Metaverse Scores trashed?

I don't think you need to worry, it looks like all the individual game scores are being reduced -- so once they recalculate each Metaverse player's total score, they are all going to drop (and your relative position will come back up).

wow, reduced a lot, even 1.035 scores were cut in half.

I wonder why my tiny masochostic win was also cut in
half, I thought difficulty was to be a bigger factor.

102 points for beating 5 incredable AI's on a tiny
rare map, heh, some people have more points for losing
games on a begginer level.

Yep, I just submitted my latest game and went from 13th to 79th on the ladder. "I am shocked and appalled" (10pts for the first person to spot the origin of the quote!)

Taking tongue out of cheek, it's better now that the playing field has been levelled so to speak...

~SDC~

Yea, im in the same boat, dropped from 2nd to 21
but its worth it in the long run, no doubt.

Why? :notsure:

~SDC~

Er, they are using a new scoring method and have
updated everyones individual scores but not their
overall scores. So until someone submits a game, their
overall score will remain what it was before. As
the new scoring method is giving out less then half
the points then it was before, this is causing people
who submit games to effectively drop in rank quite abit.

This should only be a temporary issue.

Time to take the metaverse slide once I finish my latest game.

The gap between map sizes seem to have shrunk that that's good news for smaller map gamers.

Staffa. Keep submitting though. It will equalize.

I'm happy to see they finally did the recalc, this has been something I've been looking forward to for a while. I only hope they're not going to wait for people to resubmit to get the overall scores recalc'ed as some people will be able to hover at the top spots indefinitely just by not submitting a new score.

The overall scores will get updated shortly too. THe aging system just has to be run and it takes quite a bit of time to run.

Code Monkey,

You got more points for your Painful Tiny 1.04 game than my Maso Gigantic 1.035 one.

Is this motivation to upgrade to 1.04 or what?

I don't think a painful tiny should get more than a Gigantic maso. It may just be the version problem. But if that holds true in 1.04 than I would not consider that all too great a switch.

I was just picking on one of his more extreme examples to make a tongue-in-cheek point. If you notice his other Painful Tiny games, they scored less than 1000.

He must have done something really right in that 2k game to please the scoring gods.

The recalc is good. Although I will take a hit from 1700 to around 470, I am still fine with it. Now we will just have to wait for that routine to come along to update all the totals. Afterall, I wouldn't want too many glory hogs not submitting games just so that they can stay on top forever. The Score Reaper is coming, I hope.

I was just picking on one of his more extreme examples to make a tongue-in-cheek point. If you notice his other Painful Tiny games, they scored less than 1000.

He must have done something really right in that 2k game to please the scoring gods.


Must have. I know I write down all my stats to see what generates a good score. But now, just when I figured it all out. Poof out the window. HEHE. Gonna finish one last game on 3a then go to four. HEHE they said the ai's are gonna do what most meta players do. Which suits me fine. Now I know the comp civs won't be going for what I like. HEHE.

But I hope they nerfed pop a bit. I have a system problem. My games go unstable w/too much pop. 3-4 trill is about all I can get. So I just plain couldn't generate those 11k scores.

Brad mentioned that pop score is going to be v heavily penalized by the game turn so we shouldn't be seeing high scoring games by the mere fact that they had large pops anymore.

I'm not too sure whether you are having a system problem though, could be one of those crash bugs that Cari have fixed in 1.04. If you still have one of those saves, try loading it up in 1.04.

Wow, with everybody else's scores getting reduces, I jumped into the Top 25. Quite an accomplishment, considering I readily admit, I'm not vey good at this game. My wins at the higher levels were poor examples, because it's very easy to win Beyond Human in a Gigantic Universe at any difficulty. You just have to stay out of wars.

I'll go on record and say it outright. The metaverse is a joke, and quite broken. So yes, we're normalizing scores lower. I read in another thread somewhere that its supposedly supposed to give newbies a chance....well yeah.... it will give them not only a chance, but a HUGE advantage.

Take for instance that you have 20 games played. Eventually those games are going to get normalized closer to zero. Now what happens to your score when you submit next 5 games. Are you going to get very far on the Metaverse with that score? No. That's because your scores are going to get dampened out by your previous 20 that got normalized closer to zero.

Now take a newbie that had only played 5 games on the newest version. Since the newbie is going to have fewer scores but say on a silmilar pace to the previous person. Since that newbie doesn't have the normalized scores to pull his total down, he's going to be "better" than the previous person even though the other persion has submitted the same five scores on previous runs.

Secondly I heard there is no downloading of specific AI's to Galciv because of cheese tactics, but we're not going to do anything to the metaverse because of cheese tactics. Geeze...maybe I want to play against an AI that's employing cheese tactics(influenced by the player) so I can smack it all up and down the game. I get a certain sick pleasure from beating anyone that attempts cheese against me. Maybe that's an undesireable thing here.

What amazes me is that metaverse scoring is being done client side rather than server side (which it should've been from the word go) So that rather than normalizing scores, what should've been done is this. Say you upgrade from version 1.04 to 1.05. The server would then weight the 1.04 scores much lower automatically and 1.05 scores would be submitted normally. The 1.03 scores would be receiving even fewer points than that. But it wouldn't require manually retooling everyone's scores. Also by putting the code in server side, it makes it alot harder for someone to manipulate the score client side.

Currently someone on 1.03 can theoretically submit their pre 1.04 scores to metaverse after this score re-calc is complete and get some outrageous points for it.
I've never built a game of this scale, but I'm sure this could've been done alot better than it has without expending a great deal of resources to do. I don't see the value-add of leaving things on the client side because you gotta spend time scrutinizing the incoming games with the higher scores and then renormalize them manually back to where they should be. It would seem to me that it would be better to spend resources on more server side scoring, get the automation built in and be done with it. It's a one time hit. The only intervention needed is to put an additional version number in the databse and the program can take care of the rest.

I'm beginning to see why Code Monkey is upset, because the big fear he had seems to be coming true (scores getting normalized closer to one) and that is not the way to go with this. But since I'm in the top few dozen on the Metaverse (for the time being), I guess I'm more lowly than a casual gamer and what I said is worthless to this board.

SeanB

I agree SeanB. I think the normalizing to zero or the AGING PROCESS the scores go through is ridiculous and should be eliminated. In fact, I think the whole Metaverse scoring logic with the square root of the number of games played is a bad idea. I understand what they are attempting to do but I think they could easily ackomplish that by simply showing an average score per game - sum of all game scores divided by the number of games played. And by the way, game scores on Metaverse should be same as the actual score you got in that game. This Metaverse idea is a fantastic concept but I think they are ruining it with this wierd scoring logic.

ALSO, still waiting for an answer about my 9th game score that never showed up on Metaverse after I submitted it friday night. Do I have to replay it from last saved and try to submit again or will it automatically show up after all scores are recalculated????

Dont get me wrong, I think the ageing process in concept is a good idea, but I think implemented wrong. The aging process should only kick in if you submit a game from an outdated version. In theory, that person submitting the game should still get credit, but less of it compared to one that submitted a current version.

Where I disagree is with the notion that any game you submit retroactively gets reduced toward zero, especially since those games still get held against you when calculating your overall score. So if you submitted a ton of old games, and they get halved, then suddenly you're going to be in a huge battle to get back to where you were, whereas a newbie will have clear run at the top with out any of the constraints of the old scores. This effect will only magnify itself as Galciv matures.

SeanB

Where I disagree is with the notion that any game you submit retroactively gets reduced toward zero, especially since those games still get held against you when calculating your overall score.


Great point forceinfinity.

Aging of the scores is a good concepts, but one should not forget that score count should age too So if one's 1000 point game is reduced by half, total count of games should be also reduced [by 0.5 games for example]