!! NMCC #2 !!

[Narz]

I have four submissions so far, congrats to the finishers!

 

[Narz]

Scoring System Change!

I've decided my current system of scoring isn't the best so I've decided to change it a bit (don't worry, the ranking of those who submitted so far is pretty much the same).

I think GOTM has a good system

G = GOTM score
N = normal score
M = maximum number of turns
T = turn finished

However I still think this system places far too much emphasis on the year of completion. For example, a player who finished with a 1300 score in 1970AD would get a score of 57.44, whereas a player finished a mere 10 years earlier would get 63.05. For the guy who finished in 1970 to match this score, he'd have to get 267 extra points (1567 score), thats 10 extra wonders and 7 more citizens!!

While I agree that the date of finish is more important than the game itself gives the player credit for it is not that important! I mean two lucky huts in the beginning can mean the difference between 10 turns in the end.

With this in mind, here is my new scoring system. It is basically the same as the GOTM system except that I double the player's normal Civ score before taking the square root of it. Also, I leave in the bonuses for spaceship and conquering (I think the player should get some credit for winning!).

I hope this change is alright with everyone. For this round, I will calculate both sets of scores (my original system and this new system), for the August NMCC (coming soon) and the rest I will use the new system only.

- Narz

BTW, if you haven't got your saved games in, get 'em in now, the deadline is August 5th!

 

[KingWilly]

I really like your idea of having an alternative to the official GOTM. I haven't played one of your games yet, but only because I prefer to play the Official GOTM first before trying yours. Unfortunately, I haven't had time to play the GOTM and your NMCC (especially this months GOTM18 Fundy game which took forever).

Hopefully I'll have time for NMCC#3.

Keep it up Narz!

 

[Narz]

Thanks! I'm about to post the NMCC #3 right now.

 

[Narz]

Narz wrote (before)

With this in mind, here is my new scoring system. It is basically the same as the GOTM system except that I double the player's normal Civ score before taking the square root of it. Also, I leave in the bonuses for spaceship and conquering (I think the player should get some credit for winning!).

I just realized that by doubling the normal Civ score I'm not really changing anything, the influence of finishing early is still exactally the same. Oh well, I'm just gonna use the standard GOTM system then, except I'm keeping the bonuses (that the game gives you) for conquering and spaceships.

- Narz

 

[starlifter]

With this in mind, here is my new scoring system. It is basically the same as the GOTM system except that I double the player's normal Civ score before taking the square root of it. Also, I leave in the bonuses for spaceship and conquering (I think the player should get some credit for winning!).

Hi Narz! Sorry I have not had time to play your NMCCs, but I have not even worked on my GOTM 18 in almost 2 weeks....

About the math, FWIW. First, doubling the score before the square root is simply the same as multiplying the score by 1.41, or said a different way, using a constant in exponentiation.

Since you have a free hand in doing your own scoring system, you might want to start by considing what you want your game to emphasize. Here are the current examples of gamestyles and what they emphasize:

1. Standard Civ:
- Score: Absolute
- Time factor (game year): 2020; speed is not rewarded for aa typical high scoring game. Play the game to 2020, and max it.
- Completion Time: very very long, in real time, to play.
- Place to see/submit such games: the Civ 2 HOF.

2. GOTM:
- Score: Must balance score with finish year. Highest GOTM score wins; Civ 2 score not the only factor. Early finish score is not used because it is a time-based score and the GOTM formula computes the time reward, plus the EFB is a flat score, and converts the GOTM scoring into a OCC-like year-only finish discriminator.
- Time Factor: Finish quick, but with good score.
- Completion time: Medium to long, depending on game.

3. OCC:
- Score: Irrelevant. Earliest SS landing year wins. One city.
- Time factor: Finish ASAP.
- Completion: very short. One sitting, even while making the required game log.
- Place: GOTM alternative (Yellow Star for best in a GOTM).




So what you might want to do is determine what you want NMCC to emphasize, the build a scoring system/formula to reward it. This is not as trivial as it may sound.



Here are some general thoughts:

1. Some people are going to want to play both the GOTM and your game. You would probably like to find a theme that is fairly quick to play, yet emphasizes a different aspect than the 3 above games, yet still allows fairly standard gameplay. Or, maybe you might want it to be scenario-type only, with accomplishing certain objectives. Or ???. I'll bet lots of people might have some creative ideas

2. If you choose to use the GOTM scoring system as the basis, you will probably want to review how and why Matrix and others evolved it last year. I would not recommend the EFB as a scoring differentiator, because it is a flat score and does not differentiate.

3. If you and Speed of Play (e.g., relatively quick game finishes), I'd recommend you use map setup and map size to control it. Use the map creation program in the Civ 2 Downloads section, for instance, to make random maps with precision control of usable terrain, terrain balance, etc. This might be a method to reduce people's time commitment.


About the GOTM formula: It is very, very, nonlinear. That is, you might want to look at the effect of changing it given different game years, particluarly if you include the Bonus score.


Well, those are just some general ideas.... If I were in your shoes, I'd look for a niche of a relatively standard gameplay, but a monthly game designed to be played with a variety of strategies, yet specifically made to finish fairly quick (say, between the OCC time and the GOTM time, in the earlier examples).

 

[Narz]

1. Some people are going to want to play both the GOTM and your game. You would probably like to find a theme that is fairly quick to play, yet emphasizes a different aspect than the 3 above games, yet still allows fairly standard gameplay. Or, maybe you might want it to be scenario-type only, with accomplishing certain objectives. Or ???. I'll bet lots of people might have some creative ideas

I'd be happy to listen to any ideas for my games. NMCC#3 is already out but I'll take all thoughts into consideration for future matches.

Use the map creation program in the Civ 2 Downloads section, for instance, to make random maps with precision control of usable terrain, terrain balance, etc. This might be a method to reduce people's time commitment.

Sadly, the map creation software does not work my my Mac. I wish it did because I'd love to make perfectly balanced maps and be able to do things like cut and paste terrian and create better "random" maps. If there are any Mac programmers out there who have extra time to create something like this, or simply extend the original "Civ II Map Editor's" capabilities I'd be very pleased (I might even be willing to pay a shareware fee )

As for the scoring system, I was thinking maybe I'll multiply the time factor by 25 instead of 50, I'm pretty sure this would significantly cut the penalty for a late game. I mean I want people to get rewarded for a quick finish but I am keeping the bonus scores (from winning) and the multiplier for an early finish will still be quite high. I got to figure out how to do that will Excel, I am a little rusty when it comes to spreadsheets.

Thanks for your input Starlifter, I consider you the GOTM guru so its always good to hear your opinion!

- Narz

 

[sekong]

Maybe you can set up a ending year, say 1AD. Every one compete and see how bad we are.

 

[Narz]

Interesting idea, or what I could do is compare all the 1AD scores to see who was doing the best at that point, of course I doubt everyone will remember to save at exactally 1AD.

 

[sekong]

I have a better idea. How about let the game start with a set of techs that needed to build the SS, but you forget about the ancient techs, no military techs as well. Start only 1 or 2 settlers. Or a base with a special wonder, etc.
And we compete for who can build the SS within 100 turns. I guess even the elite palyers like starlift, kev, smash will have to think about their strategy on this game.

 

[starlifter]

As for the scoring system, I was thinking maybe I'll multiply the time factor by 25 instead of 50, I'm pretty sure this would significantly cut the penalty for a late game. I mean I want people to get rewarded for a quick finish but I am keeping the bonus scores (from winning) and the multiplier for an early finish will still be quite high. I got to figure out how to do that will Excel, I am a little rusty when it comes to spreadsheets.

Something you might consider trying is changing the values, and testing them for at least say, 15 or 20 different year/score/mapsize/difficulty combinations, using the spreadsheet. Then carefully compare the results to what would have occurred with identical input into the existing GOTM foumula, and see if the finish order of people changes....

Case 1: There is no change in final order of scores - this means the "mapping" function is purely cosmetic. That is, the gaps between people's scores will increase or decrease, but the order will not be affected.

Case 2: Different finish order - in this case, determine if the games you want to emphasize are the ones finishing higher, and the ones you want to de-emphasize are finishing further back (relative to the standard GOTM system).

I consider you the GOTM guru so its always good to hear your opinion!

The most experienced one is Smash, and he's also the best & most well-rounded Civ 2 player... I'm just more technical and post more than he does. I believe he's a Mac user, like you, though he probably won't just jump in and give opinion (like I do ) unless you ask for it.

About the map generator... what version of Mac OS do you use? I know that OS X (ten) is simply a GUI that runs on the base OS of FreeBSD, which is basically Linux/Unix. Other Unix interfaces, like KDE, run in it. Also, WINE should run (a windoze emulator).... and most Windoze programs run in an emulator like WINE. Many games will not, but I'm thinking that the Mapgen program is so simple and graphic-free that it will. So if you get (you may already have one) a windows emulator (they are free), give it a try. Make the .SAV and test it with your MAC Civ.

BTW, Matrix might be able to answer specific questions about the spreadsheet, if you get stuck or don't understand part of it (he wrote it). Basically, just find the equation and change it to what you want to use.

 

[Old n Slow]

I agree with Starlifter -- good gamers will adapt to the rules’ incentives to win. In your system if SS scores are doubled & conquest scores are tripled, I predict that many folks will go for the conquest & few will build space ships. No adjustments & folks will slog it through -- milking as long as ‘real life’ time doesn’t impede (my sense is that the game rewards conquest at a much lower de facto rate than spaceship due to the extra population as the empire grows). Matrix’s system has brought a greater balance, now early conquest can compete with a developed empire launching a spaceship, but speed is emphasized.

Other thoughts -- you might consider a mid month to mid month time frame -- that way those folks in a real life time crunch won’t have to choose when it comes down toward the end -- and/or if a deadline is missed an available alternative has just arrived.

Another thought might be to “adjust the scoring for that month only” -- i.e. spaceships now worth an extra 2,000 points; end the game with a top reputation (Starlifter might have an extra advantage! -- and the Tower would no longer be so worthless); bonus points for most Wonders in the same city. My thinking is that different rules incentivize accordingly (which can also be a source of fun) -- but it shouldn’t place a burden on you (i.e. counting up to see who has the most trade routes seems a bit much).
---------------------------------
Quickies -- 5 city limit, takeovers should be eroded away (or save a slot if one of your conquered cites has a Wonder that you want)

OCC at the Warlord level (score counts!)

Custom map -- Micro (smaller than small)

 

[Ali Ardavan]

Originally posted by Narz
Sadly, the map creation software does not work my my Mac. I wish it did because I'd love to make perfectly balanced maps and be able to do things like cut and paste terrian and create better "random" maps. If there are any Mac programmers out there who have extra time to create something like this, or simply extend the original "Civ II Map Editor's" capabilities I'd be very pleased (I might even be willing to pay a shareware fee )

I have always been a Mac user. Civ2 map editor works just fine on my machine. My version of Civ2 is single player.

I have created about a dozen maps and played on some of them. It is interesting how much variation in game play you can induce with a custom map. This is partly due to the fact that the random map generator is far from random and especially bad at smaller map sizes. (For some reason it gives you a large number of mountains if you push the map size near its minimum of 1000 tiles.)

I too have not played any of your challenges due to real time constraints. GOTM is taking way too much of my time. But I like the idea of mid month to mid month time frame proposed by Old n Slow.

 

[starlifter]

I have always been a Mac user. Civ2 map editor works just fine on my machine.

Narz is talking about the 3rd party map creation software that you can download. Programs like CivMapGen completely eliminate the problems of the built-in Civ 2 map creator/editor, but they are written for Windoze. I feel sure they would run in a Windoze emulator for the Mac, though... since there is no fancy graphics and no sound.

But I like the idea of mid month to mid month time frame proposed by Old n Slow.

Old n Slow is neither old nor slow in his creative thinking!

i.e. spaceships now worth an extra 2,000 points; end the game with a top reputation (Starlifter might have an extra advantage! -- and the Tower would no longer be so worthless);

LOL, yes, I play with never backstabbing the AI. I put some little restrictions on myself in order to tweak the AI into being slightly more competitive. The tower is totally worthless to me, since as Supreme/Spotless and using MGE, the AI is almost always hacked off at me. I never need to get my spotless back since I take my lumps and don't lose it to begin with.

 

[Narz]

I appreciate everyone's comments. I will download a Windows emulator (which will probably come in handy anyway) to attempt to get the fancy Map Editor to work. As for the mid-month start and finish, I think I'll just stick with the start and finish of the month, simply because it will be easier for me to remember and keep track of the NMCC's that way.

I am not much of an expert with scenerio building but I may try some in the future (such as setting up a "Super AI" that starts with say five cities and the Pryramids and make the human's objective to capture this AI. Score would not be a factor (the first player to capture all this Civ's cities would win). To make it even more challanging I would put a limit on bribing this Civ's cities, all would have to be captured with military force. This ought to be pretty interesting, I will probably put it on King difficulty level and give the player a few starting advantages, maybe starting in Monarchy, to offset the AI's tremendous advantage.

I already have NMCC#3 out but maybe I'll use this idea for the Sept. NMCC. What do you guys think?

- Narz

 

[Ali Ardavan]

Originally posted by starlifter
Narz is talking about the 3rd party map creation software that you can download. Programs like CivMapGen completely eliminate the problems of the built-in Civ 2 map creator/editor, ...

I was unaware that such programs exist. What "problems" are you talking about? What do these programs give you that Civ2 map editor does not?

As you can tell, for some odd reason, I am really interested in createing maps. Before GOTMs I had created more maps than I had played full games of Civ2!! Go figure!

 

[starlifter]

I was unaware that such programs exist. What "problems" are you talking about? What do these programs give you that Civ2 map editor does not?

To be fair, the built-in Civ2 map editor can eventually do just about anything (though it may take a long time), since it can change the contents of any tile, including rivers. However, I highly recommend Mercator's map editor to go along with it... it can do some things, like make and merge huge maps, that nothing else can. There are various map editors & add ons by others, too, and I'm not a big map maker, but the one you wanna talk to is Mercator. There are also a lot of experts in the scenario Forum. Another 3rd party map program is the one that converts binary formats, as well as maps from other games like Railroad Tycoon 2. You can find them in our CFC downloads section.

 

[Old n Slow]

Submitted a conquest -- typical last minute deal; now back to our regularly scheduled GOTM, already in progress.

 

[Narz]

Any more games? I will be tallying the results tomorrow night, so if anyone has any more submits please give 'em to me within the next day.

 

[Narz]

The results are in : http://www.narcity.com/fun/civ/NMCC/july.html

The winner was Golem, the Silver medal went to Old n' Slow and the bronze went to NickM. Runners up were Fliipe and AnarchyWrksBest. LordValuna made a noble effort at an OCC but was destroyed before he could finish. Ups to everyone who participated. Remember, NMCC#3 is out now and the fourth installment will be available on the 31st.

- Narz