1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civ3 High Score Hall of Fame

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Hall of Fame Discussion' started by Thunderfall, Dec 11, 2001.

  1. God

    God God

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,354
    Also relating to custom sizes...

    I wanted to try a game on large map w/16 civs. It can be easily done w/editor and the map will be random. Would that be allowed. Could it be considered unfair because the AI won't have as much room to expand?


    Sneak Preview of my Japan game
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Beam

    Beam Beat 'm up Scotty! Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    At 51º35'N 4º46'E
    Duke, thanks for all the good work on the HOF, yet one more thing........

    I guess we are all very eager to see your personal HOF submissions now you can!

    Bamspeedy, although I have great respect for the way Aeson, Sir Pleb and others run for the high scores I do not have the time to play like that and have a good time in Civ3. But he, that is what I said months ago as well, it might be time to pick up new things as long as it does not involve micro management. I love Shift-A on workers! And Aesons Tournament scoring mechanism where an early finish is rewarded very well.

    btw, I see quite often multiple quoting in single post. Who can advise how to do?
     
  3. wohmongarinf00l

    wohmongarinf00l Immortal

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Messages:
    452
    i don't think u can have too many civilisations.

    expansion space is going to affect everyone equally unless u have knowledge of the map which i don't think u do.
     
  4. God

    God God

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,354
    yeah the map is random. It remains the blue(sea) color, and all I need to do is go to the editing options, and change it.

    It would affect me too, unless I came up with some way to counter it. The main reason I want it like this, is even though I can and sometimes do play huge maps, they are slow, and tedious and I would much rather play on a large map w/16 civs.
     
  5. Bamspeedy

    Bamspeedy We'll dig up the road!

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    8,176
    Location:
    Amish Country, Wisconsin, USA
    Copy the text you want to quote by highlighting and right-clicking, then when you are in the window where you type your response you hit the quote button that's up by all the other options (insert link, bold, italic, underline, etc.) then just paste the quote in the window that pops up. Use this instead of the quote button you see by people's responses, so you can have multiple quotes in your response, or to just quote a portion of what they said.

    Another question, though on custom maps. Doesn't using custom maps make it more difficult for someone to see whether or not any of the other rules had been changed besides map size? Right now if any rules are changed (like if you change map size), when you load the game it informs you that rules have been changed, but it doesn't tell you what rules had changed (like someone could lower corruption, or something else to give them an advantage, without it being too noticable).
     
  6. damunzy

    damunzy recovering former mod Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    4,978
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    Use the UBB commands:
    [quote] [i]Yo!MTV Raps said:[/i]
    [b]Copy and paste quoting material here.[/b]
    [/quote].
    This will work for you, I made it so that it would show up. It will look like:
    [quote][/quote] - encapsulates the text in a quote.
    [i][/i] - formats text in italics.
    [b][/b] - formats text in bold.

    When I said custom map I meant custom size. That way the scoring potential for patch 1.21 would be equal to pre 1.21 patch score potential.

    I don't want to archive the old scores as some people worked hard to achive them plus it can be a pain if there are more changes in the expansion or in the next patch that would change the scoring potential again....I have yet to open a game and take a look at it (someone else's game) so I don't know the message about the rules being cutomized.
     
  7. Moonsinger

    Moonsinger Settler Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    4,374
    Location:
    Iowa
    I think the 160x160 random map is fine with me. Even though I may not be able to score as high as someone who play on a 180x180 map, that's ok with me.:)

    No, I can't post the game yet. I am still around 1400 AD. I have made too many mistakes on this game; I lost 12 cavalries trying to take away a city full of luxury from the American. I lost at least 17 riflemen at the following two turns when they tried to take back that city. I'm so stupid...if I wait for two more turns, I would have discover Infantry. I declared war two-turns too soon.:( With the surving force, I am just going to dig a moat around that city, upgrade the surviving riflemen to infantries, and will try to hold that cities at all cost (it's now fortified with 7 infantries, 8 cavalries, and 1 army of cavalries). On the bright side, I am now controlling all 8 luxuries.:) On the dark side, the whole world (7 remaining civs) are now at war with me since they all have mutual protection pacts with the American.

    Anyway, I'm currently at 5400 points now. Since there are still 228 turns left on this Monarch game, that 8000 points should not be too hard to beat.;)
     
  8. wohmongarinf00l

    wohmongarinf00l Immortal

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Messages:
    452
    zulus are definitely not the way to go if u mean to conquer and build at the same time. besides the captured pyramids and sun tzu, i havent been able to get any wonders.

    i'm struggling to keep up with the joneses in the tech race. it's ok though because i'm getting bargains.
     
  9. Bamspeedy

    Bamspeedy We'll dig up the road!

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    8,176
    Location:
    Amish Country, Wisconsin, USA
    I just tried it out. In order to get a 180X180 map, you have to change the rules in the editor (world sizes). Then when you load the game, at the point where you normally get the box that says the date, civ, and difficulty level, you instead get a box that says "The rules for this scenario has been changed". It doesn't say which rules, though, even though map size was the only rule changed.

    I'm not too worried about it, because I don' think there are any scores (except for Aeson's and Sir Plebs) that have been seriously milked, so all the scores except for the top 2 or 3 Deity scores should be beatable even with the smaller map.
     
  10. God

    God God

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,354
    Yeah, but if you edit the civ3mod.bic whatever, the main bic used for all games, then I don't think "this game's rules have been edited" will come up.
     
  11. Aeson

    Aeson orangesoda Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,686
    Because the rules are saved within the .sav files now, it wouldn't be too difficult to make sure that no cheating (from editing the rules) had been done.

    I think 180x180 maps should be allowed, just not edited ones. Since much of this is based on the honor system anyways, cheating won't be a problem (or at least not any more of a problem).

    Most of the other changes in 1.21f aren't too significant from a scoring standpoint.
     
  12. SirPleb

    SirPleb Shaken, not stirred.

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,415
    Location:
    Nanaimo BC Canada
    My vote would be for allowing custom map sizes up to 180x180, with no other changes of course.

    I also like the idea of having multiple categories for each level, one category per map size. Scoring potential is very much limited by the map size, so having more than one category, by map size, would make it possible to get high on the HOF without having to play at the maximum size. But it might be difficult to decide on the size categories: Should there be one category for each of the existing map sizes? Then we still have the problem of reclassifying existing entries. Perhaps there should be just a couple of arbitrary size categories? E.g. up to 130x130 (exiting "large" size) for one group, up to 200x200 for a second group. (If going to custom sizes anyway, might make sense to make the new limit a bit larger than the old 180x180, gives people more motivation to try to beat the current high scores.)

    One more thought for dealing with this whole issue: The current high score huge milked map scores could be pro-rated by multiplying their scores by 0.79. That's the ratio of the new huge category vs. the old huge. I think that the existing high entries could probably have been played much as they were and come out with a score around that mark under 1.21. Having adjusted the existing huge milked scores, keep things as they are with no custom size submissions allowed.

    If the final decision is to archive the current HOF and start from scratch, I suggest that Aeson's recent submission be kept prominently at the top for some time. His game is a huge effort and a great accomplishment - it would be a shame to have it moved off to an archive soon after he completed it.
     
  13. Ronald

    Ronald Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2001
    Messages:
    1,009
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    I like the proposal of Sir Pleb, multiplying the scores of former huge maps with 0.79 and only allow random maps.
     
  14. Aeson

    Aeson orangesoda Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,686
    I see a couple problems with the .79 modifier. (other than 50200 doesn't look as imposing as 63545 ;) )

    First is that the smaller the map, the faster the ramp up in score to 'max' turn score can be. The .79 is the ratio of land tiles (60% water) from 180x180 maps to 160x160, and would be an accurate representation of 'max' turn score ratios. If two equally well played games were played, one on 180x180 and the other on 160x160, and then the 180x180 game had a .79 modifier, the 160x160 game should score higher. Somewhere between .8 and .82 would probably be right (just a wild guess).

    The other problem is that this is only a valid modifier for games that are milked to 2050AD. The early win bonus score is the same by date no matter what the map size. It is actually harder to finish earlier on larger maps. So larger maps are already at a disadvantage from this perspective, and would be further hurt by the .79 modifier to their early win bonus. Depending on how much of their total score was comprised of this bonus, it could make a huge difference.

    For example. On a 180x180 map, domination would be much harder to achieve than on a 160x160 map. But if both games ended at 1500AD, they still get the same bonus. Say the overall score was around 10k (3300 from bonus), a bit higher for the larger map size. By applying the .79 to 11k, we'd get 8690 for the 180x180 map, and 10000 for the 160x160 map. Even though the larger map was the better played game it would score less.

    I think allowing the same map sizes is the only fair thing to do. Any modifiers we add to the scores would most likely favor one Huge map size over another. And a modifier designed for milking could unfairly diminish a non milked score.
     
  15. Ronald

    Ronald Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2001
    Messages:
    1,009
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Aeson, you are correct that the modifier is only valid for milked games to 2050. What I understand, to reach real high scores, it is necessary to milk the game until 2050. Every early win bonus game will disappear from the high score list relatively soon.

    What the fair modifier factor is, I don't know, but I am sure that you and Sir Pleb can work that out.
     
  16. SirPleb

    SirPleb Shaken, not stirred.

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,415
    Location:
    Nanaimo BC Canada
    If the adjustment approach is used I think it should only be applied to huge maps which were milked (played to near 2050.) That would take care of one problem.

    The other problem, of ramp-up speed being similar regardless of final size, is a lot tougher. I think you are right, there's no perfect way to allow for it. On reflection, I think the right modifier might be more like .85 than .79. But, it doesn't seem to me to matter a whole lot - the highest milked scores will still remain significantly higher than the non-milked ones. So perhaps applying a wild guess of say .82 could be considered to be close enough?
     
  17. dikwhit

    dikwhit Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    3rd floodplain on the left,illinois
    A wild guess? close enough? cmon please guys. While i understand "close enough" the idea that we would all go to the trouble of milking games to death,we then go for close enough is garbage. Us anal retentive mofos are not going to settle for close enough.:D
    SirPleb Im kinda even amazed those words came out of your keyboard.
     
  18. wohmongarinf00l

    wohmongarinf00l Immortal

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Messages:
    452
    ok, i see the need to have some kind of standards to these HOF games but the truth is, i am satisfied with the way it is and not just because i have the highest scores in emperor.

    the whole concept of rebalancing scores is why the GOTMs and the tournaments are there. the HOF is supposed to follow simple
    rules. u play a game of ur own chosing with the standard rules and try to get as high a score as possible using all that you have. huge map, milked game, whatever....it is ur score and u obtained it! to go back and start modifying scores using some arbitrary modifier to account for milking and map size is sheer folly. any sort of modifier assumes game progression is deterministic and could be subject to some kind of fair scaling. we all know how untrue that is. the random coefficient is amazingly high and gets higher with difficulty. u beat the AI to a luxury by a turn because there was less distance to travel, which made everyone in ur empire happy and u beat the AI to the GL by a turn in consequence, which gave u chivalry to upgrade all ur horsemen to knights now that u are saving gold on research, which allowed u to attack ur unsuspecting neighbour who had no time to upgrade horsemen.....u get the idea.
    if someone beats my score using a huge map, am i going to complain about it? should i complain about it? no! i have a policy of not playing huge maps because they are slow but that's my problem! it shouldn't diminish the effort it takes someone else to play and milk a huge map!
    i have only milked a game once and it was tedious! those who milk take the time to do so and they should be rewarded for doing so, not chastised!

    leave raw scores alone! even if they want the modifier applied to their games, aeson and sirpbleb play damn near flawless games and i don't see the need to tinker with their scores.

    if at some point a need arises to reclassify the scores by map size, that's fine but LEAVE RAW SCORES ALONE.

    i probably should have started this rant on a new thread. oh well, we were starting to take a new conformist path...
     
  19. dikwhit

    dikwhit Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    3rd floodplain on the left,illinois
    wahr I got one thing to say ...... amen. There is enough messing with modifiers in the tounament. You have to download this,this, and this just to figure your score, PITA. Leave the hall of fame alone. Different classes for diff. sizes? sure, modifiers %^%#^%^ that
     
  20. Cartouche Bee

    Cartouche Bee Appropriations Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Multiple Victory Avenue
    Yep, leave the scoring to Firaxis. If milking has gone out of proportion to their initial intent then the early finish bonus points can just be adjusted (raised) to rebalance the scales. Map size adjustments were to be used in the tournament but that whole scoring system was abandoned in less than two weeks so there would be no reason to think that concept should work for HOF.

    CB
     

Share This Page