[09-Jun-2008] Ratings & Medals

[McArthur2]

How do you score "teamwork" when there are no teams? Do you leave that category blank?

[Joodoo]

JM EDIT Flame wars is not here

You just remove loads of time. You know how much time some people have spent time to both give and get feedback.

.

have to agree with oggiss, although the old feedback stays in your profile, you cannot add anymore...

Put me in the "I think this sucks" pile. THe comments on the feedback helped me understand and guage whether or not to join a game with people I have never played before. Now all a rude, condencending player needs to do is get a buddy to post glowing numbers and his rating goes up.

Also, if someone gets pissed off ont he game, they can torpedo you without fear of retribution or even being proven false.

Seems like a license to wreak havok. Very bad idea.

another significant point made, feedback is quite important in viewing a clear picture of someone's reputation in CC (except for forum reputation)
to me, the rating system is just not good enough

How do you score "teamwork" when there are no teams? Do you leave that category blank?

you're suppose to leave it blank in non-team games, otherwise you'd be abusing the rating system

[sideoutshu]

Great new system. I would like to see a "strategy" rating though.

[xroads]

Love the medals it will make me play more types of games.

What is the X map medal?

I dont care one way or another about feedback. Whatever works for me.

Nice site good job!

[lackattack]

I added this to the instructions:

You can't rate the Teamwork attribute when you have never played a team game with the member in question.

Great new system. I would like to see a "strategy" rating though.

We don't want attributes based on skill because the goal of ratings is to encourage good behaviour. For skill we already have score, rank and medals.

[cre8tiff]

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.

[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?

[Keebs2674]

I like the idea of medals!

At first thought, the new ratings system seemed cool too, but the more I think about it the more I don't like it. Here are my reasons:

1) At the same time it's overly broad and too narrow. It's overly broad because everyone has different ideas of what constitutes poor/good play, boorish/enjoyable behavior, and perversion of/respect for the intention of the game creators. In the old system, feedback, both negative and positive, could be specifically tailored to the concerns of the person who wrote the feedback. The new system doesn't allow for this. Someone might give me a bad mark in "attitude" because I reject a truce with them or simply don't respond to something they say in the chat, but there's no way for others to know why I received that bad mark. There's no opportunity to for someone to make a judgement on what other's have said. There's also no way for me to know why I got the feedback I received.

As for being too narrow, I'm restricted to the subject areas provided. I like giving positive feedback to people who demonstrate excellent strategy; the new ratings don't give me that option. I also know a lot of other people give feedback for poor strategy (I don't). I'm worried that with no category for that in the new ratings it will get lumped in with "Fair Play" and supposed poor strategy will get interpreted as dishonesty or perversion of the integrity of the game.

2) It's anonymous. If you're willing to give someone feedback it should be public by attaching your name to the feedback. You could still make the ratings invisible until a game in archived to prevent retaliation.

3) There's no way to respond to feedback. Perhaps there's a perfectly good reason why someone deadbeated. I always give negative feedback to deadbeaters. But if they come back with a good reason for it, I remove the feedback. I've also received negative feedback from people that was completely untrue or unfair. I enjoy the opportunity to respond.

4) Old feedback is gone. I don't like the fact that all the old feedback I gave people will be wiped away. If we're going with the new ratings system, I think we should at least have the opportunity to translate our old feedback into the new system for all past games, should we choose to do so.

In all, if the main reason for the new ratings system is that the mods had to spend too much time arbitrating disputes, I'd say you should just tell the CC community you're no longer doing that. Let people sort their disagreements out on their own.

[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.

[wicked]

wpg27offsuit, your medals will show up once you win your next game. The ratings dont "count" towards the medal until the games are archived. So when you can count 40 on your ratings left page, then you'll get the medal.

Keebs, the ratings are public, once the game is archived (5 days from completion of game). Old feedback isn't gone, it's still viewable from the profile page and will be for a couple more months at least. We'll decide what to do with it later. There's been talk of moving the comments over to your wall, but since the wall was brand new, we wanted to see how that played out first.

[ukiegirl]

sorry, don't like it
I want to see the reason why someone gets a negative and the response regarding that negative.
If you want to make the game better change the miss three in a row rule. It should be three total and get kicked out. I've played waaay too many games lately where people seem to make missing turns a game tactic. The first missed turn they could have the deferred armies like now, the second missed turn would result in no deferred armies and the third missed is kicked out.
thanks
"play or don't join"

[hatterson]

hrm I typed out a post that said I liked the new system but it doesn't seem to show up.

Oh well, I like the new system and the medal.

Thanks to Lack and Co. you guys don't get enough credit for the trouble you put into this

[wicked]

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).

[Gilligan]

Does anybody have all medals yet?

[MuEagles79]

[/quote]
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).[/quote]

and this is where your new system fails

Without requiring some basis for the rankings or requiring an explanation from a user behind the rankings, you will have no basis to "deal with them". A justification for this new system is that the Mods were tired of dealing with the "feedback wars". This is just going to breed further wars and require more work for the Mods in determining what is a justified negative rating and what isn't.

[hatterson]

Does anybody have all medals yet?

No one has the feedback medal.

[redtide]

I don't like the new system at all. I just finished a game, where some idiot over-attacked and gave away an esc game.so I wanted to leave some good old-fashioned neg. feedback. But the only options I have are:

Fair Play. Sure, he played fair, but stupidly.
Attendance. Yes, the idiot was there the whole game.
Attitude. He was quiet, nothing bad.

So none of those ratings even gives me a chance to leave him a bad rating, and there's no comment to explain why he's such a moron and should be avoided.


To me, this new system defeats the purpose of feedback entirely.

[hatterson]

I don't like the new system at all. I just finished a game, where some idiot over-attacked and gave away an esc game.so I wanted to leave some good old-fashioned neg. feedback. But the only options I have are:

Fair Play. Sure, he played fair, but stupidly.
Attendance. Yes, the idiot was there the whole game.
Attitude. He was quiet, nothing bad.

So none of those ratings even gives me a chance to leave him a bad rating, and there's no comment to explain why he's such a moron and should be avoided.


To me, this new system defeats the purpose of feedback entirely.

imo if it's bad enough for negative feedback then it would fall under the fair play category. If you think his play was fair then it seems you're leaving a negative feedback based on his strategy. If his strategy sucks then his rank will go down and the problem will solve itself (join games with rank requirements from the forums)

[homes32]

I think it is important to know why you were rated the way you were...perhaps requiring a comment as to why and limiting this comment to XX amount of characters would encourage short to the point reasons and stifle a paragraph of ranting. as the system stands I think it is going to be very hard to filter out bad/good players. personally when I looked at feedback I could tell more about the person by the way they wrote feedback and the feedback they left for others then looking at the number of +/- points they had. and while I liked the old system better I understand the need for the change and its a good idea, it just needs to be expanded on.

most importently a link to the game defiantly needs to be put back. if we can't read comments we can at least look at the game logs and chat to get a feel for what kind of player they are.

in response to Keebs2674 regarding replying to feedback, I think this got abused too much with retaliatory remarks. perhaps this will encourage to player at fault to pm/wall comment/game chat to the other players to explain in the case of unintentional deadbeating, etc.

[Keebs2674]

Keebs, the ratings are public, once the game is archived (5 days from completion of game). Old feedback isn't gone, it's still viewable from the profile page and will be for a couple more months at least. We'll decide what to do with it later. There's been talk of moving the comments over to your wall, but since the wall was brand new, we wanted to see how that played out first.

Sorry, I should have been clearer (I'll adjust my comments so there won't be confusion in the future). When I wrote "public", I meant the person who leaves the rating/feedback should be publicly known. I want to know who left me which specific feedback and I want others to know when I leave them feedback. People will be more willing to take feedback seriously if everyone knows who left it.

I know the old feedback isn't gone yet. But it will be in a couple months. Before it's erased, I think each player should at least be able to translate it, should he or she want to, to the new ratings system.

[hatterson]

Keebs, the ratings are public, once the game is archived (5 days from completion of game). Old feedback isn't gone, it's still viewable from the profile page and will be for a couple more months at least. We'll decide what to do with it later. There's been talk of moving the comments over to your wall, but since the wall was brand new, we wanted to see how that played out first.

Sorry, I should have been clearer (I'll adjust my comments so there won't be confusion in the future). When I wrote "public", I meant the person who leaves the rating/feedback should be publicly known. I want to know who left me which specific feedback and I want others to know when I leave them feedback. People will be more willing to take feedback seriously if everyone knows who left it.

I know the old feedback isn't gone yet. But it will be in a couple months. Before it's erased, I think each player should at least be able to translate it, should he or she want to, to the new ratings system.

It is publicly known.

Here's a random person I'm in a game with. http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... e+worry%3F

You can see who left the 5s for him

[quackaddict]

I have a question on what constitutes a "win" for terminator games as pertains to the Terminator Medal. Do you count each person you take out in a terminator game, or do you have to win the game and then you count all of the opponents in the game?

[ukiegirl]

that's ok i figured out my own question

[artyu]

Hi there! Great Change, it's great to see how active our webmaster is!

2 questions:
1. as said before me, there is no rating for a stupid player. maybe "bad player"?
2. should'nt there be Score Boards for medals?

[martyn]

bloody brill, well done who ever come up with this litle nugget and all concernd.all you have to do now is fix my dice lol.