Why do I have to play rdm civ?

[WoodsierCorn696]

@Haladon

I want to make a point against those arguing that the new system is fair because of democracy. In fact majoritarianism is one of the flaws of democracy. We should do a more direct cost-benefit analysis.

1. On one side we have forcing a player to play random when they don’t want to. This could be a major inconvenience.
2. On the other side, we have players being forced to pick civ when they wanted to play all random. This is not even an inconvenience. It is just missing out on a nicety.

So the question to ask is if this major inconvenience of one person worth more than a small benefit for 7 others. If your answer is yes, then the old system is better. Otherwise the new system has some merit. But then what about 2 persons inconvenience vs 6 persons benefit. Or 1 vs 5. Where do we draw the line? Presently the line is drawn at simple majority with a favour for civ picks in case of tie. I feel this gives too much merit to the small benefit of the majority in comparison to the inconvenience of the few.

You forgot that we all used to be playing random civ in the past. Almost all games were all random pre DE. This was brutally changed to pick civ by the DE system. You have to know many players played this game for years an are used to this setting and wants to play with that settings. For that reason this is implemented. Players are used to certain settings and want to play with those settings. You seem to fully neglict this part of the equation, which for me is important.

For me the line is drawn at a good spot. If something needs to change, then it would even be give more priority to random civ. But that is also based on my personal preference. I can see why the devs decided to say it is pick civ if it is 50:50.