Score evaluation

[Flamingcheesepie]

An "easy" way to link other victories into time victory would be to make their victory conditions a big score number. Say winning requires first to 5000, then winning World Hegemon vote is 1000 points, and building the CV wonder is 1000 points. Spaceship parts could each be 250 or even 500 because they come later.

 

[CppMaster]

An "easy" way to link other victories into time victory would be to make their victory conditions a big score number. Say winning requires first to 5000, then winning World Hegemon vote is 1000 points, and building the CV wonder is 1000 points. Spaceship parts could each be 250 or even 500 because they come later.

This is interesting. That would mean that it may not be enough to launch a rocket to win a game if your empire is not great enough, but it still an achievement. I dig it!

 

[ma_kuh]

You'd lose any semblance of dedicated victories with this approach. Everything is Score Victory at that point.

 

[usadefcon1]

Instead of just launching a rocket, you have to build the greatest empire... Which I consider the main point of Civ games and most 4X games for that matter.

It's feels weird to have a great, vast empire and lose to a guy, who launched a rocket from 4 cities, because somehow having more cities slows tech progression even though you have more scientists. If that's not artificial then I don't know what is

I disagree. The game is about building a Civilization which is different than building an empire. These victories give the little guy a chance.

 

[usadefcon1]

While I do want to make Time Victory a viable choice to win by making sure all other win types can be delayed, we still got a bigger elephant in the room, Science Victory which currently acts as "dynamic time victory" or whatever as someone said.

Of all victories, SV and TimeV are the most boring type of victories. TimeV must be boring and exciting at the same time, by keeping only chasing for the biggest score and bothering other civs to not win other VCs. SV is just boring by design, and it must be redesigned in some way.

TimeV at the same time also encourages you to research technology faster, so you can access more wonders and get Future Tech faster, which is parallel with SV.

Science victory in Civ 4 was my favorite because you got to see the rocket being built. Then you had to wait for it to get to Mars and the more engines you put on it the faster it would go.

 

[CppMaster]

I disagree. The game is about building a Civilization which is different than building an empire. These victories give the little guy a chance.

What's the difference between building a civilization and building an empire here?

 

[usadefcon1]

What's the difference between building a civilization and building an empire here?

One is about controlling the most territory and the other is about social and cultural development.

If you always want the biggest empire to win why don't you disable all of the peaceful victory conditions?

 

[CppMaster]

If you always want the biggest empire to win why don't you disable all of the peaceful victory conditions?

Yes, this is the way. This thread is about balancing the score evaluation.

 

[N.Core]

The more I've thought about the more I think the "answer" to a spiced up SV is just to continue to improve the AI's late game warring. If your going for SS parts and suddenly a dozen Xcom squads drop in your base, or 2 carriers filled with nukes are heading to your capital, then things get really spicy real fast.

Too much shake for a short period of time. You're making SV that's kinda relaxed to a "forget it, let's just delay all stuff so we can see who wins TimeV" type of thing.
SV must be a progressive type of victory where people race with each other, instead of stopping advancement by warring them. The Cold War would be the end of the world at that point.

 

[N.Core]

Each of the existing victory conditions has a narrow definition of greatness: first to colonize a new world, first to control the hearts and minds of most people, first to be elected best in show world leader.

Then SV must be the "first to make advancement for the society." But instead, what we get is the "first who can escape the hell hole that is Earth." It's an arsehole type of win. Building a rocket ship is only one type of advancement, there are other things that are more important.

Time Victory is already good, which is the "first who can build a great empire for a period of time."

 

[CppMaster]

Time Victory is already good, which is the "first who can build a great empire for a period of time."

More like "Who built the greatest empire in the period of time". There is no race here, because everyone finish at the same time anyway. It's who used the time the best.

 

[Hinin]

More like "Who built the greatest empire in the period of time". There is no race here, because everyone finish at the same time anyway. It's who used the time the best.

Thb, we lack the statistical means to determine if Time Victory is basically a Domination Victory ersatz or if pursuing other objectives could be worth more in term of points in the great scheme of things. If we can have this type of info, then balancing the score weights would be easier, and so the gate would open for more ambitious changes to make Time Victory something truly interesting.