The Dance of Civilizations [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread Pt1]

[Robert]

A. St Jon, compare it to a basketbal competition.
Every match teams scores, the team with most scores wins the match. The team that wins most matches wins the competition.

B. Now imagine that there's no 'match winner' but all scores of a team of every match are summed together and the team that made most scores through all games wins.

What I described in 'B' is the current situation. All ratings of all months are summed together. The person who got the most rating points win, not he person who wins most months.

So what do you want, a competition where all scores are just summed together, or where we check from month to month who's the best?
I think that latter is much more interesting. There's no competition anywhere where all scores are summed together and just the team that made most scores wins.

We can also compare it with tennis.
If these are the set results:
set 1 A vs B: 1-6
set 2 A vs B: 1-6
set 3 A vs B: 7-6
set 4 A vs B: 7-6
set 5 A vs B: 7-6

In our current system player B would win (6+6+6+6+6 game wins = 30 game wins for B, 1+1+7+7+7=23 game wins for A)
In he proposed system A wins, b/c he wins 3 sets.
Now the current situation may look like it's more fair.

But in this situation the 5th set actually makes no difference anymore, since even if A would win 6-0, B would still win because he's far ahead of A.

I fear that more examples only make it even more difficult, but please try to understand
Or otherwise just trust us

[Rasputin]

Yes lets not get into averages etc.

The current voting system is weird enough.

[St Jon]

I really do not understand this at all. If I was 6th, IG Power Score, last month would I actually lose points if I failed to move to 5th? I could understand in BtP where there was a base rating for each catagory which was just carried on month per month. I get 6pts for Story, 9pts Diplomacy, 0pts for Military and 9pts for Game Place. You add them together and you get a monthly total and a whole Game Score over the entire length of the Game.

This seems a weird form of algebra which would actually penalise the person in No.1 spot of any catagory as they could never get 'relatively better' than anyone else. Please explain this when you produce the 1st score list so that we might all understand.

[India (DoC)]

You mean the medieval age, right? I think when i get there I will have all the ancient techs so no free tech trade for me

It doesnt need to be you, any four civs get to the medieval age allows the tech trade of the ancient techs for everyone.

I hope we see the benefits of these free techs later on in the game. In discussions with other civs, we are finding that we have nothing to trade from earlier techs because we already have it all.

We will trade the non-essential techs mostly, horseback riding, music etc and it will help some civs not to fall back too much (I think it's a good rule)

[Mali (DoC)]

I hope we see the benefits of these free techs later on in the game. In discussions with other civs, we are finding that we have nothing to trade from earlier techs because we already have it all.

[Robert]

Rating ends TOMORROW!
Roughtly 20 hours left for rating!

Russia, England and Egypt yet have to rate!*

*I didn't receive an update from WarningU2 last 20 hours so perhaps you did vote since my last call. Then pls ignore this.

[Robert]

Voting site for England: http://www.ghccci.org/CIV/England/England_Vote.html

[England (DoC)]

I m sorry but could someone send me the link to the voting site.

[mzprox]

surely it should be 'B', monthly rates similar as it was in BtP except this system is more balanced (doesnt make huge differences).
I think it's also important that it doesn't really matter if someone like to give balanced scores (scoring everyone 3-5, leaving most of it on 4) or likes to give extreme values (1s and 7s)

[Robert]

If you don't understand the stuff in the post above, the question is:
A. Do you want to base the end score on the average month score
B. Or do you want to base the end score on the sum of the monthly positions

Me / Jeroen think B. is a better (more fun) option b/c good/bad months won't be 'lost' in a huge average number.

[Robert]

Rate from>	China	Japan	Mexico	Canada	Total (sum avg)	Position	Score
month>	1|2|3|4 || avg	1|2|3|4 || avg	1|2|3|4 || avg	1|2|3|4 || avg
Rate for V
China	X	3|5|1|7 || 4	5|5|4|4 || 4.5	1|2|2|1 || 1,5	10	3	2
Japan	6|6|5|5 || 5,5	X	3|4|4|5 || 4	2|4|5|3 || 3,5	13	2	3
Mexico	4|5|3|2 || 3,5	7|7|6|4 || 6	X	7|7|4|6 || 6	15,5	1	4
Canada	2|4|4|2 || 3	2|4|3|3 || 3	1|3|2|6 || 3	X	9	4	1

- Every month every civ rates every other civ. (blue numbers)
- This results in an average rating (red numbers) over all months from civ X to civ Y
- These average ratings are added together (green numbers) (thus China gets: avg rating + avg rating of Mexico + avg rating of Canada = Total)
- Based on these totals every civ will get a #1 - #4 position
- Based on these positions every civ gets a score (purple numbers), the civ with the best position gains the best score.

This is a boring system since all months will be levelled in one huge big average score.
It's way cooler to award points per month so that good months and bad months jump out!

That's why we propose the following system:

Rate for>	China	Japan	Mexico	Canada
month>	1|2|3|4	1|2|3|4	1|2|3|4	1|2|3|4
Rate from V
China	X	6|6|5|5	4|5|3|2	2|4|4|2
Japan	3|5|1|7	X	7|7|6|4	2|4|3|3
Mexico	5|5|4|4	3|4|4|5	X	1|3|2|6
Canada	1|2|2|1	2|4|5|3	7|7|4|6	X
Month Average>	9|12|7|12	11|14|14|13	18|19|13|12	5|11|9|11
Monthly Position>	3 | 3 | 4 | 2	2 | 2 | 1 | 1	1 | 1 | 2 | 2	4 | 4 | 3 | 4
Total Score>	2+2+1+3=8	3+3+4+4=14	4+4+3+3=14	1+1+2+1=5
End Score>	2	4	4	1

NB: The 'rate from' and 'rate for' positions have switched between table 1 and table 2!!

Explanation:

- from left to right you see what rates civ X gives to civ Y. (ie. in month 1 Japan gives a 6 rating to China and a 3 rating to Mexico) (blue numbers)

- The ratings are added per month and a monthly average comes out. (red numbers) (ie. in month 1 China gains an avg rating of 4.3)

- This results in a position per civ per month based on the avg rating. In month 1 china gets a 2nd position, Japan a 1st position, etc.) (green numbers)

- Based on the monthly position every civ gets a score. In month 1 china gains 3 points, Japan gains 4 points, etc. (black numbers)

- The total score is the sum of all monthly scores. China gained 3, 4, 3 and 1 points for months 1,2,3 and 4. Total that's 11 points (purple numbers)
- The end score (orange number) is based on the total score. These can be compared to the scores in table 1!

The difference in the end between table 1 and 2 is that Japan in the 2nd table (new system) gains as much points as Mexico.
Japan gains an advantage of winning two monthly categories.
If everything would be averaged, Japan would get less points in the end.
With more civs and more months the differences will be bigger.
Bottom line is: The monthly scores become more important then the average score.

It's as if in a sport competition all goals would be summed together for the entire season, which would make the team with most goals win, or goals only summed together per match, which makes the team who wins most matches win.

 

Now every month has a winner in every category!