Scoring Cap!!!

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Chofritz
I'm completly lost when it comes to the maths, I need them in swedish, don't understand anything,

Do they have different numbers in Sweden?
(j/k)

Anyway: here's the GOTM score:
G: GOTM score
N: Normal score
T: Turn ended
M: Maximum turns

 

[starlifter]

by noughmaster:

Whatever scoring system we use, most good players will always alter their game play to get a high score, so Starlifter, your argument that a cap will limit playing styles is true, but not as relevant as you think because any scoring system does. You admitted in another thread that your game play has changed toward early growth due to the GOTM scoring formula. If you're saying you don't like the WAY it limits playing styles, well OK.

You're on the right track, but the train has not pulled into the station yet. I'll play any style myself. That's not why I've been pointing a lot of things out in this thread.

People should realize the GOTM is not what Matrix legislates... it is up to the participants to make it work by participating fully.

by noughmaser (in reply to Shadowdale):
...they are proofs of my analysis for anyone who is interested or feels proof is required. A few examples are useless for this purpose; they will show what happens in a particular situation, but it doesn't follow that what they show will be true in other situations.

Your analysis is well thought out and very useful, and should be doubly so for anyone who would like some more detail and logic behind tinkering with the score method.

If people cannot really understand what is being done with the scoring formulas, then one cannot make an informed decision. Many of us can doubtless see implications from square one, but many can not. Everyone (not just Shadowdale) should appreciate noughmaster's effort to explain in words what most of us had in High School math at one time.

Civ II is a mathematical (but FUN!) game, and we are applying mathematical procedures at the end of a huge mathematical simulation to mathematically enumerate the relative numerical performance in an objective predefined algorithm. This is not MTV, .

Note From Starlifter: This message have been altered and partly deleted by the moderator. My original post are no longer in this thread, LOL

Last edited by Matrix on 09-27-2001 at 08:54 AM (Pacfic Time)

 

[Matrix]

Originally posted by starlifter
People should realize the GOTM is not what Matrix legislates... it is up to the participants to make it work by participating fully.

As I said (as reply to your suggestion #1 (remove scoring completely)): you can always simply ignore the GOTM score. If you want to make an equal goal for everyone, there just should be something that makes a ranking. The normal score of Civ2 has proven itself to be insufficient, because it is almost only based on how much time you are willing to spend on the game.

Note that the Civ2 scoring system is arbitrary on itself. It's just something decided at Microprose, or by Sid Meier. No one attacks that scoring system! It's taken for granted. I mean: just look at the HOF of CivFanatics and Apolyton. Many people strove after a score as high as possible. But it's not fun to do this every month, so one had to think of something better.

 

[starlifter]

by Matrix:

I do think 50 is the best. I just thought I should mention it because it's arbitrary.

Only starlifter opposes this, but for the rest I believe that everyone would support the square root-thing. So I'll use that for the next GOTM!

Matrix, if you are going to say something, then get it right... esp. because you are a moderator.

1. Starlifter does not oppose any proposed mathematical functions, including the Square Root! For some reason, you just dreamed that statement up, LOL.

2. I've been posting, on the record, repeatedly, since joining in June, that I'll personally play any form. Shall I post some GIF images of these, including several times in this very thread? Get real, dude.

3. It is illogical to state "Only ...", unless you have heard from all the GOTM participants. In fact, the only post that I've seen opposing that particular issue was one of your own, which said it would be a drawback to modify the math because people would have to use the spreadsheet to see where they stood each turn. That was your point, and I have not commented on it at any time.

4. I know you have stated repeatedly that you don't like to read the posts people make, but an advantage to doing so (esp. as the Moderator) is that you will not look foolish when making such blatantly false statements (I presume you are not intentionally lying).

So what do I specifically support? If you have not read my posts carefully, then it will suprise you that I have not insisted on a specific idea. I've suggested over a dozen, and summarized several into the "Six Suggestions" werlier in the thread. Others have also come up with good ideas since then, too, including you, Matrix. I do insist that we all play the same map, settings, and rules in the same GOTM -- otherwise comparisons in the discussions are not very relevant.

Speaking as a "high scorer" (LOL, who can also play bloodlust and fast conquer quite well, BTW), I can say it does not matter to me personnaly and never has. I'll even play the cap (but I suspect people will not be happy with what that is going actually to do to the game).

From the first posts I've made in CivFanatics, the one underlying and often OVERT point I have made is to consider what is best for the whole GOTM, not just a few players, and not the just "best" players. It really is startling that the fixation is often so narrow... let's remember that I don't start threads about narrow issues, but do contribute to them when others go down that path.

Some progress has been made to this goal of improving the GOTM as a whole, but the fixation by a few people on the top scores does not help the vast majority of players. If scores really cloud the issues for some people, then I'm happily willing to forgo scoring and medals, etc. altogether... it does not matter to me personally, because I will play anyway.

What will help the GOTM as a whole? Assuming one refuses to read my posts (which go back to June) and those of others (which go back to last March or so!!), then here is a greatly simplified summary:

1. Fix things like the pre-1850 SS launch GOTM scoring boost.

2. Recognize more playing styles and efforts. Some Examples might be (but not limited to):
- Early Finish
- Conquer the World (SS possible)
- Bloodlust (individual chooses no SS at all)
- Maximum power ('normal' high score style)
- OCC
- TCC

3. Broader range of rewards within similar experience groups, etc.
- Winners in groups (e.g., Newcomers, Esperienced, Experts).
- Individual awards (e.g., most improved, OCC, etc.)

4. Allow games the player chooses to terminate earlier.
- Year-specific retirement comparison (e.g., top result in AD 1000 retirement).

Questions?

This post is 4,027 characters long.

EDIT (by Starlifter!): Fixed Italics.

 

[starlifter]

Originally posted by Matrix
Do they have different numbers in Sweden?
(j/k)

As a native English speaker who spends a lot of time in Sweden doing math, I can say that I don't understand Swedish explanations of math... but I'm able to do quite well in English. I presume Chofritz is not used to reading technical math in English.


Here is the current GOTM formula:

GOTM Score = (Raw Civ II Score) * (50 ^ PNP)

Where:

PNP = (# of Game Turns - Ending Game Turn)/(# of Game Turns)


The Square Root GOTM formula by Matrix is:

GOTM Score = SqrRoot(Raw Civ II Score) * (50 ^ PNP)

Note: Several months ago, noughmaster has proposed a Square Root method... but in the PNP part. I have not seen that discussed in this thread, so to avoid confusion, I won't detail it.

This post is 938 characters long.

 

[starlifter]

Note that the Civ2 scoring system is arbitrary on itself. It's just something decided at Microprose, or by Sid Meier. No one attacks that scoring system! It's taken for granted. I mean: just look at the HOF of CivFanatics and Apolyton. Many people strove after a score as high as possible. But it's not fun to do this every month, so one had to think of something better.

Relax, dude. If you go back an read my posts for the last 3 months in this and other forums, you see I have always praised your (and others') 50^PNP formula to modify the GOTM to eliminate the pure score aspect. It has eliminate the need to play a 100 hour HOF game to 2020 every month!

Let me summarize it this way... instead of saying what I support or suggest, then here is what I personally oppose:

- The horse before the cart. In other words, define/identify a problem, discuss it, arrive at some possible solutions, then decide.

- Rush to convergence (the "MTV", or "snap", decisions).

- Caps & other multi-tier GOTMs. Everyone should play by the same rules, same map, same starting conditions within any given GOTM.

- Ignoring discussion/ideas that will help the GOTM as a whole (details are better to describe as what I suggest, than "oppose").

- Outright hypocrisy. It's OK, but just don't be surprised or offended if I sometimes point out the more obvious cases (No offense intended) .


BTW, Most games have some sort of points accumulation for doing things. There are many ways to gain points in Civ II. It might be worth considering to SQRT the population part of the score, if big populations is the issue. The SQRT function is applied to other things such as the SS and Wonders otherwise.

This post is 1,879 characters long.

 

[Matrix]

In the Netherlands we have a saying: I couldn't see the forest because the trees were in the way. In this case it means that I undoubtedly have missed something you said because you said so many things. If you're not opposing the square root-thing, while I said so - no need to make a 4,027 character long post for that. No, ofcourse I'm not intensionally lying. But when you say you think the reputation of CivFanatics is in danger - that gives me the idea you are against it. But that was still about the abrupt scoring cap.

Enough of this. We're done with the discussion and a good solution has been made. Now let's just enjoy Civ.

 

[Matrix]

Originally posted by starlifter
It might be worth considering to SQRT the population part of the score, if big populations is the issue. The SQRT function is applied to other things such as the SS and Wonders otherwise.

Noted. But are you gonna check every person's population score? I don't think that matters much, if in any case.

 

[starlifter]

by Matrix:

The SQRT function is applied to other things such as the SS and Wonders otherwise.

Noted. But are you gonna check every person's population score?

In either case, it would be you doing the processing and scoring. But the point was that if the GOTM players would like to reduce the effect of Population scores without hammering other aspects of scoring, it is possible to single the population out. People that do not score high populations will gain the benefit of being able to use the other scores they earn. This would help the conquerors and early finishers.

This post is 706 characters long.

 

[noughmaster]

Several months ago, noughmaster has proposed a Square Root method... but in the PNP part. I have not seen that discussed in this thread, so to avoid confusion, I won't detail it.

Yes, I did, but it has the opposite effect to what we want now.
I actually talked about it as an example of different functions rewarding early / late growers.
The 50^sqrt(pnp) rewards a strategy like using fundamentalism to sprawl to 255 cities, start farming, then go to democracy and massive, quick, late growth.
It's not a bad strategy actually. It wouldn't really suffer under a cap because you'd just stop sprawling at a lower number of cities.

I'm actually looking forward to thinking about the new formula and my strategy. Phases of founding cities all at once, followed by massive growth seems best. Remember that you'll have to double the score every 37 turns to make not launching worthwhile. Early trade routes after the initial quick "mini sprawl" ie. Shadowdale's style of play is well suited to the new formula.
Unfortunately, nuclear war is not, so I'll have to be a bit careful, or I'll end up with another GOTM6 score.