[09-Jun-2008] Ratings & Medals

[Frop]

Mark my words, I'm certain there will be quite a few "terrorists" who will join 8 person games and torpedo, anonymously, every other player in the game. We have all played with such people. Allowing them secrecy to work was incredibly poor judgement.

I find it shocking how short-sighted the Admins were in this case. Seems irresponsible and a "quick-fix" to avoid the headache of arbitration.

We would be better off with no rating system at all, than one that has such a capacity for malicious mischief.

If someone is abusing the system like that, then let us know and we'll deal with them. People won't be able to hide the ratings they left; they're viewable after the game is archived. So if you suspect someone of doing this, go to their ratings left page and you'll be able to see everything they left (once game is archived).

Wait a second - wasn't this what you were doing with the old system as well (moderating unjust feedback)?

[nesterdude]

I dig the medals, but the Feedback System was fine the way it was. It's more personal and someone actually has to think a little bit before writing in order to be taken seriously. Also, there was more of a deterrent to leaving negative feedback because it didn't just wash out or even out with a ton of good feedback.
Meaning: it's more noticable and tells you more about the play of the person.
Also, the categories that we have now aren't very applicable. Attendance? uhm.
I think we should stick with the old feedback system and tweak it./

[wpg27offsuit]

Medals are cool - I just left feed back for 80+ people and no medal - I thought after 40 ratings i was supposed to get bronze.

Also, I have won well over 300 games, and no medal for achievement. I GUARANTEE I have beat 20 unique players in standard games. yet no medal. WTF???

Guess the system does not know how to count - either that - or its only calculated once a day / week / month... who knows.

How often are medal counts calculated?

I think they'll show up when the games are archived.

300 wins - I GUARANTEE the games are archived - I have been a member for over a year now - Some people (the captains and generals) have badges - it seems the lower ranks - do not... Hmmm.... I could be wrong.. just my observation so far....

I am starting to lean towards not being a fan of this.

[mudEguy]

Looks like some good changed. Now, how's about changing the delayed deployment armies? If someone misses a turn, they should lose the armies. That'll speed games up and not encourage the silly "strategy" of waiting two turns before starting play.

[bob3603]

I dig the medals, but the Feedback System was fine the way it was. It's more personal and someone actually has to think a little bit before writing in order to be taken seriously. Also, there was more of a deterrent to leaving negative feedback because it didn't just wash out or even out with a ton of good feedback.
Meaning: it's more noticable and tells you more about the play of the person.
Also, the categories that we have now aren't very applicable. Attendance? uhm.
I think we should stick with the old feedback system and tweak it./

I agree about the feedback, you should add back the ability to leave comments. Also with comments wouldn't it be easier to spot false feedback, as a negative feedback needed a reason? Now people can leave bad feedback without leaving a reason.

[hatterson]

Medals are cool - I just left feed back for 80+ people and no medal - I thought after 40 ratings i was supposed to get bronze.

Also, I have won well over 300 games, and no medal for achievement. I GUARANTEE I have beat 20 unique players in standard games. yet no medal. WTF???

Guess the system does not know how to count - either that - or its only calculated once a day / week / month... who knows.

How often are medal counts calculated?

I think they'll show up when the games are archived.

300 wins - I GUARANTEE the games are archived - I have been a member for over a year now - Some people (the captains and generals) have badges - it seems the lower ranks - do not... Hmmm.... I could be wrong.. just my observation so far....

I am starting to lean towards not being a fan of this.

You haven't left feedback under the new system for that many people. Old system feedback doesn't count for medals, just the new 1-5 ratings

[jiminski]

I don't much care about the old feedback going.... If you ever tried to leave a negative feedback you will know what an unbalanced and ineffective tool the whole old system was!
basically it encouraged mediocrity and irrelevance! Only those who made a habit of leaving negatives could get a contested neg past a mod anyway ...

Saying that, if you took the time to read the 'positives', made about unknown players by known players who you respect, this went a long way!

Tweaks
I strongly suggest that the grading be out of 10
Rating out of 5 is too blunt a marking system ... (really you have to give all your mates a 5 anyway) there needs to be more nuance allowed for! in this system a '4' is almost an insult and a 3 definitely is, so where does that leave the system? discredited and worthless by and large.*


Also, At the moment, i think the categories are too meaningless without the addition of a final category which describes skill, or tactics.. this would tie it all together!

Attendance: Ok, yes it indicates deadbeaters and is useful
Attitude: again OK helps indicate the stroppy-tossers
Fairplay: yeap fine gives you the chance to weed out those who employ dubious tactics
Teamwork: i suppose this could be a partial and vagueindicator of skill but it is not available in non team games anyway.
Skill/tactics: We are on a strategy based gaming-site and we give more credence to 'Attendance' than 'Tactics'!?



*I intend no offence and with the odd tweak, i think the system will be a great improvement; freeing up the mods from whining gimps... which is the whole point of the excercise. (please indulge this whining gimp a little longer if you can stomach it.)

[hatterson]

Skill/tactics: We are on a strategy based gaming-site and we give more credence to 'Attendance' than 'Tactics'?

I think the reason that Lack left out strategy is because the rankings and points are supposed to be the indicator of that. I don't really care if someone has 5/5 on 1000 feedbacks for great strategy, if he's a cook with a 200 rating I'm not very optimistic. The same can be said if a person has 1/5 for strategy but yet is a colonel or brigadier.

Edit: I'm not saying that it wouldn't be interesting to have. I'm just saying a reason why I think it wasn't implemented.

[jangler3]

Something strange! I've left 25 rating so far. And yet the page that tells you about ratings received/left says I have left none. Also I got a Pm telling me I got a rating but it says I have none. I am assuming that you need at least 3 to show up on the game list. I have seen players with ratings so I was wondering what's up?

[jiminski]

Skill/tactics: We are on a strategy based gaming-site and we give more credence to 'Attendance' than 'Tactics'?

I think the reason that Lack left out strategy is because the rankings and points are supposed to be the indicator of that. I don't really care if someone has 5/5 on 1000 feedbacks for great strategy, if he's a cook with a 200 rating I'm not very optimistic. The same can be said if a person has 1/5 for strategy but yet is a colonel or brigadier.

Edit: I'm not saying that it wouldn't be interesting to have. I'm just saying a reason why I think it wasn't implemented.

with the greatest respect Hatt, your perception of Lacks perception does not alter my perception!

[amazzony]

Something strange! I've left 25 rating so far. And yet the page that tells you about ratings received/left says I have left none. Also I got a Pm telling me I got a rating but it says I have none. I am assuming that you need at least 3 to show up on the game list. I have seen players with ratings so I was wondering what's up?

Ratings get added to profiles after games are archived, at least I understand it like that.

[bayou]

How 'bout a description of the medals in the instructions or rules somewhere? Or did I miss it?

[jrf2c]

We need a rating for skill/tactics, the most important thing in this game.

[t-o-m]

How 'bout a description of the medals in the instructions or rules somewhere? Or did I miss it?

look up

its up with the Forum FAQ | Members | View Your Posts.

[jangler3]

Something strange! I've left 25 rating so far. And yet the page that tells you about ratings received/left says I have left none. Also I got a Pm telling me I got a rating but it says I have none. I am assuming that you need at least 3 to show up on the game list. I have seen players with ratings so I was wondering what's up?

Ratings get added to profiles after games are archived, at least I understand it like that.

Yeah, That's what I was thinking after I posted the question. So that means people were giving out rating to games on the cusp of being archived.

[jiminski]

We need a rating for skill/tactics, the most important thing in this game.

Amongst other things, i said exactly that a few posts back .. (and indeed about a month ago in the first thread)

not having a skill/tactic rating for a game on a tactics based gaming site, is like going to a restaurant and rating it on:
Service 8/10, Ambience 8/10, Value 7/10, Toilets 8/10

and not having a rating for the bloody : Food (2 out of 5)

[AndyDufresne]

How 'bout a description of the medals in the instructions or rules somewhere? Or did I miss it?

This may be coming soon.


--Andy

[dezzy26]

Duplicate Start A Game Thingy

Did you know that 48% of public games on the Join A Game pages are duplicates - meaning there are already waiting games with identical settings? Now when you try to start a new public game and there is already an identical public game out there, you'll be presented a listing of duplicates and given an opportunity to join one instead. Hopefully this will trim down the pages of waiting games and make games fill up quicker. You can still start your own game if you insist.

this is great and all that but i like to start most of my own games, as i like to pm people who i want as partners
now it takes even longer to create a game, especially as at one time u could keep clicking create multiple times b4 the new page loaded and now u get an extra message asking if you really want to create a new game

[jiminski]

I am not completely sure ... is that relevant Dezzy?... also i have read that exact text somewhere else .. or am i having a flash-back!?

[ShikamaruorGarra]

The only question is will we keep the old rating system on our profile?

[AndrewB]

Awesome update lackattack! And implemented without a hickup, well done

[dezzy26]

I am not completely sure ... is that relevant Dezzy?... also i have read that exact text somewhere else .. or am i having a flash-back!?

the top half of the text is in lack announcement at the beginning of this thread (not sure why it didnt quote tho) so yeah i reckon it does have some relevance so dont worry your not having flashback from yer lsd days lol

sorry lack the update is awsome im just not keen on the creating games bit but ill probs have to live with it.

hey ho such is life

[jiminski]

I am not completely sure ... is that relevant Dezzy?... also i have read that exact text somewhere else .. or am i having a flash-back!?

the top half of the text is in lack announcement at the beginning of this thread (not sure why it didnt quote tho) so yeah i reckon it does have some relevance so dont worry your not having flashback from yer lsd days lol

sorry lack the update is awsome im just not keen on the creating games bit but ill probs have to live with it.

hey ho such is life

hehe phiew!

[kaydub]

We need a rating for skill/tactics, the most important thing in this game.

yes please. something about logic or gameplay. just because an opponent takes all their turns, isn't mean in chat, and plays fairly doesn't mean you want to play them.

[wcaclimbing]

can there be an explanation of what each number of stars mean?

I don't know if I should be scoring as 3=average or all 5s unless something bad happens...