Your game confirms that this alignment setting produces a deflated score. It is either a alignment bonus problem or SD thinks that 5 good AIs are an easier setting and deserves lower scores.

I am the opposite to you. I have found the couple of Tiny/Small maso games I played a bit more tolerable than the larger galaxies. I assumed a Gigantic maso would be beyond me, but didn't think about being able toi stay isolated long enough to build up a bit. That's a good point you make, so I will give it a go.
Before I played Small I tried a few Mediums and got properly thumped.
I am wondering if Medium is the hardest size to play on Maso (not taking into account the amount of work and playing time required on Gigantic and Huge). ON Tiny and Small with +Speed, you can evade the AI and defend the few planets you have. One Huge/Gigantic (and mybe Large) you can stay out of the way long enough to get things rolling.
In terms of the opening phase of the game what have you guys found to be the hardest size. (I Have only played Tiny/Small/Medium maso so can only speculate).

As part of an attempt to mod the game, I realized that the ai desperately needs expanding, even on maso. It is utterly unable to provide any threat when it's out of range, not knowing how to use starbases to increase range. This means a gigantic maso with tight clusters should be easier than a scattered or smaller map, because if the ai is unable to reach you when it's got better classes of ships, it will be unable to be a threat and when you'll start settling the PQ14/PQ13 planets to get more production, it will be unable to present a threat as you'll be rich enough to pay them out of war or strong enough to fight them.

That's why I posted in another thread that more points for gigantic map is not fair.

Actually, even on gigantic it is almost impossible to be "out of range". The ais at maso get a +1 range bonus (or was it +2 ?) and research the +1 range tech before you have finished settling "your" cluster. I know I can usually reach other clusters with my colony ships, even if I decline to, so they most certainly can.

Also, on gigantic, there is almost always a resource part of the way, and the ais are good at grabbing them, which also extend their reach.

However, with the right starting position, you can take the sectors it might be able to reach before they get to them, and settle the others at your leisure. Once that is done, the ais are in no hurry to make contact with you.

So the benefit is not that they can't reach you, because they certainly can, unless you have a very strange map. It is that they are in no hurry to do so, and the distance protects you from culture flipping early on. (I once tried "sharing" a cluster, rushing to the common border to mark "my" part of it, and saw my planets start to flip as soon as I built them )


One last remark : I think more points for gigantic is fair, not because they are more difficult to play, but because they take much longer. It is true that they have their good points, like giving you more time at the start, but they also have disadvantages : you can't take an ai out with an alpha strikes when it owns 30 to 40 systems for example, and when it comes to moving ships around you have to think long term.

I just won a Gigantic Maso very easily (with my pacifist playing style). It is easier to make peace at this level because you are likely to have a high tax income from all your planets, but the amount of money they demand for bribes doesn't increase proportionally. So I was able to keep the peace and ultimately buy up all the influence resources. With a total +700% influence bonus, it's pretty easy to win.
I also set it to tight clusters, which helped. The AI was slow to explore the remote clusters and (with the help of +2 speed pick) I was able to build an empire bigger than anyone else's early on.


~SDC~

one of the biggest flaws in the AI right now imo.

Yes. It ought to work both ways; smaller and weaker AIs should realise that they can't afford to pay so much for things.


~SDC~

ummm... when i play masdo.. no matter what map size , cluster tightness, pq15 abundace or lack there of, I always get my but kicked and the AI's are definatly quicker at exploring then i am

I'm no slouck at normal.. scores of up to 13k on large prove that.. so what the bejesus am i doing wrong ? (apart from trying to play masso.. LOL )

Matthew, you sound like you just ate one for breakfast.

As Blue has found, it seems takes quite a bit of experience at that level before you get the hang of it.

Personally, I find the medium-sized maps to be the most challenging on Maso. Tinies are easier because closer distances makes AIs easy to rush. For Gigantics, it is easier to avoid the AIs until you are ready and AIs tend not to be able to wage war as effectively over large distances.

The multiplier given for map sizes is not a reflection of the difficulty of the map size, it is rather an indication of the amount of time spent on that size in general. Gigantics obviously take a much longer time to complete as compared to Tinies. I don't think the current 3-1 Gigantic/Tiny ratio is unreasonable.

Different players with different playing styles would have their own judgement with regards to the difficulty of various map sizes.

~SDC~

I just finished my Huge/Maso and scored a lot better than my last Gigantic/Maso. This time instead of 5 pure good AIs against me (pure evil), I took everyone as pure evil. Much better score.
I did notice that most of my points came from my economy and society scores (10K each), while researching all techs only got me 6K. The other catagories were about the same.

Looks like I'm going to make sure I have a happy populace with lots o' cash before I "win" from now on. I think this also supports my score for my last Gigantic/Maso as well. That game I was short on cash and my morale was less than 100% by the end.

~SDC~

I think the scoring factors in your moral and economy at different points in the game, not just at the end.

I just finished my first gigantic game and have to admit, I am not sure I would play one again! ohmygawd.... hats off to you regular gigantic players. Too much grind for me though.
Tiny/Small/Gigantic are beatable (haven't tried Large/Huge maso yet - will do that next).
Like Ray and Co said - Medium/Maso with Common or Abundant definitely seems to be the hardest setting. I have played 3 and lost 3!

Congratulations on your 19K win. That's tough. The Gigantic ones take me days to finish. I busted through a Huge galaxy in less than two. Huge ones are much easier to manage as well. Getting late, brain, shutting down ... must ... sleep.

~SDC~

Lothmorg and other gigantic players,
about how many HOURS are you taking to finish a gigantic? Days doesnt tell me much. I rarely get to play for more than 1 to 2 hours on weekdays and maybe 7 total on the weekend. It took me over a week to finish my last large game. Playing huge right now and Im seeing a completion time of November coming.

Ray,
I definitely think that the scoring is screwed up when you play 1 or 2 evil vs the rest good. This should get you a significant bonus in my mind but when I did it my score was very disappointing (havent submitted it yet so dont look for it). The thrill of it was awesome though! Having 3+ civs declare war on you in one turn is quite exhilirating . Seeing their dreads descending upon your frigs and BH's is more of a despair filled event (:( .

Hi General, have you think about joining an empire? We need people like you Sir come an visit our place at http://www.galciv.com/metaverse/empires.asp?id=264 or come and visit our website and if you like to create mods you can post them over there also at http://www.cdgroup.org/forums/tbs/gc/ Good hunt and Good Luck Kaplahx!!!

he tacticus do you like to join the European Alliance?

~SDC~

Typically, a gigantic galaxy will take me about 20 to 25 hours to complete. I am very slow to start, but I pick it up towards the end. Gigantic starts are a micromanagement hell.

~SDC~

I take 6-8 hours for a gigantic. I did 2 1/2 hrs before but that was Calkwalk.

Using governors, reducing micromanagement and having less of ships, constructors and SBs speeds up the game a lot.

Thanks... I am still not too good at the scoring side, not sure what factors give you a better score. So can't match Ray's 30K games. Got no idea how those guys do that. I just kill/flip everyone, the games ends, and I see my score. Sometimes it's high, sometimes it's not. I assume it's a combination of money, tech, TGs, Wonders. What about morale and population/number of systems... does that factor in?

I know when I play at maso, the only early TG/wonder I can get is Diplomatic Translators... and that is only leasing myself into -700bc debt. By the time I am out of debt, the AIs have already built Resturant/Eyes/Gravity/Aphro etc. I don't get any more TG/wonders until midgame.

Simple answer. The new beta scoring system. I got only a couple thousand more than you on 1.05 and that's probably because I finish the tech tree.

I don't get most of the early TGs/wonders as well. Those are tough to get at Maso.

~SDC~

oooooohhhh. ok, didn't realise that. is the ramped up score due to playing on maso? I remember Brad saying that was a change.

oh well, no more gigantic maso for me until the xpack!

Holy frickn cow! And you actually win? I probably just sit and think for that amount of time. By the way, what is "calkwalk" LOL ? Do you have white lines of calk showing you where to move your ships too?