A player Ranking System

Lots of players complain about idiots ruining the game for them...first off id like to say ... "get over it" and "ignore it" and "its really not that big of a deal you stuck up people" and "its a freakin game"

next id like to propose a Ebay like rating system. When players are in a group..they are give the option to rate their team members from a scale. i was thinking a 3 level scale..."Good, Ok, Bad" This can only be accessed when in a group...

So your fighting, then some guy starts freakin out with the map, or aggros everything and your party dies.. or just says "You guys suck, instead of giving things a chance im leaving" and they leave...you will be given the option to Rate this behavior...

However, to prevent one idiot from spamming everyone and giving people bad ratings for no reason, it would have to be a majority vote.

Also, the vote option wouldnt appear, until after the 6 person groups come up.

Every Month your rating points could go away, to have a clean slate.

Also, they could expand on this idea, and make it class specific also...at the end of the missions you can give ratings too.. like "Good ok Bad Monk" so people know how good the person is at doing theyre job.

EDIT : No more GOOD and OK... only BAD rating

or, you could just refer this guy as a good party member to someone you know, or add him/her to your friends list.
Not to flame or anything, but i don't like the idea, giving ratings will just make people complain more. I mean, like "Hey, why didn't i get a good rating, i was good, man You guys sucked!"

good idea...

take out the good and ok.. leave only the Bad rating

I think a rating system is not a bad ideas but it have to be conditional when you "vote" such as actually in the party with them. That way and evil guild can't have fun destroying people.

I also like the idea of of only voting "your good" so that stops the potential abuse.

I would also restrict voting until ascension if you have an "bad voting" in place. You may have Pvp players rushing through voting down people who are 1st time players that just got to yak's end. Or the sterotypical war voting down the healer "your not healing goog enough" that tend to rush in.

at least then we could find out who has the biggest problems and err ... likes to complain more ... in turn the person at the bottom of the list would probably be alot more enjoyable to be with.

Ya but If some guys is a complete jerk it would go like this.
oMg WTf stuPid n00bs i f**** pWn U.

He gives everyone a "Bad" rating

He said it would have to be a majority vote. Do you know what "majority" means, or did you just not read his post thoroughly enough?

I like the idea, but it could be exploited. I have heard stories of people who grouped with a guild (PUGs mostly) and the guild was rather rude to them--excluding them, not rezzing, etc. With this rating system, the guild could just all vote someone to bad, even if that person has done nothing wrong. There would have to be a way around that, but I can't think of any feasible way right now.

Also, if there's only the option of a "good" rating, a guild could group together and just rate eachother by majority, similar to what could be done with the bad rating. It's just too easy to exploit, but if there were was to make it harder to exploit, I'd be all for it. It's a great idea on paper, but the flaws are too many.

i went over that... it would have to be majority...or simply, more then 4 votes to be given a rating...if only 1 person votes, nothing happens to you, except it records(ONLY for the one grouping) that 1 person has voted you

Yes, the rating system is nice, but is it needed? All it will do is give people another reason not to invite you into their party, like oh, i see that you only got an ok rating, im only looking for good rating ppl. If you're charasmatic enough, a decent person, then you don't need a rating system to get into a group, just to show off how nice you are. If you get an idiot in your group, kick him and invite someone else. Plus, with this whole rating system, you would run into the whole, bunch of idiots with a bad rating grouping together, just to vote themselves good.

all good points... the first reply said similar things...

so i figured. take away the Good and Ok...and just leave the BAD.

to fix the bads grouping together..the Bads arent allowed to vote on another bad.

That would be interesting tho, just because you got a bad, now you're not able to group with other misfits? So, in other words, the devs, by implimenting this, would be discriminating against ppl with bad ratings by not letting them group with a certain person. And that would also bring up, how many bads could you have in a group? 2, 3? And if you won't allow them in your group, then they won't be able to play the game, as they will not be able to group up with any others with poor or bad rating.

Um, I'm confused, does this rating system have to do with skill or attitude?

Just because someone is an ass doesn't make them bad, and vice versa, just because someone is nice doesn't make them good.

I personally don't like the idea of a rating system, I think the fame system is already bad because now new players to the game who may be very good, won't get into any good groups or guilds, because their rank isn't high enough.

I think it is just up to your self to maintain who was a good group mate and who wasn't also by friends references.

-Reiden

^
|
|

Exactly!

both...it has to do with wheteher or not you feel like grouping with them..

if theyre a jackass, then you dont have to group with them...

if theyre just plain bad.. you dont have to group with them...

though id encourage only using the rating system for people that are jackasses

if there is only a BAD rating, then people would usually tend to be on there best behavior...if they suck, but are nice, people wouldnt rate them bad, because they know they are trying.

still there will be those obnoxious jerks who vote you bad just because!

i think there should be a different ranking system for the HoH. If some1 plays in the HoH for a LONG LONG time, they will eventually get a high rank, even if they suck. Also, if a crappy person happens upon an elite group, they may get a high rank by just tagging along. I think they should have a skill ranking. They should track your activities, for example a healer could be tracked by how quickly his teamates die, or how many people a elementalist or warrior kills, just something like that.

Original, and a bit of wishful thinking derrty, but said ranking system would also just depend on the people you group with, i mean if you're a monk, and an idiot runs ahead and keeps dying in PvP, then really, is it your fault. Or if you're an ele, and no one attacks on target, is it your fault the guy isnt dead?

The only way any rating system would work, if its not controlled by the players. Theres always 2 views and without a third party watching theres never going to be a right answer.

A rating system that would work would be server stats based off something like PVE per mission win/lose/tries and PVP win/lose/time per group. Both numbers cumulitive average from the beginning of post searing.

Maybe have a toggle that would add those 2 numbers above/below player names.

Don't support this idea at all. In addition to the clear abuse of the system, there is also this issue:

Player A: LvL20 Ranger/Monk LFG doing Mission and/or Bonus
Player B: *Whipser* You can join us if you like, one sec for invite
Player A: *Whisper* Ok
Player B: *Whisper* Sorry the Party leader checked your rating and its currently on bad... so your not welcome.

See where this is going? This system would add to the divid in players on the server... and would encorange flaming.