el_perdedor wrote:also i didnt really read the post that are before mine.
have not the time. i will pay attetion from here on.
el_perdedor wrote:so my idea of the GT-League was more of a duels league.
The games will take about 60 turns, i think.
We can start at the same time more games.
A map for, say about 6-8 cities per side.
I don't really like the idea. For me, Civilization is something massive, with politics, diplomacy, alliances and cooperation taking up a lot of the game. This is more like chess so, basically, why not play chess then?
To the points
i would do 2 for win and 1 for losing
This is the same as 1 point for winning, 0 for losing. Not that it matters.
That of more players and the points will be distrubiet(or how ever it is written) depending the position each one got in the game. I like it, but more for a ranking in the usual GT games. And i would do the point starting from the last one. I.e. 8 players game, the one who ended last, 8th position, get 1 point. 7th position 2 points. 6th position 4 points. 5th position 8 points. And so on. That would it make more attractive to win bigger games. Perhaps, i have already some critic for this idea.
This is actually a good point; yes, someone winning a 10-player game should get less points than someone winning a 20 player game... but definitely not twice as much because that actually penalises someone for playing the "wrong" game... Ok, I'll think about it a bit...
Maybe do the middle of both? Let's see...
score1 = ( Rank + Number of players - 1 ) * 100/N Meaning: in a 20 player game, 1st gets 100, last gets 5. This is adjusted so that each game is worth the same, regardless of how many players there are.
score2 = ( R + N - 1) * 100 / 20This one is "normalised" for a game of 20 players (average? We could normalise it to some other number); if there are actually 20 players, 1st gets 100 points. If there are 30 players, 1st gets 150 points; if there are 10 players, 1st gets 50 points and so on.
The final score may be a sum of
both, to make it a compromise. If you're interested in how it actually works, feel free to run simulations or trust others to calculate your score
I could do a few examples later.
A variation may be to adjust the first formula, or make it a list, to stimulate being actually good, so that the first gets 120 points, second gets 105, third gets 95, fourth gets 90... or something like that (this is still added to the second formula for the final score).