Simple question re: Metaverse scoring

from GalCiv2 Forums
I keep hearing experts "dare" less experienced players to try Gigantic games at the highest difficulties (mainly when such less experienced players are complaining about the lack of AI challenge). Yet Frogboy has stated that he thinks the AI offers the greatest challenge on Medium galaxies.

So my question is: why does Metaverse scoring reward playing larger maps, which are in fact easier to beat? Note that I'm assuming standard star density and planet quality settings.

As far as I can tell, the game experience "scales" pretty well with map size: you do not need to do anything drastically different on a Gigantic map than a Medium one, except perhaps know how to prolong your colonization phase. If this is true, all that a Gigantic map adds to the challenge is that there's just more of the same stuff to do, one could say more micromanagement.

So essentially Metaverse scoring rewards players that are willing to make a biggest time investment. I like my games to be skill-testing, not just long. But this preference will probably never be reflected in my Metaverse score.

I'm by no means a great player, but I think that if I the top Metaverse scorers would play Medium/Large maps like I do, I could in the near future post scores that are competitive with theirs. Unfortunately (for me), they have no incentive to do so since bigger maps means bigger scores.

Please forgive my ignorance if there's something I'm missing: I've only been playing the game for a couple of months, and just recently became interested in the Metaverse.
3,032 views 3 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
They don't any more, read the changes to scoring made. You now get a square root added to the score based on years played, that completely negates the advantage of gigantic.
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Still - there is something special over a gigantic map with hundreds of planets to explore, trying to keep pace with 9 other opponents with optimal AI and 200% economy.
I skip the micro management for all planets under lvl 9 and let the govenor tell them what to do or just give them away to a nice minor
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I would say that the AI is incredibly aggresive and effective when it comes to colonization. Depending on their starting locations of course, consistently out colonize me in the initial grabs, the economic bonus is a big help. Besides that however, I find the AI does have its problems in this as it doesn't know when to stop.

In my current game almost 1/3 of the galaxy was left to the Drengin at the start, it's theirs and they're power is increasing very rapidly now. The Altarians that are next to me (one of the 3 civs boxing me in) are still building colony ships trying to get at some of those unclaimed planets, but most of them are taken by the time they get across the galaxy. They over extended themselves and I'm chipping away at their meagerly defended planets.

I think since games like this will also tend to drag on, so they have to gain a big advantage from the colonization period. If they can't eliminate you fairly early, I think the AI starts to lose to superior human strategies. Their early game is excellent, mid is okay, but in the long run they kind of drop the ball. I was lucky enough to ally myself with the Drengin however, if I were a good race, I might very well lose the game simply due to their incredible size. Throwing ships mindlessly at targets can work if they can make enough of them and have sufficient tech to make them powerful.

I think the danger is there that a massive AI will come out on top, but I also see the Altarians really suffering because they are still trying to colonize while I'm making war. I can only guess that's why overall AI performance will be better in medium maps, but if they all do well, one civ is less likely to rise to such a dominant position which is harder to de-throne.