your rank during a CIV game?

hawai_74

mac über alles
Joined
Aug 5, 2003
Messages
1,074
Location
switzerland
Just a quick question. when you're playing, for instance at Monarch level, and you won that game, were you always first or did you reach the top at the end?
 
perhaps i'm not clear enough for english speakers :(
I try (with no success) to win a game (monarch difficulty). And i always finish the game at the third place or at the fourth place. My current w/ the egyptians looks quite the same i'm third behing Greece and the babylonians (they have about 200 points and 2 techs more than me). I stopped last night about 1500 AD. I'm asking if this happens often for the civers here: to be third during the industrialisation ages and win during the modern ages?
 
No, you can be lagging behind, and build the UN and be elected; or build and launch the spaceship after hindering the efforts of some other nation and become first. On the harder levels it's normal to play catch up or play from behind, that's the challenge albeit on Regent or lower you ought to lead, IMHO.

So, did you check out Poly (Apolyton) Hawai 74?
 
When I play on Monarch I tend to lead all game except for the very very very beginning. (first 40 turns)

On Deity, I can win without ever leading.
 
GR8Madmax said:
I almost never lead from the start. I usually take the lead towards the middle part of the game.

How do you usually end up losing? Space Race? Do you go to war with the Civs ranked ahead of you or leave them alone?
i lost once with the UN, another time in 2050. I tried to go to war with the civs ranked ahead, but this was too hard and a waste of money... this time i try to attack smaller civs like india on another close island.

@Drakan
yes, but i didn't register yet. btw Nice site full of informations too.
 
Your score is based entirely on the number of tiles within your borders, and the number of content and happy citizens you have. You get points for having a large empire, and everything else is ignored. So it's very possible to be ranked low, but be winning in ways that the score doesn't measure. I generally don't look at score at all in the game, the "power" ranking is more helpful since it measures more factors.
 
Tomoyo said:
When I play on Monarch I tend to lead all game except for the very very very beginning. (first 40 turns)

On Deity, I can win without ever leading.

This has been my experiences too ;) . Monarch is still the most fun for me.
I don't enjoy the AIs having a 4 tech lead after just a few turns as is the
case at higher levels, but thats just me :crazyeye: :rolleyes: .
 
nullspace said:
Your score is based entirely on the number of tiles within your borders, and the number of content and happy citizens you have. You get points for having a large empire, and everything else is ignored. So it's very possible to be ranked low, but be winning in ways that the score doesn't measure. I generally don't look at score at all in the game, the "power" ranking is more helpful since it measures more factors.

Yeah I was going to point this out too, the scoring isn't really a good condition of how a civ is really doing, it mainly counts how many happy people you have.

hawaii 74, Since I usually play Regent or Monarchy, and usually catch up/take the tech lead around middle ages or early industrial age (i.e. ToE), I'm not sure unless you can give us a save of one of your games, to determine what maybe the problem. It could be needing more workers, more military, more city improvements, more trading, more expanding etc.

Also were you born in Austria or are part Canadian, cuz then I might have to change my signature...
 
troopper5 said:
Actually, when I play, I take lead on start, but I lose afterhand.
Psychic Tomoyo thinks you are building too many buildings and wonders and not expanding enough and not building enough workers.
 
On Emperor I usually never fall past 2nd or 3rd place, but I used to always fall somewhat behind in tech. Don't worry about the score, usually it doesn't really matter.
 
what does it mean when you killed everyone on the map and then when that warrior hits the ball up it only goes to like one of the 2nd or 3rd or 5th light?
IS THAT the amount of points compared to the other guys?
how is that determined?

is that your history score compared to your newest?
since i only see it once i dont remember any details on it and havent seen it since.
 
That is simply based on how high your score was. Magnificent, the highest one, I think requires you to have at least 4000 points (I can't be sure, thought).
 
... so waxing your opponets out of there quickly wont get you very high...
aww well...
 
nameless53 said:
... so waxing your opponets out of there quickly wont get you very high...
aww well...
There is a bonus for wiping out your opponents quickly, and if you do it fast enough, on a high enough level, you can get a very high score.
 
HalfBadger said:
Also were you born in Austria or are part Canadian, cuz then I might have to change my signature...

i'm swiss and i've the canadian nationality :lol:
but i've nothing to do with austria, your sig is saved.
 
i finally finished that Monarch game, and... [party] i won. I won by space race in 1969 (strange date...) and i was third on the Histograph, so i have my answer
 
You can trail in score for a long time at even Warlord. If you play on a huge map and decide not to expand all that far out, even though you are building all the wonders and are first to all techs, you can be in second place.

This is due to the value placed on land ownership. As you play at higher levels, you will have more trouble trying to be be first in score, even if you elect to grab all the land you can. I have trailed at sid until I either grab much more land than number one or I launch my ship.
 
Back
Top Bottom