To Staffa my explanations

from Stardock Forums
I just submitted the game crippling medium. I got score 8321 - unexpectedly high for medium. Game figures:

July 2219 Pop 5366 All tech researched including final frontier. I have managed to wipe out the last planet at the same turn when final frontier was researched.

Let me explain why I not finished in 2210 as was promised. I play quite unusual strategy - pure diplomatic. I never being in war, slowly building cultural SB and planets join to my empire. Why slowly, because of if I try build SB in sector with planet owned by Majot, this major starting demand those base.

So, during all the game I have things to do, no just pressing turn to grow pop. At the end none of my planets have population maxed, population ranged from 56000 to 95000.

Conclusion. I understand that the best strategy is those which allow you at the same turn finish all techs, build all TG and Wonders, max pops of all planets and do it both in the shortest time. There is some known contradiction with difficulty setting, certainly it is impossible to build all TG and Wonders. I have managed build most of them (2-3 were rushed) but not all. I think that with painful I'll build all of them, but one or two and also it would be possible more precise coordinate researching and pop growing. So I'm going to try my strategy with painful and look on result.
955 views 49 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top
Huh, ive tried researching final frontier and taking
last planet before, i got a tech victory for that.

My last tiny game i got all but 4 wonders, i stopped
in 2004 at 1.2 trillion before doing galactic understanding
bout one tech shy of beyond human.

My pop ranged from about 20 to 40 billion per.

It amuses me that your getting way more points
for a medium crippling then I got for a gigantic
masochistic, or for that matter, any masochistic
game.

I think getting all but 4 wonders is pretty damn
awesome on masochistic, I really tried, didnt
seem to help much, but then again I have no 1.044
tiny game to compare it too.

It looks like if i want to stay on top I have to
either go back to crippling or start massively
exploiting pop also. Dont think either course of
action is worth it, this is beginning to be no fun.

Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top
You could compare it against my experiment on Maso/Tiny/Rare.

Mine was Military Victory, 2219, 670B pop, Galactic Creation, All except 4 TG/Wonders, 3,223 pts.

4,000 is probably about the max for Maso/Tiny.
Siege of Centauri
Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top
You know, this is a lot like college football.

Margin of victory used to be a large part of determining who the number 1 team was (like population). A lot of people complained that this made good teams run up the score on bad teams, and that it wasn't really an indication of a better team.

So then they put more emphasis on "strength of schedule" and wins. Essentially the skill level of the teams you're facing is the main factor for determining rank, if you win. That was taken into account before, but it was important to pile up a lot of points before the game ended. Now it only mattered how good the team you are playing is, and if you win. But people complained about that, saying that if you only barely beat a mediocre team, that should count against you, and that if you beat the hell out of a good team, you should be rewarded.

The developers can make adjustments, but unless they just assign a fixed number based on difficulty and type of victory (eg. maso giant military = 10,000, maso huge military = 9,000, maso giant tech = 6000, etc.) there is going to be some way to fiddle with the numbers to make your score better. If quick wins get the most points, then the top players will play the type of maps, and pick the race picks to get a fast win. And if population is rewarded, people will make sure they colonize every 13 and 14 planet. And if tech victory gets the most points, people will conquer the entire galaxy and then go for tech.

And so no matter what the developers do, there will be a best way to get points. They can try to make the difference between the best way and the second best way smaller, but someone's going to look for the way to make the most points, and that someone will find it.
Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top
I want to stress that I don't exploiting pop in my last game. It is something which we miss in scoring system. For example in Civ games there was reward for time in peace and in my last game I never being in war - this is just guess. May be time when you made researching is important, for example in last game after a while I go straight to beyond human, when I researched beyond human nobody including me didn't research dreadnought tech. Only after that I researche all other techs before finally got final frontier.

As for fun, I think that most interesting is to discover different strategy for winning or may be just invent "absurd" rules. I started those challange and quickly lost first game, but after I found some new (at least for me) approach and win several times. Now this strategy shows exellent score on medium game and believe me it was not boring. For sure after playing the same stategy several times it starting boring and I hope to find something new.
Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top
Sergey, im not gonna ask you to stop doing what you find
fun :)

I didnt play your game and I cant honestly say what
you did or did not do, but going to 2219 in a medium
crippling seems very excessive. 5 trillion is alot
for a medium :)

Reply #7 from Stardock Forums Top
I know its not your fault sergey, I mean the
13th ranked player has never beaten a game beyond
beginner. There are countless examples of absurd
scoring going on.

Dont sweat it to much :)
Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top
You dont want to get point, all your vision of the game is that the best startegy is those which can give fastest win. But in this case you will loose more then half of game features. It is absolutely clear that for tiny map you just rush to frigate may be battleship and game will be finished.

All your consideration and ideal scoring system (your other thread) are based on the only idea the faster the better.

But try to take another point: the more you are in peace the better.

but going to 2219 in a mediumcrippling seems very excessive. 5 trillion is alotfor a medium
End of quote


I have explained that I use non military strategy and for that type it is not very excessive, just try won the game military without building transports and combat transport.

to redshift8

I
And so no matter what the developers do, there will be a best way to get points. They can try to make the difference between the best way and the second best way smaller, but someone's going to look for the way to make the most points, and that someone will find it.
End of quote


I absolutely agree, and I already wrote that learning scoring system well and fast is very important part of metaverse competition.

Reply #9 from Stardock Forums Top
I'll agree with you on that one staffa. I think that difficulty should factor into the points more than they do. I agree that it's a little silly to have top ranked people only playing simple difficulty. I don't think I should have scores that can compete with someone who plays on maso all the time. I also don't think someone that plays on normal should be able to compete with me. I have to hope and trust that the devs will get it right eventually.
Reply #10 from Stardock Forums Top
Staffa, the main problem in the scoring is a size problem. Try Maso medium and see how you come out.

I'm doing crippling medium, but I cannot submit for some reason. And my logon is not working in sds. So something wierd is going on. Meanwhile these Easy mediums are outscoring Gigantic Painful, one of which I have ready to submit but I cant cuz it will kill my score (assuming it would let me submit anyway) Hey, my root canal today was more fun. :)
Reply #11 from Stardock Forums Top
I play a lot more like what Sergey played in this last game. I rarely build a transport or combat transport. Sometime wars are forced apon me, but I usually try to achieve supremacy and then get something for peace. I usually take over the galaxy with culture, which is a slow process, but it gives me time to climb the tech tree. Also I usually trail the AI in tech, so have to scramble to be able to counter the overlords when they come.

2219 doesn't seem unusual at all to me. I still think maso should score more than crippling, but I have faith that brad and company will figure it out.
Reply #12 from Stardock Forums Top
I agree that difficulty should be more valuable than it is, I think that best possible score for givan map size for one difficulty should be somewhere like average score for the next difficulty. Also it should be considered that difference between difficulties nonlinear. Difference between maso and crippling is huge, while difference between crippling and painful is quite small.
Reply #13 from Stardock Forums Top
What's this? ANOTHER round table discussion on scoring by the Top 10 players of the Metaverse? (rolls collective eyes for rest of Galcivers)

Hehe guys, why don't we divert our attention to another topic? Like MEDALS?
Reply #14 from Stardock Forums Top
Sergey, should the metaverse control how galciv is
played or should galciv control how the metaverse is
scored?

Galciv is a strategy game, the princables of strategy
games do not include using artifical means outside
of the actual game to encourage people to play longer
to experience all the areas of the actual game.

If the game is not balanced enough to cause people
to need to use the entire tech tree, then using
the metaverse scoring system is just a crutch that
hides the problem with a cure that is worse then
the disease.

That said, I dont believe this is even true, most
players actually do need the majority of the tech tree.

Of course you wont need it on a tiny and small maps, but
its absurd that people tech all the way to final frontier
on a tiny map, if you actually needed to go to the
end of the tech tree on a tiny map, what exactly would
people be doing on larger maps?

On gigantic maps, I naturally get to excaliburs, its
pretty well balanced, if its to fast to you, then
your problem is your not playing masochistic :)

Anyway, its flawed to use the metaverse to try and
force people to explore galciv more fully.
Reply #15 from Stardock Forums Top
Sergey, should the metaverse control how galciv isplayed or should galciv control how the metaverse isscored?
End of quote


I can agree that galciv should try to not control but influence how the metaverse is scored, but I can't agree that your approach "the faster the better" is the only correct criteria for scoring. Just try to play peacefully (may be it is impossible on maso) and may be you rediscover GalCiv for yourself and change your mind.
Reply #16 from Stardock Forums Top
Peacefully as in not trying to win?


Or peacefully as in trying to win via cultural flipping
alliance or tech?

If the first, thats absurd
If the second, speed is still a valid measure of skill.

Reply #17 from Stardock Forums Top
Ray, I'm on that medal action.

Staffa, Sergey, I just said something very similar to what sergey said in another thread (Staffa's Ideal Scoring System Thread). I basically think that the very best crippling should be low to middle maso, and the best painful should be low to middle crippling, and so on. I don't think there should be any way possible to have a normal difficulty score higher that the worst maso win ever done.
Reply #18 from Stardock Forums Top

I can agree that galciv should try to not control but influence how the metaverse is scored, but I can't agree that your approach "the faster the better" is the only correct criteria for scoring. Just try to play peacefully (may be it is impossible on maso) and may be you rediscover GalCiv for yourself and change your mind.


I have played peacefully and wrapped up the game by 2205.
Reply #19 from Stardock Forums Top
Staffa. Guess You and I are gonna have to hit turn for about 120 times, end the game in 2217 instead of 2205, build up that pop, Turn off tech win, so I can go through the entire tree, and Milk that Medium and small cow. Everyone else is doing it.

Either that or don't even worry too much about taking over the galaxy untill 2200. while my pop skyrockets. and then we can claim "But it was in normal gameplay!!!"
Reply #20 from Stardock Forums Top
"I don't think there should be any way possible to have a normal difficulty score higher that the worst maso win ever done."

I think I'm the winner of the worst maso win ever 268 pts (1.035).

[Message Edited]
Reply #21 from Stardock Forums Top
Oh wow, I feel stupid.

Turn off tech victory, well DUH, thats how you do it.

Starts swearing at himself.

Ok, I will def have final frontier next game :)

But i refuse to hit turn doing nothing, I refuse
at least until I see how 1.05 turns out.

Reply #22 from Stardock Forums Top

Oh wow, I feel stupid.

Turn off tech victory, well DUH, thats how you do it.

Starts swearing at himself.


I feel honored. Staffa learned something from me. HEHE.
Reply #23 from Stardock Forums Top
With all due respect Pontius, you aren't playing at the higher difficulties. You may find it more challenging to win quickly on crippling following the peaceful approach.

With regards to hitting turn a few hundred times, I don't know that everyone else is doing it. As for not worrying about taking over the galaxy till 2200, I'm not really sure why you believe that those of us who don't play the same way you do are doing something wrong. We just enjoy different things. You may like beating up on the AI at tough by 2205, where I like struggling to stay alive vs. crippling till dreadnaughts when I can usually start to turn the tables. Other players might not have as much difficulty with crippling as I do, but I like to keep raising the difficulty until I have trouble winning, but still can. That point is crippling for me on the current version of the game, and I can't beat it by 2205.
Reply #24 from Stardock Forums Top
Some people enjoy losing, doesnt mean it should score
as well as winning.

Dont confuse having fun with a measure of skill.

By all means, have all the fun you can, but dont
expect me to believe that taking twice as long to win
on the exact same map with the exact same end control
of the universe should result in the exact same score
on the metaverse.

If that comes off as insulting, I apologize, I know
your a good player and I am glad your having fun
with the game, but please dont confuse fun with skill
even newer players have fun(of course they do!)

Reply #25 from Stardock Forums Top
#20 by Veteran RayChua - 6/10/2003 10:16:37 PM

"I think I'm the winner of the worst maso win ever 268 pts (1.035)."
Regretfully, I have to disappoint you. My worst maso win has scored 156 (Also 1.035). Besides, I have half a dozen maso wins scoring in 150-200 range. And the real jewel in my collection is maso win on small for total of 139 points. All these scores come from fast military, cultural or alliance wins.