Add a player rating feature?

[ihack4fun]

I've heard a lot about players being verbally abused and opponents only going every 3 days (I've suffered from both), what if a player rating feature was added? Such that after the game you can rate your opponent and leave a comment about their attitude. Then there could be a way to look at and punish players who are vulgar or intentionally delay games for weeks. A safety on the system so these players also don't just give everyone 1 star would be a review of players who always give low ratings. What do people think? (I know this would be a lot of work for programming and such but lets just see if people like the concept. Also possibly elect admins who have played a lot to run it to decrease work load)

[MagElf]

rating other players may be the second best way. If you loose a game you potentially give not those good ratings, as when you win a game.


What, if they implement a new feature like: "Average response-time" of a player in a game.

And on top you can build an average "Average response-time" of all games of that player.

I personally enjoy it much more, if my opponent is an average-1h/turn player, than an average-12h/turn player.

With the first player I play 24 turns per day. With the second only 2 turns per day. Assumed, that I'm a very fast playing Gamer too!

This performance-index of all players is easy to determine.

[jetricakerempuh]

when talking about profiles, i think it would be nice to see some player's details and statistics. At own stats like total games played, win/lose ratio, most points won (in one game), maybe some link to full profile on site... etc.

[ihack4fun]

Yes, that's probably better mag. Ur lucky that u got fast moving players. The way some of my games go I'd love to get 2 turns per day. At one point, one of my games was going at 2 turns a week!

[Eijolend]

So basically you want to publicly outlaw everyone who is not able or doesn't want to play all the time from the league? No thanks!

Also rating systems in competitive games tend to be a bad idea. Just look how awfully trolled systems like XBoxLive are.

[MagElf]

(08-15-2012 05:41 PM)Eijolend Wrote:  So basically you want to publicly outlaw everyone who is not able or doesn't want to play all the time from the league? No thanks!

Also rating systems in competitive games tend to be a bad idea. Just look how awfully trolled systems like XBoxLive are.

Lets say, the Outwitters-Server calculates the data of each player and found this summary:

e.g. )
Type A (fast player) : They play 6 or more turns/game/day
Type B (normal player) : They play 1-5 turns/game/day
Type C (slow player) : They play less than 1 turn/game/day

33% of the user are e.g. Type A, 33% Type B and 33% Type C.


Isn't it a good idea to create an option in the "Create Game Dialog" in which you can select :
- I want to play a fast game
- I want to play a normal game
- I want to play a slow game

Those three types of Games match to the types of Players. And in first order you get a type C player, when you want to play a slow game, and so on ...

[Eijolend]

That would surely be better than the rating feature, MagElf. My post was mainly a response to the OP.

I still don't like the idea of segregating the player base though - probably you would have to introduce seperate ranking systems for everyone, because it feels weird for two players to be placed in the same system if there isn't even a chance they will ever play each other.
Also at high levels (and I could imagine at very low levels) the player population is already very thin, so you are repeatedly playing the same handful of people and splitting the players apart would make it even more problematic - not every ST falls in your fast category.

[ihack4fun]

Yes. This was why I was thinking of a more attitude based system. Not "punish the slow players" but "punish people who curse / intentionally drag out there losses"

[Fluffysox]

IMO, no thanks.

This system can be abused by picking on someone, even if they are a good player. And what if the player COULD only play once every 3 days due to irl stuff? I think shaming them publicly on a game they enjoyed and possibly spent money on isn't going to attract people.

[MagElf]

(08-16-2012 03:29 PM)Fluffysox Wrote:  IMO, no thanks.

This system can be abused by picking on someone, even if they are a good player. And what if the player COULD only play once every 3 days due to irl stuff? I think shaming them publicly on a game they enjoyed and possibly spent money on isn't going to attract people.

such a player should then start a game with "play a slow game".

When I am a fast player, then I never ever want to play against a player, who needs 3 days for each turn. That means, that I need weeks or months to end a game against him.