Sick of being called "Dan Quale"

[droehrich]

I usually go for a space race victory or, failing that, a time/score victory. I can't find what you score points for. Anyone know the actions which increase/decrease your score?

[rah]

score has never interested me so I don't really pay attention to it but a few things I know influence it.

Speed of victory. The early the year the better the score.

Map size.

Difficulty level.

I'll let the experts come in and give you details.

[Fistleaf]

Population definitely plays a part, but I'm not sure whether unhappy citizens give you fewer points.
I'm pretty sure land area gives you points too.

[droehrich]

Noble, standard and normal. So...actually winning doesn't do anything for your score? I mean, Good God, I win the space race, in the lead in points (4812), and still get the "Bert the Unready" blast. I know it's silly that that bothers me, but what can I say?

[snoopy369]

Winning does give you something for score, but your civ matters quite a lot

First off, winning gives you points based on WHEN you win. If you win in the last turn (2050, in a normal game), you get very little for the win; if you win in 1885, you get a lot.

Second, there are quite a few other significant factors:
Land Area
Population
Technologies
Wonders
are the most significant; I don't know how difficulty level affects these things (I do believe it affects the win point value).

[Crossfire]

Size of military adds a lot to the points total too.

And here I get all disappointed when I don't get an Augusta Caesar. Maybe my goals are too lofty.

[wodan11]

IMO the assumption that "faster is better" is dubious. It makes the whole concept of score somewhat ludicrous. Why should some victory types be penalized simply because they take longer or can't be done in the early game?

Wodan

[ybrevo]

Originally posted by wodan11
IMO the assumption that "faster is better" is dubious. It makes the whole concept of score somewhat ludicrous. Why should some victory types be penalized simply because they take longer or can't be done in the early game?

Wodan

I agree!

But then again I don´t look much at the score at the end. If I feel my strategy went the way I wanted it, I am satisfied with that.

ybrevo

[snoopy369]

Victory types themselves have a score associated with them - Conquest is lower than Space, I don't know the rest but they're in between IIRC. Thus, the bonus from Space is higher but presumably the time bonus is less (or they're part and parcel, i'm not sure about that part).

[TriMiro]

In my experience, the way to achieve high score is to win domination as fast as possible (right about the time of cavalry). Space race always gives lower score.

Land area and time are the two most important criteria.

[droehrich]

So what's the secret to fighting long, drawn out wars required for a domination victory? I tried it with the Zulus. I started out well enough, took four cities and a good chunk of fairly decent land, and then my economy went to cr*p, research went to zero, my cities went bug sh*t and my army became obsolete because I fell way behind in the tech race. I do fight wars with limited aims (taking out one neighboring civ) but I just can't see sustaining a war over the long term.

[Vampgelus]

In deed, the faster the better is one rule. Evrything that affects in-game score is next on the list (wonders, techs, population, army, treasury). Put all that together and add a multiplier depending on difficulty. Nobel is x1, anything below is less, anything above is more. It's that simple ^^

Btw, my greatest victory was diplomacy in 1323 with De Gaules, that gave me an August Cesar, nobel difficulty.

[Hauptman]

Originally posted by droehrich
So what's the secret to fighting long, drawn out wars required for a domination victory? I tried it with the Zulus. I started out well enough, took four cities and a good chunk of fairly decent land, and then my economy went to cr*p, research went to zero, my cities went bug sh*t and my army became obsolete because I fell way behind in the tech race. I do fight wars with limited aims (taking out one neighboring civ) but I just can't see sustaining a war over the long term.

The secret is, dont fight them too soon!

Expand slowly, as your economy can afford it. Get a decent size, settle in for industrialization using your decent size to get to it first. Start building tanks as you research flight, then once you have enough bombers, go bonkers! And dont stop til you win, if you did it right their riflemen cannot win against your tanks, and by the time they get infantry your tanks are so well promoted they dont even notice...

[Supr49er]

Originally posted by wodan11
IMO the assumption that "faster is better" is dubious. It makes the whole concept of score somewhat ludicrous. Why should some victory types be penalized simply because they take longer or can't be done in the early game?

Wodan

It seems CIV has always rewarded early victories.

[DaveV]

Here is an explanation of how the score is calculated.