Accelerated Production Scores

[Yzman]

This sorta bothers me about scoring. Let me say I always play on standard size map, monarch diffilculty. My hightest score is 4642. I got this with accelerated production option on. I finsished the game diplomatically at around 1040 AD. I owned maybe 1/3 of my continent. I defintely wasn't a real power.

Now for my current game. I got sick of the game going so quick so I took off accelerated production. I play the game and conquer my whole continent and the Japanese one. Basically I owned half of the earth. Now at around 1900 I win by a dilpomatic victory. I'm thinking wow my scores gonne be great with all this land and happy people.(I had 95% approval). Then the game finishes and I get a score of 3100. This score sucks compared to my others. All becuase when using accelerated production you will usually finish the game quicker so you will get a higher score. I don't like this. Score shouldn't be how fast you win. Score should be how great of a civ you had. Culture, land, etc. But with the current system a builder like me who wins by diplo or space mostly has to wait long to finish so the score isn't high. The game doesn't reward the small culture civs but only the huge military civs. I think this should be changed.

 

[Catt]

The same complaint may be lodged against games played under 1.21 (or earlier versions) versus 1.29f games -- at least for games on Monarch or higher. The changed tech progression rates means that it will be harder to beat your high score games from pre-1.29f by using 1.29f.

I try to ignore my score and focus my memories on the particularly satisfying wins / achievements.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

F*** score! I play for fun, not for points!

 

[Yzman]

I don't care about the score too much either but its always nice to do better than you did before. I use it as a way to see how I'm progressing with my playing and if the scores are made like that it makes it hard.

 

[Beam]

The scoring system isn't the best part of the Civ III implementation.