Victory scoring problems.

[Ronski]

Something that I dislike about the game currently is how you are scored at the end of the game. some aspects of how the score is being given at the end of the game seem a bit off and not well thought out.

Examples

Naval score: being based on number of fleets instead of individual ships this scoring punishes players who keep a single large standing fleet supported by smaller convoy raiders. An easy fix would be to grant naval score based on current standing navy, how much production it took to produce, manpower in the navy, naval experience spent on currently active vessels as well as their technological level.

Army score: Same thing with navy as you are being scored based on how many divisions you have without any regard to what those divisions include. A division consisting of a single infantry battalion is worth as much as a division consisting of modern tanks and 5 support battalions when it comes to scoring the land army.

Air score: This is the least transparent but it seems to completely ignore all airplanes in the reserves.

Industry and controlled provinces: This one is a bit trickier but I feel like puppets should contribute towards their masters scoring based on their autonomy level instead of being able to outscore their master on this respective field. Controlling the whole USA as a puppet while being ranked behind them in factories and land while those factories essentially belong to you feels a bit flawed.

 

[davej]

Something that I dislike about the game currently is how you are scored at the end of the game. some aspects of how the score is being given at the end of the game seem a bit off and not well thought out.

Examples

Naval score: being based on number of fleets instead of individual ships this scoring punishes players who keep a single large standing fleet supported by smaller convoy raiders. An easy fix would be to grant naval score based on current standing navy, how much production it took to produce, manpower in the navy, naval experience spent on currently active vessels as well as their technological level.

Army score: Same thing with navy as you are being scored based on how many divisions you have without any regard to what those divisions include. A division consisting of a single infantry battalion is worth as much as a division consisting of modern tanks and 5 support battalions when it comes to scoring the land army.

Air score: This is the least transparent but it seems to completely ignore all airplanes in the reserves.

Industry and controlled provinces: This one is a bit trickier but I feel like puppets should contribute towards their masters scoring based on their autonomy level instead of being able to outscore their master on this respective field. Controlling the whole USA as a puppet while being ranked behind them in factories and land while those factories essentially belong to you feels a bit flawed.

I share similar sentiments and this has been mentioned since day 1. Don't know why they even bother. I would, however,would love to see something like this in an in game ledger.

The true objective of this game is undefined. If you go by this scoring system, it implies you are supposed to spam your country as large as possible and probably need a WC well past 1948.

 

[Ronski]

Yes I understand it has very little to do with gameplay, but they made the decision to include the score screen at the end so it would be nice to at least have it polished a little.

 

[davej]

Yes I understand it has very little to do with gameplay, but they made the decision to include the score screen at the end so it would be nice to at least have it polished a little.

Are you suggesting you want the game to work properly?

 

[Dalwin]

To me, that score table is almost completely useless. It is no way represents how a faction has performed throughout the game, nor is it a reasonable reflection of the factions current strength. It is little better than a set of random numbers.

The only thing it is good for is comparisons within the same column. There is no meaningful or reasonable scaling of importance from one column to the next.

 

[Bundeswag]

Well it would be nice to compare stuff like ships sunk between countries or manpower lost at the end of the game. Imo the idea of a score doesn't really fit a game about total war, it is war everyone loses.

 

[Dalwin]

Well it would be nice to compare stuff like ships sunk between countries or manpower lost at the end of the game. Imo the idea of a score doesn't really fit a game about total war, it is war everyone loses.

It may be a war that everyone loses, but as a game someone should win. Usually this is not a problem, but I have seen an MP game that almost made it into 1945 and mid-way through '44 it looked like the deadlock would last another few years. When the collapse did come it was sudden and almost unexpected.

For MP situations where the group wants to call the game at a certain date or only play for a fixed length of time, it would be nice if there was a realistic score that could be called on to declare the winner if neither side had surrendered.

Also if playing the historical factions etc. it would allow in situations where the Axis loses to declare either the Comintern or the Allies to be the primary victor, encouraging a little of the race for Berlin mentality.

 

[davej]

Well it would be nice to compare stuff like ships sunk between countries or manpower lost at the end of the game. Imo the idea of a score doesn't really fit a game about total war, it is war everyone loses.

It would be nice to have all the info of each country in table format (as seen in the details section of each country) so you don't have to manually select and remember each country. I like to know how I compare with the rest of the world.

 

[Ronski]

Well the scoring system isn't even good for comparing things inside the same column, the most glaring example being the navy. You can have 1 fleet of 1000 ships or 1 fleet of a single outdated submarine and your navy score in both cases is the same regardless of what you have done throughout the game. Same goes for lots of other stuff like divisions, where your war efforts are not counted at all and the only score you get is how many divisions you have when the game decides to give you a score. I think it would be better to remove the scoring completely until its somewhat accurate.

 

[davej]

Well the scoring system isn't even good for comparing things inside the same column, the most glaring example being the navy. You can have 1 fleet of 1000 ships or 1 fleet of a single outdated submarine and your navy score in both cases is the same regardless of what you have done throughout the game. Same goes for lots of other stuff like divisions, where your war efforts are not counted at all and the only score you get is how many divisions you have when the game decides to give you a score. I think it would be better to remove the scoring completely until its somewhat accurate.

I wouldn't mind a breakdown of the ships and types of divisions. Some people say this is cheating and too much info. They could have it disabled for ironman or MP. I don't even mind if just a mod were made, but these are in game variables and probably need real programming intervention to get done.

 

[fabius]

I find the scoring system that small divisions and fleets score higher than less but more meaningful units odd. And it's even freakier that the devs with all their experience made it this way.