Curse

Akilles · Nov 27, 2005, 06:23 PM // 18:23

Like in WoW, you can get a bad reputation going and be targeted by all since your so hated.

I would like a reputation meter!

For example! When forming a team the players will have a color next to name signifiying if they will stay with you or usually cheats the team.

I went to do a bonus and a guy named Mighty Swords Men went with us, as I only needed the bonus I stated I will do the mission as well to help out. Well he never let on that he was using us to just do the mission, he ran way ahead and as a loyal team we went to res him, he continued to aggro to keep us busy and he ran off to complete mission and we never got the bonus. B4 we went to next town he quit game so we could not yell at him.

In a case like this The leader should have an option box, when members join the team they must agree to mission or mission and bonus. If the team fails then no harm on the reputation comes to you, if the team does not complete bonus (when they pledged to) yet they complete mission that party suffers a reputation loss. If you had an error=7 then THE TEAM IS NOTIFIED! by the game and no penelty to the player or the team as they are one short now.

Now when we form teams we can see who is trustworthy or who is a consistant liar. That title will make people play far more honestly as liars will never be picked. This will also help in trading as ppl can see that if the guy or girl is an honest player there for he he has a better chance of an honest trade.

This idea would be under the leaders control, when formin the team he can toggle the use of this option so you can have a Reputation based mission or standard as is now and no penelty. The reputation will not be character based but will be on the account so either character you use, your reputation follows you.

This will only enhance honest players as only your reputation is on the line, the characters will get no penelty.

benmanhaha · Nov 27, 2005, 06:30 PM // 18:30

So, its kind of like setting guide lines before a mission, and if they are broken, you get a bad rep. Its an interesting idea, but i think it would be stupid for the whole team to get a bad rep because one guy messed up.

Pevil Lihatuh · Nov 27, 2005, 07:20 PM // 19:20

um... dont like the idea. the kind you're describing makes it too easy for people to 'grief' others (i.e. just make themselves party leader and then bad-rep everyone). rep systems in games always end up being abused, or making people who made honest mistakes look bad and end up soloing/quitting. the only game where it works is UO (and then because its a 'murder' count rather than "omg so and so is evil!!!!).

Akilles · Nov 27, 2005, 07:42 PM // 19:42

maybe i did not explain it right, sry if not.

The whole team would not get penalized since you all agree to do say the mission and bonus, so your commited to a sort of virtual contract and you know that if you do not follow through then you get the rep that you are someone who half asses everything. The team will say "wait, we MUST complete the bonus or else." This is also why I said I would want it to be electorial, the leader will decide weather he wants to have ppl promise to do what they set out for. Then you the player can chose to join or not and if you do the teams can see who wants to join who will be trustworthy.

If one person lags out then the said "contract" is nullifed. Nobody loses anything. Noboday can decide if you are evil or not, they have no voice, it is all based on weather you say "Yes! I will do this!" and the servers record that you finish what you commit. The people have no voice in this at all.

What about people who need to leave asap? well often you try and squeeze in a quick game so you then know not to join a group that will require you to commit.

Pevil Lihatuh · Nov 27, 2005, 08:02 PM // 20:02

perhaps. just dont think this really encourages you to team up. the game has always been advertised as good for casual and hardcore gamers alike. and if a casual gamer were to join, then have to leave (casual could mean 'stay at home mum with potential kiddie problems at any time') they'd get penalised.

Personally I think I'd prefer a forum where it was allowed (as long as you had evidence) to say "so and so is a leaver/griefer/whatever".

*shrugs* I'll leave it to see what other people think