A simple drum roll, trumpet fanfare, and a 21 gun salute might not be enough to fully recognize how fantastic the results of Gotm19-Ottomans really are.

The final count of valid game submissions that can be scores and ranked includes 243 submitted games for this event and this represents a 53 person increase over the Celts game in April which had also set a record.

In addition to the fanatistic volume and diversity of submissions for this game, we also saw several exciting firsts in this game.

Many of the victory conditions showed 40 or 50 different approaches to achieving victory and could in effect allow us to analyse whole groups of games as if they were their own individual groups with a specified victory objective.

The top three games submitted for this GOTM were all based on Conquest victories using the awesome power of upgraded Sipahis(Balkan Dragoons) to destroy the world.

The 2nd and 3rd place submissions for this game were both submitted in Civ3v1.29 and actually finished in exactly the same year with a final Jason score that was only 6 points apart. Absolutely a fantastic effort by both players and this margin of victory is equivalent to have just one extra town founded one or two turns earlier in that game that the exact same equivalent town in the other competing game. You just cannoy get any closer than that reflecting truly a great competitive rivalry between these two players who played the game thousands of miles apart and on two totally separate continents of the reall world.

Complete Gotm19-Ottomans Results (http://gotm.civfanatics.net/games/gotm19_ottomans_results.php)

The results also include a direct link to the replay viewer that has been provided by Dianthus to let you view and compare games that originated in Civ3v1.29 or PTWv1.14 or PTWv1.21 even if you do not have the other version of the software available on your computer.

Congratulations again to all players who submitted games for this record setting GOTM Event.

I'd like to say congratulations and welcome (first time GOTM submissions) to two of our top ten finishers, Qitai and DaviddesJ!

Also, Mazarin's game is a real eye opener. A little under six and a half hours playtime and still very well played! (by comparison I spent 22 hours playing just about the same game)

Many congrats to all the winners, especially SirPleb for his awesome 390 AD conquest victory and Yurian for taking this month's diplomatic parchment award. :goodjob:

But also well done to all who participate, looking back at some of the older results really shows a tremendous increase in the playing standard in general in this competition.

Wow, netted a siliver =) and so close. And Sir Pleb's 390AD victory is truely impressive.

And a very much thanks for making so much improvement to the GOTM. The new Jason scoring is what really make me want to play this game. Thanks Aeson.

Cracker, there are some typos in the Civfanatics home page announcing the results.

It says Bremp won in 2050 A.D., and also you said "the difference between 2nd and 2rd".

But, wow, that was a very close race for silver/bronze :eek:

Cool, I'm up 6 places from last month in my first emperor win.
More importantly: gotm19 was excellent. :goodjob: Imo, even more enjoyable than gotm18.

I still have some strategy issues I need to address. Most importantly, I always let wars come to me (not that I'm not prepared, usually wars come right when I'm about to go to war, but they don't come from the 'right' civs). I should declare war myself now and again. Diplomatic is the only victory I've had on higher levels, but in gotm19 I should have no probs winning a space race, and more cities/earlier conquest would have made for a better score. Then again, that would take more time and I barely managed to submit as is lol.

It's great to see so many new faces doing so well. Hell, it's great to see so many new faces period. GOTM is a nice place to be.

Cracker: I don't understand how the Space race and Diplo victory awards were made this month. I am only a simpleton, but in each case there are other higher scores with the same victory condition. I hesitate to hit "submit reply" because I just know I'm going to look very silly.

Congratulations, Sirpleb, on being back at the top! I am in awe of your conquest victory date! Whew!

I couldn't find my name in the list although I submitted my game and Creepster confirmed the reception.

Congratulations to Sir Pleb and DaveMcW two excellent games!!!

Gotm 19 was one of the most enjoyable games for me. The map was interesting. I also finally reached my goal of getting the earliest 100k cultural victory (Thanks Ribannah for not playing this time ;) )

Unfortunately for me, the Jason curve changed. With the old curve, the ranking would have been:
1) Ronald 11632
2) Dave McW 11361
3) Sir Pleb 11013
4) Qitai 10475
5) Bremp 10469

This shows, that the old curve was not optimal:
My game was not better than Sir Plebs. He beat best date by 32 turns, I beat best date by 8 turns, DaveMcW beat best date by 39 turns !!! (a truely awesome game, for me in the same league as Sir Plebs victory), Qitai and Bremp werer both one turn behind best date, all of us were close to domination limit.

Looking at the results with the new curve, I feel, that it is now more in favour of earlier victories (which is fine with me), and that the influence of beating best date or be at least close to best date is much smaller than before (something I don't like)

What particularly puzzles me is the large percentage (40%) of domination games with rather late victory dates in the top ten finishes.

Do you have any thoughts about that Aeson?

Ronald

Originally posted by Ronald
What particularly puzzles me is the large percentage (40%) of domination games with rather late victory dates in the top ten finishes.


I'm afraid there is something wrong with the new Jason score curve for Domination victory.
I tried the web calculator and it looks like the sooner you finish the lower the score is!:confused:

Originally posted by Zinad
I couldn't find my name in the list although I submitted my game and Creepster confirmed the reception. Zinad,

I've PMed the mods on your behalf. Hopefully they'll find your results ASAP. :)Originally posted by Mark Cutt
I'm afraid there is something wrong with the new Jason score curve for Domination victory.
I tried the web calculator and it looks like the sooner you finish the lower the score is!:confused: It appears to depend on whether you were before or after the equalised dates.
Can you PM Aeson with your input data? :)

Originally posted by Ronald
Congratulations to Sir Pleb and DaveMcW two excellent games!!! I also finally reached my goal of getting the earliest 100k cultural victory (Thanks Ribannah for not playing this time ;) )


Actually, Ribannah, who turned in an amazing performance in the QSC19, did submit. Check the list of submissions, and you will find her name. Not seeing her name at the top puzzled me, and I contacted her. It turns out that she would have placed 2nd in the overall rankings for GOTM, having won the space race in 1120AD.

Why were her results not included? It turns out that she was accused of cheating, and subsequently was permanently banned from the GOTM and from the forums. According to Ribannah, there was no explanation given.

Ribannah is clearly a very skilled player, as is indicated by her excellent, keen insights. It would appear that she would not need to lean upon the crutch of cheating to do well.

I realize that I may have overstepped the bounds in this post, and I stand ready to accept the consequences. I only wanted others who were curious, just as I was, to know that, unfortunately, Ribannah will no longer be participating in the GOTM. I didn't want her to disappear from the GOTM/CFC landscape without any trace of an explanation.

I, for one, am going to miss you, Ribannah!

:( :(

Originally posted by ainwood
Can you PM Aeson with your input data? :)

I sent an email to Cracker. I'm pretty confident the error will be fixed soon.
I'm afraid this will result in a lower ranking (currently 20th) for myself:(

I don't understand how the Space race and Diplo victory awards were made this month. I am only a simpleton, but in each case there are other higher scores with the same victory condition.

The awards are given to the fastest finish in each category. Often that's the same game as the highest Jason score in that category, but not always.

What particularly puzzles me is the large percentage (40%) of domination games with rather late victory dates in the top ten finishes.

Do you have any thoughts about that Aeson?

Sipahi and map conditions mostly. It made Domination and Conquest the 'default' victory conditions for games that were very well played. There was a point in the game where it just became very easy to finish that way (all the legwork being done).

Any 'well' played game, in relation to the scoring system set up the way it is now, is going to expand out to the domination limit quickly and be relatively fast. Basically work toward Domination, though certain tradeoffs need to be made depending on the victory condition. The optimal expansion rate might not always be the fastest either, as there are population tradeoffs that aren't always fruitful (in tech rate and the population to territory ratio) early on in a fast finish type game.

I'm afraid there is something wrong with the new Jason score curve for Domination victory.

I tried the web calculator and it looks like the sooner you finish the lower the score is!

I assume you are leaving the score the same between dates? It looks like the same score, but the Jason score uses the 'base' score by subtracting the Firaxis date bonus and then computes it's own date bonus instead. Since the two bonuses aren't the same the Jason score will diminish faster than the ingame score when the date is moving through periods in the curves where the Firaxis bonus exceeds the Jason one.

It doesn't mean the Jason score is broken, just that the results are being influence by an obviously broken system (Firaxis date bonus) in that method of testing (keeping the scores the same while changing dates).

If the base scores are the same, the Jason score will always increase when the date is decreasing.

I am very sad to hear this news about Ribannah. I hold out hope that this may have been a misunderstanding.

Congratulations to all the players, especially Sir Pleb. Your game is just fantastic. :goodjob:
I am very happy with my result :), but If I had played two more turns, the silver medal could be mine :p

Originally posted by Aeson

I assume you are leaving the score the same between dates?

Aeson, as suggested by ainwood here are the data I used:

GOTM19, NEW CURVE, Firax score 7000, Domination Victory

End date 900AD --> 9337
940 AD --> 9350
980 AD --> 9364
1020 AD --> 9378

Those numbers are as intended.

Originally posted by Bremp
Congratulations to all the players, especially Sir Pleb. Your game is just fantastic. :goodjob:
I am very happy with my result :), but If I had played two more turns, the silver medal could be mine :p

And Luckily for me, I did not try to play a few more rounds. In a rerun to simulate what would happen to the score if I played longer, I realized that I actually had a duo victory - I had just pass the domination limit without realizing it - and that would have reduce my scores to 11099. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Aeson
Those numbers are as intended.

I think I got it (maybe).
You mean that 7000 at 1020AD is a higher base score than 7000 at 900 AD because the 7000 at 900 AD has a higher end game bonus than 1020AD.
In addition the above difference between the two base scores is higher than the difference of the bonus that Jason score assigns to the two end dates.

In summary Jason score gives a lower bonus than firaxis for early finish (at least in this specific case).

Please tell me I understood.

Sounds like you got it.

Originally posted by Mark Cutt


I think I got it (maybe).
You mean that 7000 at 1020AD is a higher base score than 7000 at 900 AD because the 7000 at 900 AD has a higher end game bonus than 1020AD.
In addition the above difference between the two base scores is higher than the difference of the bonus that Jason score assigns to the two end dates.

In summary Jason score gives a lower bonus than firaxis for early finish (at least in this specific case).

Please tell me I understood.
You got the idea.

The variation of the Jason score is linked to number of turns while the one of the Firaxis score is linked to the number of years.

In the same time the weight of the end date score is increased in Jason score compared with the Firaxis end date score to reduce a little the importance of the base score (that can be milked).

Originally posted by Aeson
Sounds like you got it.

Great! This means that I'm 20th. :) :)

Aeson many thanks for the explaination

I update the analysis that correlates QSC results and full game results.
I divided the full game players in 4 quartiles and calculate how many players of each quartile participate to QSC.

Here are the results:

GOTM 17
Top 25% players: 58% played QSC, 42% did not play QSC
2nd quart. players: 46% - 54%
3rd quart. players: 15% - 85%
4th quart. players: 20% - 80%

GOTM18
1st quartile players: 65% - 35%
2nd quartile players: 28% - 72%
3rd quartile players: 25% - 75%
4th quartile players: 22% - 78%

GOTM19
1st quartile players: 49% - 51%
2nd quartile players: 28% - 72%
3rd quartile players: 13% - 87%
4th quartile players: 10% - 90%

The message is still the same: QSC is played by the top performers and/or QSC helps emerging players to become a top performer

Good game. The scoring system did not like space race this time, so my (for me) good game was scored below all other similary good games with different conditions.

I can't say I am surprised about Ribbannah, although I know he is a good player. Too bad he had to leave.

Congratulations to the usual lot of people who are ahead of me, and to the "usual" astonishing results obtained by you guys (and girls!).

Now, I have a small petition: why don't you all compete for lowest score one of these GOTMs... ;)

EDIT: Mark, where in Italy?

Originally posted by Karasu
EDIT: Mark, where in Italy?

Latina, 70 Km South of Rome

Wow, some truly amazing games this month. 390 AD conquest?! 1555 AD 20K culture?!?!!!! On Emperor???!!!!!!!!! Impressive, to say the least. :)

@ Sirp: See, you clobbered me and Borealis both. ;) Must've been those extra hours you spent playing .... yeah, that's it.

@ MarkCutt: We actually tied! Haven't seen that before.

I'm sorry to hear about Ribannah, too, although I also wasn't shocked, having seen some discussions in the forum several months ago.

Renata <--- picked the *right* victory condition again, apparently, although I really couldn't imagine having played any other way with Sipahi :D

Originally posted by Renata
@ MarkCutt: We actually tied! Haven't seen that before.


Yes, we tied even if you finished earlier and you had a better Firaxis score.
As you can see from the above posts it took a while for me to understand that this was not a Jason score bug.

Congrats to the 20th's:goodjob:

To find I ranked 198 was a humbling experience. Well it was my first emperor game and at least I won :)

It seems like I'm just playing way out of my league around here. The skill level is simply amazing...

Renata <--- picked the *right* victory condition again, apparently, although I really couldn't imagine having played any other way with Sipahi

Hotrod<----- Picked the wrong one :lol:

I actually could've won some 50 turns earlier via diplo but decided to go for space. Looks like Domination or Conquest was the way to go - I didn't use the Sipahi to their potential. Cleared my continent and took India just for fun while I raced toward space. Should've played more aggressive and took the rest.

Great Games by all !

All you top players do nothing but strive to make me try harder...and realize I have much yet to learn. Sir Pleb, I echo the statements here about your remarkable game...a pity I can't come over and watch you play. I am sure I would learn a ton.

Sirp: Great to see you played this game! Nice work on the top 10 finish!

In fact, all the top 10 finishes are very impressive. One day I hope to see my name in that category.

I am not competitive about the GOTM, not at all, but when I look at the guy just ahead of me in the rankings and see a smirk I just, well, :mad:

I couldn't really be more pleased with my game because I clearly improved thanks to taking advantage of all the great advice available here. Special thanks to Moonsinger for her great tips. Sorry to see Moonie drop out of the top five, but hey, its no shame to be past your prime... :D

These newcomer aces are scary but we shall wait and see if they can play a real game...spacerace anyone? :p

One thing that sticks out is the under seven hour game...wow, some of my turns take nearly that long. Seriously, how can someone keep the game runing for 247+ hours, huh Balton? Using Civ as a screen saver? Hey, I do that too.

I think Shillen is a relative newcomer and he medaled! Congrats! Beats that darn milking don't it?

Speaking of milking, do we have mad cow disease? Top milker was 84th, Assura you have my assurance that you are the last of a dying breed.

No offense to Sir Pleb, whose play is otherworldly, or any of the quick killers form this game but I tip my hat to Ronald and DaveMcW for their cultural games. Its just awesome to see the combination of speed and depth of play necessary to get a top cultural win since going for speed and going for culture naturally works against each other. Kinda. Anyway, great games and I hope Aeson wises up and boosts the scores of these types of games.

I have two requests, make that three. In the results table can we have a column showing base score? It would mean so much more.

Second, can we include the number of GOTMs played in a column? This would add so much to viewing the chart.

Finally, I would like to see someone interview the top newcomer of the month (this month it would have to be two of them!). Just to get an idea of the person, their gaming background and real life personna. I think it would add a great deal to the community.

:thumbsup: to all for a great month and special :goodjob: to all the first time players and those most precious to us, the lowest scoring medalists! demonica is the :king:

Oh, one more thing, with 230+ players we need more medals!

My second full GotM, My first attempt & win on Emperor, in the top third. What more could I ask for? :)

Congrats to all who made, played and ranked this game.


Ted

{I support the decisions of the GOTM staff to assure that the published results include only those games that should be recognized as valid game results while excluding those games that include patterns of play that indicate some sort of prohibitted external advantage may have been used.}

{Skyfish - I have editted your post to be more in line with the respectful tone that I would like this discussion to set. You have my blessing to revise the message again to put the content more into your own words. I want to make sure that we maintain a level on moderation in all posts on this topic while recognizing that you are fully entitled to express specifics of your observations and concern. I do not want to see postes "bashing" or "labling" Ribannah. The difficulty and magnitude of the administrate decision should speak for itself and you are free to indictate that you support the process and its eventual result }

Everyone should remember that this thread has an assigned purpose of focusing on the published results and congratulations for players who submitted valid game results for Gotm19-Ottomans. - cracker

cracker my apologies if my post was not in line with the tone you want to set, however my post was not mentioning ANYONE and was NOT "bashing" or "libeling" at all, it was very moderate and positively geared.
Please recognize this.

Ah 120th out of 243. Just scraping in the top half. I'm happy with that. When two thirds of the field thrash the AI on emperor, you know you're playing in a field full of smart cookies! :goodjob:

Polishes up a little egotistical badge that says "I can't play Conquest class now -- I'm too good!" :D

Originally posted by ltcoljt
One thing that sticks out is the under seven hour game...wow, some of my turns take nearly that long. Seriously, how can someone keep the game runing for 247+ hours, huh Balton? Using Civ as a screen saver? Hey, I do that too.



:lol: I just realized this morning when I got to work that I left my GOTM20 game running when I left the house this morning (just had to get in a few turns before work, you know). So my game time for next month will be a little, ummm, inflated. :)

I like your ideas, by the way.

Renata

I just realized this morning when I got to work that I left my GOTM20 game running when I left the house this morning (just had to get in a few turns before work, you know). So my game time for next month will be a little, ummm, inflated.

That's one way to keep reloads down :lol:.

@ Renata :lol: I cannot remember how many times I have left civ running while being pulled away for repeated honey-do and toddler demands (I always cave). I think I have saved many a game--leaving it running and then reloading when I return to have the clock provide a better gauge on my playing time (of course it never works). And 7 hour win--will never happen for me--too afraid of missing something, so I double check lots of things (everything in the early game).

Congratulation to all the winners!:goodjob: Wow, over 200 games ended with victory! That is a very good record considering that this was an Emperor game.

Special congratulation to SirPleb for an amazing conquest.:goodjob: Can't wait to see what you are going to do next...Predator OCC?;)

Since I had no plan and no specific goal in my game (other than some old feeling for my dairy cows), I'm very happy with 6th place.:) I was planning for the 2050 AD celebration, but my Sipahies were running out of breath and were forced to retire around 1040 AD.

Do I get the award for the greatest plummet from QSC 11th (10th) down to 62nd.

And to think I was happy with my game. Need to set my sights higher I guess. This was the primary reason for my choosing to play predator. Conquest/Domination continually get the best results for score maybe a Predator game is exactly what I need to kick start my game.

Originally posted by hotrod0823
Do I get the award for the greatest plummet from QSC 11th (10th) down to 62nd.

Actually, I think I might have that, uh, honor. A few games ago I was a 9th place finisher. In GOTM 19? Try 93rd. Of course, I dropped several places from the new curve's effects on cultural victories...

Hergrom

Originally posted by hotrod0823
Do I get the award for the greatest plummet from QSC 11th (10th) down to 62nd.

And to think I was happy with my game. Need to set my sights higher I guess. This was the primary reason for my choosing to play predator. Conquest/Domination continually get the best results for score maybe a Predator game is exactly what I need to kick start my game.

Nice try, hotrod, but my drop from 16th to 73rd is significantly more impressive than yours. In achieving this, my Jason score only fell about 500 points, which I consider to be pretty minor. So my collapse in the rankings is yet another testimonial to the skyrocketing level of play in the GOTM.

In hindsight, I agree that the decision to go for space wasn't as promising. I ignored the UU's power because in almost all my domination games, the game is basically decided by the time MT is researched. Combined with the fast research rate of Emperor, however, it allowed for a lot of players to bring the hammer down on the game in shockingly quick fashion.

And before I feel too self-pitying for my decision to launch -

Congratulations to Shillen for his 1315 AD launch! Your score may not be all that high, but you won the medal going away. How you've varied your game each month is very impressive.

I was talking specifically about QSC19 rank to GOTM19 rank but now that you mention it the competition is improving emmensely. You really need to bring your A-Game every month. I improved from 74 in GOTM18 to 62nd in GOTM19. We shall see what the predator brings.

I echo Txurce comments on Shillens impressive launch I was happy to get the UN built at around the same time he hit the stars. :goodjob;

16th. It was better than I expected. I can see very close scores all around the chart. That's very nice and I'm looking forward for new challenges.

Whee! I received the lowest Conquest score. :)
I suppose I should be proud that almost all of my conquesring was done within a span of about 100 years. Losing 2 F.Palaces (due to sloppy play) set me back a good 200 turns. :(

247:06:31 time! Wow! I thought my 47 hours was extreme. I sure hope he left it running solo for most of that time.

Originally posted by Hergrom


Actually, I think I might have that, uh, honor. A few games ago I was a 9th place finisher. In GOTM 19? Try 93rd. Of course, I dropped several places from the new curve's effects on cultural victories...

Hergrom

Try dropping from 21st to 218th, and then we'll talk ;)

Congratulations to everyone who submitted the game :D.
Condolences to everyone who lost or dropped down in rank :( .
I improved from 155th to 26th gaining around 9000 Jason Points ;) .

Well, 114 on my first GOTM submission. Not real pleased by my point totals though.

It should have been much higher but the victory snuck up on me. I was going to milk it a bit by moving my Palace to the east continent when I got dogpiled by my so-called Polite friends. By the time I was done punishing them for their mistake I had a Domination victory. Took me a lot longer after I moved the Palace because my production core was now corrupt! Bad move!!! Oh well, still alive in GOTM 20 but I don't know if I will have a victory or not.

Just a quick question for other Mac players out there... are any of you getting Type2 crashes? I seem to get 1-2 of them per day. Makes me reload last auto save which I don't like considering we are submitting games. I need to post in the trouble-shoot forum I guess.

Well, congrats to all...

Congrats to Aeson, Kemal, and Ronald for "beating the curve" with diplomatic and cultural wins! I've never been able to do that. ;)

And congrats to all 32 people who got a 9000+ Jason score! It's certainly getting crowded with so many skilled players up there. :)

219 out of 244 - can't win for loosing. Looks like several people around me spent 10+ more hours on it - sorry guys. I took a dive as well, but not as far as some percentagewise.

Somewhat suprised to see a victory at 212, with 7 losses above it. I guess the Jason system is at work.

SirPleb takes the prize with earliest victory as well!

:worship::worship::worship::worship: :whipped:
We're not worthy!

I guess it's more required reading time.

Originally posted by ltcoljt
I am not competitive about the GOTM, not at all, but when I look at the guy just ahead of me in the rankings and see a smirk I just, well, :mad:


I'm not sure I get your meaning.

:eek: Maybe I should put more time into my GOTMs... I generally don't leave it running when I'm not playing, and I was surprised to see that my 8-9 hours spent on the game ended up being very low... This month's 'time spent' will be much higher with the Deity Paranoia Factor in play. ;)

Congratulations to SirPleb for such an early conquest victory, and to all the participants in this GOTM! :goodjob:

Originally posted by Smirk


I'm not sure I get your meaning.

He's referring to what 'smirk' really means in the english dictionary (=to smile in a conceited or complacent way).

Originally posted by Smirk
I'm not sure I get your meaning.

It's just a little double entendre. Ltcoljt was #23 in the rankings, and you, Smirk, were #22. So, when he looks up directly above him and sees a smirk (your name, plus the literal English meaning that Bamspeedy gave), he jokingly said that it got to him.

Thanks all! What an awesome set of results this month - so many games, and so many strong games!

Special congratulations to Qitai, Snaga, DaviddesJ, and Sirp, each making an awesome GOTM entrance.

It is funny to not see 2050 dates in the results. I guess that might swing back the other way now with the coveted (by some - I still want to get them :) ) cows looking like a less hotly contested target.

I'm embarassed to read my pregame GOTM19 post and see "with very aggressive research we could become the tech leader and get to Military Tradition somewhere between 300AD and 600AD". I sure underestimated that one, beat it by 18 turns. It turned out to be an ideal map for conquest. And it was lucky for me that the new Jason curve came in this game. The way this game felt to me was best said by Qitai in spoiler2: "Had 57 Sipahi by this time. Reason for the incredible speed of attack. Surprise myself as well." :)

Something interesting that GOTM19 has shown: It is possible to get an early conquest or domination win without rushing to war at the start. Some of the top games (including mine and Qitai's) did not involve any war until well after the QSC cutoff.

Yeah I figured something along those lines, I seldom get too involved in these threads because I am not that competative and play this only for entertainment and enjoyment, and also enlightenment ;).

And to potentially bring this back in line with what a proper post should be I'll congratulate SirPleb on what appears to be a fantastic game. I was waiting and hoping SirPleb would finally oust the great milking god. :P

What is the criteria for the 'cow award'? I thought it was just the highest Firaxis score, but now it looks like it is the highest base score before the Firaxis early win bonus is added on.

Yes, it's for the highest base score. The tables are about as wide as they can get at this point, otherwise we might include the base score and turn numbers.

Originally posted by Borealis
Deity Paranoia Factor


You should trademark that. :)

Renata

Originally posted by SirPleb
It is funny to not see 2050 dates in the results. I guess that might swing back the other way now with the coveted (by some - I still want to get them :) ) cows looking like a less hotly contested target.

My feeling was in the right place and I knew that I would be the only one who would dare to reach for the year 2050 AD in this game. This small map was just too perfect for a little farm and everything seemed going well for my dairy cows too; unfortunately, my job had to come first.:cry: Of course, there will always be a "next time".;)

Boy, I sure sucked, again, for the 2nd month in a row I was next to last. BUT>.........

I have learned alot and I will continue to submit, Even if I lose!!

I will eventually win a gotm. I am learning more, I know I am as I can see it in my play. All I need is to have some #$%$&^%@ Patience while playing my #%@ game!!

:) to all Awesome games again by top players.

Thanks to Moonsinger for her trading thread ( even though I was not able to participate, I read it and lots of learning:) )

Hmm...maybe there should be a special medal for the victory that had the least time put into it? :)

In fact I might try for that in GOTM20 -- I haven't even be able to start yet, and since I'm going on a holiday starting on the 18th it doesn't look likely that I will :(

But maybe I can try for a "under 5 hours" Deity win and see if I can squeeze our 5 hours to do it in :)

For some reason all my games since the PTW timer feature was added have taken almost exactly 20 hours. I can't remember any completed solo game which has taken under 18 hours or over 22 hours.


Deity Paranoia Factor



Oh please! After two Deity victories in succession games, I'm definitely expecting to see a convincing victory from you in GotM 20. From Renata and hotrod also. Would give me some satisfaction even if I can't play :)

-Sirp.

I'm definitely expecting to see a convincing victory from you in GotM 20. From Renata and hotrod also. Would give me some satisfaction even if I can't play

Working on it ;)

Originally posted by Sirp
Oh please! After two Deity victories in succession games, I'm definitely expecting to see a convincing victory from you in GotM 20. From Renata and hotrod also. Would give me some satisfaction even if I can't play :)


I hope so, too, but I'll still have Deity Paranoia Factor (tm) until I start winning on Deity consistently. I still want to win a straight-up solo game, but these little things called GOTM discussions keep sidetracking the time spent playing/time spent reading & posting ratio. :D

Wow, I'm 13th! My highest finish so far... :D

Congrats to all the players who submitted and especially SirPleb!
Awesome game.... :worship::worship:

I rather doubt I'll ever make top 10 in the GOTM - but I must admit I enjoyed 19 a lot more than 18 (my first).

It was nice to see my place rise a little, although that was down to bad luck in 18 and very good luck in 19.

Congratulations all round, and if you enjoy this as much as I do, there's a lot of people out there having a good time. :)

Special respect also to those who lost and still submitted - things are not going well for me in 20 so I might end up joining you. :(

Originally posted by CruddyLeper
Special respect also to those who lost and still submitted - things are not going well for me in 20 so I might end up joining you. :(

Position 221 with my first submission... rather chuffed with that since I've never won a game!! Not even on chieftain... there I've admitted it...
Still I do tend to get bored by the time the industrial age ends so I usually retire early...
GOTM20 is going pretty well but I'm sensing I'm about to be ganged up on... free gpt Mr Agressive AI Ruler? :p

I'm sorry to continue to post analyses on the same subject but I'm intrigued by the relationship between QSC and the full game.

I extracted form the QSC and full game ranking the 61 players who partecipated to both and I created two new QSC and full game ranking with only these 61 players.

Finally I calculated how each player's ranking changed between the two competition.

The outcome is no rocket science and probably will just make explicit what each players already knows about his/her own skills.

The summary is that there are players that start slowly (relatively to the average) and then greatly improve their performance in the later ages and other players (I'm in this category) that still need to work more on they middle/modern age skills.


GOTM19 vs QSC19 Ranking (only 61 players who played both)

GOTM a lot better than QSC
Adel, col, denyd, Vici, rabies, RufRydyr, Moonsinger, DaveMcW, tao , watorrey, Zwingli, flexo, Iver-P

GOTM better than QSC
pterrok, Apolex, CdB, Shillen, DaviddesJ, Greebley, Xevious , zagnut, SirPleb, lkendter

GOTM same as QSC
Txurce, Planetfall, Ronald , Aeson, alexman, BadAndy, Bremp, Hergrom, LeSphinx, civ_steve, whb, alpha_fys, KingofAmerica, Leonard, Smirk, MadScot

QSC better than GOTM
SSharlow, Darkness, el_kalkylus, Mark Cutt, Peluin, Pigumon, Creepster, vanatteveldt, jeffelammar

QSC a lot better than GOTM
BillChin , ControlFreak, Nada, Wotan, TedJackson, forged, alamo, gazza666, Email10, Mad-Bax , Aurian, hotrod0823, Ambiorix

Mark Cutt
Thanks you very much for spending time on this. Quite informative. I always new I was a slow starter. I often get quite upset with just how short the QSC is. In all of the GOTMs i've played to date, my main play to improve my position/score in the game happens very shortly after the QSC cut-off. In the case of GOTM20, it happened a mere 3 turns.

I really need to strengthen my QSC portion. I guess all that black area and 'unknown' equations really makes my playing a bit reserved in that time period.

Wow, my loss at 211 came ahead of someone with a victory. So does that make me a good loser? :)

Of course, I'd trade places for a victory.

I'm sorry to continue to post analyses on the same subject but I'm intrigued by the relationship between QSC and the full game.

It is an interesting observation that you have made here. the one thing I think that needs to be taken into account is that they really have different objectives. The QSC is focused on the results up to 1000 BC where as the final game takes into account a lot more. Some of the players who score better in the game use an approach that does not generate the best score for a QSC but does set them up well for a good end game. A culture game is the best example I can think of here. You may sacrifice production or potential for more cities for a temple and you don't get the full results until later in the game (culture doubling earlier and for longer).

My QSC score was high because I focused on a single goal build as many cities as possible by 1000 BC. My end game was not as sucessful because I failed to have as focused a goal as I did for the QSC. I did not decide what I wanted to do until after 1000BC, and I made a huge mistake about upgading units over seas. I think that most of the top finishers have an end goal planned out shortly after they start the game and focus on achieveing that goal instead of the QSC score. IMHO, this is what allows them to perform better.

Creepster,

What was your mistake of upgrading units over seas? Is that a bad thing to do?

Mark Cutt,

I also want to applaud your supplimental analysis efforts here with theQSC and the end GOTM results because this sort of process can help to set perspective.

There may not be a direct first order comparison between QSC score and oveal GOTM finish posotion because the games do have two or three distinctive phases and the QSC is only designed to measure performance in the first phase. The the fact that players can choose to win the GOTM in their choice of of 6 to 8 different ways means that the games diverge more as they get further into the game.

One thing that helps in this perspective is to look at the total QSC score and the three parts of the QSC in particular and then compare these results to groups of players that are chosed based on their final victory conditions. There are common elements of successful play that begin to emerge for you much more quickly when you see the analysis in this format.

DaveMcW's game maske a good reference point for this process even though it is a single reference point without other peers in this Qsc19 data set. Because Dave is so supremely focused on the 20k Cultural victory even from the second he makes his fist move, you will see that he ends up sacrificing growth and military power to pour resources into improvements and infrastructure that are yielding unmeasured cultural power even at this early stage of the game.

You can select the high scoring QSC games that then went for Domination victory and see how well they were positions at the end of the QSC by comparison to their final result.

There are still a great deal of intervening events that typically occur in turns 81 through 160 that can have a significant impact on shifting the rankings around.

If we had a sort of triple crown of the GOTM where we measured the Second Round Challenge just as we do the Qsc and the applied a similar process the End Game Challenge. You will find that players who perform well in the GOTM end up performing consistently well in all three phases of the overall game.

Nice work, Mark.


BTW, I live in Pisa -but I hope to leave asap, so I won't modify my "Location" field...

That is an interesting category [QSC a lot better than GOTM] to end up in considering that while the game exceeded my expectations (actuallly winning a game at emperor), I feel that I have a LOT of improvement to do in all aspects of game play.

Participating in the QSC & GOTM is an awesome learning opportunity, and while I may not have enough time to appreciate all of it, I thank everyone for the opportunities it represents.

Well, with 3 GOTMs on the record, I decided to look for patterns, besides the 3 losses in a row. Since the numbers of the games change each time, I finished 11th (GOTM17), 27th (18), and 33rd (19) - from the bottom, so my postion is rising - slightly. Now it could be to my improving skills or that we are getting so many newbies in just starting out. But since it is my choice, I will select the first;)

I think I get to move up on the Monk scale pretty soon.:D

Does anyone have the link to the global rankings?

Originally posted by Mark Cutt
GOTM19 vs QSC19 Ranking (only 61 players who played both)

GOTM a lot better than QSC
Adel, col, denyd, Vici, rabies, RufRydyr, Moonsinger, DaveMcW, tao , watorrey, Zwingli, flexo, Iver-P

GOTM better than QSC
pterrok, Apolex, CdB, Shillen, DaviddesJ, Greebley, Xevious , zagnut, SirPleb, lkendter

GOTM same as QSC
Txurce, Planetfall, Ronald , Aeson, alexman, BadAndy, Bremp, Hergrom, LeSphinx, civ_steve, whb, alpha_fys, KingofAmerica, Leonard, Smirk, MadScot

QSC better than GOTM
SSharlow, Darkness, el_kalkylus, Mark Cutt, Peluin, Pigumon, Creepster, vanatteveldt, jeffelammar

QSC a lot better than GOTM
BillChin , ControlFreak, Nada, Wotan, TedJackson, forged, alamo, gazza666, Email10, Mad-Bax , Aurian, hotrod0823, Ambiorix
Well that explains how the master ended up beating the students. Congrats on the nice comeback LK!:p I guess since you're training games for HotRod and me ended well before our diplo and spaceship wins we never got the training in the middle and late games.

Actually, I think if you weren't going for domination, you got hammered in the middle game score. Just sitting on the starting continent was not the way to score high with Sipahi available.

Great games to everyone.:goodjob:

Originally posted by scubagtr

What was your mistake of upgrading units over seas? Is that a bad thing to do?

I failed to realize that I needed navigation to get the resources over to the Roman island. I had 20 odd horsmen waiting to attack after I upgraded them. I had The Great Lighthouse, a harbor on all three continents, and a barracks, but there was a sea or ocean tile between the landmasses that prevented the upgrade until after Navigation. I ended up unable to use about half my troops for most of the game. :lol:

I also think the QSC score is an indication of a strong start but not necessarily a high scoring game. Perhaps if there was a "score" like QSC that gives value for tech, units, territory, gold etc. seperate from the Firaxis my "score" at the end game would score would be better. :lol:

For the most part Space/Diplo games that don't have large territory gains are going to score less overall than domination or conquest or culture 100K games. You don't need huge territory to win that route. A strong tech position means nothing for a high Firaxis score.

The Firaxis score is mostly focused on territory and population and that means domination/conquest/culture will almost always score higher in the end vs. space/diplo. The best way to score high and get a space victory is to push to the domination limit then sit back until you launch. By maximizing territory you can maximize score. The trade off is that kicking domination may still be the best option to get the highest score because the score gained by waiting for space launch may not improve your Jason score vs. a faster domination win.

Most people agree space and diplo are easier victories and should be scored lower. I wounder if the QSC type score at the end game taking into account all areas of the game, not just territory and Population would actually bare that out. As far as an overall "power" position. A domination win with Sipahi doesn't require any tech beyond Military Tradition and very little infrastructure.

All that being said, having a Good QSC sets you up to chose any victory path. I just chose poorly. We shall see if my Predator GOTM20 will improve my score even with a weaker QSC. By focusing on Conquest from the start hopefully my GOTM score will improve and I can be one of the higher scoring Conquest/domination games vs. the lower scoring space/diplo wins I have gotten recently.

Originally posted by Creepster

I failed to realize that I needed navigation to get the resources over to the Roman island. I had 20 odd horsmen waiting to attack after I upgraded them. I had The Great Lighthouse, a harbor on all three continents, and a barracks, but there was a sea or ocean tile between the landmasses that prevented the upgrade until after Navigation. I ended up unable to use about half my troops for most of the game. :lol: [/B]I think saw that point in your GOTM19 spoiler post, and didn't understand it then either. The Roman island was connected to the start continent by coast tiles at one point, and with sea tiles along quite a stretch of Carthage and Celt region coastlines. In my shadow game I was trading with the Romans for ivory with no problems as soon as I met them and way before Navigation. I only lost the ivory (and went into disorder :( ) when I declared war on the Celts, as the coastal connection was in Celtic territory.

I can only assume the Romans still controlled the coast link to your home island, and that stopped your trade access, and you could have fixed it by taking the appropriate Roman city first. That wouldn't have done anything for you on the big continent, of course.

[edited confusing quote attribution]

I'm not one of those who thinks that space/diplo are by default easier. There seems to be a mental block against war-mongering in a lot of players, but once you learn how to do it, it's no harder than anything else: prioritize cash and units higher than previously, prioritize research and improvements lower. That's about it. You quickly learn the necessary things like happiness management, wonder prioritization, and so forth.

I think conquest/domination may even be easier than space on the higher levels. I keep thinking about SP6, where we could have turtled after taking the coal and gone for space --- but keeping up with several deity AIs all trying for the same thing would have taken a considerable amount of skill and finesse. Instead we demolished the entire Pangaea in about 25 turns with 150 tanks.

Diplo's a funny one, though, I'll admit. You can have a very powerful game with no chance at all of winning a UN vote, or a very weak one where you do in fact win that way.

Renata

Originally posted by cracker
You can select the high scoring QSC games that then went for Domination victory and see how well they were positions at the end of the QSC by comparison to their final result.

I'm not sure I did what you were suggesting but I tried.
I correlated the changes in my mini-ranking (remind that only the 61 players that participated to both QSC and GOTM are considered) and calculate the changes in these rankings for each final victory condition.
The result is someway surprising.
It looks like Spaceship is by far the option that gives you the worst GOTM result compared with the QSC result.
I'm not sure I can explain it (maybe I made a calculation mistake):confused:

The following table shows for each victory condition the number of players that get it (out of the 61) and the average increase/decrease of their ranking (in the 61 list)

Cultural 20k: 1 player, +14,0 in GOTM vs QSC
Conquest: 4 players, +7,8 in GOTM vs QSC
Domination: 18 players, +3,3 in GOTM vs QSC
Diplomatic: 14 players, +2,9 in GOTM vs QSC
Cultural 100k: 3 players, +0,3 in GOTM vs QSC
Spaceship: 21 players, -7,0 in GOTM vs QSC

P.S. I need to learn how to embed excel pivot tables into the post

Originally posted by hotrod0823
Most people agree space and diplo are easier victories and should be scored lower.

What! Where are these people. In order to score well in a space race game I still need to expand to the domination limit and build happy faces as I research the tech.

In a domination game I don't need to research at all, I don't need to build libraries or universities or other city improvements. All I need to do is save cash for mass upgrades and divert shields to units and beat the AI to death.

A space race game, if played to max score, is far harder than a domination or conquest win.

And none of the victory types should be scored lower than another. It should be a balanced system where one can win the competition with any chosen victory condition.

Thats this man's opinion and I might be wrong. ;)

Okay maybe not most people but Aeson and I have had this discussion in another thread and territory is the main reason that space races and diplo races score consistantly lower. You can back into a space win with a small nation verses a larger dominating one. If you look at the scores domination and conquest are alway leading the pack.

Some other info following up on the QSC vs. GOTM From Mark's earlier post:


QSC a lot better than GOTM

BillChin - Space
ControlFreak - Diplo
Nada - Space
Wotan - Space
TedJackson - Diplo
forged - Space
alamo - Space
gazza666 - Domination
Email10 - Space
Mad-Bax - space
Aurian - Diplo
hotrod0823 - Space
Ambiorix - Space


Is this all just a big coincidence? Space may not be that easy but according to the Jason score is not as powerful even when played from a strong QSC position.

Hotrod

Originally posted by Mark Cutt
[B]...It looks like Spaceship is by far the option that gives you the worst GOTM result compared with the QSC result.
I'm not sure I can explain it (maybe I made a calculation mistake):confused:
I think you may be making the mistake of using the wrong input factors to base your conclusion on.

Our data indicates that a good space race victory is no easier or harder that a good victory in other categories, but we do see 4 to 5 time more space race victories among first time players.

This comment in no way degrades the Space Race victory as a choice of method of success, but it is the victory condition that tends to appear 1st on the list of conditions that are chosen when all else fails. We are seeing this relationship slowly shift now that the scoring emphasis based on the Jason system is more balanced. There is also a game specific component to these results comparisons because as other players have observed, the space race, culture, and diplomatic victories where not necessarily the victory choices du jour in this game when you had the Sipahi/Dragoon SlamaJama available.

I though Jason score assume each turn to represent the Maximum "milking" points per turn past the "earliest victory date. Anyone who is not at the domination limit by the earliest spaceship victory date will be "losing" points each round they delay their launch. Since being at domination limit is actually counter productive to a quick launch, these measures are diametrically opposed. Only an extremely quick SS launch or a quick almost-domination will score well with the space race. Same can be said for Diplo. Am I right, Aeson?

Originally posted by cracker
There is also a game specific component to these results comparisons because as other players have observed, the space race, culture, and diplomatic victories where not necessarily the victory choices du jour in this game when you had the Sipahi/Dragoon SlamaJama available.

You're right!!
I'm pretty sure that this kind of analysis would have a completely different outcome if done on gotm18 or gotm17

Edit: The more I think about it the more the picture gets clear. As you said Spaceship was not the best option for GOTM19. This kind of "orientation" of GOTM19 has an impact on the score after the QSC deadline. The QSC games are not yet that differentiated, therefore the QSC performance of spaceship winners are homogeneously spread in the QSC ranking whereas the full game score of spaceshippers is negatively impacted by the "orientation" of the game.

hotrod,

can you calculate a qsc score from a .sav file for me. I ask because I had the highest scoring space race victory and I would like my data to be considered in this space race debate. I was keeping my notes using RufRyder spreadsheet and lost them due to a crash, thus could not submit for the QSC.

Originally posted by hotrod0823
Is this all just a big coincidence? Space may not be that easy but according to the Jason score is not as powerful even when played from a strong QSC position.

That's because few players try to maximize Jason score while going for space. It's rather counter-intuitive to expand to the domination limit and then delay victory for 100 years until you can launch the spaceship.

And some people just hate to milk games. ;)

Thats right Dave I agree. I think Aeson proved a point by getting his Diplo win. I am not sure but I imagine he went to the domination limit and tried for the diplo win to show a 10K game can be had even with diplo victory.

One other note was the power of the UU taken into consideration when figuring out best dates. Currently there is no modifier for the UU perhaps there should be.

The main reason IMHO for the easy of some but not all of the domination games is the power of the UU. Sipah at 8.3.3 makes an unstoppable unit vs. guns and very powerful against rifles. I doubt anyone going for domination had a Sipahi go against any infantry.

What if the Sipahi were not around?

Originally posted by Aeson

This was from the GOTM18 Results discussion and may not be specifically applicable here but wanted to include it as justification for my comments on space being "easier"

Because this map had a 'Large' landmass setting, Spaceship/Diplomatic were probably the two quickest victory conditions, other than a small empire 20k type game. Conquest and Domination were going to take a while because so many units had to be moved around. Cultural 100k was probably somewhere inbetween. Because of that, the 'easy' victories were Spaceship/Diplomatic, and so the players struggling to win gravitate to those victory conditions, while the players having an easier time of things could go for whatever victory condition they wanted to. On most maps this is going to be the case, and I'd expect the average Jason and in-game scores to be lower for Spaceship/Diplomatic because of it. Even if the map favored Spaceship/Diplomatic through the scoring system (this one actually favored any game played to ~14-1800AD).

Not specific to GOTM19 but on par with what we are talking about. Space vs. Domination

Indeed, HotRod, the primary focus in the spoilers was the power of the sipahi. But it would be very difficult to make a modifier for UU. I for one never thought the Celts UU would be as powerful as SirPleb made them. It all depends on how well you control the tech rate.

BTW, goodjob on the new server (I'm assuming here) normally, I can't get on half the day the results are posted.:goodjob:

Has anyone ever won the GotM with a Space Race victory and if not would it be possible. It should be, IMHO, and if its not then there needs to be some tweaking to the scoring system. All victory conditions should have a shot at the top slot. Of course I am sure that its impossible to perfectly balance it out.

Originally posted by Mark Cutt
QSC a lot better than GOTM
BillChin , ControlFreak, Nada, Wotan, TedJackson, forged, alamo, gazza666, Email10, Mad-Bax , Aurian, hotrod0823, Ambiorix

My QSC game is better thanks to the forum, and it does reflect in the overall game (though you can't tell here!).

I still need work in deciding on a direction in post-QSC gameplay. I wind up building and trying to prepare to exploit the inevitable war. Not nearly to the point of doing a conquest.

Extremely fast (ie. DaveMcW) type games are often going to score a bit less for Diplo, Space, and Culture 20k games. That's because part of being extremely fast in those conditions means making a population/territory tradeoff in most cases. Tradeoffs tend to have diminishing returns. You might trade 10 turns for 10% of score/population, but for 40 turns you might be up to 50%. The rate the returns diminish is going to be map specific. On this map, the returns started diminishing very fast once Sipahi weren't being used (or at least not used in great numbers). ;)

I don't even want to try to account for diminishing returns in the scoring system. It would be almost completely dependant on the best dates, which aren't terribly accurate. Setting an exponential curve for the 'leeway' off a faulty focus(? not sure of the mathmatical term) might results in scores in a range of 0-100000 very easily, with 90000 of that being mostly based on how badly the best dates were off by. If someone with far better math skills than I have was willing to set up a 'safe' was of accounting for diminishing returns it could be included. Otherwise, the fastest finish awards are always there to shoot for, even if the Jason score won't be able to properly give credit in those cases.

I did play my game mostly to target 10k with Diplo (my Spaceship score would be about 500 points higher given the timing of hitting domination). Sipahi helped me as much as they did SirPleb from a relative standpoint of how well we set ourselves up for the conquest phase, and would have helped anyone trying to gain territory (and the population derived from it) with them regardless of victory condition. If I would have thought ahead (instead of just hoping for a leader) and set up a Palace jump by ~500BC, I'm almost certain I would have scored 11.5k+ with Diplomatic. So it's definitely possible to still score well with even the 'late' victory conditions, although I agree it's a more difficult balancing act because of the conflicts in interest that arise.

This map had some of the same conflicts for Conquest and Domination too though. A very fast tech rate to Astronomy (f you missed the Great Lighthouse) and Military Tradition was important. Optimally (pangaea maps with early UU's) the tech rate should be slowed as much as possible for pure Conquest and Domination tries.

I think it goes to show that each month the map will dictate not which victory conditions will score best, but which method of obtaining a given victory condition will score best.

I've obviously had more 'playtime' with the current scoring system, playing my part in designing it by necessity requires to understand it (at least if the design is anything other than random ;) ). I hope as people become more experienced with the Jason scoring system that such observations as I posted above will be supported more. It does pain me a little to see what I feel are wrong conclusions jumped to. Not because they are wrong (that's part of learning), but because they could scare people away from playing towards victory conditions they want to play towards, which is contrary to why the scoring system was designed in the first place.

Yeah, Aeson, but given what you have just said it becomes clear that I was tilting windmills by setting sail towards a space race (milk as you go) victory from the start. I had no chance to win the gold as the space race can't win the gold, and no chance to win a medal because I was trying to max score as I went. So, essentially that is one approach I can never try again. It's a shame because it was interesting and I think it was a pretty well played game.

What about adding some depth to the equation by adding medals for highest scoring game of type as well as fastest finish. This makes more sense to me than these lowest scoring medals. With so many more people playing we need more medal opportunities anyway to encourage and reward a variety of playstyles.

On a more fun note, TF has been gracious (and brave!) enough to give us access to a database account for use with the GOTM. As a preview of where the GOTM is headed as far as cataloging the games...

http://gotm.civfanatics.net/saves/showresults.php

Currently only the GOTM19 results have been added to the database, and there are still some bugs to be worked out (any MySQL pointers on matching to only one entry in a multi entry SET?). User Interface and functionality inputs would be greatly appreciated too! (either start a new thread, or pm/email them to me so this thread stays on-topic as much as possible :) ).

Yeah, Aeson, but given what you have just said it becomes clear that I was tilting windmills by setting sail towards a space race (milk as you go) victory from the start.

Not at all... I have a very strong suspicion that playing from just before SirPleb's victory, you could get to a Spaceship (He probably wasn't keeping Diplomatic an option ;) ) score that was in contention for medals. I definitely see how my own game could have contended for a medal if I had made better choices.

It admittedly is more difficult to balance the 'late' victory conditions to achieve the max Jason score possible. I don't think the max Jason score possible varies much by victory conditon though. On this map, all victory conditions could score 11k+.

What about adding some depth to the equation by adding medals for highest scoring game of type as well as fastest finish. This makes more sense to me than these lowest scoring medals.

Idealy we've targetted the awards for fastest finish to compensate for the fact that very fast finishes do tend to score lower than they could if 'milked' out a bit. That leaves the medals mainly for those less fast, but still as well played games that are milked a bit along the way.

The Phillibuster awards are included for fun, and to make sure that there is some involvement for the newer and less experienced players. I don't know if you were around back then, but several months ago the GOTM was having some major problems. A general lack of trust in the validity of games being submitted seemed to be driving a lot of players away, as did the fact that milking was the only way to have any shot at a medal most months. Phil's contributions (among others, such as the Lowest Scoring OCC competitions, ect.) at that time were a big part of why the Staff feels things started to turn around, helping to bring a lighter side to the GOTM. Think of those awards as a reminder that score isn't everything, and that for newer players trying a tougher difficulty than they've ever played before, even a low ranking victory is still a pretty amazing victory.

I might as well just shut up around here.

Originally posted by ltcoljt
I might as well just shut up around here.
On the contrary ltcoljt! I think the reason that the changes in GOTM have been made is because people like you with differing opinions have been able to frankly state their idea in a constructive manner. Your comments (all of them) today have had a positive candor and I think that your ideas are getting through, even if not acted upon yet.

The opinions and insights of everyone matter here (as long as they adhere to forum posting policy). Just realize that the Civ3 community in general is a rather analytical community, and any argument put out there is probably going to find someone who disputes it.

Regarding the scoring system specifically, any insights or suggestions are always welcomed by me. I will dissect them as best I can, as will others, but it's that process that usually leads to any advancement. And just because I don't agree with something initially doesn't mean it won't be used. ;)

My initial suggestion as to the awards was much like yours, awards for highest Jason score for each victory condition. Discussion in the staff forum resulted in a better option from the viewpoint of the staff as a whole, which is what I detailed above. I agree with that decision, even though it probably isn't what I would have come to on my own.

Well, Aeson, all I can say is you need to go back to the staff forum and let them know that "a better option from the viewpoint of the staff as a whole" means beans to the players. I think that more medals would equal more interest and let the staff eat cake. Out of 234 submissions you had only 4 100K cultural submissions and only 1 20k, so something is obvisouly less than optimal.

Ask the staff how much staying power the GotM will have for people if it's always gonna be about who conquers fastest. Why do you think Bamspeedy is playing a OCC this month? He is bored if you ask me.

Originally posted by ltcoljt
Why do you think Bamspeedy is playing a OCC this month? He is bored if you ask me.
I think you should have asked this question privately of Bamspeedy and let him give you his answer and perspective. It is difficult to put speculative words into the mouth of another person and then expect to use those words as any sort of valid support for a discussion point without creating some sort of expanded conflict or miscommunication.

In some ways, Bamspeedy's choice to play an OCC represents the ultimate Man of laMancha style decison in my book.

I want to caution us all also to avoid spoiler discussions of Gotm20-Spain outside of the defined limits for those discussions in their assigned topic threads.

Originally posted by Aeson
I have a very strong suspicion that playing from just before SirPleb's victory, you could get to a Spaceship (He probably wasn't keeping Diplomatic an option ;) ) score that was in contention for medals.
I think so too. I believe that from my 10AD save it would be possible to get very near 12K Jason in a spaceship victory. This map was very balanced in that regard - fast research to Sipahi could be used as a key to a high scoring game for most of the victory conditions.

Sirpleb,

Let's do that!!! This month we might have some players who want a little extra excitement and a chance to follow the master.

Let us setup a Quick Game in the Quick Games subforum and use your 10AD save as the starting file. All payers would begin playing from that point in time with the objective of fastest Space Race victory from that point in time. We can use the existing Jason Score calculator and players can self report via a brief events timeline plus a final turn save file.

How long do you think it would take the average people to play a space race victory from your 10AD position??

The fact that your 10AD file is in PTWv1.21 may exclude some players but it may still be a fun and exciting play opportunity.

If I get some spare time, i would not mind trying this. I analyzed SirPleb's game in the civreplayviewer utility (great util) and was nothing short of amazed at just how fast his conquest went once it started.

Sir Pleb, in order to get 12k jason with a spaceship victory, do you feel the territory you have at 10 would be sufficient, or would you need to capture some more?

..or is that the kind of thing we should try to find out for ourselves?

I would also like to see if I can recreate the amazing conquest results from that point. how he managed to beat down the other continents so fast just astounds me. I used the same units in my own conquest victory, but they certainly did not tear through the enemy that quickly... especially Rome.

Well, Aeson, all I can say is you need to go back to the staff forum and let them know that "a better option from the viewpoint of the staff as a whole" means beans to the players.

The point I was trying to make is that no single player defines what the GOTM 'should' be. Certainly not me, maybe cracker could if he just wanted to play by himself... which he doesn't seem very keen on. ;)

Realize that you are a single member of the community, like any of the rest of us. Because every player's voice counts, that means no one's voice should shout the other down. You speak for yourself, I'll speak for myself, and let 'the players' speak for themselves as well.

There was polling done way back when on what victory conditions we should have, and the number (well, if we should have 'more' or 'less' relative to what was proposed then). The current award system is our best effort to conform to the results of those polls.

There are a lot of new faces since then, so if you feel strongly about adding more awards, you could start a new poll with your suggestions. The Staff mainly concerns itself with trying to provide a solution that conforms to the general opinion of the community.

Originally posted by ltcoljt

Well, Aeson, all I can say is you need to go back to the staff forum and let them know that "a better option from the viewpoint of the staff as a whole" means beans to the players.

If you want more awards then suggest them. We are always willing to add more to the game. Not every choice will make it to implementation, but it will be fairly looked at. The staff here is not about dictating ideas out, we are part of the community, and we welcome others thoughts and ideas. There are limitations as to what we can do though. A lot of these limitations come from amount of time we can dedicate to this forum (after all this is a volunteer group) :) there are also practical considerations. eg there should not be so many awards as to make them meaningless. So please suggest away We have been and always will be ready to listen.

Originally posted by Mark Cutt


I'm not sure I did what you were suggesting but I tried.
I correlated the changes in my mini-ranking (remind that only the 61 players that participated to both QSC and GOTM are considered) and calculate the changes in these rankings for each final victory condition.
The result is someway surprising.
It looks like Spaceship is by far the option that gives you the worst GOTM result compared with the QSC result.
I'm not sure I can explain it (maybe I made a calculation mistake):confused:

The following table shows for each victory condition the number of players that get it (out of the 61) and the average increase/decrease of their ranking (in the 61 list)

Cultural 20k: 1 player, +14,0 in GOTM vs QSC
Conquest: 4 players, +7,8 in GOTM vs QSC
Domination: 18 players, +3,3 in GOTM vs QSC
Diplomatic: 14 players, +2,9 in GOTM vs QSC
Cultural 100k: 3 players, +0,3 in GOTM vs QSC
Spaceship: 21 players, -7,0 in GOTM vs QSC

P.S. I need to learn how to embed excel pivot tables into the post

I did not submit in the QSC because of a lost timeline. I did load the save and the worksheet and it looks like I would have finished about 34th. I won by space race at 23 place in the GOTM, so I would have been one to improve while pursuing the launch option. I credit this however to not trying for the fastest launch, but to mix in some milking with a fairly fast finish. I will try out Sir Pleb's game to settle this issue in my mind.

Aeson and Creepster spoke for me too.

In addition to that, I have been at work for 14 straight hours and I have a design review tomorrow with RIDs coming after the deadline all day long... Which is why I am not posting too much here beyond my agreement with them.

Cheers.

Originally posted by cracker
Let's do that!!! ... Let us setup a Quick Game in the Quick Games subforum
Ok, sounds like fun!

I'll review my notes and start a thread later tonight in the Quick Games forum, and will post a link here at the same time.

First thing will be to describe the setup, see how many people are interested, and see what people think the goal should be.

It may be best to start from a 30BC save - at that point Military Tradition is one turn away.

@rabies: To get a very high Jason score with any victory from that point will require taking more territory for sure. The tradeoffs between speed, research, and quality and development of the territory remain open questions :)

One caution I should add to this: To get a really high Jason score in a space win from this save will be a fairly long effort, more than I spent on the conquest from that date :)

Originally posted by Mark Cutt
I extracted form the QSC and full game ranking the 61 players who partecipated to both and I created two new QSC and full game ranking with only these 61 players.

Finally I calculated how each player's ranking changed between the two competition.
Very interesting.

Purely for my own info & monitoring I have been taking my QSC and GOTM rankings and recording them expressed as percentiles.

So I have for QSC 19: 73rd percentile, GotM 19: 70th percentile.

Obviously, filtering out the non QSC rankings presents quite a different picture.

Looks like I'll have to do a bit more work than I originally thought :)


regards

Ted

Originally posted by SirPleb
One caution I should add to this: To get a really high Jason score in a space win from this save will be a fairly long effort, more than I spent on the conquest from that date :)

Well, that doesn't seem like a "quick" game to me.;)

Originally posted by ltcoljt
A space race game, if played to max score, is far harder than a domination or conquest win.


Not true. Domination plays a special role in this game and especially in gotm since to have a good scoring game, no matter the victory type, you have to expand to the domination limit. The reason space race and some others are deemed easier is because you don't have to expand to the domination limit in order to win. This goes moreso for diplomatic which IMO is about the easiest way to win (as long as you don't shoot yourself by breaking deals etc).

The point is (and one that SirPleb has illustrated for many months now) is that getting to the domination limit is a root skill afterwhich you can do whatever you want in any game. You can win most any victory type without getting to the domination limit, but you can also win any type after you've reached the domination limit with a much higher score.


This isn't an all or nothing sort of strategy either you can still be working on getting to domination without sacrificing other goals like faster tech, culture (with the exception of 20k). A good space race game is both a fast expansion to domination as well as a fast tech pace.

Originally posted by cracker
Sirpleb, Let's do that!!! This month we might have some players who want a little extra excitement and a chance to follow the master.

Sign me up! I would love to follow in the footsteps of the master, Sirpleb. I wouldn't feel as if I had earned such an excellent 10AD position, but I think I could get over it. :goodjob:

Originally posted by Renata
Renata <--- picked the *right* victory condition again, apparently, although I really couldn't imagine having played any other way with Sipahi :D

I must laugh at the quote. I fell exactly the same way, as Sipahi will eat rifleman for lunch. I barely was in the industrial age and only cared about rails and rifles. This was a rare game where I didn't even do much with factories.

================================

Originally posted by hotrod0823
Do I get the award for the greatest plummet from QSC 11th (10th) down to 62nd.



:hmm:
Well so much for the student beating the teacher. ;)
Despite a weak start paranoid about a early "small" map war, I still came ahead @43rd.


================================

QSC = 43 of 98
Full = 56 of 244

This was a backwards game for me. I usually do better with the QSC and drop down in the full score.

========================

Now the challenge is can I continue this trend with #20?

Congratulations for all the great victories accomplished this month!

I'm new to CFC (though I've been reading the forums for months), and I'll probably submit in GOTM-21. I'll just have to be sure to study masters like SirPleb (a fellow Canuck)... otherwise I will assuredly lose.

Originally posted by Smirk


Not true. Domination plays a special role in this game and especially in gotm since to have a good scoring game, no matter the victory type, you have to expand to the domination limit. The reason space race and some others are deemed easier is because you don't have to expand to the domination limit in order to win. This goes moreso for diplomatic which IMO is about the easiest way to win (as long as you don't shoot yourself by breaking deals etc).

The point is (and one that SirPleb has illustrated for many months now) is that getting to the domination limit is a root skill afterwhich you can do whatever you want in any game. You can win most any victory type without getting to the domination limit, but you can also win any type after you've reached the domination limit with a much higher score.


This isn't an all or nothing sort of strategy either you can still be working on getting to domination without sacrificing other goals like faster tech, culture (with the exception of 20k). A good space race game is both a fast expansion to domination as well as a fast tech pace.

Smirk,

First of all I want to apologize in regard to the play on your name that I made, it was no reflection on you, just the language.

Now about this post, I don't think you really read what I said. I said A space race game, if played to max score, is far harder than a domination or conquest win. You must have missed the phrase "if played to max score". I did reach the domination limit in my game, and I did so in such a way as to juggle research and infrastructure builds while I was in conquest mode. It would have been far easier to 1. just go straight domination or 2. just go for a speed run to a launch.

If you will look at my result you will see that I scored substantially better than the fastest launch and not to poorly versus the domination scores.

Those of us who play Sir Pleb's upcoming quick game will no doubt be facing a far harder task than he faced if we play not for the fastest track to the launch but to max score as well.

Thats just my opinion.

Itcoljt> Just curious. What would your Jason score have been if you had gone for the domination win?

I don't think it's far harder to play out from Domination to Spaceship, or harder at all. It's basically milking while keeping research high (which does require skill, but no moreso than getting to Domination quickly). It definitely is more time intensive, but IMO time expenditure doesn't equate to difficulty.

Originally posted by Qitai
Itcoljt> Just curious. What would your Jason score have been if you had gone for the domination win?

Impossible to really answer that because of the way I went for the space race win. I paced myself, alternating between expansion (which I would have continually pursued if going for a domination win) and building infrastructure/milking. I went for the latter because I thought I would have had a higher "score" with some milking than I would have gotten by a beeline to a purely fastest date space win. I may or may not have been correct on that, but I did have a higher score than the space race medal winner.

As a result my "pacing strategy" I didn't reach the domination limit until about 1300 ad. Replaying the 1325 turn for instant domination I see that I would have been able to finish in about 30th place, down from my 23rd with the space win.

I was focused on my strategy from the begining, I would have to back way, way up and replay a lot of the game to see what would have been my best domination result.

We will be able to know more about how space race stacks up against domination in the scoring when the Sir Pleb quick game results are in, but I must point out that there might be two ways to play that quick game. Fastest to finish and pursuit of the highest score. In my mind it should be possible to score higher by not going for the fastest route. But a lot will depend on Sir Pleb's positon.

Originally posted by Aeson
I don't think it's far harder to play out from Domination to Spaceship, or harder at all. It's basically milking while keeping research high (which does require skill, but no moreso than getting to Domination quickly). It definitely is more time intensive, but IMO time expenditure doesn't equate to difficulty.

I think that getting to the domination limit first and then going for the spaceship will not necessarilly yield a higher score than delaying getting to the domination limit a bit in favor of building and milking as you go. This is what I think is harder.

Sure, by slowing down you lose some territory score, but you should be able to make that up by a higher average of happy pop and a quicker finishing date.

I just don't think its so simplistic that the best result is always obtained by getting to the domination limit asap.

Originally posted by Creepster
I failed to realize that I needed navigation to get the resources over to the Roman island. I had 20 odd horsmen waiting to attack after I upgraded them. I had The Great Lighthouse, a harbor on all three continents, and a barracks, but there was a sea or ocean tile between the landmasses that prevented the upgrade until after Navigation. I ended up unable to use about half my troops for most of the game. :lol:

Like others, I don't understand how this happened. It's barely possible that hostile units severed the coastal route between the continents, but with Astronomy you should certainly be able to connect. Can you post a save file that shows the problem?

Originally posted by ltcoljt
I think that getting to the domination limit first and then going for the spaceship will not necessarilly yield a higher score than delaying getting to the domination limit a bit in favor of building and milking as you go.

Score only comes from two things: people (happy, if possible) and territory. It's not too hard to make people happy, if you have lots of extra cash for entertainment, but I think it's a lot easier and quicker to increase your score by adding territory than by adding people. (The latter requires not just population growth in your existing cities, but building cities that have no other function, and irrigating and railroading all of the tiles around them, etc.)

Originally posted by TedJackson
So I have for QSC 19: 73rd percentile, GotM 19: 70th percentile.

That's right. I made the analysis also using the total percentiles as you did.
The point is that, as discuss before in the thread, QSC players overperform non-QSC players in the full GOTM ranking (e.g. 90% of the QSC players have a better percentile ranking in the GOTM than in the QSC). That's way I preferred to post the analysis made on players who played both competition.

Originally posted by Aeson
Also, Mazarin's game is a real eye opener. A little under six and a half hours playtime and still very well played! (by comparison I spent 22 hours playing just about the same game)

Of course I didn't really play for 159 hours (a lot of those hours were from leaving the game running when I was called away, and then not getting back to it until the next day). But I'm sure I played a lot more than 22 hours. I find it hard to imagine playing through a whole game in "only" 22 hours, although I'm sure I'll get faster as I play more games.

Anyone interested in the GOTM19 replay mentioned earlier in this thread, going for high score space victory, please visit the thread here in Quick Games. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55719)

Originally posted by Mark Cutt
The point is that, as discuss before in the thread, QSC players overperform non-QSC players in the full GOTM ranking I shouldn't post when I'm tired.

I meant to say thank you for bringing home to me the flaw in my method of self evaluation. Instead I waffled on about my (flawed) figures. :)


regards

Ted

Congrats to SirPleb and those who received top awards.

I am also expecting an award of some kind :eek: for 247 hrs on the same game. Actually it was a lot longer but a power failure prevented me to go over400 hrs :p

The main reason for keeping the game on was to keep the number of reloads to an acceptable level. Otherwise I would have had to turn it off everynight as my job takes me all over Europe on short trips which prevents me to play continually. And I cannot install the game to may business laptop and my personal laptop a PowerBook Pismo gave me a message that prevented me from submitting the Celts game so I am down to my Dell at home.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Balton
I am also expecting an award of some kind :eek: for 247 hrs on the same game. Actually it was a lot longer but a power failure prevented me to go over400 hrs :p

The main reason for keeping the game on was to keep the number of reloads to an acceptable level. Otherwise I would have had to turn it off everynight as my job takes me all over Europe on short trips which prevents me to play continually. And I cannot install the game to may business laptop and my personal laptop a PowerBook Pismo gave me a message that prevented me from submitting the Celts game so I am down to my Dell at home. [QUOTE]
Hi Balton,
You don't have to do that, you know. You might have read that in a message some time ago but if you were not told to watch your play style (I assume you were not), you don't have to do anything to actively lower the number of sessions you play. Still your counter is amazing, I thought you played 8 hours per day, all month long.

DaviddesJ
Can you post a save file that shows the problem?

I will look through my saves. I am not sure if I hae a save after Astronomy and before Navigation.

Originally posted by Yndy

Still your counter is amazing, I thought you played 8 hours per day, all month long. You ain't seen nothin' yet! I run civ3 continually in the background as well, not because I'm worried about reload or session stats but just because that's the most convenient way to do it for me. On my current rate of progress on GOTM20, if I manage to get through the game (a BIG "if" :crazyeye: ) , I'll probably have close to 500 hours on the clock, and only a couple of reloads.

However, I notice that the playing times for most Mac games in the stats show up as zero, so maybe the counter isn't working anyway.

Civ 1.29f and Mac saves don't include a time played counter (AFAIK). It's an added feature of PtW, which is why they are the only ones to have the time played noted.

So far, out of the PtW games where we've extracted the time played data, mudfoot is currently the 'champion' (most stable system?). His GOTM18 submission had 588 hours of playtime on it... thats 24.5 days!

Aeson, I have a time total on my Mac game, for some reason. (I also have one extra game credited to me in the global rankings - I've only submitted three.)

Originally posted by ltcoljt

Now about this post, I don't think you really read what I said. I said A space race game, if played to max score, is far harder than a domination or conquest win. You must have missed the phrase "if played to max score". I did reach the domination limit in my game, and I did so in such a way as to juggle research and infrastructure builds while I was in conquest mode. It would have been far easier to 1. just go straight domination or 2. just go for a speed run to a launch.


I see what you are saying but in practice that isn't what can happen or even what does happen. If you rush to domination limit as fast as possible you have the best potential score. If you then delay domination and go for another victory you are adding more time to the game but not really more difficulty. The only hard SR victory is the one where you are racing with the other civs to built the ship, and once you are dominating this wouldn't ever happen.

The other side of the coin which is to ignore domination and just rush to a SR victory will always score lower than the domination-then-SR game, however you can still get the fastest victory awards and it might be the only way for some victory conditions. The best games, those in the top 10 are usually those that perform both a fast domination and also a fast victory. That is melding two goals. If you try this but sacrifice one aspect or the other you will end up somewhere in the middle. For instance if you slow down expansion to improve your tech rate you will be somewhere in the middle of the person that didn't slow down expansion and the person who only concentrated on the solo goal of fastest SR victory. So you won't score highest and you won't get the fastest victory awards. Think of the Jason score as a compromise between fastest victory and full game milking. The best games will be those that create a good scoring kingdom and at the same time move quickly to the chosen victory.

Looking at your game data what is being said here is that every domination win above you could have halted the domination and then went on to another victory say SR and won either before you did with a similar score or after you did with a higher score. If you really want to see the difference a good civ building game can do look at Moonsingers game, she won 1 turn after me, but scored a thousand points more which earned her a spot 14 places above me.

Originally posted by Smirk

Looking at your game data what is being said here is that every domination win above you could have halted the domination and then went on to another victory say SR and won either before you did with a similar score or after you did with a higher score.

This may well be true for Itcoljt's 1520AD spaceship (which doesn't seem particularly early, to me), but it's not true for Shillen's 1315AD spaceship (which had an even lower Jason score). If I'd shifted to building a spaceship as fast as possible after conquering everyone else, I couldn't have finished by 1315AD. Perhaps SirPleb could, since his domination was so early, but the rest of us couldn't.

The fundamental issue is that the Firaxis scoring only rewards getting lots of territory and people; it doesn't reward anything else even if those other things are "difficult". And the Jason score just approximates the Firaxis score if the game is played all the way to 2050AD, so it has just the same issues. It's never going to reward other difficult feats. If you want that, you need a completely different kind of score.

Hello all...

Congrats to all who played and finished regardless of victory and loss... and a "wow" to the top five - TREMENDOUS!

In fact, given that I came in 192nd and I thought I played an okay game, I am very impressed.

This was my first Gotm and clearly I have a long way to go. My score though is probably reflective of my style which can be conservative (I don't go out with the intention of conquest) and more interested in building social and economic infrastructure. However, I have never won a cultural or diplomatic victory.

In terms of the scoring debate et al., I just really enjoy the opportunity to play a game that hundreds of others are, and the pregame discussions.

Thanks to all who contribute and again... congrats to the top five!

PS. A special thanks to Moonsinger for great pregame analysis and patience for neophytes in explaining some of the mysteries of the workings of the game.

Originally posted by DaviddesJ

This may well be true for Itcoljt's 1520AD spaceship (which doesn't seem particularly early, to me), but it's not true for Shillen's 1315AD spaceship (which had an even lower Jason score). If I'd shifted to building a spaceship as fast as possible after conquering everyone else, I couldn't have finished by 1315AD. Perhaps SirPleb could, since his domination was so early, but the rest of us couldn't.


Did you look at these games at all? Shillen made sacrifices to get that early SR, notably expansion, he did little to none of it. He conquered the Celts, compared to ltcoljt who played a domination limit SR game. However ltcoljt didn't reach the domination limit until after 1300 and if he can remember or has a save of around then, chances are he can figure the score and see if he did better or worse in the last 200 years until he got the SR victory. As a guess I would say the last few hundred years or so he lost a lot of relative score since it appears he put a lot of production into many tightly packed cities. This may have been needed for the faster tech pace but its obvious that Shillen played a different game.

What I think you can expect is that if your play until domination limit is only better than average, and your eventual victory condition is only better than average then you will end up only better than average. You have to play the later part much better if you want to make up for earlier flaws.

Originally posted by Smirk


Did you look at these games at all? Shillen made sacrifices to get that early SR, notably expansion, he did little to none of it. He conquered the Celts, compared to ltcoljt who played a domination limit SR game. However ltcoljt didn't reach the domination limit until after 1300 and if he can remember or has a save of around then, chances are he can figure the score and see if he did better or worse in the last 200 years until he got the SR victory. As a guess I would say the last few hundred years or so he lost a lot of relative score since it appears he put a lot of production into many tightly packed cities. This may have been needed for the faster tech pace but its obvious that Shillen played a different game.

What I think you can expect is that if your play until domination limit is only better than average, and your eventual victory condition is only better than average then you will end up only better than average. You have to play the later part much better if you want to make up for earlier flaws.

Actually, I already checked this. I reached the domination limit at 1300 AD. By playing the next turn to expand I would have finished around 30th, instead of 23rd place. My score would have been about 300 pts lower.

The purpose of the tight packed cities was to add score, not tech rate. And it would have been very easy for me to have gotten to the domination limit eons earlier and yes, that would have produced a higher score. Essentially, I spent a lot of time pursuing a space race "milk as you go" type game for nought. I do think that space race games should score more. Cultural games too.

I agree that Shillen played a different sort of game than I did. I was trying to tie in the elements of domination and milking with a decent tech pace to see how it would turn out. I think it's clear. Domination or conquest games are favored by the scoring system.

But that's just my opinion and I might be wrong. Aeson clearly thinks so. :D

Since he made the scoring system .......

For me, the comparison between ltcoljt's and Shillen's games boils down to finding it harder to achieve a 1315 launch than a 1520 one, no matter what size either civ attained in the process. I wish the scores could somehow reflect that.

Originally posted by Txurce
For me, the comparison between ltcoljt's and Shillen's games boils down to finding it harder to achieve a 1315 launch than a 1520 one, no matter what size either civ attained in the process. I wish the scores could somehow reflect that.

I completely agree with your statement Txurce, I would also wish that the finishing date (in relation to the best date) has more influence than it has now.

Ronald

Well, I think the real question is who did better and does each of them deserve an award? For me, the fastest space victory (regardless of score) would be harder to achieve than the objective of the highest scoring space victory. What if there is another player who have gone for a space victory, say in 1700AD and has the highest Jason score among the space victories. Does this person than deserve the price, leaving nothing to Itcoljt again? And would that be hard to achieve for any of the top scorers. I say it probably isn't hard for them to just milk the game and launch a space victory when the time comes. So, should there be a reward for highest scoring space victory? My answer would be no. Getting the fastest space victory is a challenge, but not the highest scoring space victory. Any of the early domination game could potentially achieve that.

Anyone with lingering doubts about whether a space victory can ever compete with conquest in the GOTM might want to check out Aeson's post here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1056405#post1056405)

Aeson played from my GOTM19 30BC save and got a mind boggling 12229 Jason score for a GOTM19 Space victory in 1265AD. And he notes that he played one aspect casually, could have boosted score more, probably between 12400 and 12500.

I think that Aeson and I should be playing GOTM as an SG :lol:

Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!!! You've already got the rest of us outclassed, we don't need you working together. :p

Renata