Etiquette for rating noobs

[Grifter]

I started a game on Netherlands map. I got screwed by not 1 but 2 noobs who both attacked me with no thought for the 4th player who cleaned up and won. I tried to make an alliance with the 1 player but he didn't check the game chat window until it was too late. One noob apologized but the other did not.

My question is - do I leave a bad rating for both of them or should I refrain since they are new to the site?

On a second thought - I wish CC had special non-rated games for new players to play so that they learn the game. These could be hosted by veteran players who would be happy to dispense advice if asked for. A special achievement would be given for hosting such games. Just a thought.

[Metsfanmax]

There's a difference between "newb" and "noob." The former applies to the current situation.

I don't think anyone would blame you for rating them with poor performance. After all, the only way the rating system makes sense is if there are bad players as well as good ones. I know everyone wants to have a perfect 5.0 rating, but let's face it, it makes no sense to have a rating system if everyone gets high scores. The distribution should be normalized properly.

[HighlanderAttack]

I don't want a 5.0--then I could not tell noobs how I feel about them


Anyway, you will find that the ratings over the long hall tend to equal out.

Anyone 4.7 or higher is normal and a decent player and a decent person in my opinion.

4.5 and 4.6 are questionable

4.4 and lower most likely have some issues and when you get to under 4.0 that person has major issues

These are just my opinion.

[King Doctor]

under 4.0 that person has major issues

Clear proof that this rating system is utterly useless.

When having an above average rating is considered to be a sign that you have 'major issues', then the system isn't working.