Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is scoring independant of difficulty level?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is scoring independant of difficulty level?

    Is scoring in the game independant of difficulty level? When I finish the game on Monarch level do I get the same score as on Prince if I played and finished roughly the same?

  • #2
    bump
    Voluntary Human Extinction Movement http://www.vhemt.org/

    Comment


    • #3
      AFAIK there's no difference. I haven't tried the other levels (only played Noble), so I'm not 100% sure

      What annoys me the most is that you also get the same score on a duel map as you get on a huge map and it doesn't matter how many civs you play against. If you play a huge map with 18 civs you'll have a very hard time to beat the score of the game where you played on a duel map with 2 civs (due to early conquest, you'll get a very high score, and getting an early conquest on a huge map with 18 civs is close to impossible... you have to be very good)
      This space is empty... or is it?

      Comment


      • #4
        Theres a multiplyer that works out your final score based on the level. But it's still possible to win well on a lower level and get more points than a scrappy win on a higher level. Most I've gotten was 10326 on Monarch even though I've scraped a win on Emperor before

        Comment


        • #5
          Score factors (in order of importance):

          Population, Land, Techs, Wonders

          Population is more important than all the others put together.

          You also get a win bonus:

          Win in first 1/4 of game score^4
          Win in first 1/3 of game score^3
          Win in first 1/2 of game score^2

          And a score multiplier for difficulty level:


          Settler : 0.4
          Chieftain : 0.6
          Warlord : 0.8
          Noble : 1.0
          Prince : 1.2
          Monarch : 1.4
          Emperor : 1.6
          Immortal : 1.8
          Deity : 2.0


          I would love to say I worked that out for myself but I was just reading about it at CivFanatics. Which also means if any of it's wrong it's not my fault.

          This was my second game, and I be no means expected to get a score this large. What kind of scores can we expect by the elite players, in the 100,000's or maybe millions.
          Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
          Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
          We've got both kinds

          Comment


          • #6
            thus scoring is seriously flawed

            level multipliers should be higher and they should take number of civs playing into account too IMO.
            Socrates: "Good is That at which all things aim, If one knows what the good is, one will always do what is good." Brian: "Romanes eunt domus"
            GW 2013: "and juistin bieber is gay with me and we have 10 kids we live in u.s.a in the white house with obama"

            Comment


            • #7
              As far as I can remember Civ scoring has always been skewed towards conquest victories.

              It would be nice if, now that the gameplay is more balanced towards different types of victory, the scoring took that into account as well.

              Check this score milking exploit/strategy out:

              Though I have had Civ4 ever since it was released, it has been sitting on my shelf collecting dirt. Until recently a few days after patch 1.52 was released, Julius Caesar came to me in a dream begging me to command his praetorians on grand conquest. I told him that I’m not really...


              Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
              Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
              We've got both kinds

              Comment

              Working...
              X