Well, after you wrote about 750th place of other players, questioning their motives, I thought mentioning your own would put things in proper perspective I believe that you are good in this game, in other similar games and other ladders. Which does not change the fact that this competition is more important to people who participate in it regularly. So what wrong do you see when peo
You did not overlook by chance the topic of this very thread, Soulcatcher? Nobody is complaining about anything, people are just interested about schedule of changes that were announced in the opening of this thread. Why would I be terrified by anything? Galciv2 is a wonderful game without any online aspect. And it is not the only game in town. Nevertheless, Metaverse is a fine concept that could prolong game life, and all attractivness of Metaverse is based on score an
Yes, after my beta 3 score dropped me a bit, I stopped to play and for some time watched how my position was sinking with many people still posting 1.0 scores. Ironically, now it started to rise again without playing. I could not understand what happens, but then I got it - people with 1.1 above me continue to play and drop down .
We don't know "how" and "when" they will be recalculated. Generally, the only safe way to play right now is to create a new virtual persona. BTW, I am not all that obsessed with points and never even played on metaverse in original GalCiv. But whole metaverse idea is point based, so the longer this confusion goes, the more people lose interest in metaverse playing, and, I am afraid, in GalCiv2 in general. Now, I don't know, may be this recalculation is a very complex proc
I also would like to know when the scores will be adjusted. Of course, it would be nice if that would start with beta 3 which sharply reduced the scores. Right now playing on metaverse will reduce your (and you empire) overall score if you have some history of successful games. On the one hand it creates some confusion about whether it makes "economic" sense to post results right now. On the other hand, if new scores will be indeed adjusted by a factor of 10, I thiink it would be better to do
Just finished Beta 3 gigantic game on tough, in 8 years, military conquest, everything perfect, huge population and income, researched everything, - 37K. I posted it just on principle, though it probably would not add anything to my score. Numbers themselves do not matter and as I see from the thread relatively my score is pretty good. On the other hand, estimating very conservatively, the same game would give me 5 times more points in be
Colonial Fleet too, but not my game , otherwise I agree that it is an amazing achievement. Apparently in new system the player will receive higher score for time and difficulty, but still not too high because I doubt he could do this and also conquer and develop enough of planets.
I think the 10 or 15 year suggestion might be a little steep. One could do a military conquest in that timeframe, but going for a tech win would probably be impossible... I'll say "almost" impossible just to be safe. But I think the time limit idea of beginning to deduct points s at a certain time has merit.
So say we all
Yes, I also prefer that scoring system would not encourage quick games explicitely. In ideal world your desire to research more technologies and spend some time on that would not be punished, it just should not give a clear advantage, so nobody will be forced to do it just for the score. You've made a nice research infrastructure and want to use it - it may give you some points, but on the other hand, if you do the same with slow research you may lose
We can only guess, but the longer game also means more research (even when it is irrelevant), more and probably happier population, more planets, better economy - all good things. I do think that this should be severly affected by a number of years you spent to achieve these results. A problem with my particular playstyle is that in order to achieve higher score I would have to postpone final victory quite artificially and simply spend time improving m
Yes, that's good you did submit it, and it is good you achieved an absurd score. I think, that the main flaw in the scoring system is that when you by all means won the game, it forces you to play longer - even when absolutely nothing meanigful can be done in additional years.
http://metaverse.galciv2.com/index.aspx?g=player&id=2896 First of all, I want to say that I have nothing against this galactic achievement, I am actually somewhat grateful that it dispays so clearly problems of scoring system. I wouldn't even call it an exploit, because exploit would create less absurd score, I'd call it a demo. On the other hand, it is hard not see that a possibility of this gamestyle practically destroys metaver
In addition to the crash that I reported in another thread, all versions of Galciv2 have the following problems: 1) Windows priority order. I think, it happens when you press turn button. For example, some new race wants to talk to you, you have some preliminary screen, like "Finally we've met"; Then you have a report from some planet that it has completed something, and there is nothing to build. You press GoTo. Then you are back in a race dialog. After you finish it, you retur
Hello, Yes, it crashes. The bad news is I am pretty sure I don't have any .cra files, searched the whole system. I played two games with the beta so far, and both ended with the same kind of crash - after long hours of the game. The good thing is that tthe crash is very easy to reproduce (well, on my system anyway). When it happens, it will happen every time when you try to continue the same campaign, in the same place. For example, I have a saved game which you can load, but which
