Some sort like a "Retire to Hall of Fame" function in the Metaverse?

I can remove my score by delinking my serial number from RayChua games but I really like to have keep my rank and medals.

~SDC~

If I bribe X to go to war with Y, that should be considered to be almost an act of war with Y. Certainly relations should be downgraded to Hostile, and if already cool, wary, or hostile it should mean war.

In addition, if X is at war with Y, then Y should consider giving gifts of any sort to X to be a hostile act.

Hows Y gonna find out? LOL

I read this thread twice and still can win at Maso. Tried 3 times since this thread came out. I've won many games but maso has me

How about if you have a very (VERY) high espionage ability, you occasionally get to listen in on enemy discussions? I get messages about "The Arceans are paying tribute to the Drengin to maintain the peace." Big w00t. How about, "The Arceans are asking the Drengin to invade us!"?




I actually like that comment when you think about the suggestions here like banning ctrl-N and not allowing players to go back to old save games. These are problems that you will find in some form in every single game I can think of. RTS? Oh, the AI got my favourite starting position next to the lake. Restart! FPS? Here's two very common situations:

1) I walk around a corner and a marine gets me with a rocket launcher at point-blank range. I hit the quick-load, and toss a grenade around the corner.

2) I see a row of ledges / laser trip-mines / whatever up ahead. I try jumping past, but fall/fry/explode. So, I quick-load and try again.

You could call scenario 1 cheesy. Forbidden knowledge and all that. What about 2? I jumped left when I should have jumped right, so I died. I think that if I jump right, I could beat this thing. Should I restart the whole game? What about if I'm playing maso, and I let a strong enemy capture a minor planet, and I'm busy fighting a weaker enemy. I quickly realize that I'm up the proverbial creek, and I should have stopped the strong guy get the minor planet instead of playing with the little one? Can I go back, try a different strategy, and see if it works?

At the end of the day, these save-load cheeses are always going to be around. The ones truly desperate for scores will find ways to get around them, and being forced to play Ironman mode is no fun for me. I'd rather have Brad work on in-game problems than "external problems" such as these.

Ray: I don't like seeing people leave the Metaverse because of different scoring systems. If you enjoy playing those gigantic maso games, then submit them, damn it! Don't let any of this stuff stop you. If you're bored with them, try some freaky new ideas to win quickly and submit, even if the score's bad. Hmm. Maybe you could start submitting losses, and get all the Fellowship to follow your lead. Start a cult going for it.

Okay, I was joking about that last bit. But I meant the rest.

what i love is when the choice is totally removed for me, forcing me to redo twenty minutes work (now it's not play, i've already been over this part so the fun factor is gone) because i did one thing wrong right before an "insta-die" moment the designers put in. platform jumping in fps are a great example where the quick save is a MUST.

i'd rather have cheese than annoyance.

Yes, but GalCiv is a stragegy game. A turn based strategy game. I don't believe there is any situation where you would need to quicksave to avoid these kind of annoyances.

The only major difference I see is that with those FPS examples, you realize right away that you've messed up. Here, you can make a blunder and not realize it until a long way down the track. Ever played any RPGs where this sort of thing happens?

"Quick! You know that scroll you were given three months ago that everyone said was worthless? It's the spell of ownage! Cast it on the evil wizard and you win!"
"Oh, um, that scroll? Well, everyone said it was worthless, so I sold it for a few beans."

Okay, I can't remember any specific examples, but I do remember several games that let you sell or destroy mission critical items with no warning and no way to get them back.

The parallel with a turn-based strategy game is that you don't realize a blunder right away. If it's a game-losing blunder, and you've realized that you messed up, are you forced to play it through until every planet gets invaded? Maybe it doesn't cost you the game, but it makes it ten times harder. You could play through the effectively maso game (even if you only wanted tough or painful), restart the whole game, or go back to when you made that mistake and try again. What if you made a good choice and won the game, but you want to go back to that scenario and try a different tack, to see what happens?

It's got a hint of cheese about it, sure, but there's bigger cheeses in the actual gameplay that I'd rather see the devs spend their budget on.

You know, all that whining about what cheese it is to reload is because of one thing... people taking the MV seriously. I know how StarDock and our favorite Frog can shut down ALL this whining about this or that tactic is cheesy... Don't have points in the MV at all.

That's it. No points. Then there would be noone that could possibly take it seriously. You've got no metric. It would just be "Thank you for submitting your game! Here's a big smile and a warm, fuzzy hug from the Star Dockians! By the way, they wanted to say your skin looks... delicious."

There. After that, no more need for any Star Dockian to have to waste their time hearing about how cheesy it is that a game that takes 30 minutes to play and win scoring 20K is way out of balance versus a game that took 3 weeks to play only scoring 150 points. No more "Stop everyone from cheating by reloading an earlier save in their game!". No more "Stop everyone from using CNTRL+N to get a starting position that they like!"

All of all that whining and worry about how other people are getting stuff over you just goes away. No metric, then what they do won't matter to you. You can then concentrate on just having fun and improving your game, rather then your score. And no more people playing to score the best on the MV! Cause there isn't any!

What about it Brad? Sound like a plan?
[Message Edited]

Discussing something in a rational way is not whining. There is nothing wrong with striving to make a good thing better.

Yes there are some who write to whine and complain. But others are writing in a good-natured attempt to make things better. Sometimes, the only difference between the two is in the attitude of the person who reads it.

You know the people who save-load at every random event until they get exact one they want? That's pure cheese, but they'd probably do it whether or not the metaverse existed, so I don't think scrapping the metaverse would help that. It's not like I care what they do in the privacy of their own home, anyway. On the other hand, if people want to play Ironman games, and come up with a foolproof way to make it uncheatable, I'm happy for them to add it as an option. I just don't want to be labelled a cheater for a casual reload.

Oh, and I don't think anyone here's whining. I had to look up some stuff on a forum for another game, and I was reminded what a great place this is. They had moderators flaming vets for actually answering newbie questions, then pointing them to the FAQ, instead of just saying "read the FAQ". The mods said "it was a waste of server space". Incredible. It's good to be home again.

modders who make a new event and test it out without playing a 300 turn game that MIGHT have it?



lol. talk about self-defeating: if i get people who answer newbie questions angry, there will be fewer answer the newbie posts. everyone wins!

just curious where is this forum?

russellmz2 . . . your right these are the kindest, happiest forums I've sver had the pleasure of participating in

Jinn, there are plenty of people whining about the MV and how it scores. Funny thing is, most people that are whining don't think they are... Most whiners won't. Because they think it's a legitimate concern of all right thinking people in the universe.

For instance, you don't think a casual reload is cheating. There are those that do, and seriously whine about the fact that you can reload when you want. Something to remember.

Why has the the number of Maso players gone up so much lately? Because Maso scores so many points. The MV Point Chasers are moving up just to score more points. And some people are whining about maso scoring so much. Look at this title thread.

Suggestions for improvements are: "How about the AI has to find the yellow stars like we do? That way, it's an even race to see who gets what? I'd enjoy that!"

Complaints that other people can use CNTRL+N until they get a start they like do not seem like an improvement to me.

Again, why should Star Dock waste time on the MV? That time could be better spent actually improving the game, rather then constantly messing with the MV, couldn't it? Even Brad has said that, repeatily, here in these forums.

What change, if made, would really improve your enjoyment of GalCiv? That's not whining, that's a good thing to share. But most suggested changes aren't really going to appeal to most of the other players, and those will seem to be odd or whining.

Enjoy the game, have fun. Don't worry very much over what others are doing. Only worry over what will improve your enjoyment. And don't take offense when people tell you, "you're whining". That means they don't agree. It happens.

Have fun, and keep on GC'ing!

That was on an old unofficial forum for EV-Nova, but I think that one's dead now. The new forum's better, but still - half the posts are frequently asked questions that are in the FAQ, the other half are frequently asked questions that aren't in the FAQ (and really should be).

The game was originally mac, and got ported to PC, and I think there's a few subtle differences. Someone asked a question (saying he had a pc version), Vet one said "answer's X on the mac", vet two said "it's X on the pc too", and a mod told vet two not to spam.

Actually, when I stop and think about it, it's quite a good forum. There's no trolls or spammage. Guess it shows how much I've gotten too used to this place. I'm spoiled.

#116

#117



What's spammage exactly?

I'm gonna dob you in, you silly koala. They'll bump you down to Citizen so fast it'll make your head spin

Actually, when I said spammage, I was thinking about creating twenty new threads with the subject "mary had a little lamb". I shouldn't have said that, now it's only a matter of time before someone tries it...

Star Pilot,
I agree that there are some people who whine too much. I just wanted to point out that not all people who post game improvement suggestions are whiners. A point on which we seem to agree. Maybe I was a little defensive , because I like to post my ideas on how to improve the game. The are not meant as complaints. No game is perfect, nor will there ever be one.

As far as what improves a game, well, I think the metaverse is an important aspect of the GalCiv. You do not. We will all just have to agree to disagree on that.

About time for me to get some whining in, while it seems to be in fashion. Did I advocate that maso score high? Yes, but it was envisioned as part of a gentle curve or even somewhat straight graph where the difficulty modifier was small at cake and steadily and progressively more rewarding on the way up, with maso getting a little spike at the top. Instead, it looks like we got a slightly different animal. This is a complex scoring system with many variables, so it is usually hard to isolate one thing and say, "Aha! This is the problem," but there seems to be a three tier system in place now. The first four levels seem to score close to each other, then there is a slight jump to another similar scoring bracket at normal up to level 8, painful. Then the spike starts and then goes off the chart at crip and maso. Throw in some different play styles among those other variables besides difficulty, and that makes this a rough guess for any player, even one who looks at a lot of records, to know what is really going on in the non-maso levels. But the maso spike is quite obvious. This can be fixed.

Then we got this whole mess of victory conditions scoring differently so "everyone" tries to engineer military victories to bump score. I was always against that, too. Of course, a lot of the time that "military victory" was comprised of mostly culture bomb flips because some enterprising player just conventiently turns off culture victory. This, as well, can be fixed.

(WARNING: Gerakken going into opinionated editorial mode.) And let us not forget our new generation of crankers, playing maso tiny. I can't forget to rant about them. Old crankers, GCCG crankers, maso tiny crankers. All have the common thread of maximizing points by minimizing opposition and time taken. This cannot be fixed. At least not in any easy manner. Here, it is not the game that is skewed, but the player. Sure, the devs can program a patch to make tiny maso score less, and they can even pad the maso AI with even more bonuses to make it harder, but the enterprising score monger can still find a way to engineer a high scoring victory. Plug one high score hole, the score monger just moves onto the next weak section of the wall and chips away there.

Sure, I agree that in every sport or competition people are looking for an edge. That is just the nature of competition. But there is a difference between someone who trains hard to play hard and someone taking performance enhancing drugs, using non-standard equipment, or outright changing the rules in their favor in the match. Each generation of cranker fits that last category. The payoff matters more to them than the game. "For the love of the game," that still exists. But in a lot of sports, the love of money became greater. In Galciv, we have a similar break down. There are some of us who play for the sake of the game. Then there are those who play for the payoff on the Meta.

When I run the numbers of the top people, I know that although it is not my intent to reward any cranker types who are lurking in the Meta, I am giving them credence as well as the type of player I am looking for. I vainly dig and dig to find those in the upper echelons who play the game and not the Meta, but more and more I am finding people playing the Meta. To go back into a sports analogy, I am looking for iron men to play the grid iron. Old school athletes who play the game well and where the paycheck matters little, not the more modern mentality where winning may not be everything, but the paycheck is.

Am I disillusioned with the Meta? Not really. How can I be if I never really cared about my exact ranking. Am I disillusioned with the forum? Heck no. You people are great folks in general and I try to come here often. Not so much these days because of other things going on, but people know I care about this community. If I had to narrow down the source of my discontent, I would have to honestly indict myself for coming to dislike modern American society with all of its entitlement and self-esteem culture where materialism is king. The ever changing tactics of score mongerers in Galciv playing the Meta for the biggest rewards just reminds me too much of that society sometimes.

Well, thank you all for putting up with ol' Gerakken's yapping. Maybe I wasted space, but maybe there are some thoughts here to ponder whether you agree with my assessment of the current scoring situation or my editorializing afterward. I just needed to put something in writing.

http://www.galciv.com/forum.asp?BID=GF&id=98678#98705

Reply #10 (by me)

Maso may be the way to get big points quickly - but remember the tale of the hare and the tortoise.

Certainly, the most difficult I currently enjoy playing is "challenging" - and then only when I'm in the mood. It doesn't prevent reasonable scores, but you do have to submit games regularly to stay up in the charts - I like a game that lasts between one and two hours - all the time I can spare at the moment - and where I get a challenge, but don't always lose on.

Anyone who looks at my card will see that the most difficult level I've got recorded is challenging, most of my games are at normal, and most are "small" universe. This hasn't stopped me getting into the top 25, being a vice admiral, whatever!

Little and often can work quite well - but you have to be prepared to keep at it.

Alex


~SDC~

Gerraken,you are a really important part of the Gal Civ community and as always, your editorials are very thoughtful and interesting. Mostly, I agree with you. The new scoring in 1.1 should have never, ever made sub-maso or sub-crippling scores go down. It just seems like an un-necessary psychological bummer for newer players and those who are happy playing at their preferred levels. I also think the maso bump is a little generous. But, maso is very, very hard and (at least for me) - MUCH harder than crippling. To me, the difficulty rise in maso compared to crippling is like the difficulty in crippling compared to beginner. Although how much reward is in question, there should be some extra reward for those who study the guides and threads, get beat up learning how to play maso, and then master it. I am still in the "getting beat up by maso" phase so my opinion may change. LOL

In addition to the reward for a harder difficulty, there is still the reward, as Alex points out, for consistently submitting games week after week after week. This is a good thing I think and one of the interesting things about the metaverse. It is not only a snapshot of who is best (difficulty) but who is persistent or dedicated. Plus, practice makes perfect and playing 50 games is a great way to improve. Often the tortise does outrank the hare on the metaverse board like Alex says.

I think most of us know who the best players are but that may be reflected more in who gets the highest score at a particular level and map size rather than metaverse rank. It is pretty obvious to most of us, that a tiny map is easier than a gigantic. But how a tiny maso compares to a gigantic painful or huge crippling is hard to evaluate so the scoring will never please everyone.

OK I have to say this . . . Sometimes the word "cranker" is a little perjorative and it could unfairly be applied to those who submit a lot of games when we all really want a lot of people to submit a lot of games so our gal civ community is big and active. It sure beats having few people submit few games. LOL.

Does cranker mean someone who plays fast? Is that bad? Does cranker mean someone who submits lots of games? Is that bad? Does cranker mean someone who plays on tiny/small maps? Is that bad? I get confused when people talk negatively about "cranking".

Maybe a new category of recognition for the "highest scoring game" in a particular category would be more accurate to determine who is the best player but the metaverse scoring summary is more than that since it reflects dedication to (or obsession with? LOL) Gal Civ.

One final thing I have not seen mentioned is that some of us prefer (or preferred) to dominate the game rather than just win. This is what I did for a long time but I can't dominate anything on maso. On maso I am always behind and always just trying to figure out how to survive and keep from getting toasted. There is no way I can run the tech tree like I used to for example because I am too busy trying to figure out how to win and don't want victory to slip away while I milk the score. When I win the game on maso, I am usually near the bottom in economy, military, & tech. On my sub-maso wins, I am number one in every category. So for some of us, maso really changes the game and adds a new dimension. Maso lets some discard milking the score and just play the game knowing the score will be adequate even if the maso player just barely wins. But, who knows if the score for a maso tiny should approximate a huge crippling. That may be where the issue gets murky and opinions vary. One thing for sure is that Stardock deserves credit for a great game that often re-invents itself for different players who play at different levels, different map sizes, and different versions.

Anyway, that is my 2 bc worth.

Rick

[Message Edited]

After writing the above I did a quick scan of the top 50 average score players to try to find the biggest games. I counted only four players who have ever scored 50k or more in any single game. Unless you are Ray, who can do this on huge, this means a gigantic maso victory on 1.1. Man, that sounds difficult in both skill and stamina. I suggest these are the best players at the moment.

Rick

OK, I need help. I don't have any trouble with culture flips - because I never get that far. I always end up at war, usually vs 2 or 3 of the majors. I've tried the 1 ip per turn trick - no effect. Tried trading - no effect. Tried building a military to get people to leave me alone - no effect.

Last time out - #2 ranked military and neutral didn't stop the Yor from jumping on me (with their #1 ranked military) or the Altarians (who said they jumped on me for being evil - go figure!) The only help I could get was bribing a minor to go to war with the Altarians, keeping them off my back for a while. I held my own for quite a while, though it required a huge investment in the military, keeping research and social very low. All the while, nothing I would give (all techs, all money, all influence) would convince either of the ai's to peace. Finally gave up, as the battleships arrived to plague my lonely frigates and battlehammers...

I keep reading about all these "wins with no military on MASO" - how in the world do you do it?? I know, I know - "Bribe the AI to go to war with each other. Trade and give an IP to improve relations"... - why doesn't this work for me? Obviously there's something else I'm missing here...

Signed,
Frustrated and Going Back to Crippling