1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Suggestions for improving the HOF

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Hall of Fame Discussion' started by Matrix, Aug 26, 2007.

  1. Denniz

    Denniz Where's my breakfast? Moderator Hall of Fame Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    11,092
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dallas
    It was late and I may have over simplifying a little to be brief. One query page on the stats with the ability to select all the different combinations currently in the database could probably provide most of what you are taking about. We can all argue about the details when/if we get everything else done that needs doing first.

    The primary focus of the current HOF is Fastest Finish. We chose that as our focus. I understand your point of view. As you say we have a difference of opinion. Can we just agree to disagree for now?

    As my parting shot, let me point out something that I believe shows want I have been trying to verbalize. I think that the highest score in the HOF (Main & all Beta) is a Chieftan game that is ~50k higher than the best Deity Score. (The same player's best game in the germinate (Main) HOF is only ~25K higher...) He has a thread about it. Civ4 can be milked.

    Both the Deity and Chieftain games are impressive in their own way. Both take a skill and determination. The Deity game, which was a 290BC Domination victory on a Huge map, is unarguably the more difficult to achieve of the two. I and most players probably stand absolutely no chance of ever winning a Huge Deity Domination game. Most of us could probably replicate the Chieftain score if we wanted to milk a game that much.
     
  2. Denniz

    Denniz Where's my breakfast? Moderator Hall of Fame Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    11,092
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dallas
    I understand what you are proposing. I promise that we wont forget about it. But right now, I don't know what we are going to do about BTS and Quattromasters. At this point, it seems pointless to keep debating this.

    For my parting shot here let me ask, why should every game get two bites at the apple? (Also, see my milking point in the above post.)


    I am sorry but my brain hurts. Can we stop now, guys?Please. :crazyeye: :mischief:
     
  3. Matrix

    Matrix CFC Dinosaur Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2000
    Messages:
    5,516
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    :lol: Sorry for being so pushy. Indeed, a query page with "any" for at least condition, but preferably also world size and difficulty is all I'm asking for. :)

    But now I do understand that Civ4 can be milked. :( World size and difficulty therefore are not as important. I'm still interested to see how much effect these two aspects have on the score, but that's just curiosity for which you really don't have to put too much effort in.

    However any condition really is a must IMO. Because even though some conditions are more effective than others, when I play I don't aim at a certain victory type, but rather see at what opportunity presents itself. Usually that's domination or space race, but my first game was a diplomatic victory because my vote alone was enough. :lol:
     
  4. Alan_of_Dale

    Alan_of_Dale Quattromaster

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    I like HoF the way it is now, except I would prefer you fix the Quattromaster ranking, which the HoF website claims is determined by the average of the categories, to actually be the average of the categories, instead of by some super secret non-linear formula that only the initiated are privy to. :crazyeye: Sounds fishy to me.

    What's wrong, you got something against baseball, mate? :confused: Why not let everybody compete to what ever level they can get to. Sounds suspiciously snobby to me.

    Having said that, I like you personally very much. :)
     
  5. Dianthus

    Dianthus Small but hardy

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003
    Messages:
    5,814
    Location:
    Woking, UK
    It's not supposed to be secret, just an omission/oversight that it was. I've updated the formulae page to show the weightings for the different categories. An example of the working would be:

    15*58.1 + 15*37.0 + 15*46.7 + 15*65.0 + 15*27.7 + 25*18.5 = 3980
    3980/100 = 39.8

    You might recognize those numbers ;)
     
  6. Ozbenno

    Ozbenno Fly Fly Away Moderator Hall of Fame Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Messages:
    11,434
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Ahh! I always wondered what the different weighting for gauntlets was. Thanks Dianthus!
     
  7. DaveMcW

    DaveMcW Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,489
    Hi Dianthus.

    What are the chances of getting

    Difficulty: Any
    Mapsize: Any

    ... on this page?
     
  8. Dianthus

    Dianthus Small but hardy

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003
    Messages:
    5,814
    Location:
    Woking, UK
    It's possible. We actually used to have that, but took it away so that we only show "official" tables, where "official" tables are those that count towards Quattromasters.
     
  9. Alan_of_Dale

    Alan_of_Dale Quattromaster

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Right, thanks for your reply and website update. :) It's just that I sent a couple of emails a couple of months ago to website support where there is usually an immediate response, but these emails did not receive a reply. Hence I thought it was a secret. Your website had previously claimed that it was an average of the quattromaster categories rather than as you have updated it now to read a weighted average.

    One remaining issue I have with the above formula. The Gauntlet catagory games are already weighted 12 times more than the League of Nations games, as well as 11/2 times more than Map Quest, etc. So why is the Gauntlet given a further 25/15 = 66.7% increase in weighting? That would be 20x more weighting for a Gauntlet game than for a League of Nations game. :confused: That's a bit much, don't you think? And having to play all those inferior civs and maps and low_scoring/low_difficulty levels, etc is a handicap in itself and scores for those maps and civs suffer significantly compared to widely used civs and maps. Yes, there are a few diehards that refuse to give up on a Gauntlet and I know of at least one that has claimed to have played a Gauntlet over 20 times, but my guess is that the average number of games anyone would play for a Gauntlet would definitely be under 10, and typically just two or three to improve a score. And this does not even take into account that one will probably need to play some inferior civs and maps and game types, etc, quite a few times to get a good result. So I believe that an equal weighting of all quattromaster catagories is certainly more fair. Just add the 6 numbers and divide by 6. After all people do not need coersion to play a Gauntlet, as there are plently of people playing them already because they are fun.

    And there is another aspect that is unfair. Those people who have been around for a couple of years and have played Gauntlets when there was less feirce competition will have a permanant advantage over recent comers who have to battle it out Gauntlet after Gauntlet just to get a medeocre result. Time to level the playing field.
     
  10. Dracandross

    Dracandross Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Finland
    This is only party true. Because only best with few participants get decent score. And being best is something! Now you get decent score if you finish in top 3 cos of multiple entries (over 10 if not very hard). Anyway those who shine on gauntlet plaque are those who still are winning gauntlets.

    Also if you want to get same status you have to finish just 4 times in high end and then you are done with it. I like the way gauntlets are weighted now!

    -Dracandross
     
  11. Alan_of_Dale

    Alan_of_Dale Quattromaster

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    So you're saying that with only four games and you're done, this is somehow a fair comparison to 24 games played in League of Nations with all those crappy civs, Map Quest with many crappy maps, etc. I think not. There is still an uneven playing field with respect to time of membership and necessary games played.
     
  12. ori

    ori Repair Guy Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    16,560
    Location:
    Baden-Württemberg, Germany
    :confused: I really do not understand this post. What is the complain? That the Quattromaster requires so many different games and people who were here earlier had more time to complete it? Or that they could play in more gauntlets (which though part of QM is not the same).
    Each Gauntlet is scored on its own merit and to have a good score you need to be in the top part of the gauntlet winners in two of each major and minor - the thing with that less competition means better score is not true in either case:
    Apart from the gauntlets games from two years ago compete with games entered last week.
    In terms of gauntlets: less competition means less score for those not finishing first, take Gauntlet Major 3: I finished 3rd in an extremely challenging map - since there were only 3 players my QScore is 4.7 In GMajor 9 I finished 8th out of 11 and suddenly my Qscore is 28.6
    Im GMajor 12 which had 38 participants even the 38th has a QScore twice the one I got in GMajor 3 - so even if I had finished last there again - with 35 more submissions I would have gotten more points. In effect the only ones that really are not favored by more submissions are the ones that consistently finish first - and they just cannot receive better scores...
    And of course absolutely without any self interest here :rolleyes: I like it that games do not decay - some people :mischief: might have times were they can submit more games and other times were they just submit a game per month...
     
  13. Dracandross

    Dracandross Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Finland
    I mean four decent games. For nations you are not even going to get decent games as some of those are inferior when thinking of HoF. But yes it's right as gauntlets have competition. You can easily pull out at least now 50+ points for all nations by going some not so much played victory+speed+diff combinations.

    Also gauntlets have often varying non obvious nations so that game fills those slots too. Gauntlets are best way to make difference as all active players show their effort and it is for sure earned if you score high.

    Besides it is counted same way for everyone anyway.

    I agree that older gauntlets give some advantage but it is not too huge. There are much worse problems with QM challenge scoring like

    1) Duel maps give too much: proposed duel .4 ti .6 sm .8 st .9 la .95 hu 1.0 so you could really get high score without newest pc's and crushed nerves.
    2) Barbs dont give enough on higher levels and larger maps with barbs are even less rewarding. There should be at least three levels of barb bonuses depending on size/difficulty Example: settler duel should have +.03 and st+ .06 and at deity it should give like +.1 to .2 on huge (at least anc starts). Specially barbs should give more if you are going non offensive win like culture space or diplomacy and less if it is for conquest/domination(/time)
    3) There should be jump in scoring at pr-monarch due archers and on deity due second settler.
    4) If there are only 2 submissions 2nd gets only 10% no matter how hard it was to get 2nd score.
    5) It is still very hard to get huge/deity/anc spacerace on quick even as it is possible and its way too easy to score up to 100pts with just numerous tries with future start.
    6) Multiple (5+) submits in single category should drop scores of your lower submissions (30pts from duel prince conquest for all stupid civs. Effective for base score but very boring)

    Before all of these are fixed I'll not complain about gauntlets scoring high.

    -Dracandross
     
  14. Alan_of_Dale

    Alan_of_Dale Quattromaster

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    However, over time there is sufficient chance to overcome this, such that people who have been here longer have a time advantage to get to a combination that suits their strengths. And I still submit that the competition is greater now as everyone in general is improving in knowledge of the game.

    Also I think you may have missed my previous post which fully explains what the complaint is. Just to reiterate, instead of using a stock standard averaging formula to determine the final quattromaster formula, the HoF has finally disclosed after some effort that weight factors are multiplied onto the ALREADY HEAVILY WEIGHTED quattromaster individual catagories such that 5 catagories are weighted at 15% while the Gauntlet catagory is weighted at 25%. My contention is that the catagories, due to the number of entries there are in each catagory, are already weighted enough and no further 25%/15% = 65% ad hoc weighting is required. My reasons are more fully described in an earlier post.

    Just to fully disclose the relavance of Ori and my positions, it turns out that I am ahead of Ori by a significant factor in 5 out of 6 catagories, but because the Gauntlet category has the additional factor of 65% ad hoc bonus, his final score is higher than mine. However, a straight add of the six numbers and divide by six will put me ahead of him and possibly one other. So really we both have vested interests with regard to this issue.

    I will also say that I have not noticed any green "new" catagory labels on your catagories for some time. Perhaps you are resting on your laurals and find that you do not have the incentive to further improve your other catagories since your longstanding Gauntlet score is carrying you well enough already. Perhaps this is one more reason to level the playing field, in order to give people the incentive to play all aspects of the game, e.g., struggle with inferior civs and difficult maps.

    At any rate I stand by my initial postion that the already heavily weighted gauntlet catagories should be sufficient and no further ad hoc 65% bonus should be added. I felt it was unfair when I first noticed it and I still feel it is unfair.
     
  15. Alan_of_Dale

    Alan_of_Dale Quattromaster

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Agreed, but that in itself requires skill which should be rewarded. A crappy civ will hurt your score, period.

    Don't support your points 1), 3), neutral on 2), can't fix 5), point 6) is possibly already taken into account in the sense that only two of one's entries can appear in any one table, and I strongly support your point 4). This point 4) is a serious fairness defect that has been raised many, many times and goes back to that weighting (not that again) chart on the formulas page. This is another example it seems to me of establishing the status quo in a pecking order. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Maybe we should ask for the political party affiliations of the people who created this wacky scoring scheme. Seems they want to spread out the rankings with this and create a great divide between the strong and the weak. I contend that this is anti-competitive and would lead to less participation in the HoF community. After all this is a brilliant website and concept. Perhaps some people drop out because they feel that to continue is futile. I'd prefer it to be more inclusive and less exclusive so that more people will want to participate.
     
  16. Dracandross

    Dracandross Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Finland
    Well this causes that top end of QM list have at least good gauntlet scores. And without heavy weighting of gauntlets it would turn to be list of most active player instead. Not to mention its boring to rush some huge/large settler-monarch games for enormous amounts of points for many lists.

    You compared that it takes 24 civs (48 games) to complete nations. If you count out about 5 nations (10 games) that are superior to some extent and another 5 that are decent (10 games) it leaves you 28 games. I think that most players don't have over 40 points in most of those 28 entries. Which leads to problem that national challenge is heavily weighted on running prince/conquests.

    Decent: India, Arabia (vanilla spec), England, Inca, +some other great early UU civs that I can't point out right now.
    Good: Any fin civ (at least 5 that were not above)

    For maps there are about 10 maps that about equal are at least terra, g. plains, inland sea, continents, pangaea, archipelago&highlands (in certain tactics) and subpar iceage, lakes, +maybe some i cant recall.
    Therefore it doesnt make big difference mapwise either.

    Speeds are just extra flavor and really do not change much, its good that they are not weighted heavily. Maybe quick/normal are good to make difference beetween incarushing and some other tactics. Difficulty levels have same thing as top end games get so much points its not big of a difference.

    So in the end only gauntlets and vicotry conditions are ones I'd deem harder to score high and therefore worth more if we want to QM to show some kind of playing skills.

    If anything needs also heavy weighting its different victory conditions.
    In addition nation challenge favors those having warlords as vanilla players can't submit anything on those. That alone says that league of nations should not score high (or anyone without warlords should just state that he scores 25pts per warlord nation to even score).

    -Dracandross
     
  17. Dracandross

    Dracandross Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Finland
    To clarify what I meant:

    For 5 (spacerace): It is true that this can't be fixed but it causes problems with scoring and therefore diminishes worth of QM tables showing scores for speeds/nations/spacerace victory condition/map types as you can submit multiple future deity games for lots of points even if you dont end best you should get 50 points or so. And they are not a challenge at all unless you try to go for position 1.

    For 6 (multiple entries): Yes you can't flood top 10 player plaque with your names but you still get QM points for all of your games. And getting 30 points for prince/duel for 20 games is far too easy and it needs to be changed so that you can't 100% score for all games.

    -Dracandross
     
  18. Alan_of_Dale

    Alan_of_Dale Quattromaster

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    I don't think so. Because if a person has good overall scores he has a higher chance to do good in a Gauntlet. I'll check out that monarch setting, thanks. ;)

    Or that it is very hard to get 40 points for crappy civs. :D

    Note, we crossposted. I just commented on your other post.

    Lots of good points here. Hadn't thought of that last point on the number of nations on vanilla vs warlords.

    Don't agree that any map is as good as the Great Plains map. That's my favorite and best scoring map. Haven't had a chance to play that one IIRC for a long time due to the inferior maps I've been playing. Yes, it is to a certain extent possible to overcome some maps by picking a victory condition to strive for. However, those victory conditions may still not favor some peoples strengths.

    As for victory conditions needing to get a bonus, too, I think this diminishes League and Map Quest too much IMO. I think it is just better to level the playing field.
     
  19. Alan_of_Dale

    Alan_of_Dale Quattromaster

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Thanks for the tips. I wasn't aware of this cheese. :D

    These hadn't occured to me because I have been approaching civ in a broad manner so as to as much as possible for every game to get a place in tables result. My strike rate is quite high in this regard (and only hurt by Gauntlet games really). I'm already #14 in Game Counts (games in tables (max 2 per table)) with only 66 published games so far and with about 18 #1 spots (mostly in multiple entry tables). Perhaps that enhances the value of the games I've played in that there is no cheese that I am aware of. Perhaps the games in tables statistic should be deemed an official award to discourage cheesey game play. I have also been trying to keep my points per game up by choosing the victory condition (not by milking) so that my total points is currently #15. I think this balanced approach to civ is good for learning the game.
     
  20. ori

    ori Repair Guy Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    16,560
    Location:
    Baden-Württemberg, Germany
    First of: It seems I really missed your prior post - I probably read it, but did not remember it when I posted this one. I think I understand your position, mine is a bit different ;)

    Actually the reason there are no new entries for me are twofold: I mostly play games for the gauntlets anyway and then submit all of those, since I started a new job on a new continent my time for playing has decreased significantly :) Second: I moved on to BtS and do submit for the Beta gauntlets but they do not count towards the Quatromaster - so you'll see new submissions for that once BtS becomes legal.
    As for the weight: you see I wouldn't mind being last in the Quatromaster and I do agree that the extra weight for gauntlets can be validly challenged (though of course those games tend to be more difficult than similar games in the normal tables and IIRC this was the initial reason for that weighting) - I would not mind weighing all 6 categories as 1/6 of total score, what I would mind is to say that older achievements are somehow less valid than newer ones, they are not neither in the normal tables nor in the gauntlets.
     

Share This Page