Conquer Club

zimmah wrote:

Bones2484 wrote: ie: Someone might believe that a 5 star in Attendance means a player takes a turn every 6 hours while I believe it to be every 8. Is that REALLY that big of a deal?

no, as long as you can still effictefly tell the deadbeaters etc. apart from the rest. because that is after the whole point of the ranking system.

so the rating might be a bit subjective, however they should at some degree have some kind of standard. otherwise you'll not be able to tell who's good and who's bad

exactly, if you give the good people 5s and the bad people 1s then the differences will come out. that'll make it easier to see. in your way, differences will be almost impossible to see.

but, I'm fine with everyone doing what they want because that's their prerogative.

I'm just going to look at it like this:

If someone has a very low rating, I may reconsider if I'm going to play with them.

I've already received a PM from a player berating me because he thought I'd left him a 4 in one category (above average!).

Actually I hadn't left him a 4, I left a 5 because there were no issues in the game, the 4 had been left by someone else...

But the expectation (for a lot of players including myself) despite the 'official' idea of 3 being normal, is that you receive a 5, and anything else is seen as marking you down.

edbeard wrote:lol. you're quite high on yourself on this. average doesn't necessarily mean the same to everyone.

It's my right to rate people as I see fit and your right to rate people as you see fit. Don't tell people how to rate when they're just doing what they see as right. That's quite arrogant of you.

look at the game instructions i'm not talking bullshit when i say 3 is the average, and neither i want to 'tell people what to do' it's just i would like to have accurate ratings so that they are actually usefull! if you just mess up someone's ratings by giving them 5's for no particular reason, you'll only make them look better then they are. and you'll make the system more prone to errors.

mightyredarmy wrote:I've already received a PM from a player berating me because he thought I'd left him a 4 in one category (above average!).

Actually I hadn't left him a 4, I left a 5 because there were no issues in the game, the 4 had been left by someone else...

But the expectation (for a lot of players including myself) despite the 'official' idea of 3 being normal, is that you receive a 5, and anything else is seen as marking you down.

that was before the update, that's fixed now, above average now really means above average, so he shouldn't complain (explain it to him if neccesary)

edbeard wrote:

zimmah wrote:

Bones2484 wrote: ie: Someone might believe that a 5 star in Attendance means a player takes a turn every 6 hours while I believe it to be every 8. Is that REALLY that big of a deal?

no, as long as you can still effictefly tell the deadbeaters etc. apart from the rest. because that is after the whole point of the ranking system.

so the rating might be a bit subjective, however they should at some degree have some kind of standard. otherwise you'll not be able to tell who's good and who's bad

exactly, if you give the good people 5s and the bad people 1s then the differences will come out. that'll make it easier to see. in your way, differences will be almost impossible to see.

but, I'm fine with everyone doing what they want because that's their prerogative.

nothing wrong with giving the truly good people a 5, but what will you give to the truly good people if you gave all the others (except the truly bad ones) a 5 already?

suggs wrote:It would just be easier if went back to the old system.

There are two polls (one in this forum, one is suggestions and Bugs ) and a suggestion (that I made)... so far. I don't know if Lack will pay any mind, but it might be worth trying.

so how would you rate a hotel if the results of your plans were determined by random DICE.


stop and think for two minutes and you'll realize you can't implement a true 5 star rating when the results of the game are determined by a random factor.

Using your logic you'll be rating people by the luck of their dice. The only way somebody is going to go above and beyond in such a simple game is if the dice are on their side. Otherwise they'll just be doing the best they can with the dice they are dealt. So if I get really lucky dice and easily pick apart the board I guess I deserve a 5 star rating. If I get just average dice I only get a 3. It just doesn't make much sense to me.

Molacole wrote:so how would you rate a hotel if the results of your plans were determined by random DICE.


stop and think for two minutes and you'll realize you can't implement a true 5 star rating when the results of the game are determined by a random factor.

Using your logic you'll be rating people by the luck of their dice. The only way somebody is going to go above and beyond in such a simple game is if the dice are on their side. Otherwise they'll just be doing the best they can with the dice they are dealt. So if I get really lucky dice and easily pick apart the board I guess I deserve a 5 star rating. If I get just average dice I only get a 3. It just doesn't make much sense to me.

Since none of the 4 categories deal with the dice, I don't follow your point.

Molacole wrote:so how would you rate a hotel if the results of your plans were determined by random DICE.


stop and think for two minutes and you'll realize you can't implement a true 5 star rating when the results of the game are determined by a random factor.

Using your logic you'll be rating people by the luck of their dice. The only way somebody is going to go above and beyond in such a simple game is if the dice are on their side. Otherwise they'll just be doing the best they can with the dice they are dealt. So if I get really lucky dice and easily pick apart the board I guess I deserve a 5 star rating. If I get just average dice I only get a 3. It just doesn't make much sense to me.

What the hell are you talking about? The ratings have nothing to do with how good their dice were, or if they won or lost. It has to do with their performance. You obviously have failed to read the forums where the mods specified that 20+ times.

yeah nevermind that last post I was responding to a post I forgot to quote and I don't feel like finding it.

Molacole wrote:so how would you rate a hotel if the results of your plans were determined by random DICE.


stop and think for two minutes and you'll realize you can't implement a true 5 star rating when the results of the game are determined by a random factor.

Using your logic you'll be rating people by the luck of their dice. The only way somebody is going to go above and beyond in such a simple game is if the dice are on their side. Otherwise they'll just be doing the best they can with the dice they are dealt. So if I get really lucky dice and easily pick apart the board I guess I deserve a 5 star rating. If I get just average dice I only get a 3. It just doesn't make much sense to me.

it's NOT about the skill (and therefore also not the dice, and even if it was based on skill, you can be really skilled and still be unlucky with the dice. shit happens) of someone, it's about how someone behaves, and that's not affected by the dice

except maybe for 'dice complaining' which is part of someones attitude.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

suggs wrote:It would just be easier if went back to the old system.

There are two polls (one in this forum, one is suggestions and Bugs ) and a suggestion (that I made)... so far. I don't know if Lack will pay any mind, but it might be worth trying.

i want to keep this system, just with comments.

To all those that say they wouldnt give 5 stars if a player made a mistake or didnt play SUPER GOOD.....

Isnt this what the rankings are for?
U suck=cook
Good=top rank.

Why give less than 5 if the player played on time and was nice to play with?
Of course, if he suicides or do something really reaallly dumb then sure, 5 stars isnt justified.

With the way some of you top ranks are thinking, i will be getting 3 stars cuz im not as good as you....duh!

Btw, they ask for fair play, not how good you are.

Give me a 3 under fair play even if I just played well (and njot to your pro-standards) and ill make sure to give you the same or less for attitude.

SlayerQC wrote:To all those that say they wouldnt give 5 stars if a player made a mistake or didnt play SUPER GOOD.....

Isnt this what the rankings are for?
U suck=cook
Good=top rank.

Why give less than 5 if the player played on time and was nice to play with?
Of course, if he suicides or do something really reaallly dumb then sure, 5 stars isnt justified.

With the way some of you top ranks are thinking, i will be getting 3 stars cuz im not as good as you....duh!

Btw, they ask for fair play, not how good you are.

Give me a 3 under fair play even if I just played well (and njot to your pro-standards) and ill make sure to give you the same or less for attitude.

That's FINE. That's what it's SUPPOSED to be like. You obvioulsy fail to realize that the mods have already SAID THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. It has NOTHING to do with an elitist attitude, it has to do with the fact that the mods say USE 3 AS AVERAGE.

Am I the only one that finds this hilarious that people are still trying to argue otherwise? 3 under fair play is EXACTLY what it says - average. Figure it out genius.

At least it's official now, 3 = average!


How can it be "official"?
It is not moderated in any way!
Leave any rating you wish, to whoever you wish.

Great attendance = 1
Poor attendance = 3
No attendance = 4
Deadbeating =5
Having a headache = 2
playing zimmah = 1

Hrvat wrote:At least it's official now, 3 = average!


How can it be "official"?
It is not moderated in any way!
Leave any rating you wish, to whoever you wish.

Great attendance = 1
Poor attendance = 3
No attendance = 4
Deadbeating =5
Having a headache = 2
playing zimmah = 1

Dictionary definition of official:
3. authorized or issued authoritatively
5. appointed or authorized to act in a designated capacity

You lose.

zimmah wrote:

Bones2484 wrote: ie: Someone might believe that a 5 star in Attendance means a player takes a turn every 6 hours while I believe it to be every 8. Is that REALLY that big of a deal?

no, as long as you can still effictefly tell the deadbeaters etc. apart from the rest. because that is after the whole point of the ranking system.

so the rating might be a bit subjective, however they should at some degree have some kind of standard. otherwise you'll not be able to tell who's good and who's bad

No, you cannot. Some people think it is just fine to "talk crap" in the games, insult each other, etc. They won't rate each other poorly. But, a lot of folks would just as soon avoid that stuff.


Also, a lot of people always used to give negatives for insane or childish reasons. With comments, between the comment and the response, you could usually tell when you had a complete jerk .. and more often than not the jerk was the one LEAVING the negative. Now, there is nothing. PLUS, it is hard to even pick out who left a negative.

Then you have the whole "real time" issue. Some (primarily freemium) folks think that every 1v1 or freestyle game is just "supposed to" be a "real time" game... and would neg or give a nuetral to folks who didn't.

It is absolutely possible to have a rating system that is meaningful without requiring the mods to "nanny". I would actually be fine with a return to the old system, but NO mod review (except maybe ... and only maybe... for seriously nasty language and serious type threats)
I don't think most people really and truly care if they get a "gold star", other than the person who gets it. What folks really want to know is the negative stuff. The kudos are fine for a wall or PM, but feedback is to give other people an idea of how someone plays and whether you think they will make a sportsmanlike opponent or not. The current system doesn't do that.

Dictionary definition of official:
3. authorized or issued authoritatively
5. appointed or authorized to act in a designated capacity

You lose.

you get in your games:

attendance = 1
fair play = 1
attitude = 1
fair play =1

YOU lose.
It makes no difference if system is "authorized or issued authoritatively" or "appointed or authorized to act in a designated capacity".
Who cares.
Your well deserved 1's stay.

Just follow this link and you'll see what I mean:
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... =Astroheat


-----------------------------

Hrvat wrote:

Dictionary definition of official:
3. authorized or issued authoritatively
5. appointed or authorized to act in a designated capacity

You lose.

you get in your games:

attendance = 1
fair play = 1
attitude = 1
fair play =1

YOU lose.
It makes no difference if system is "authorized or issued authoritatively" or "appointed or authorized to act in a designated capacity".
Who cares.
Your well deserved 1's stay.

If I recall you asked "how could it be official??"

I, quite simply, refuted your cynicism.

Hrvat wrote:At least it's official now, 3 = average!


How can it be "official"?
It is not moderated in any way!
Leave any rating you wish, to whoever you wish.

Great attendance = 1
Poor attendance = 3
No attendance = 4
Deadbeating =5
Having a headache = 2
playing zimmah = 1

dude, watch the updated instructions page, watch the updated rating page, mouse over your stars if you want, you'll see. it is official, ask any moderator here, from the very beginning of this system the system was supposed to be like this, like said before go figure genius!

Hrvat wrote:

Dictionary definition of official:
3. authorized or issued authoritatively
5. appointed or authorized to act in a designated capacity

You lose.

you get in your games:

attendance = 1
fair play = 1
attitude = 1
fair play =1

YOU lose.
It makes no difference if system is "authorized or issued authoritatively" or "appointed or authorized to act in a designated capacity".
Who cares.
Your well deserved 1's stay.

Just follow this link and you'll see what I mean:
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... =Astroheat


-----------------------------

just to make sure you wouldn't f*ck my ratings up, i put you on my ignore list.

People who expect 5's for everything need to change their mindset. If you go play a normal game, play one turn a day, don't say a word in chat, ho-hum, you're done, don't expect 5's for everything. You're not getting rated LOWER when you get a 3, you're getting rated average, because let's face it, you were an average player in an average game. If you don't impress someone with your gameplay, or chat them up, or whatever, don't expect 4's and 5's. 5 IS NOT THE AVERAGE PEOPLE, 3 IS! Most of you are average, or it woudln't be called AVERAGE! lol Seriously, we need a mindset shift here. Don't automatically EXPECT a 4 or a 5. EXPECT A 3!

wicked wrote:People who expect 5's for everything need to change their mindset. If you go play a normal game, play one turn a day, don't say a word in chat, ho-hum, you're done, don't expect 5's for everything. You're not getting rated LOWER when you get a 3, you're getting rated average, because let's face it, you were an average player in an average game. If you don't impress someone with your gameplay, or chat them up, or whatever, don't expect 4's and 5's. 5 IS NOT THE AVERAGE PEOPLE, 3 IS! Most of you are average, or it woudln't be called AVERAGE! lol Seriously, we need a mindset shift here. Don't automatically EXPECT a 4 or a 5. EXPECT A 3!

Although this is literally nearly word for word what I've been saying, maybe a mod saying it will have greater effect.

Well I can't keep up with all the threads and what's being said. Just posted this because someone came in chat upset they got a 4 for attitude when they never said a word maybe other than "gg" in chat. I'm like dude, you should've gotten a 3, so quit your whining!

It'll take some time to get used to the new system and change the "automatic 5" rating. I'm guilty of this myself and will rectify it.

Wow, just looking at these poll results is disappointing. Looks like we all have some public education to do.