Why is my score so low?

[Civ_Starkey]

Hey guys.
I am just wondering how you get really high scores, because I can win but only seem to manage scores around the 3000-4000 mark. I play on Noble difficulty now. Once I got a score of around 7000 with the Arabians on Cheiftan (my first Civ IV game) but I don't know how I did so.

Thanks,
Civ_Starkey.

 

[Adam7Eight]

The quicker the win, the higher the score.

 

[Civ_Starkey]

I see...
I'm not trying to say that's wrong but It just seems strange, because my highest score was with a space race victory in about the year 2000, and my lowest was with the earliest win.

 

[THARN]

I would prefer to have more points scored by civ happiness and battle victories/tech advances-great cities more than how quickly i win(if at all).
I think the person who plays to just have a successful civ should get some kind of reward for it.

 

[Helmling]

There are a lot of factors Starkey, but generally if you want a big score, conquer the world as fast as you can. Space victory scores will never come close to conquest or domination scores.

Sorry.

 

[Thalassicus]

The score system is currently out of whack... a late, leisurely Conquest victory (say, 1200 AD) can easily give you twice the points of a challenging Space Race victory (such as 1700 AD)

It's one of those things on your "hope will be fixed in patch" list.

 

[Mr. Pointless]

I got 12,000 points playing on Noble Tiny map with winning Conquest by 300 BC

That shows how bad the scoring system is .

 

[MRM]

I got 12,000 points playing on Noble Tiny map with winning Conquest by 300 BC

That shows how bad the scoring system is .

Try a dual map next time and you can get up to 40 000 points ...

I agree that should be fixed ...

I see why they did it that way - it's of course more difficult to win earlier and in generall I agre with that - but mapsize and victory type should play a role too IMO

 

[Colonel Kraken]

The scoring system is totally screwed up. Don't pay any attention to it. The scoring is very heavily weighted toward controlled territory and early game wins = Conquest Victory! So much for putting as much weight into winning peacefully!

 

[MRM]

The scoring system is totally screwed up. Don't pay any attention to it. The scoring is very heavily weighted toward controlled territory and early game wins = Conquest Victory! So much for putting as much weight into winning peacefully!

Would like to see the scoring system to be improved instead of beeing ignored -

Just some suggestions

domination/conquest victory - score bonus for large and huge maps - score penalty for tiny and duell maps

culture victory - bonus for average culture of your cities ( this way not only your 3 main cities counts )

diplo victory - bonus for every civ that is voting for you ( this way the vote for yourself strategy would get no bonus and winning more friends would be rewarded )

spaceship victory - more bonus for larger space ships ( I want the more flexible space ships of civ1 and civ 2 back )

 

[LeSphinx]

The quicker you win the great scoring you have. But I thing it's not exactly because the system takes into account technologies, wonders, .....
Maybe, we will have a new scoring system for GOTM and HOF... as civ3... (jason scoring system...)

 

[Craterus22]

check out the hall of fame thread on the board... some guys have scored well over 60,000.

in addition to early win bonus... population is a little bit more than overweighted... so an early high pop win gets you the biggest points...

it seems as if the game designers wanted to give an incentive to people to build via a modified ICS strategy.

 

[drjones]

I see...
I'm not trying to say that's wrong but It just seems strange, because my highest score was with a space race victory in about the year 2000, and my lowest was with the earliest win.

It's ok not to like it, it is a very crummy measure of the sucess of your civ. After all is a flat-broke razed half the world to win by 100 bc civ really 10x better than a huge populaiton technicly advanced civ full of happy citizens at 1800ad? Personally I look at the 'points if I won this turn' and watch it get lower and lower.. as I win the game and build a magnificent civ. So yeah every scoring system is arbitrary but this one bites a good deal. They went to great lengths to make domination not be the only viable victory condition but since dom/conquest are the only ones you can pull off early (in my experince at high difficulty) they are the ones with the biggest scores.

I assume it's modable but that's not much help for competitions like the HOF and getting people to agree to changes would be tough since any change would favor one playstlye over others.

-drjones

 

[Nilrim]

Once just for fun, it was around turn 10 I went into world builder ploped down a couple modern tanks near every AI city and owned the world the next turn. It is still one of my highest scores in the HOF. They really need to fix the scoring it is way out of whack.

By the way is there a way to clear the HOF? Can't seem to find it in any of the options.

 

[Civ_Starkey]

Thanks for the replies everyone.
I see what you mean about the scoring system being out of whack.

I might try for a Conquest or Domination Victory sooner rather than later, even though its not really 'my style'.
But yeah, readjusting the scoring system is certainly on my wants for the next patch list (along with Broadband so I actually can download in some period of time under 17 hours..)

Thanks,
Civ_Starkey.

 

[Colonel Kraken]

it seems as if the game designers wanted to give an incentive to people to build via a modified ICS strategy.

This is definitely what it seems.