducal-based voting.
Seriously, if the realm has but a single or few dukes, and they are elected by the ruler, what are the odds of someone else getting elected to that position? Not to mention that in some realms you can be ruler and duke at the same time.
Vote per time in realm, while I personally dislike it, would be newbie-friendly compared to that, and that's already available. I think you overestimate how bad it is.
-
I am also not a fan of the system, but I think it could be fun. A way for greedy realm founders to keep power.
-
I am also not a fan of the system, but I think it could be fun. A way for greedy realm founders to keep power.
An obvious way for it, while being less effective than current options. I'm all for diversity, so I don't see why not. Sounds like nepotism to me.