GalCiv 1.092 up on Drengin.net

Wooohooo the final frontier option for the AI is in the game
Is there an AI path that tries to reach this goal or doesn't the AI have the strategy yet to reach Final Frontier?

Thanks for the update Brad!

~SDC~

D/loading it now . can't wait. hurry up d/load

Thanks Brad!

I love this game and I love this company!

For those of us interested in the new scoring, I have reloaded all 12 of my 1.091 games under 1.092. The results are as follows:

Calkwalk 1.091/1.092 scores
15610/15360

Crippling 1.091/1.092 scores
Game 1 - 19670/22810
Game 2 - 20160/23300
Game 3 - 20390/23730
Game 4 - 20600/23730
Game 5 - 20970/24060
Game 6 - 21290/24430

Maso 1.091/1.092 scores
Game 1 - 26140/30000
Game 2 - 24690/30000
Game 3 - 25780/30000
Game 4 - 24610/30000
Game 5 - 23490/30000

Calkwalk scores seem untouched but the patch readme did say that the harder difficulties are tweaked, not the lower ones.

On average my crippling games increased in score about 15%. However, 1.092 crippling scores are still lower than the 24-25k scores that I have gotten under 1.05.

The impact to Maso is interesting. All my Maso games are scored at 30k under 1.092. Would all Maso games now be scored at 30k or is this just a hard cap in terms of scoring? More testing is required though I suspect the latter.

Brad, would like to ask you if it is okay for me to resubmit my Beta 3 games under the Beta 4 scoring. Beta 3 was supposed to give higher scores but it seemed to have given lower scores than 1.05 instead. I will only resubmit if I hear from you that it is ok. Thanks.

I thought that all prevous game scores would be automaticly updated through the metaverse.. I hope this is the case.. as I for one havn't kept all my games and don't want to be penalized for this when others re-submit their games

Since Ray's Maso scores were already so high, he didn't get a lot more for resubitting them with the apparent hard cap of 30K. I had 2 maso scores that went up as follows:

Maso 1.091/1.092 scores
Game1 about 8,000/15,270
Game2 about 13,000/22,850

Well, good for me and a couple others. Maybe we'll actually have people who play maso regularly now.
[Message Edited]

Edited because my reading abilities are sadly lacking.

Basically I agree with BlueSteel.
[Message Edited]

It would good if they could just recalc our 1.091 scores to 1.092 scores automatically, Blue. To carry it even further, I thought it would be good if all 1.05/1.091/1.092 could be synchronised under the same scoring system once the Xpack is out.

~SDC~

Actually, I would suggest tweaking the single resubmission opportunity to allow resubmissions only under the same version.

~SDC~

I've not resubmitted yet, Qui-Jon. Just loaded them up to see the new scores.

~SDC~

If there is indeed a hard cap of 30k, then a Maso player would not feel incentivised to play at Gigantic as it is likely that his score would be capped. Qui-Gon's medium/maso achieved a 23k score. So a Maso player would likely want to play at Large or Huge to get a very good score without hitting the cap.

If the intention is to create a wider differential in scores between difficulties, I do not see the reason why the cap should remain at 30k. I would suggest that the cap be raised to a higher number such as 50k.

Reading the other thead on 1.092 scoring, the base score for Maso has been doubled and Qui-Jon's games do show a near doubling of scores. Therefore, it is likely that my Maso games would have been scored around 40-45k without capping.

~SDC~

I take it then that the answer to my question in no. ohwell it looks like i get the short end of the stick yet again In future i'll be keeping all save games so that i can re-submit them.. (If i remember that is)

Blue, don't give up yet. I believe Stardock did a recalc fairly recently. Give them time to get going on the new beta. I could probably dig out some of my old saves, but I don't really think it's worth it unless you've invested a ton of time at the top 2 levels. And Stardock may decide those players are the ones who deserve a pat on the back. We'll see.

Blue, yes, our old scores remain.

We had a similar situation sometime ago under ver 1.044 where the scores were wonky. When 1.05 came out, there was an explicit post from SD saying that the re-submit flags for 1.044 were removed so that players could resubmit them under 1.05. Some of us who archived/retained our savegames did so, including myself.
~SDC~

We have learnt that what's "legal" may not be what's "proper", so I would prefer if SD gave the go-ahead before resubmitting.


[Message Edited]

This is really good feedback. I had forgotten about the hard cap so I will update it in the next build to raise the cap from 30k to 50k.

Forgive me if i'm wrong or out of place here... but if the metaverse doesn't adjust scores for playing games on older versions. wouldn't that just encourage those who are getting these high scores to keep using the older versions ?

I think it would be better if the metaverse re-calculated the scores when submitted to the current scoring method. and report the change when it reports the successfull posting of the scores. that way everyone is playing on an equeal playing field (bar for added mods). It would also mean then that the game itself wouldn't have to calculate the metaverse scores and it would make it easier to change the scoring algorythims in one place at one time. and when the algorythum does get changed that the metaverse should automatically change already posted scores to match.

It probably isn't likely that people will play with older versions, IMO. Everyone likes new bells and whistles, and I think everyone is looking forward to the new improvements. I could be wrong though. There's always someone who thinks the MV _IS_ the game. To me it is just an added bonus.

I don't quite understand your logic here, Blue. According to what Frogboy stated, scores are not penalized under the new version, i.e. the beginner level scores were not nerfed. Scores on harder levels do get a bigger boost, however. So by playing older versions you would only be depriving yourself of the higher scores on harder levels, for no apparent gain.

But this is still another beta. And it appears you have to have a drengin account to get it. This is in slight contrast to what I have read. Is it going to be just the final X-pack that is provided at no charge? Plz explain.

Also, I think anyone re-submitting old scores just for a point boost is, TRUE cheeze. Esp when there are players out there stuck with 1.05. And why are Beta scores considered anyflappinway (at a different scoring level)? level the boat until the field gets leveled.

Need coffee. My symbiont got up on the wrong side of the brain this morning.

On the earlier versions of the beta, the scores were actually usually a bit lower than the 1.05 release

Alex


~SDC~

Which is a prime example why things currently under tweaking should not be counted.

Hi Mitch, Jonh here reporting at the first Galatic olympics. There is a large crowd near the gates protesting the new pole vault event. They feel the that having the bar continously move up and down while the athlete is running towrds the pole pocket is unfair and in no way a good judge of skill. "If they time it right, they don't even need a pole" one ofthe signs read. However security has the area fenced in and they assure us the protesters will not break through security and disrupt the games in progress. back to you Mitch.

The scoring has been constantly tweaked since day 1. Not just betas but actual updates have had scoring tweaks as well. Lost count of the number of tweaks we already had.

No one is stuck with 1.05 for long. The beta is due out in a couple of weeks. I suggest you save your endgames and resubmit as many games under the new version as soon as you get the free exp pack. At worst you will be behind the curve for only a short time.