Crichton Crichton

Metaverse - a joke?

Metaverse - a joke?

Does anyone else feel that the Metaverse is just one big joke anymore? :notsure:

I mean, the ranking is soley based on playing alot of games and posting them. Where is the skill? :(

Simply put, you can not possibly catch up to players with huge scores and lots of high score games already submitted. I just do not have the "TIME" to compete with them. Yes, time, not skill. If you submit any LOW scores, you hurt yourself(and please do not reply with the usual "I dont care about scores, or any other blah, blah, blah). If you have a competition set up ranking players,
1.give everyone the low down on how it works(what scores big, low and all inbetween, etc),
2.do not lump sum half dozen game sizes in one list, 3.make claims you are not a galciv player if you play for a score when you promote a top player list as a sell point for the game(anyone submitting a score is into the ranking or they just wouldnt do it; anyone who says they do not care, is either: high ranked already or on the way, or knows they can never catch up).

Why is there a lump of all the game types in one list, they are completely different playing experiences.

Check my scores out, it doesnt even calculate correctly for 8 games(last I checked). I checked several other 8 game players, some calculated right some not. I wonder how many others are not calculating right, but at 8 games it is messed up. BTW, one of my scores, the 86, I DID NOT submit. You can see I progressively submitted higher scores, I would never have submitted a simple level game score of 86 after the two I had in the hundreds. I did have a 800 some point game I submitted, that does not show.

The system is SERIOUSLY FLAWED. It should be addressed IMMEDIATELY before anything else, such as patches, or future expansions. The next best game is coming someday and some will move on when it does if there is no reason to compete here, but I had hoped to play a single player game with a posting competition spirit. That spirit is dead.

I mean, you are putting out all these patches and adding content, but the scoring/ranking is still seriously messed up.

Metaverse is one big joke. :notsure:

Suggest(You need rules in ANY competition/ranking):
1. Ranking for every different galaxy size played.
2. Cap points given for pop size at each of these levels, maybe even cap score at each planet size, period.
3. Limit submissions per wk, maybe one galaxy size per wk.
4. the square root thing of number of games played is bizarre; get rid of it; rank top 3 games(a total) in each game size for each player; that would eliminate the no lifers advantage of flooding the ranking, especially with gigantic crippling games one day right after the next(which I think is impossible to do without exploitation of game somehow, just time wise it seems impossible with all the ingame tasks per turn)
5. Put the current Metaverse in a museum as the way it was, and start over with a firm set of rules/standards.
6. Finally, do it, change the BS Metaverse.

Great and fun game, but for me, the next best thing to come out will take me away if the Metaverse is not completely overhauled. ;)
1,569 views 84 replies
Reply #26 Top
RayChua,

No offense, but you are rank 5 now, so of course you have the care free happy go lucky attitude about the system. But plain and simple, the Metaverse is a mess. Everything you posted is the hype they made the Metaverse to be(and is not), but simply it is a submit only high scores, or lots and lots of scores, or some such combo. I would love to see a top rank say, "redo Metaverse"(meaning you lose all prev scores btw) If you are truly "skilled", it wouldnt matter to you. All the top players know that it is a submit, submit, submit, like I said, and at some point, just submit now and then to keep ranked, since submitting some so so score might hurt your ranking. Archive the old Metaverse, say the top 100 and redo the whole thing, with rankings for each galaxy size is the best solution.

Making a change now, say in the next month is alot better than waiting. Sure you might lose the some players(true top skilled players would stay, since a new system would be no prob for them to retake their position back... right? lol), but in the end you would develop a more solid base of players coming to your boards. :)
Reply #27 Top
If it really makes you that happy.... Redo Metaverse ;)

Seriously, Stardock did say that they would recalc the earlier scores and reduce the impact of milked games.

However, I feel that if this is going to take too much time away from them improving other more important aspects of the game - such as game balance, new features and AI - I say just reset the Metaverse and be done with it.
Reply #28 Top
Thanks RayChua! :D

That made my night! LOL

Just resetting is not enough. Could just build up with same problems. I mean, even a redo, I will prob never "compete", but the system is a mess and I would love to see as much support for it. There have been plenty of updates to the core game. Step back and fix the Metaverse is the next step. I would also like to see them take a month to just let the game be. Fix it as it is, you know, the Metaverse and any current in game bugs at this patch level, but take a break from making the next 1.05, and 1.06 and such that alters the game, such as the starbase stuff and such.

Restart and make ranking for each galaxy size would be great!

On that note, nite all. :d
Reply #29 Top
4 points.

1 I notice you only play on small and tiny maps.
Think you should get 5000 points for a game that lasts a few hours ?

2 Some people like me do not cheat or like losing.

3 I play the game because I like it. I spend many hours per game not for a score.

4 Why do I bother, master gamers like you are all that matters.

You are a poster boy for all that is wrong with this forum.
Reply #30 Top
There is no ranking system that will satisfy everyone.

Have the scores be divided purely by the # of games and you'll ahve people ticked off that a person who invests 5 good games into the metaverse is #1.

Have it purely additive and then it's just the guy with the most time to spend.

We took a happy medium.

We use the metaverse to update the AI. We can look at the strategies used and enhance the AI based on that. The message board is only really good for killing cheese tactics in general.

If you don't like the Metaverse, there's nothing forcing you to participate. It's just an added bit of fun. I find it enjoyable myself but that's just me.
Reply #31 Top
No, Frogboy, I completely agree - I find the whining about the "jokiness" of the metaverse to be representative of the worst in strategy gamers. It's a single player game with about as much exposure outside of strat gamers as some random rice farmer in China's daughter. Moreso, there's no prize or a trip to a tournament hanging on your ranking, no, it's at most an icon on this, and only this, forum. Wow, that sure is worth bitching about.

The only thing I do hope gets done soon is the system to retroactively process scores according to the current scoring algorithm. While I think the metaverse should just be for fun and taken with a grain of salt, until that change is implemented the best anyone can hope to do is drop like a stone with every game submitted while newcomers will never, ever see the top 250 - that is an issue that should be addressed, but other than that, this is one gamer who supports the basic system and sees no need for major change.
Reply #32 Top
First off, yes.. if someone devotes more time to something, they SHOULD be ranked higher. If I spend tons of hours playing, I most likely am now more experienced than you (if I am winning games). Higher scores are for winning on higher difficulty levels, on bigger galaxies.. makes sense to me.

The scoring system might not be perfect, but look.. it is hardly for money or anything more serious than bragging rights. Who cares?

The most fun IMO for people should be joining a team and competing this way. Then your empire will have those that play more.. some that play less, but it all contributes, so it is all good.

The gathering of intelligence data from games submitted is a great thing, imo.. the REAL benefit of the Metaverse.

fleabitfox
Reply #33 Top
Metaverse rankings appeal to the competitive nature of human players, prompting them to submit more games so Stardock can refine the GalCiv AI. In that regard, I don't see why we shouldn't improve the metaverse to attract more players. You don't even have to change the scoring formulas here. By simply allowing the metaverse entries to be sorted in a variety of manners, as mentioned above, you create more top players out of thin air. If someone wants to be the fastest player to ever beat a tiny masochist map through cultural conquest with an evil alignment, why not let him do it? Minimal programming, maximum effect, sounds like a good deal to me ;)
Reply #34 Top
Well, my 2 BC on this is that there are those who do play for score, and those who play to play. I do take pride in my meager Metaverse achievements, but I am obviously not milking the system from my games: several alignments, map sizes, and a progressively higher difficulty level (though I think challenging is about as high as I want to tempt the game fates). I do want to submit my games, and I do want a sense of accomplishment, but I do not see the need to play for exploiting score.

As for fixing the system, well, that is harder. The first baby step is to obviously have an automated routine to adjust the scores from any version to whatever the new standard is at the moment. The next small step is to have difficulty matter more. Map size does significantly affect score, but I am actually for that. Afterall, time served, you know. My advise is not too make map size matter so much (but make it matter) and difficulty matter relatively little in comparison.

The Metaverse can be improved, yes, but it still does its primary two jobs. One, it does help the dev team improve the game. Two, it does lend some street cred to the players to compare each other with. It is just that it now takes a careful reading of a player's profile to determine who is earning that credibility the hard way and who is milking the system. The day when the magic bottom-line number tells all is not at hand, yet. But I have faith.

Reply #35 Top
Actually the arguements are the same kind that I hear made on MMORPG in general and EQ in particular where there's this battle between the casual player and the hardcore player with regards to quests and zones. There are several items, zones and quests in EQ (especially epic) that takes upwards to 20 to 30 people and days of actual play time (I'm talking up 48 to 72 hours actually played) to achieve. There's things in that game that cater to both and the same applies here.

My only issue with the Metaverse is the quirkiness with the scores. I just submitted a game that was on Challenging that with a score of about 1530. I then do a game on painful with a score of 2600. So far, normal scoring curve. Then I do cripping (2nd highest difficulty for everyone) and the score ends up being only 2700...same victory type across the boards, same galaxy size. So I'm having difficulty reconciling what happened between painful and crippling. I would've expected teh score to come in about maybe 3500 to 4000. Prior to the update, the scores probably would've been about 6000 and 9000 respective. Too bad they're adjusted so low :-(

SeanB
Reply #37 Top
Crichton: you got some real good points here.

The main problem imho is the fact that 'no lifers' (sorry guys ;p ) can flood the metaverse, and the fact that there is no seperate scoring for the different galaxy sizes. So what about:

- Player ranking for different galaxy sizes (where you would get higher points for higher difficulties etc.)
- Empire ranking for different galaxy sizes. So teams can pick a certain galaxy to rule.

- monthly statistics:
* Best players/ games/ empire(!!) per month divided over the galaxy sizes. (with appropriate ranks/ medals)
* Best 'single game' per galaxy per month

This shouldn't be too hard to implement.
Reply #38 Top
"Serious replies only please, not juvy bs."

I'm not sure what "juvy" means, but my serious reply would be that it is unrealistic to expect the Metaverse to be a serious competition. GalCiv is a single player game, and is highly customizable which means people playing on normal/small galaxy are playing a much different game than someone playing gigantic/crippling.

If your looking for serious competition against other people you're playing GalCiv for the wrong reasons. Go find a game that has multiplayer for that. That's what I do.
Reply #39 Top
I can say one thing with absolute certainty: I've never played any game anywhere at any time that had a ranking system where a good-sized percentage of the people involved didn't think the scoring method sucked. PK-muds, turn-based strategy, real-time strategy, figure skating, game review scores, movie reviews, anytime you find a ranking system you find a lot of people who'll hate it.

I think the metaverse could be improved, but I also know that no matter how they arrange it you'll get a lot of posts by people who hate it. So improving the metaverse should probably be real low on Stardock's priority list.
Reply #40 Top
"Have the scores be divided purely by the # of games and you'll ahve people ticked off that a person who invests 5 good games into the metaverse is #1.

Have it purely additive and then it's just the guy with the most time to spend.

We took a happy medium."

Frogboy: You have a point with the #games issue. I understand that that is difficult to solve.

However, that is not my point at all.

Rather, 3 other things:

1- Difficulty counts for too little.

2- Map Size counts for too much.

3- Possible Scores are getting smaller with every update, so players who just bought the game are are at an ***ENORMOUS*** disadvantage.
Reply #41 Top
(Technician:) "Think you should get 5000 points for a game that lasts a few hours ?"

No, I think YOU shouldn´t get 4.000pts for a game at Beginner Level. ;)

Nothing personal, but that´s simply unfair to the really good players.
Reply #42 Top
Supposedly the scores degrade with time. If thats true then eventualy those old scores that are inflated will decay away.

Rob
Reply #43 Top
Coffeedragon

You did not read where the scoring was different with different builds? That the scores will be leveled out ?

or

The purpose of the Metaverse is to allow Stardock to analyse games for future development. Not a means for competition.

In case you have not noticed I am nowhere near the top 10. The scores in the top 10 are from people who won games on gigantic map with more intellegent AI. This is proof the scoring system works.

Also the more I play the slower my total would increase.
How can I explain this is you most likely do not understand and other people have already explained.

Example

10 games at 100 points = 1000
square root of 10 times 100 = 316

100 games at 100 points = 10,000
square root of 100 or 10 times 100 = 1000

1000 games at 100 points = 100,000
square root of 1000 times 100 = 3160

Notice how the more games you play the slower the score increases.

Do I worry or care? No!

The only way to have competition like what you want is to have no flexibility built in the game. Eveybody playing the same maps, AI etc...

I would not play such a game but I believe such game would make you happy.

Winning a game on a small map is not the same as winning a game on a large map. I has no personal plans on playing a game on anything smaller that gigantic. I would say though that if I played at smaller maps it would make much more sense to increase the difficulty level.
Reply #44 Top
BTW, in 1.04, which is in beta now on Drengin.net, all 3 issues mentioned above are addressed.

difficulty levels matter more, size of map matters somewhat less (bigger maps still help though), and overall scores are higher.
Reply #45 Top
Awesome.. I think I'll start submitting some games finally then.. ehrm, now that I am finishing some. LOL

One question tho.. are games that are STARTED on an older patch submittable to the Metaverse? I've dutifully updated my game, but if someone didn't bother to say.. update after the Shazam! setting was implemented, and is winning games with the PQ bonus, do they take? Just curious.

As an aside, I talked my friend into getting this game. The lamer went and edited that file to change settings.. gave himself 500% PQ for 1 point.. extended range to 10.. etc. etc. He was loving it. I explained to him just how lame he was. :p

fleabitfox
Reply #46 Top
Technician, apparently you don't realize this, but if the Metaverse wasn't meant for competition, then why keep score? Better yet why keep it in the form of a highscore list with players names attached to them? That by itself annouces it as a highscore competition. The whole idea that you form empires and compete for control is oh wait I used the compete word in there. You belonging in an empire should know better than that.
Reply #47 Top
I actually like the way the Metaverse works. The only problem is the old games that have too high of a score in comparison to the new games, but that is supposed to be fixed in the future, so we patiently wait.

Finally got myself a 2000 point game under 1.03A. Yeah!
Reply #48 Top
BTW, I don't know why people think the larger maps take so long to play. My most recent Huge map (on all Intelligent opposition) took me about 3 hours to complete.

Although I admit, I'm not as patient as most people and would do a lot better if I paid attention to more details.
Reply #49 Top
forceinfinity,

My guess is that keeping score is a way to encourage people to submit games to the metaverse. I believe the real purpose of the Metaverse is for Stardock to analyze games, then in turn improve the game based on that analysis. I would also presume that if there was no score or competitive element added to the submission of games, not nearly as many people would participate. Anybody or his brother could run a ladder board. Therefore, while competition is a part of it, perhaps it was "meant" for software improvement. Or at the very least, each part has equal weighting. SD or company, am I close on this?

~SDC~
Reply #50 Top
Since I started this mess, I should post a reply again.
Probably last in here, since it has now turned to being personally put down.
Bill Oreilly:
"The last resort of the desperate."

First, it is the usual sad sight to see the typical unintelligent reply of the ignorant that can only attack an individual because they have no other argument but to put the poster down personally.

Technician, shame on you for taking the low road.

"1 I notice you only play on small and tiny maps.
Think you should get 5000 points for a game that lasts a few hours ?

2 Some people like me do not cheat or like losing.

3 I play the game because I like it. I spend many hours per game not for a score.

4 Why do I bother, master gamers like you are all that matters.

You are a poster boy for all that is wrong with this forum. "

NOTE the final line of that. Real sad. No Technician, people like you is what is wrong with the real world. Attacking me is the typical last ditch effort of those who have not ground to stand on.

See other reply to coffeedragon where Technician has to add little put down to me. Real sad. I am not attacking, I am reponding to poor conduct.

Technician:
"Winning a game on a small map is not the same as winning a game on a large map. I has no personal plans on playing a game on anything smaller that gigantic."

Technician only plays simple/beginner gigantic games btw.

I have played all size galaxies, but saw no point in submitting some "low" scores to the Metaverse(all wins baby). BTW, I play crippling and maso. A child could play beginner/simple games and win, imo, and would improve to higher AI before 20 some of em.

I really hope those posters, Raychua, dikdirk, Coffeedragon, forceinfinity, and others intelligent posters address the personal attack issue addressed in this post as well as they did the original topic.

BTW, GalCiv post took the typical road,
"If you don't like the Metaverse, there's nothing forcing you to participate"
their solution being if you do not like it then leave.

CodeMonkey, it was not whining, that is also the road those with no argument take. Sad.

Note: In the end, basically everyone seems to have stated(ahem..agreed) in one form or another that the Metaverse was not right. :D

Next best thing, baby...what would keep people alot longer is a competative spirit, which is impossible with the current Metaverse.