An idea generated in www.civfanatics.com's forums, several people have their say on how the game is played turn per turn. Every 2 days or so the host sends some screenies of how the game is progressing and people who have a been given a certain position have their say and other people vote on what to do etc...

It's good because, whether you just want to have a say or play an in depth part of the game you can do so.

Viking Invasion add on, un-modded, Byzantines in Late era, with the objective of beating back the Turks and restoring the glory of the Byzantine empire (glorious achievements).

Positions.

King , the host, will probably choose how battles are fought aswell, seeing as he will be the one to do them. The host will have to promise not to quick save and reload battles, to make things realistic and accept the suggestions of his lieutenants.

Captain of Industry , responsible for allocating florins and organising the navy.

Master imperialist , reponsible for choosing which provinces to invade and keep and which ones to raid (for instance deciding to invade Flanders from Britain, but not Normandy, because the army would have to be split to defend 2 provinces) and where emmisaries, princesses, spies, assassins and priests should go.

Lieutenants , responsible for: analysing the different troops involved in battles, determinning whether it is safe to attack or if a province can be defended and how the battle/siege/castle assault/defense should be fought; what troops need to be trained and analysing screenies of how battles went sent by the host to determine how to avoid mistakes or gain successes more in the future.

Each of these positions can create lower positiosn if they want, except the voters.

Voters , anyone who goes onto the thread and has a say. I don't think if I started a game of democracy there would be enough voters to have a democracy...

What do you think?