POLL - ?New rating system better or worse?

[mightyredarmy]

I've read a lot of debate about the feedback / ratings system over the past few days, but I haven't seen anyone measuring the numbers for and against the new system, forgive me if there is already a poll and I've missed it. Please vote and comment, thanks.

[Bones2484]

No one has made a poll because it's only been two days. Can we at least give it some time to start working itself out?

I'm abstaining from a vote for now.

[Pedronicus]

I think it's unfortunate that if you haven't played a doubles game without that person on your team, missing out a 5 stars for teamwork subtracts from a players average.

[Bones2484]

I think it's unfortunate that if you haven't played a doubles game without that person on your team, missing out a 5 stars for teamwork subtracts from a players average.

No, it doesnt. Giving 0 stars (or not being able to score teamwork) will cause that attribute to not even be counted for the overall score.

For example, if I give you a 4 for Attendance/Attitude/Fair Play your average score is (4+4+4)/3 = 4. The teamwork score, being blank, does not count into the equation.

[svenny24]

i think it's stupid, i liked to read feedbacks, now you know nothing about you're opponent

[oVo]

It's too early to really evaluate, but it certainly won't prevent you from joining games with players you might have avoided using the old system.

[zimmah]

I've read a lot of debate about the feedback / ratings system over the past few days, but I haven't seen anyone measuring the numbers for and against the new system, forgive me if there is already a poll and I've missed it. Please vote and comment, thanks.

i don't say it's better, neither it's worse.

as it is now, it's far worse, but with a few tweaks, it might get far better.

[edbeard]

I think it's obviously worse and I think everyone knew it was going to be worse than the previous system. You can't compare subjective numbers with words. Everyone knew this. It's not about trying to get to a better system. It was about getting rid of a system that had way too much maintenance (this is why the system was so good btw. the amount of work it took to upkeep made it useful. unfortunately it just wasn't something that made sense to have).

[Matroshka]

I think it's a bit early to tell.

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

I like it alot more and thats coming from the player who by far had the most positive feedback that was lost.

[Bones2484]

I like it alot more and thats coming from the player who by far had the most positive feedback that was lost.

You had to just throw in that self-gratification... didn't you?

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

I like it alot more and thats coming from the player who by far had the most positive feedback that was lost.

You had to just throw in that self-gratification... didn't you?

read in between the lines if you like

[zimmah]

I like it alot more and thats coming from the player who by far had the most positive feedback that was lost.

You had to just throw in that self-gratification... didn't you?

well he has an impressive feedback history. 16 pages of nearly only positives and some neutrals, hardly any negs if any (first neg doesn't count as it isn't truly a neg but just a joke)

[Bones2484]

well he has an impressive feedback history. 16 pages of nearly only positives and some neutrals, hardly any negs if any (first neg doesn't count as it isn't truly a neg but just a joke)

I'm well aware... I was just laughing to myself because I don't think JR can make a post where he doesn't build his own ego in some fashion

Anyways. The more I look at the new feedback and read about it, I like it. I think, given a few weeks of evening out, it will be very nice to have.

[Eliminator15]

I hate the ratings, I hate them. Now, because you can't go straight to someone's feedback nobody will look at it. Already I've seen some really good players that are great at teamwork and attendance getting a 1 or a 2 on those from some really horrible players who don't know what they're doing. I like the feedback. Brink them back.

Ratings

[PLAYER57832]

I not only hate it, I started a poll (before this one), and tried to come up with a different idea (2 actually) ... in Suggs and Bugs. But, we'll see.

The biggest problem is there is no real way to know WHY someone is getting a bad rating ... or who the folks are that give all those undeserved bad ratings.

[Stegura]

I like the old system because it felt more personal

[Blastshot]

it should be 3 stars, not 5. 1=neg,2=average,3=good. but keep the 4 catagories

[FabledIntegral]

Reasons why this system is worse -

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... assassin07

[Hrvat]

Do you wish to know how well our new rating system works?
Follow link below:
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... =Astroheat

[JimRocky]

i think it's stupid, i liked to read feedbacks, now you know nothing about you're opponent

Well I wouldn't say the new one is stupid, but I have to agree with the rest of your statement. I find that reading the feedbacks give you more of a feel for the type of player than silents stars whose relative values are not even entirely clear amongst all participants.

I guess time will give a better indication of how it will all shake out.

[TaCktiX]

The new rating system needs some help. Due to the ratings medal, people are encouraged to just straight spam ratings, not caring if they even paid attention to the player in question during this or that game. So you have assassin07-like pages. And ratings are straight impersonal. With Feedback you would get some cool stuff like "wow, didn't see him coming, gg" or "hilarious guy in chat, killer strategist in the game". Now you get a 5 in 3 categories, which mean nothing.

I think instead of encouraging spam and impersonality, that comments be ALLOWED (but not required) on ratings to explain why the rating was given (if people are so inclined). Also, remove the ratings medal. It's thoroughly pointless as most people will just hit up each and every single person in the games that are finished with a 5-5-5 rating so they're making no enemies and getting a medal at the same time. I personally am maintaining my previous system of only leaving a rating (feedback in the previous case) if something really impressed me about the player in question.

[detlef]

It is really unfathomable that anyone could see this an improvement. If you thought it was hard to monitor the old system, try getting everyone to grade in a consistent manner. It will be nothing short of impossible. Besides the fact that plenty wont bother to read any guides that are made to explain this, others still will sabotage the system out of principle or will simply be a slave to human nature and default to the "anything less than 5 is failure" system. Our own golden boy Johnny has given out nothing but 5s, that will be the norm. That will be average, so everyone will end up with a rating above 4.5 unless they're a complete douche. Of course, how will we ever know what you're true rating is.

Did you play some of the few people who will actually grade by the letter of the law and give you a 3 for merely being civil and timely and not cheating? Or did you play the types who dole out 5s for basically everyone? Nobody will ever know and we'll have all these caveats. "Well my rating would be higher but the guys I roll with actually understand how to grade." "Sure, that guy's got a 4.8 but that's just because all his cheater friends prop up each other's ratings", blah, blah.

So, what if anything will we learn from these ratings? That absolute a-holes, cheats, and deadbeats will be exposed. Something the other thing did just fine.

My guess is that the mods realize how pointless ratings really are and have simply devised a useless system so we'll just quit bothering to rate anyone. Well, that and now we can just start bitching at each other via pm rather than wasting their time haggling over the rating we got. Well, actually, I'm sure it's just a matter of time before people start deluging them with e-tickets pissed that they got a 3 instead of a 5 so their precious rating just went down.

I'm just glad I'm not them.

[Luvr]

I don't think the new system is that bad and people seem to be making tons of predictions about it without even giving it time. We've had the old system for.....how long? Long before I ever got here...we should at least give the new system a chance before bashing these people's hard work.

Anyway, I don't think the old system was that great. I think now that it's less personal you're more likely to get more ratings and thus it'd become more accurate. Previously I had over 900 games played and only about 63-8 feedbacks. I joined a game the other day and due to me not realizing it had started I didn't start my first turn until almost 4 minutes into it and already someone was like "oh look at her feedback, she's a deadbeater and misses turns on purpose".... I was being judged on a couple bad feedback even though I hadn't even missed a turn and even though I replied to my negs. And at least a couple of my feedback could have been deleted for being against the rules or whatever I just never bothered to open a ticket over it.

And if you really want to take feedback into consideration...it's still there...

[detlef]

I don't think the new system is that bad and people seem to be making tons of predictions about it without even giving it time. We've had the old system for.....how long? Long before I ever got here...we should at least give the new system a chance before bashing these people's hard work.

Anyway, I don't think the old system was that great. I think now that it's less personal you're more likely to get more ratings and thus it'd become more accurate. Previously I had over 900 games played and only about 63-8 feedbacks. I joined a game the other day and due to me not realizing it had started I didn't start my first turn until almost 4 minutes into it and already someone was like "oh look at her feedback, she's a deadbeater and misses turns on purpose".... I was being judged on a couple bad feedback even though I hadn't even missed a turn and even though I replied to my negs. And at least a couple of my feedback could have been deleted for being against the rules or whatever I just never bothered to open a ticket over it.

And if you really want to take feedback into consideration...it's still there...

I'm curious how you expect it to work itself out over time? How is an ever-changing community of players who can't agree on a damned thing going to come to a consensus on how to grade people. I mean, without that, the system is completely useless and so far we are 100% polarized on the topic. If those who think the default should be a 5 don't change their ways (and they won't) the system will show us nothing.

Hell, I'd be among those inclined to have 3 be default but couldn't help but wonder "what was wrong" with a player in a game I was in who had a 3.7. Edited to add: Well, he's a 4.3 now. Imagine that.

So, just curious, from those who think we need to give it time, how do you see this evolving. Also, who wants to make a bet that within months, basically everyone will have the same rating and that rating will be nearly 5?