1.1 Scoring Change

Will be applied rectoactively

from GalCiv2 Forums

We've been analysing Metaverse data and while the scoring was taking the game turn into account, it clearly isn't enough.

That is, even if you're taking the game turn and dividing the score by that, one can still sit on a lead indefinitely.

So for 1.1, the game turn will be squared so that it has a much more significant impact.  In addition, the difficulty level will be applied exponentially.

Existing Metaverse scores posted will be retroactively modified. So, for instance, that 4million score that someone got by playing the system will end up being 13,300 instead (though we're going to delete the score entirely since it was a clear case of abuse). 

In terms of Metaverse scoring, it isn't just the faster you win, there's a sweet spot where you maximize your civilization's various strengths.  I.e. if you were to win on the first turn, that wouldn't really give you a great score because you haven't accomplished much.  I don't know what that sweet spot is.

The scoring system works as follows (in 1.1):

Each turn your population is taken, then multiplied by the difficulty level to the 1.1 power. That amount is then divided by the game turn.  The final result is taken to the square root.

Then your research score is taken into account in a similar way.

And economic history.

And military history.

Overall, population probably counts a bit more than the others.

What's new in 1.1 is the difficulty level being taken to the 1.1 power and that this overall score is then divided again by the game turn.

However, so that scores don't get ridiculously small, we are multiplying 1.1 games by 10. So there will be an advantage to using 1.1 over 1.0x at that point.

This will start with this week's beta of 1.1. We plan to release 1.1 final early next week.

metaverse
42,138 views 82 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
How do you take normal or intelligent into a number ?
Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top
The scoring system works as follows (in 1.1):
Each turn your population is taken, then multiplied by the difficulty level to the 1.1 power. That amount is then divided by the game turn. The final result is taken to the square root.
Then your research score is taken into account in a similar way.
And economic history.
And military history.
Overall, population probably counts a bit more than the others.
What's new in 1.1 is the difficulty level being taken to the 1.1 power and that this overall score is then divided again by the game turn.


In terms of Metaverse scoring, it isn't just the faster you win, there's a sweet spot where you maximize your civilization's various strengths. I.e. if you were to win on the first turn, that wouldn't really give you a great score because you haven't accomplished much. I don't know what that sweet spot is.


If I understand correctly, the score is calculated each turn and nothing prevent it from decreasing if you play too many turns. I don't know if it is a good idea to penalize people that play very long game due to the fact tha the sweet spot is not an easy thing to detect. Could it be possible that your metaverse score corresponds to the best score you have done at any turn, before taking into account victory type modifier. That way, you will have the score corresponding to the sweet spot if you play a very long game.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
So for 1.1, the game turn will be squared so that it has a much more significant impact.

*snip*

Each turn your population is taken, then multiplied by the difficulty level to the 1.1 power. That amount is then divided by the game turn. The final result is taken to the square root.

Hmm, am I missing something or did you simply forget to mention the squaring of the turn number in the second explanation? I guess it should be "That amount is then divided by the squared game turn."

Looks good in general, well, at the drawing table anyway. This silly game milking has to end, it takes the fun out of metaverse games.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If I understand correctly, the score is calculated each turn and nothing prevent it from decreasing if you play too many turns. I don't know if it is a good idea to penalize people that play very long game due to the fact tha the sweet spot is not an easy thing to detect. Could it be possible that your metaverse score corresponds to the best score you have done at any turn, before taking into account victory type modifier. That way, you will have the score corresponding to the sweet spot if you play a very long game.

Very bad idea because then everyone would have to prolong their games so that they reached their sweet spot to be competive.
Now a minority probably will save and reload a huge amount of times if they are so afraid of not having a perfect score but that only makes me
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
How do you take normal or intelligent into a number ?


IIRC the difficulties are already represented internally by a 0-100 scale.
Reply #10 from Stardock Forums Top
Very bad idea because then everyone would have to prolong their games so that they reached their sweet spot to be competive.

Well, I guess it depends where is the sweet spot compared to your kind of play: is it before or after you have finished normally your game.

But if my proposal isn't implemented, I guess that some people will try to see when their metaverse score starts to decrease, meaning they have left the sweet spot
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Can we see the scores graphed in game? I would like to know that my score was still increasing, especially since I play more as a builder than a militarist and games tend to go longer.
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
That sounds great! I am excited to hear about the retroactive scoring too:) I was going to mention that on the forum, but figured it'd be a pain to implement. One suggestions while you're looking at the metaverse though. Is there any way you can display the universes settings? IE Races, starting relationships (im always unknown but you could be cheap and ally half the races till you were ready to kill them), size, density, research rate, etc...

The more #s the better
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Thanks as always for a very fast reaction, Frogboy.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I applaud that changes are being made, but personally I think difficulty needs to be more than just to the 1.1 power. Masochistic (assuming that is 10) now multiplies by 10, and after taking it to the 1.1 power, that now multiplies the score by 12.6, whereas playing at "tough" is defined by 7, which would multiply the score by 8.5 (instead of the seven before). I think that masochistic is MUCH more than 50% harder than intelligent. I would see it as more natural to multiply the scores by the square of the difficulty. Then a masochistic score would multiply by 100, and tough by 49 --- so masochistic scores would on average be twice as high as tough scores.
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I applaud that changes are being made, but personally I think difficulty needs to be more than just to the 1.1 power. Masochistic (assuming that is 10) now multiplies by 10, and after taking it to the 1.1 power, that now multiplies the score by 12.6, whereas playing at "tough" is defined by 7, which would multiply the score by 8.5 (instead of the seven before). I think that masochistic is MUCH more than 50% harder than intelligent.


Perhaps Frogboy meant "patch 1.1's power factor"?
so it could be 2, 3, or even 4, not just 1.1.
I hope.

So for 1.1, the game turn will be squared... Each turn your population is taken, then multiplied by the difficulty level to the 1.1 power. That amount is then divided by the game turn. The final result is taken to the square root.


so... which way it is going to be? Squared beofore division or Square root after division?
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think it is something like √ [(Pop * {Dif ^ 1.1})/Turn^2]
Reply #17 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Square root would really bring down the scores. It'll be squared before, which brings down extremely high scores from people exploiting the current system *cough* 5 MILLION *cough*
Reply #18 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Can we see the scores graphed in game?

Seconded!!!

Now if Stardock would fix the HUGE ship combat imbalance. Last weekend I completed the Dread Lords Apocalyse Mission on level Tough on Nov. 8, 2227. I destroyed 209 ships and only lost 3 non-combat ships (the scout from the game's start and the other two I think were freighters). It does not matter how powerful the enemy's weapons are if you fire first and destroy them before they can fire! By game end one of my frigates had 65 HP from leveling up! The odd time I failed to take out the enemy before they could fire, my ships had leveled up enough to survive the hit! I have yet to lose a combat ship in the campaign missions, playing each on level Tough! Having both fleets fire at the same time would restore combat balance.
Reply #19 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
One suggestions while you're looking at the metaverse though. Is there any way you can display the universes settings? IE Races, starting relationships (im always unknown but you could be cheap and ally half the races till you were ready to kill them), size, density, research rate, etc...

The more #s the better

I second that! It would be very nice to have some more information displayed about the games that have been submitted.
Reply #20 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Now if Stardock would fix the HUGE ship combat imbalance. Last weekend I completed the Dread Lords Apocalyse Mission on level Tough on Nov. 8, 2227. I destroyed 209 ships and only lost 3 non-combat ships (the scout from the game's start and the other two I think were freighters). It does not matter how powerful the enemy's weapons are if you fire first and destroy them before they can fire! By game end one of my frigates had 65 HP from leveling up! The odd time I failed to take out the enemy before they could fire, my ships had leveled up enough to survive the hit! I have yet to lose a combat ship in the campaign missions, playing each on level Tough! Having both fleets fire at the same time would restore combat balance.


A) That's an issue with the AI not coping well with races setup for first-strike, not a flaw in the combat system.

B) There's no need to spam it across every topic, just report it in the bug or idea forums.
Reply #21 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Hmm, seems like galaxy size and number of races at start should figure into scoring also.
Reply #22 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Hmm, seems like galaxy size and number of races at start should figure into scoring also.


I'm not sure galaxy size should make a difference-- is a huge galaxy with few star systems harder than a smaller galaxy with many?

Regarding races, which do you think should be worth more, fewer or more races? I think the more races there are, the easier the game gets (more races to tech trade with, more minor races to ummm.. adopt).
Reply #23 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well actually galaxy size does figure in.. population. More planets = more population. Population is a part of the score calculation. So, having said that.. I wouldn't advocate extra consideration for galaxy size.
Reply #24 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
This is great news!
One of my only complaints with the game has been the flawed scoring system for metaverse games.. Given that this is pretty much an external non-gameplay issue, that's some good going.

Looking forward to trying it out.
Reply #25 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Just change the way for games challenging and above, leave normal and under without changing.