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

Judging Quality of Victory

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by greenOak, Apr 20, 2019.

  1. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    Just throwing this one out there, but why is # of turns by far the most common metric to use when judging quality of victory. What about something like score? Just to clarify, I'm not saying using score is better than # of turns, but rather that they both seem equally valid to me.

    Also, when discussing strength of civs, it seems like there would be some vastly different answers depending which measure you use. Namely civs with weak early games and strong late games would rate much better using score as opposed to # of turns.
     
  2. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    Because epeen.

    Well, to give a serious answer, it's because you can milk the score easy. If you can launch to space in the Renaissance Era, you're going to have massive score anyways over time.

    Also the game is often decided long before it ends, so pretty much every late game bonus is meaningless even if it gets there.
     
  3. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    I don't see how milking the score is any different than knocking turns off victory. There is a certain value at which point it will become very difficult to achieve a score greater than that, and there is a certain number of turns that becomes very difficult to break. Both involve a lot of luck. Moreover, there are certain things you can do to boost both that are really simple, and others that are quite convoluted.
     
  4. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    10,842
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Score can be milked by conquering lots of cities which is generally considered easier than closely managing a small to medium empire.
     
    Depravo and Chocolate Pi like this.
  5. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    Score in 6 isn't weighted at all; it's pretty much about having the most land/playing larger maps.

    If it was like 4 where it was weighted by difficulty level and speed, that would be different, but it really doesn't mean anything.
     
  6. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    I agree the current score system sucks in Civ 6 and is mostly just who is closest to domination victory, but that doesn't mean something akin to it could work.

    And the # of turns for most types of victory are dependent on map size. Culture, Religious, and Domination are clearly affected by map size. Science and Diplo probably are too in a less obvious way.
     
  7. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    Score can be milked by a lot things (even if conquering cities is the most efficient) and being able to conquer lots of cities, while keeping population high, producing tons of culture, all while being able to complete the space projects is a skill.
     
  8. Infixo

    Infixo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2016
    Messages:
    3,215
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warsaw
    Is it? Neglecting „unnecessary game features”, exploiting various mechanisms either bugged or badly designed, missing totally on the half of the game - does it really feel like a „quality victory” to you?
     
  9. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, but all things equal, speed does matter more. Score has no value in victory besides score victory. (Eg, you can win with a low score, but you can never win if someone is faster than you to a victory)
     
    TheMeInTeam and ShakaKhan like this.
  10. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    Eh I'm still not buying it. Just because you can win with a lower score than someone, doesn't mean that that it's somehow a worse way to judge quality of victory.

    Using my example in the first post, I would personally consider a 250 SV in which I was leading in culture and top three in every other victory category a better win than a 240 SV win in which I was last in culture and middling in everything else. It certainly feels more dominant, but that's just me.

    Also while being faster is better, it is possible to be on a 240 SV pace and lose (usually to some religion bs), and in another game be on a 250 SV pace and crush.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2019
  11. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    The problem with that is that it's inherently subjective. Some could argue the excess culture was wasteful because it didn't contribute to victory and you "shouldn't" have done it, if it were about efficiency.

    But across the board, a faster victory also has less chances of losing simply because there are less turns involved.
     
  12. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    Basically everything you do in Civ is exploiting the AI playing sub-optimally. It's pretty arbitrary as to what is considered bugged or badly designed. And for the record, I dislike pure power-gaming in Civ, but that is irrelevant.
     
  13. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    Which basically summarizes about what I think about the whole issue.

    It's a contest.

    A contest that nobody cares about or takes seriously, because it means absolutely nothing and certainly a joke compared to anything actually competitive.
     
  14. Infixo

    Infixo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2016
    Messages:
    3,215
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warsaw
    Ok, I’ll make myself more clear. There is nothing of quality in winning a game in a sort of „speedrun” mode - it’s all about efficiency. In other words - number of turns simply doesn’t measure quality.
     
  15. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    This has nothing to do with what I said.

    The problem with this line of thinking is that the absolute fastest victories use strategies that undoubtedly increase your chance of losing in the first ~30 turns or so. I could just as easily argue that these super fast wins aren't efficient because there are other strategies that would have guaranteed a higher win%. It would be the equivalent of putting yourself in a bad position in a game of chess hoping you get a super quick checkmate.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2019
  16. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    I disagree. Trying to win as quickly as possible is a perfectly valid goal to have when you start the game - and number of turns measures how well you accomplished that goal. My argument is simply that there are other power-gaming goals that are just as valid, and require just as much skill.
     
    TheMeInTeam likes this.
  17. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    I mean, results basically just come down to exploiting the AI. Using it to measure skill or quality is a bit meaningless.

    This gets touted a lot, but I am not sure if there's much substance behind it. It seems to me that players are regularly able to get speedy victories and while it is entirely possible they just hide their losses, it's also speculation.
     
  18. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    I think its definitely possible for the best players to get really fast wins without ever losing, but I still think the absolute fastest wins have significant loss% probability associated to them. I'm not entirely sure, but I believe the fastest science/culture victories don't build military units in the first 3-4 builds, and I don't believe it is possible for the player to defend or prevent an early AI attack with such a strategy. I can't come close to the times some people get, but I know my fastest SV/CVs come when I get greedy pumping out early builders/settlers.
     
  19. Infixo

    Infixo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2016
    Messages:
    3,215
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warsaw
    You change the topic with every answer. I am talking about quality.
    You can set whatever arbitrary „goal” you want in your game. But that doesn’t make it a quality metrics.
     
  20. greenOak

    greenOak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    37
    I honestly don't know what your talking about. Define quality.
     

Share This Page