Dan Quayle

[Sherlock]

They REALLY need to loose the 'rating'. If you want to play a particular style 'no war' or 'cultural victory', or whatever they shouldn't beat on you for it when you're done.

 

[mechaerik]

Just out of curiosity, what difficulty do you play on?

 

[Sherlock]

Just out of curiosity, what difficulty do you play on?

I'm just starting so I'm playing on Chieftain, I think it is. Just finished a game where I was five hundred points above anyone else and got a diplomatic victory. Was peaceful the whole game.

I'll bet if I'd taken out a few of my neighbors the rating would be way higher.

They should call it the 'Agressiveness' rating, not the 'Leadership' rating.

 

[war ensemble]

A big use, in my opinion, is simply to divert your closest neighbors' resources. Stationing a privateer at every coastal city when he has no unit of comparative results in a lot of lost production for him as he suicides units. Not to mention free Great General points for you.

Doh! Wrong thread.

 

[mechaerik]

I'm just starting so I'm playing on Chieftain, I think it is. Just finished a game where I was five hundred points above anyone else and got a diplomatic victory. Was peaceful the whole game.

I'll bet if I'd taken out a few of my neighbors the rating would be way higher.

They should call it the 'Agressiveness' rating, not the 'Leadership' rating.

THERE is your problem. The ratings take into account your difficulty level.

 

[Sherlock]

THERE is your problem. The ratings take into account your difficulty level.

Yes, but not that much. What they really take into account is how much you attack the other civs.

Try to get a high rating with a peaceful win sometime.

 

[Gustavus]

I'm betting (and I don't know) that you let the timer run out and won a time victory, that by 2050, you won the game automatically? I used to do that a lot, and I'd get scores of like 5,000. You have to win a certain victory conditions that is not the Time Victory, ones like cultural, domination, conquest, space race, diplomatic. Notice that Cultural, Space Race, and Diplomatic don't require you to kill a lot of civs (well, diplo MIGHT). If that's not your situation, my apologies.

 

[Codeman]

What they really take into account is how much you attack the other civs.

Try to get a high rating with a peaceful win sometime.

I have had many victories in which a played the peacefull style. It actually takes account of score at time of victory, the date of victory, and difficulty level. The earlier the win the higher the points and rating. The higher the difficulty level the higher the riating.

 

[Zubbus]

The feature's fine. Just need to add Bush underneath Quayle.

 

[omnimutant]

What they really take into account is how much you attack the other civs.

Not so sure on that I won on monarch without firing a shot (had barbs on and they did the dirty work). I Got the rating of Shaka.

Just need to add Bush underneath Quayle.

Oh Please... does that ever get old?

 

[Zubbus]

Oh Please... does that ever get old?

You asking me? I don't know who voted for him the 2nd time.

 

[mechaerik]

Yes, but not that much. What they really take into account is how much you attack the other civs.

Try to get a high rating with a peaceful win sometime.

Chieftan is the 2nd lowest diffivulty. it DOEs take your difficulty, time of completion, etc. etc. It is indeed possible to get a high score with no violence.

 

[Abraham Lincoln]

The rating don't come from aggressiveness. It comes mostly from the year when you win, but also from wonders, land-area, population and techs. But in the start of my Civ-career, I thought the score came from aggressiveness. If you won this game 2040 AD, or something near that, it's not so weird that you got the leadership rating, Dan Quayle.

- AL

 

[mechaerik]

I should also mention, that even when I was very aggressive in the game on low difficulties like settler and chieftan, I would still get Dan Quayle.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Yes, but not that much. What they really take into account is how much you attack the other civs.

Try to get a high rating with a peaceful win sometime.

You won't get 1,000,000 peacefully (someone actually did that in HoF!).

But I get >40k in pretty much every game I play just for winning.

The last game I played was totally peaceful on immortal, won UN in the 1700's, 45,000 score. That's well over what you need for the highest "rating" (augustus caesar). In fact, it's hard to win at all monarch+ and NOT get augustus as the rating! After a while you just start ignoring it and caring about the W.

 

[Abraham Lincoln]

I should also mention, that even when I was very aggressive in the game on low difficulties like settler and chieftan, I would still get Dan Quayle.

Did you win as late as 2050 AD, or something around that?

 

[mechaerik]

I was not very brave.... I would usually stall until the modern era for nukes and bombers to start a war. Now I axe-rush, and I whip cats and swords/maces to crush my enemies.

 

[De Begerac]

At some point I'll actually go look up who the hell it is.

Cyrano

 

[Ramesses]

At some point I'll actually go look up who the hell it is.

Cyrano

This word is all you need to know about him:

"Tomatoe."

 

[Chiyochan]

The rating don't come from aggressiveness. It comes mostly from the year when you win, but also from wonders, land-area, population and techs. But in the start of my Civ-career, I thought the score came from aggressiveness. If you won this game 2040 AD, or something near that, it's not so weird that you got the leadership rating, Dan Quayle.

- AL

yet combat is inherently the only victory that you can win sooner than every other victory, that does put emphasis on violence.