Which is better?

[MrWhereItsAt]

Wel usually, just started my first Emperor game though. Productivity still higher than anyone else, it's just everything else that is lower. I'm like NZ - high per capita workload, low overall effect.

[Dominae]

What does your starting location look like?

[Shogun Gunner]

I like the Power Graph...

[Dis]

Originally posted by Vince278
I go by score and power. Culture is useless to me since I'm usually tops in that every game. I just use the demo screen for comparison but it doesn't help me any in making decisions.

I always have the most nationwide culture. But often, the AI has cities with more culture than mine. I haven't figured out why they can do this with ease. Even with just a couple of wonders in them.

[Kloreep]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Demographics screen - specifically: manufactured goods, GNP and productivity. Score screen can be very misleading, and the power screen is more meaningful anyway.

GNP can be misleading as well, as corrupted commerce is included. But it is a nice overall guide.

Manufactured goods doesn't include wasted shields, though, so it's a good measure of production power; and productivity doesn't include corrupted commerce or shields, so it's a good measure of your overall production of the 3 resources.

[Lord_Davinator]

I like the demographics cuz it tells you areas that you might be weak in...but then again I hear rumors that the demographics are not that acurate, and keeping an eye on the scores is a sure way of knowing whos top dog, and I use it to pick who to ally with and who to go to war with

[Kloreep]

Originally posted by Lord_Davinator
I like the demographics cuz it tells you areas that you might be weak in...but then again I hear rumors that the demographics are not that acurate, and keeping an eye on the scores is a sure way of knowing whos top dog, and I use it to pick who to ally with and who to go to war with

Demographics certainly aren't the whole story, but IMO the score is a far worse indicator. It's too easily inflated by having a large territory.

[Aqualung71]

IMHO score is the most misleading indicator in the whole game. If I placed any importance in it, I would have resigned from a bunch of PBEM games long ago

[Vince278]

Isn't score used to determine a winner when time runs out?

[Kloreep]

Yes, it is.

So if you think the game is going to go to 2050, definitely try to grab territory, even if it's useless and corrupted.

[Aqualung71]

Originally posted by Kloreep
So if you think the game is going to go to 2050, definitely try to grab territory, even if it's useless and corrupted.

....or time to start another game

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
....or time to start another game

I'd be tempted to shoot off my entire nuclear wad on the last turn.

[Dis]

I built a nuke for the first time last game. It didn't seem to do much except lower the population by half. Which I guess is cool. I suppose it would lower the AI score.

How else is score calculated? Land area and population. But anything else?

[Kloreep]

Originally posted by Dissident
I built a nuke for the first time last game. It didn't seem to do much except lower the population by half.

It also damages/destroys units. Good for taking huge chunks out of SoDs.

Originally posted by Dissident
How else is score calculated? Land area and population. But anything else?

The happiness of the population matters. I don't remember the exact figure, but unhappy citizens = something, content or specialist = something more, and happy = something even larger.

Edit: But no, nothing else. Which is why I think it's worthless; territory figures too largely, and you have no idea how much corruption is biting in to the productivity of the population.

[Vince278]

I believe future techs count as well.