Has the scoring system been re-worked?

[HungryMouse]

I have played 3 games on BTS so far, and in all my games the game has said that I showed the leadership skills of Augustus Caesar (if I am right, he is on top of the list?). The highest score was something like 23,000. This is strange because I have never previously got so high in rankings. The highest rank before was maybe fourth or fifth from the top.

I use absolutely the same settings as before (Noble, large map, continents, 7 rivals). The only difference is that I play with the new civilizations (Dutch, Mayas, Portugal). playing style is the same, I usually go for Space victory or cultural.

Has anyone else noticed this?

 

[MrCynical]

The Dutch in particular are a very strong civ, which might make a difference. Some of the corporations also generate food, hence higher population and higher score, which might be a factor depending on whether you're using them.

Augustus Caesar is top of the list (though I think you're only just into that rank with 23000?)

 

[Game_Mieser]

Compared to your previous games with Warlords of Vanilla what date are you winning on? This seems to be the biggest impact on score.

The earlier the better the score.

 

[HungryMouse]

The interesting thing is that my games ended in later years than before! Space race was won in some 1980-s, cultural earlier, perhaps 1930-s.

The Dutch are strong, for sure, but I don't think that it would make such a difference. Some leaders from Vanilla and Warlords are even better suited for Space race or cultural. And I don't use corporations since State property beats them up!

 

[Game_Mieser]

Since there are quite a few gameplay elements involved in scoring it's hard to tell just what has caused this better scoring then, but like the old addage goes, Don't look a gift civ in the mouth.

 

[ori]

Has the scoring system been re-worked?

No, the scoring system seems to be the same (from a quick glance at the code).

 

[Jay]

The interesting thing is that my games ended in later years than before! Space race was won in some 1980-s, cultural earlier, perhaps 1930-s.

The Dutch are strong, for sure, but I don't think that it would make such a difference. Some leaders from Vanilla and Warlords are even better suited for Space race or cultural. And I don't use corporations since State property beats them up!

You may think it was later but you could be wrong as turns have been added to the overall game. You really need to go by turn number i think and i also heard somewhere that score is calculated from the percentage of the game you played to win the game e.g. 50% might be 1700AD out of a gamw to 2050AD (random guess) and this is a element in your score

 

[Lurking Liu]

I got Caesar with only something like 20300 in a luck-sack game a little while back, so you don't need 23000 anymore. (Industrious Civ, started with Marble, Corn, Iron, and some other resource in my first city, second city had Stone and Copper. Got Masonry, Bronze Working, and The Wheel off successive goody huts. I was trying for a Diplomatic Victory as it's been a while since I had one--I was 15 votes shy so I stole 20 of Shaka's votes [read as: Invaded!] but won a Cultural Victory before the next UN session. I never touched my Culture Slider, either... Complete luck. Noble difficulty, BTW)

 

[ori]

You never needed 23000 the game calculates an arbitrary "MaxScore" depending on the map you are using and if you exceed this "MaxScore" you are Augustus - for various reasons this scoring is flawed and gives you the highest rank extremely easy...

 

[Astax]

Win with 100k and call me in the morning Anyway if I win in low 20k I feel like I didn't do so well

 

[Lurking Liu]

You never needed 23000 the game calculates an arbitrary "MaxScore" depending on the map you are using and if you exceed this "MaxScore" you are Augustus - for various reasons this scoring is flawed and gives you the highest rank extremely easy...

Oh, don't tell me that... I normally get Warren G. Harding

 

[ori]

Win with 100k and call me in the morning Anyway if I win in low 20k I feel like I didn't do so well

Oh, don't tell me that... I normally get Warren G. Harding

Never said it is extremely easy to get high scores - though if you know that it is mainly population that counts its easier - the thing is that Augustus is a rank you should almost always get if you win higher then Noble/Prince since there is a difficulty modifier which screws the way the ranks (NOT the scores) are calculated.

 

[Lurking Liu]

Heh, I haven't had a problem with population until recently. It's mostly game length. I tend not to care if I win or not, so I don't bother with aiming for any particular victory until it looks like the AI is about to win. Only then will I quickly check to see what I'm closest on (usually Cultural Victory) and go for that.

So, in short, I completely see why I get the lower rankings =)

 

[hvevo]

Well, I never got scores over 100000 in Warlords, but with BtS I've noticed it is very easy to achieve that. I've got over 100000 points twice with Space Race (victories in 1860s if I recall correctly) and Diplomatic (1120AD and ~1200AD), and once with Domination and Conquest. I even got ~60000 points with a cultural victory in 1800s. I play Small/Standard maps on Prince. I suppose someone re-worked the scoring system to some extent (at least it gives Space Race victories more respect now)...