Seems I'm stuck on Neville Chamberlain-level...

[Sascha77]

What exactly do I have to do to earn a higher rank/score?

I've finished two games to far, one on King, one on Prince, both on Epic. Both times my final score was around 700.

The first game was a science victory, launching my mission to Mars around the year 1980. I was completely ahead on science, military tech and civics/tourism - heck, I could've easily turned the game into a cultural victory (or even domination).

The second one was pure conquest, taking the last capital around the year 1800. Since I had accumulated a vast empire by mid-game and the guys I killed first had been kind enough to put campuses into many of their cities, my science was through the roof. I was invading the last three civs with battleships, infantry-corps and artillery when the civ with the second highest science rating was still between Renaissance and industrial era.

The graphs in that last game had me *way* ahead in everything - yet I still only got 750 points or so and the ranking of Neville Chamberlain.

Are truly high scores only possible on emperor and up or what am I missing here?


S.

 

[skyclad]

Yes you get more points for winning games on higher difficulties So just step up to emperor and do it all again

EDIT: last game I won culture win on emperor (now trying immortal!) in around 1900 and got about 1200 points.. only lech walesa level. Gotta finish faster!

 

[mzprox]

I won a deity game, space vic aro750und 1700 ad, 15 cities, I thought i was going great, yet my end score was 750..

 

[Lord Shadow]

I think Civ games have traditionally valued very high difficulty, very early victories as far as high scores are concerned. Civ6 may not be an exception.

 

[Disgustipated]

More population seems to up my score the most rather than difficulty level or time of win unlike past civ games. Bug or feature, I cannot say. Play a large map with lots of cities and your score should go up.

I just got my highest score yesterday. I was going for some achievements and didn't get my win until after the year 1900 which is late for most people. Consequently, more time allowed my cities to grow more. It was my first 1000 + point win. I was on a tiny map. Imagine if I had been playing a huge map I would have gotten Augustus.

 

[Gordon Brittas]

Just think of all the paper you've got.

 

[elitetroops]

In my science victory I noticed that the score showing up on the score tab of the victory panel also was my final score in the rankings. It showed 813 before completing the last mars module and my final rating was 814. This would suggest that victory date and difficulty has no effect, unless those numbers automatically vary by difficulty level and turn number. Need to see more games to know if this is true.

The largest part of your score comes from "empire", which I would assume includes population. Don't know what else is included in that score. Other factors are civics, great people, religion, tech and wonders.

 

[Deaga]

I feel like score numbers have been deflated quite a lot compared to Civ5, but they kept the same ranks. I don't think I've broken over 1000 points on the two Deity games I won, so it feels like just raising the difficulty isn't nearly enough to get the higher ranks. Maybe playing on bigger maps, where you can have more cities and thus more score?

 

[Disgustipated]

This would suggest that victory date and difficulty has no effect, unless those numbers automatically vary by difficulty level and turn number. Need to see more games to know if this is true.

This is my experience as well. Difficulty level and time of win have no effect. If you want to run up your score, go as many turns as you can and run up your population (and to a lesser extent wonders).

This may be a bug that is fixed at a later time.

 

[ThERat]

My Always War game with total domination, Emperor difficulty got me around 1500 points. Lots of cities in the end (large map, around 60+ cities owned)

 

[elitetroops]

I looked at score in a few different saves and it appears the following factors add up to your empire score:

5 points/city
3 points/district (not sure about aqueducts or neighborhoods, didn't have those in my saves)
1 point/population

Other than that you get:

2 points/tech researched
2 points/civic researched
3 points/great person recruited
5 points/wonder owned

Not sure yet about religion score, but that appears to be a very minor factor. In my science victory I had only 6 points from religion when it was the majority religion in at least 9 cities. Maybe it has something to do with how many cities you have actively converted? Or something to do with how many foreign cities are following your religion?

Anyway, with 67 techs and 50 civics, that's 234 points for teching everything, then you can add on to that by repeating future techs and the last civics. There are 30 wonders for max 150 points. Great People are hard to estimate, but let's say 40 great people is already a lot, which would give 120 points. Religion is a very minor factor.

Adding up techs, civics, wonders and great people, that still barely 500 points. Let's say 700 points with a big chunk of future techs and a bit from religion. For the top level you need 2500 points, so that would leave 1800 points to be covered by your empire score. That's 40 cities at average pop 22 with an average of 6 districts/city, or 60 cities at average pop 13 with an average of 4 districts/city.

City spam is the way to go for highest score, and add tons of districts (+farms) as well. Maybe Japan is a good candidate with 3 half price districts? Or perhaps Germany, who can place a ton of districts early and build more districts in smaller cities.

 

[Magil]

It does seem like the difficulty modifier and/or finish time don't add much to the end game score, unlike in past Civ games. Even a Medieval era victory on Deity got me the rank of Dan Quayle.

 

[elitetroops]

It does seem like the difficulty modifier and/or finish time don't add much to the end game score, unlike in past Civ games. Even a Medieval era victory on Deity got me the rank of Dan Quayle.

They don't add at all right now, it appears. I have a feeling there was supposed to be multipliers for difficulty and finish date, but they forgot to implement them. The massive empire needed for Augustus Caesar ranking is insane. It might be quite hard to reach without accidentally triggering a culture victory.

 

[Guandao]

So far, I've gotten Nero and Andrew Jackson...
I need to expand more.

 

[Japper007]

The only way to get a high score right now seems to be to just artifficially run it up by playing after winning, or delaying your victory as long as possible. Score doesn't seem to take fast win-times or high difficulty into consideration much.

This problem is a direct carry-over from civ 5, where score didnt indicate much about the actual power of a civ either.

 

[Inhalaattori]

I had fast Deity win and got really low score. So I guess you need to have long game to get high score.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I got Louis XVI, and that was on King with a 1903 Space Race victory with 17 cities and a few Future Tech/Globalisation/Social Media unlocks.
Well, it doesn't really matter.

 

[dwarfling]

I think you pretty much have to win by Score to get a high rank. I thought I did alright with a t280 Space Victory on Deity/Standard only to get ranked as Neville Chamberlain.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Right now, the score system does not reward great play. A very fast victory on Deity results in a pitiful score. Hopefully this will be fixed, and along with that fix we'll get a Hall of Fame

 

[MadDjinn]

something something the points don't matter like...

you get the point

but yes, I'd agree with the sentient that the score side changed to be a much lower amount, but someone forgot to change the ranking numbers.

or there's supposed to be scaling, but it's not there. I would assume the best score would be one on a Deity Huge map, and the worst score would be on a settler/duel map.