Single character IMO. Two things affect this decision for me... 1. Metaverse recalcs - my first 2 characters were knocked off the number 1 spot and decimated scorewise by the recalcs. 2. There is no grouping of games in 30-day brackets as there was with GC1 - which means that the diminishing returns factor is in effect for ever. So when (1) happens to a character with a number of submitted games, you are left with a whole bunch of low scoring games that drag down your overall score for ever. Likewise, Syrrus K sees that he gets far less MV points for a 250K+ game than I do because of the total number of submitted games for that character. I really see no problem with starting off a new character for that reason, as it probably gives an overall better chance of competing for the number 1 spot in the long run.

Some good points Magnum...

Oh well... Like the boss says... Play for fun.

Good morning. I would like to play for fun, but I am still recoverying from two full days of playing only to receive the Treasury bug and had to throw the game away. Not sure I want to start another game real soon.

Think on it as two days of tactics refining! Now go get em!!

I am lacking in motivation as well.

I put in a 110 k game and it REDUCED my overall score from 272k to 271. !!!

Very depressing.

I don't think I will have any thing more to give until the end of Nov. I am about 1/3 through a Huge Maso. First time w/ all 9 races so I am hoping that will boost the score a bit.

Good morning Diplos...

1. B.C. Space Orcas 5277732
2. The Galactic Diplomats 4814423
3. The Overmind 2524673
4. The Galactic Empire 1704968
5. Qourth Empire 1646077
6. The Browncoats 1376427

463309... And the chase continues.

V... That's the nature of the verse. A bit frustrating at times.

Wyer... Bugs... hate'em or love'em they're still bugs.

Good depressing morning Diplomats. If I think back on GCI vs GCII, I think GCI was more enjoyable and playable longer. Maybe one should think of GCII as a warm up for the real game that will come out soon. GCII and the MV together are a depressing combo.

I'm just annoyed that you cant mod the darn game for MV games as you could GC1. The exclusion of Kryo's hull mod really stopped me from playing MV games as it reduces my enjoyment. I 'like' designing ships in the games and doing this probably takes more time than actually playing the game so to speak. To change the MV to exclude a harmless ship mod was beyond my recognition.

Still i look forward to the betas for DA and must remember this time to do a fresh install for the betas, just in case they prove to be unstable

Hail Diplos. Packing is complete. Cari is my hero.

Good morning Diplos.

Good morning Diplos. My turn   

It is 05.30 right now.  

Well, I'm shocked at the micro-management it takes to finish up a gigantic all abundant Maso. I had hoped to have it completed by last weekend and I'll be lucky to have it done this weekend!

After reading the post Mag made about the overall score degradation and removal of the 30 day blocks as was the case in the first MV, I'm regretting my decision to do all those racial victories via Tech win. If my score from my current game gets nerfed badly by this, I'll likely start another character.

Good morning Diplos. Yes, Chip, that is a problem. If you want to maximize score for a single game, you must micro manage everything. The alternative is to play many lower scoring games, which has its own defect in your MV score as it gets divided by a function of the games played.

My next game is going under another character.
I have taken Vulcan as far as I can...14th
I am just treading water with 110K scores.

Yes, applying the full number of games to all scores (without 30 day blocks) seems like a bad idea to me...

Good morning Diplomats. As we all know from GCI, the MV changes slowly if at all. Recalcs generate all kinds of unhappiness, but the current situation certainly makes the MV less fun or useful. I am doubtful it will change anytime soon.

Vulkan .you tread water with 110K scores.
Mere mortals like I would be happy with a 110 score.!  
You must share with us (line from Dune) please!
This message comes from one who hasn't posted ONE score yet!!!!!      

Cardassian. Come and join us st the Diplomats.
Plenty of advice there.

Play a few games to get the hang of things before you post a score.

Anyone remember the "Alternative Metaverse" we had going in GC1?

I'm sure that arose from many of the same issues we are discussing here (which IMHO are exacerbated tenfold by the removal of the 30 day blocks), and gave a much more balanced view of people's efforts (i.e. Chip playing 10 * 30K games would be worth the same as me playing 1 * 300K).

Anyone got the nous to implement something similar now? I'm not sure how it was done in the past, but I assume it took a feed from the real meta to get the submissions - so I guess some sort of approval / blessing from Stardock would be required (Kryo?).

I'm not sure how it was done in the past, but I assume it took a feed from the real meta to get the submissions - so I guess some sort of approval / blessing from Stardock would be required (Kryo?).

Back in the GC1 days Idle just set up a scraper to hit the meta twice a day--not really horribly complicated. Should be even easier now since we've got RSS feeds to work from.

Back in the GC1 days Idle just set up a scraper to hit the meta twice a day--not really horribly complicated. Should be even easier now since we've got RSS feeds to work from.

Great news Kryo!!!   


(When will you have the AltMeta2 set up?) 

Anyone remember the "Alternative Metaverse" we had going in GC1?

So how would this alternative metaverse work? Is it merely the sum of games submitted? Would it contain the 5% depreciation of scores every month to a minimum of 65%.

Using the cumlative total isn't really fair to newer players. They'll potentially never have a chance to catch up. Using the monthly depreciation of scores without division by some function of number of games submitted would eliminate the problem of only getting 25% credit for the score of your 32nd game.

But depreciation of scores by 5% down to a minimum of 65% would mean that it takes 7 months to get to 65% and then would stay there forever. I think this scheme could be fair to both new players and old players by depreciating games by on the order of 17.33% per month down to a minimum of 0. This would mean that 3 month old scores would still be worth 50% but 6 month old scores would be out of the picture. This would be fair to the older players because they get full credit for each new game and also gives the new player a chance. Certainly within 6 months any new player would have no disadvantage vs. an older player. At even 3 months a new player posting better cumalative scores would have a reasonable chance of catching up.

I am not sure why people feel that a new player should have the same advantages as an older player, or should even catch up to the score of an older player. The Metaverse, in my opinion, is about two things. One, a record of your scores as an individual, and therefore each game should reflect the score from the game, i.e., raw score. Two, a team competition where each player contibutes to the overall score of the team. The team score can be arranged in any manor one wants, based on the raw scores of the team members. I am not to concerned about the team scores or how they would be calculated.

But, for individual scores, one would have a list of the highest scores in the game, for however many categories of game play one wants to track, for example, highest score for each dificulty on each size of galaxy. This would be a lot of categories, but also if someone wanted to be tops in all of them they would really have to play many different styles of games. New players have as much opportunity to compete in those categories as anyone else. Of coures, their experience would probably indicate that there scores would not be very high on their early games, but that is the nature of the game.

Good morning Diplomat. Haven't seen you at the Core recenly Mumble, good to see you here.