One other possibility would be that the empire score be calculated by taking the score we use now and dividing it by the number of games played giving you the empire average. This way it will not matter if you got one person or 100 people in your empire, only on the average rating of every ones submissions in your empire.

Steve

First and foremost, It's a game. I have no problem with a requirement for Senate. But I do have a problem with limited membership. I'm not gonna get in a game of. Well mr 13k, We're kicking you out because a 60k wants in. That's not competition of the sort I'd like to see. Does not limiting empire size artificially help empires that are currently small? We had no such crutch when we were small. We worked and competed our way up.

That would encourage the best people to form one person empires.

Hey you can get all that right now!!!. Join the European alliance!!!.

can't agree more, really, and have to defer to your experience on this one. however, at 13k i 'might' be vulnerable to a 60k player wanting in or i might be kept because i might get 60k one day and anyway i gave the Meta "sperm pressure" which has to be worth 100k+
if i'm tending toward smaller empires, it's cos i appreciate the enormity of your work, and feel that it shouldn't be that hard, competition would be fiercer/easier and cos it is only a game. that's all.

Actually about maybe an hour or so a day playing is all. Some days 3 or 4 when I get some cave time. Some days zero. I just know how to get the big scores. I usually post my strategies. Haven't done so in awhile though. Maybe I'll make a website on how to drop the big bombs.

I don't know about making all empires invite-only, I can't see how that would increase participation. And setting 1-20, 21-40, and 40+ membership levels seems really artificial to me. Maybe if they make empire a score a function of the number of players in it - but then, you'd have the top scoring players complaining about all the "deadwood" players below them and kicking them out. Doesn't sound like fun to me.
Damn, I'm stumped.

Out of curiosity, have any of the devs said what proportion of gamers are active on the metaverse? (i.e. active metaverse players / total no. of game sales)

What we could have to make the smaller empires get more involved is to have their own rankings page, with the 25 empires above them, the 25 empires below them, and them in the middle. We could also have a longer rankings page (including the front page), showing the top 50 or 100. The longer list could be the default, with an option to go back to 50 or 25 if you've got a slow connection. Maybe something stored in a user's preferences, so they don't have to switch back every time?

They have. It's very low.

ok how about this - the eternal compromise - we have a fixed number of super-empires in the premiere league(this could be created, or, in deference to the history of the META, the current top whatever - we could have a competition to see who gets to be in the premiere!) and then in the normal division a collection of smaller empires that can affiliate to the super empires. for example the POSSe could be its own empire in the normal division (competing with other empires) but is affiliated to GROSS in the premiere league in the eternal search for the next big number score. cometition both big and small.

...and when a couple of teams dominate the big leagues? ...and when a couple teams dominate the small leagues? :notsure: Evil Steve, I'm am glad to see folks working hard to increase participation in the Meta, but I don't think this fixes the "we'll never reach the top" feeling that some will always create for themselves. It's something that will always be there to some degree. I like a couple other ideas so far. 1) New empire filters combined with storing user preferences for the filters chosen. 2) Stressing the "let's keep policing ourselves" effort in order to maintain an inviting community. In other words, discouraging overly aggresive provocation, but not getting rid of it because people have a positive response to various forms of interaction.

I have one idea to add here (as opposed to my usual shootin' down ideas ). How about a 'stickied' and 'closed' thread titled "Welcome to the Metaverse" written by (or approved by) the Stardock crew. Not everyone is interested in fighting with our jumbled forum to get a sense of what it's all about. And if this is done, a "Common Metaverse Submission Issues" thread that is also 'stickied' and 'closed' is desperately needed! Can y'all understand me?

One idea that could be worked into the current format without much pain would be an "Imperial" forum right next to the "Strategies" and "Mods" areas, if Stardock is willing to throw in a few hours. Keep the general forum for gameplay issues and generic questions to keep from hitting people over the head with empiring unless they're interested.

I also favor a self-policing "anti-ambush" policy for recruitment. 2 or 3 Imperial threads per empire, no recruitment attempts outside of them anywhere on the Forums, PERIOD. Else every thread turns into a recruitment spiel, as it often does now. When people are ready for an Empire, they will know who has helped them out, who they like chatting with, and can make the effort to find those nifty little icons and join up. Coupled with a stickied "What the Heck are Empires" thread to let people know where to LOOK for those icons on the Metaverse pages, we could start this NOW with enough support.

But now, on to the rant.

I actually like the idea of limiting the size of empires, down the road (for GalCiv 2?). But these are the rules we started with, and we shouldn't tamper with them just to deliberately cut the top 2 empires and give others a sense of capability. You shouldn't punish someone for doing well.

I grew up in Chicago. The Cubs haven't won the Series in...well...nobody alive saw the last one (1906? Somebody who's more into baseball stats than me HAS to know this one). But they have one of the most rabid fan bases in the sport - or in ANY sport.

Based on some of the reactions I've seen here, if somebody was born in, or moved to Chicago, they'd throw up their hands in disgust and find another team. Crickets would take over the ivy on the walls of the empty ballpark. You get the idea.

The same can be said for many of us here in the Metaverse. Yes, the top 2 empires have a commanding lead. Yes, our own empires are down on the charts at the moment. BUT WE KNOW THAT LEADERS CHANGE OVER TIME. Likewise, we can climb to fill that void if we make newcomers feel welcome in an attractive setting of players who are active, having fun, and are willing to help new players and treat them as equals.

If being a part of a winning team TODAY is truly all that matters to you, fine. There's an easy solution. Join a winning team. At the moment, there are two to choose from. You'd need to flip-flop on a daily basis, and keep an eye on the chargers coming up from below, but that's OK - you'd be a WINNER!

GalCiv is a single-player game. That's where winning matters. The Metaverse is just about friendly competition, raising the level of interest in the game in general, and a sense of community with others who have similar interests. Although we may occasionally lose sight of that.

Okay, the adrenaline is wearing off...must remember to switch to decaf. Sorry for the extended diatribe, but I felt some of this needed to be said.

actually i just remembered that the main reason i joined the meta was cos i really liked the idea of the ai being improved by the submission of player scores. the rest is just extra. BTW, don't suffer from the "we'll never reach the top" syndrome.....

LOL En Guarde!

I'm sorry, Kit, using a metaphor that's clearly swashbuckler and pirate-related is a no-no. Keep it up, and I'll have to use a Jedi mind trick- oops.

P.S. I believe it's "En garde," isn't it? Any Frenchmen here?

Merde! I thought I changed that! I knew it was 'en garde'! I did! I did I did I did! I'd edit it, but Honor has a death-grip on my pride.

Is using French on a common thread effectively a recruitment pitch for the Euros? Mon Dieu!

I've lost track of the number of times we have asked for a separate Empire forum. We have asked in the main forum and we have asked in the Galactic Council but SD has not responded. They probably don't think it is worth the number of engineering hours to be invested.

edit:typo
[Message Edited]

Sacre bleu!!! Was ist das? Sind wir übergeschnappt? Nerazumijeti? Nema Problema.

I personally don't like limiting empires. This may create an impetus to kick out "non-performing" members once the quota is met.

ca plein pour moi
can plein pour moi, moi, moi, moi.....

There are two proven formulas on the Meta: numbers and will. Numbers grant a long term residual effect in that a "dead" player's score stays with the empire the player last held. The reality of the situation, though, is that will to play is the ultimate solution. Determined players keep climbing, whether they are maso gigantic players or prefer cakewalk tiny. Nothing is going to replace a determined player except the player retiring.

Now the Meta could be tweaked to keep dead players as part of an empire roster but drop their scores from the empire pool, but there still is the little fact that a half dozen real serious Galciv players banding together could make a very formidible empire in their own right. Because of this participation factor, limiting empire size is a false fix.

Adjusting score to truly coincide with difficulty would be a great start in solving part of the problem, but the problem of these willful, determined players who just refuse to quit will still vex the more laid back players. So, while the Meta can be retooled for whatever end goal is in mind, the teamwork of a larger group will always, always beat the smaller team or the individual.

It is time for the "little guys" to realize that they either need to step up to the plate to be super players and/or recruit like mad. Enough empires have risen and fallen in my time, and the courses of enough empires have been changed by players joining/defecting. The small empire of today may well be the superpower of tomorrow. I should know. I have been on both sides of the fence. So enough whining about "oh, the little guy is doomed, give us a crutch" and more "let's get involved and show the others we mean business", whether that is in scores or forum participation.

I would also be strongly against any change to membership rules (numbers, scoring). We don't need it.

What are we trying to do?

Encourage more metaverse members to improve the community. We want mroe support from Stardock and we have to earn it. The way we earn it is to increase the size of our community, or the financial impact of our community on Stardock.

To make the metaverse more fun for smaller empires, we don't need to actually change the metaverse, we just need to change the way it is perceived and interacted with. Whichever empires earn their way to the top deserve to be there. The fact that many players are not interested in seeing that or seeing 'join x empire' in so many threads is what we need to deal with. Allowing for customisable filters so that players can compare against similar empires would be a good start. An empire forum with sticky's help posts and weekly empire news updates would also help.

Fewer 'join x empire' posts in non empire specific threads would also be nice, but that's a personal preference and not really important.

Paul.

~SDC~