If the point is to gauge early play that creates good end games, then anything that brings the top QSC in line with the finished games should be worth the effort.
The disparity with tech is that the vast bulk of available techs are usually worthless in a conquest game, this is especially true for a slow tech game. In 18 for instance iron was all that I needed in the ancient age, when others were dirt cheap or free I got them. So I'm sure I did well relatively since all the techs I got were dirt cheap, but overall both because my drive was to slow techs down, and the pyramiding value of techs I won't score well in the tech field. In other words, the equation of gold spent and earned I did well. But since tech value far exceeds their gold value I did poorly because getting techs was not a motivation in of itself.
As for when to change, whenever a better system is decided on. The point of QSC is to gauge play, not to play for the QSC gauge. If you played for a good QSC score and thus overspent for techs based on their old overrated value, then let that be a lesson.
BTW I'm 100% sure Pyramids, etc pay the maintenance for their related improvement. So it could be a bit of a time hassle to go thru and count built improvements by hand. I generally sell them anyway since 7g is a lot more than nothing! Of course if they were scored, I would keep them until after 1000 BC.
This is off-topic but I also feel counting the free improvements is too powerful. The effect of pyramids will readily make it self clear as long as you built it before 1000 BC. So there is no need to effectively count the same thing twice.
This is also the problem with techs, they are counted sometimes more than twice.
Counting gpt and other territory scores is a lot of the same thing. The only way to get more than you pay for is to maximize the free borders you get when settling nearby, this is sound strategy and should be rewarded. Moving to some far flung region has no real value.
This goes for luxuries as well, their value is happiness which is directly related in the in-game score. If you hook up 8 luxuries and all your cities are 4 or less, then you just wasted a lot of worker time. However, IIRC most of the other scoring overshadows happiness greatly. If the only points are those from the in-game score, then its basically meaninless.
The disparity with tech is that the vast bulk of available techs are usually worthless in a conquest game, this is especially true for a slow tech game. In 18 for instance iron was all that I needed in the ancient age, when others were dirt cheap or free I got them. So I'm sure I did well relatively since all the techs I got were dirt cheap, but overall both because my drive was to slow techs down, and the pyramiding value of techs I won't score well in the tech field. In other words, the equation of gold spent and earned I did well. But since tech value far exceeds their gold value I did poorly because getting techs was not a motivation in of itself.
As for when to change, whenever a better system is decided on. The point of QSC is to gauge play, not to play for the QSC gauge. If you played for a good QSC score and thus overspent for techs based on their old overrated value, then let that be a lesson.
BTW I'm 100% sure Pyramids, etc pay the maintenance for their related improvement. So it could be a bit of a time hassle to go thru and count built improvements by hand. I generally sell them anyway since 7g is a lot more than nothing! Of course if they were scored, I would keep them until after 1000 BC.
This is off-topic but I also feel counting the free improvements is too powerful. The effect of pyramids will readily make it self clear as long as you built it before 1000 BC. So there is no need to effectively count the same thing twice.
This is also the problem with techs, they are counted sometimes more than twice.
Counting gpt and other territory scores is a lot of the same thing. The only way to get more than you pay for is to maximize the free borders you get when settling nearby, this is sound strategy and should be rewarded. Moving to some far flung region has no real value.
This goes for luxuries as well, their value is happiness which is directly related in the in-game score. If you hook up 8 luxuries and all your cities are 4 or less, then you just wasted a lot of worker time. However, IIRC most of the other scoring overshadows happiness greatly. If the only points are those from the in-game score, then its basically meaninless.
