Really beyond the sword?

[Damburger]

I've returned to the game after not playing a while (due to lack of suitable computer, damn you game programmers not writing linux versions!) and noticed something.

I played as Julius Caeser on Warlord difficulty, winning a domination victory in 1935 with 24k points

Then I played as Spain, same difficulty, and won a cultural victory in 1981 but only got 6k points. I would also have rated the game as much harder to win.

How come I get so much less credit for a cultural rather than military win?

I will include saves shortly if anyone wants to see them.

 

[DMOC]

The game just gives a higher score for domination and early victories rather than cultural and late game victories.

 

[oranges]

Both the end date and population/land are important for the final score. Apart from ending later, you probably had a much lower population numbers and less land in the cultural win.

 

[PieceOfMind]

The amount of time you have left in a game is a big factor in determining the end-game score. The more turns you have left, the better the score you get, and it's not a linear dependence on the number of turns either. If you finish a game before the Industrial era for example, this multiplier would be huge and assuming you have a reasonable score to be multiplied you'd get a mammoth end-game score.

Put simply though, I'd suggest ignoring the end-game score as any sort of indicator as to how well you played. Be your own judge.

 

[Damburger]

Both the end date and population/land are important for the final score. Apart from ending later, you probably had a much lower population numbers and less land in the cultural win.

That seems a little daft given that only one of the many types of victory is dependent on how much land you grab. For my cultural victory, I avoided excessive expansion and focused on micromanaging my cities (although I was drawn into several wars and expanded slightly as a result). Seems you are punished for not being violent...

The amount of time you have left in a game is a big factor in determining the end-game score. The more turns you have left, the better the score you get, and it's not a linear dependence on the number of turns either. If you finish a game before the Industrial era for example, this multiplier would be huge and assuming you have a reasonable score to be multiplied you'd get a mammoth end-game score.

Put simply though, I'd suggest ignoring the end-game score as any sort of indicator as to how well you played. Be your own judge.

Fair enough.

 

[oranges]

That seems a little daft given that only one of the many types of victory is dependent on how much land you grab. For my cultural victory, I avoided excessive expansion and focused on micromanaging my cities (although I was drawn into several wars and expanded slightly as a result). Seems you are punished for not being violent...

Theoretically, you can achieve a higher score through a cultural game, you just need to finish earlier enough. The calculation is not the best balanced one, but I assume no one really cares too much .

 

[Legba]

The score is nice and can either boost or hurt my ego, but in the end I just worry about pulling off the win.

 

[GooglyBoogly]

The score calculation also depends upon technology. If you are just about to win max out that slider!

 

[yena]

I've returned to the game after not playing a while (due to lack of suitable computer, damn you game programmers not writing linux versions!) and noticed something.

Both Civ4 and Bts (including 3.17) run perfectly on Linux with Wine 1.0. I will never have to use my Window partition again

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Score also depends on difficulty (along with tech/pop/land/finish date). Winning at all on monarch + will give you Augustus Caesar practically every time.

My highest scoring game was a domination win on monarch at 126k, but I had an emperor game won in 1754 via AP diplomatic, and that was at 104k also. A lot less pop, but a lot earlier of a finish.

Domination will tend to net the highest scores, assuming you can do it, and do it quickly.

 

[Pacifist46]

As far as I understood, the score was based on three things: the in-game score, the difficulty level and the number of turns left before the end. Therefore, winning a domination victory, you normally have a much higher in-game score as you have conquered most of the world, maybe have a vassals. IMO this is not right, because it tips the balance too far towards military. Normally I feel just as satisfied winning a cultural victory in 1900 and having a military consisting of two musketmen and a warrior than having built up a massive military and wiping out all the Civs, but having no culture.

I guess it's up to the player.