our problem was that we also wanted to integrate CB into our existing score system. that score system does know nothing about "population", so you could have won a CB game but if your CV wasn't good you would have gotten 0 points for it. hence the idea to also show CV in the goal so it is transparent to players that CV is also necessary if you want to get scores. we cannot just add population to the score algorithm, because nobody knows what would be fair equivalents of CV and population. would it be fair to give the same score for 5000 inhabitants than for 100 million euro CV? or rather for 10,000 inhabitants?
and even if you find two numbers that are matching: growth rate of CV and population are different and both are not linear. it would be nearly impossible to integrate it in a fair way, arguments would arise whether CB servers got an advantage for scoring or "normal" servers.
anyway, remember the server name is TEST and it was meant to find out exactly about things like this. and what we have learned is that
- the additional CV goal contradicts the whole CityBuilder idea too much and fades out the actual town growing idea
- there won't be a fair way to include population goals into the current score system
next step is to draw conclusions from it and come up with new ideas. on
this thread lots of ideas were discussed how the score system could be changed. it seems it goes into the direction of having a separate score system for CB, including a separate highscore table and personal scores.
also we are thinking about changing the system to give scores (or maybe call it XP then and give players ranks/levels?) every quarter to resolve the unfortunate situation where people play 80% of the time on a server but aren't connected when the game is won, not getting any points for it. with points/XP every quarter players could even go to a long run server and only participate for one or two game hours, still getting some points.