[PC] Luck Related Tags ( Lucky / Unlucky )
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:55 pmWhen leaving ratings for opposing players, there should be the tags: Lucky, and Unlucky
Conquer Club
Conquer Club, a free online multiplayer variation of a popular world domination board game.
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/
[PC] Luck Related Tags ( Lucky / Unlucky )
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=471&t=74810
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:55 pmRe: Tags
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:59 pmCould we also add "newb" and "noob"
Re: Tags
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 10:05 pmi was just thinking of this idea,
I know the dice are very random but i think a lucky tag should be added
I know the dice are very random but i think a lucky tag should be added
Re: Tags
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:35 pmmaybe you could you could change the title to something more descriptive, like "Rating Tags: Lucky and Unlucky"
Re: Tags
Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 5:48 amI was thinking of a tag that could be added: cool name
put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 12:17 pmcould we simply add a lucky button to the tags when rating games, a large number of speed games are won by luck(i dont mind cause its in my favour as well) but for such occasions where there was an extreme edge by luck just throw a button in ratings that says "lucky"
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 1:45 pmshaggybb wrote:could we simply add a lucky button to the tags when rating games, a large number of speed games are won by luck(i dont mind cause its in my favour as well) but for such occasions where there was an extreme edge by luck just throw a button in ratings that says "lucky"
But what would that gain someone? Aren't the purpose of the tags to note something about how a player plays the game or how they react to it, so that players in the future can use those tags to choose to play against (or not play against) those players? "Lucky" wouldn't really have any meaning in this context, since "lucky" would change from game to game. There wouldn't be any reason not to play against someone with the "lucky" tag, because there would be no reason to believe they would continue to be lucky.
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 2:20 pmI think that a 'Lucky' tag would help CC cut back on the spiteful feedback left by players who lost to the dice.
Instead of an angry loser rating the opponent(s) as 'Poor Strategy' with all 1 stars, the angry loser could just leave the 'Lucky Sod' tag and also cover up the embarassment of losing to lots of people
Instead of an angry loser rating the opponent(s) as 'Poor Strategy' with all 1 stars, the angry loser could just leave the 'Lucky Sod' tag and also cover up the embarassment of losing to lots of people
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 2:24 pmManBungalow wrote:I think that a 'Lucky' tag would help CC cut back on the spiteful feedback left by players who lost to the dice.
Instead of an angry loser rating the opponent(s) as 'Poor Strategy' with all 1 stars, the angry loser could just leave the 'Lucky Sod' tag and also cover up the embarassment of losing to lots of people
You make an interesting point...one I hadn't considered.
And if I believed it would have that affect, I would support it wholeheartedly. Sadly, I don't for a moment believe it would have any impact at all on those who respond in spiteful manner to losses.
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 4:15 pmHere's the problem I see
I win 3 games... ManBungalo rates me "Lucky"... Woodruff rates me "Lucky" someone else doesn't rate me lucky. Against ManBungalo I began with a bonus and moved first... so he rates me lucky after my win. Against Woodruff, I moved first and managed to break a bonus that Woodruff had with a great first round of dice. I reinforce into Woodruff's bonus so he can't retake it and he fails to do so. I then win the game. He rates me Lucky.
I play a game against a 3rd player where we are both fighting for seperate bonuses... eventually the fighting becomes more and more scarce and desperate as we fight over 1 part of the map, each drawing on chained reserves until one runs out of chained reserves to bring in. Then I win that game and take the bonus because I have more chained men that I can keep up the fight longer in that area of the map. I don't get rated lucky for it.
My question is... in anygame you play, wouldn't you consider yourself at least partially lucky? Think about it.
a) You have a great drop, have a bonus and defend it... you then wipe the board and win... you've got the lucky start.
b) You have a horrible drop compared to your opponent who you both consider to now be "lucky" because of his start, but something happens... you have great dice and manage to break him!
. So all of a sudden, the "Luck" has shifted from his start to the luck of your improbable-supposed-to-be-impossible round of breaking his bonus. If he comes back and wins... you say he was lucky fromt he drop. If you win... he says you were lucky for your rolls on the first round.
c) Even in the extreme cases... someone attacks, and can't win the first attack, then they attack again and again and again before it's their opponent's first turn, they lose all the 2 vs 2 rolls and then complain that their opponent was "lucky" because their own attacks (all 12 in the first round) lost them everything.
Where do we finally draw the line saying that luck is something that you can rate someone on? I shudder to think about Codeblue1018's rating system after that. lol.
Jasmine
I win 3 games... ManBungalo rates me "Lucky"... Woodruff rates me "Lucky" someone else doesn't rate me lucky. Against ManBungalo I began with a bonus and moved first... so he rates me lucky after my win. Against Woodruff, I moved first and managed to break a bonus that Woodruff had with a great first round of dice. I reinforce into Woodruff's bonus so he can't retake it and he fails to do so. I then win the game. He rates me Lucky.
I play a game against a 3rd player where we are both fighting for seperate bonuses... eventually the fighting becomes more and more scarce and desperate as we fight over 1 part of the map, each drawing on chained reserves until one runs out of chained reserves to bring in. Then I win that game and take the bonus because I have more chained men that I can keep up the fight longer in that area of the map. I don't get rated lucky for it.
My question is... in anygame you play, wouldn't you consider yourself at least partially lucky? Think about it.
a) You have a great drop, have a bonus and defend it... you then wipe the board and win... you've got the lucky start.
b) You have a horrible drop compared to your opponent who you both consider to now be "lucky" because of his start, but something happens... you have great dice and manage to break him!
. So all of a sudden, the "Luck" has shifted from his start to the luck of your improbable-supposed-to-be-impossible round of breaking his bonus. If he comes back and wins... you say he was lucky fromt he drop. If you win... he says you were lucky for your rolls on the first round.c) Even in the extreme cases... someone attacks, and can't win the first attack, then they attack again and again and again before it's their opponent's first turn, they lose all the 2 vs 2 rolls and then complain that their opponent was "lucky" because their own attacks (all 12 in the first round) lost them everything.
Where do we finally draw the line saying that luck is something that you can rate someone on? I shudder to think about Codeblue1018's rating system after that. lol.
Jasmine
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 9:30 amI think this is a fairly simple and good suggestion. I don't think adding a lucky tag would be effective for anything more than adding some diversity to the ratings system. Right now I don't think the current ratings tags account for the aspect of luck (which in alot of cases CC experiences) so I am all for tags related to luck. There could be a bunch of new tags to go into the lucky chategory:
-Good Dice
-Bad Dice
-Good Drop
-Bad Drop
-Lucky
-Unlucky
etc etc
-Good Dice
-Bad Dice
-Good Drop
-Bad Drop
-Lucky
-Unlucky
etc etc
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 2:23 pmgimil wrote:I think this is a fairly simple and good suggestion. I don't think adding a lucky tag would be effective for anything more than adding some diversity to the ratings system. Right now I don't think the current ratings tags account for the aspect of luck (which in alot of cases CC experiences) so I am all for tags related to luck. There could be a bunch of new tags to go into the lucky chategory:
-Good Dice
-Bad Dice
-Good Drop
-Bad Drop
-Lucky
-Unlucky
etc etc
None of those would have any bearing on future games, and isn't that really the purpose behind rating tags?
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 2:41 pmgimil wrote:I think this is a fairly simple and good suggestion. I don't think adding a lucky tag would be effective for anything more than adding some diversity to the ratings system. Right now I don't think the current ratings tags account for the aspect of luck (which in alot of cases CC experiences) so I am all for tags related to luck.
I guess the primary question here then is...what are the rating tags for?
I have always presumed they were meant as "signals" (both good and bad) of expected future play from a particular player.
If I'm right in that regard, then the suggestion doesn't make sense, as "luck" in any given game isn't something that can be predicted in any way.
If I'm wrong in that regard, then the suggestion does make sense, since they would be meant more as a "why I lost to this guy" marker.
But if I'm wrong, I don't think I'd ever use the rating tags again (and I use at least one rating tag in 99% of my ratings), since I've been using them improperly and their "proper use" doesn't make any sense to me.
Re: put a lucky tag in ratings,
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 3:33 amIt doesn't sound like a very fashionable idea. Consider your current tags... they have to do with the sportsmanship and decisions the player makes. They can be rated according to their attitude and their tactics. If they are horrible in chat they can be rated appropriately, if they are friendly in chat, they can be rated appropriately. If they make illogical suicidal attacks against their allies they can be rated specifically for such decisions.
You can't rate someone for the dice they get. Here's an indicator: view the game, the player with their name stricken with a line straight through? That player's been eliminated and at some point in the game or definitly moreso than the other player, was unlucky.
The player who won? For more of the game, they were "lucky".
Rather pointless to rate someone based on dice. Am I going to avoid a player because they have lucky dice 50 games in a row like I would avoid someone who uses abusive language in chat?
Theresa
You can't rate someone for the dice they get. Here's an indicator: view the game, the player with their name stricken with a line straight through? That player's been eliminated and at some point in the game or definitly moreso than the other player, was unlucky.
The player who won? For more of the game, they were "lucky".
Rather pointless to rate someone based on dice. Am I going to avoid a player because they have lucky dice 50 games in a row like I would avoid someone who uses abusive language in chat?
Theresa
New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:05 pmConcise description:
Specifics:
This will improve the following aspects of the site:
- Add new ratings tags reffering to luck.
Specifics:
- - Godlike Luck
- Good luck
- Bad luck
- Deadman`s Luck
This will improve the following aspects of the site:
- Some people happen to win a game based more on luck of dice and firstdrop than "good strategy" or other ratings.
- Would improve the ratings tags by expanding the area of rate including luck. Some ppl are naturally more lucky. And if you win/lose a game based on luck alone, it would be a far more appropiate tag than any other.
Re: New ratings tag : Luck [TO DO]
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:27 pmAgreed, we need more tags. Luck would give a lot of explanation to some of the ratings players hand out.
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:50 pmbahaha
yeah more explicatory ratings so i wont have to leave only 1s and get banned for it
yeah more explicatory ratings so i wont have to leave only 1s and get banned for it
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:13 pmKamikaze1.0 wrote:Concise description:
- Add new ratings tags reffering to luck.
Specifics:
- - Godlike Luck
- Good luck
- Bad luck
- Deadman`s Luck
This will improve the following aspects of the site:
- Some people happen to win a game based more on luck of dice and firstdrop than "good strategy" or other ratings.
- Would improve the ratings tags by expanding the area of rate including luck. Some ppl are naturally more lucky. And if you win/lose a game based on luck alone, it would be a far more appropiate tag than any other.
Stupid suggestion, given that this tag would mark something that is 100% out of the player's control. It doesn't even make basic sense.
And no, some people are NOT "naturally more lucky" in the context of an online die roll. Good lord.
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:18 pmGiven enough games luck evens out, but its pretty damn lopsided in 1-2 games sometimes.
What the heck would it prove? So someone has good luck and beats you, its no reason to hate them. Sometimes you need to attack when the odds are not in your favor and sometimes it works. Its good strategy when you know when to try it.
What the heck would it prove? So someone has good luck and beats you, its no reason to hate them. Sometimes you need to attack when the odds are not in your favor and sometimes it works. Its good strategy when you know when to try it.
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:46 amRatings should not be given for luck or based on luck. BTW. This is a luck based game.
Useful tag like "Missed Turns" would be good.
Useful tag like "Missed Turns" would be good.
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:38 pmWoodruff wrote:Stupid suggestion, given that this tag would mark something that is 100% out of the player's control. It doesn't even make basic sense.
And no, some people are NOT "naturally more lucky" in the context of an online die roll. Good lord.
You're half Vulcan, half Human. You don't sense emotion in the same way that we 100% Humans sense emotion.
Ratings are an emotional, sometimes illogical, othertimes heartfelt experience. If you feel sorry for your opponent, you may give them "all 5s" and despite their inability to click the assault button, you may tag the same sorry individual with a "Good Strategy" and perhaps appropriately, "Brave." Does the tagged player truly have "Good Strategy?" Maybe yes, maybe no. Are they really "Brave" adn can be expected to run into a burning building to save Kitty Kats? Truly indeterminable.
In the same manner that you determine no person could be considered "naturally more lucky" than any other player, so also it would be unfair to determine that a player has "Good Strategy" simply because they won a one-on-one game. By your logic, no tags makes sense, yet, you use them.
There are times that otherwise even-tempered individuals will stab "three 1s" on a player. Perhaps a good explanatory tag would be "Lucky" or "Amazing Dice" or "Great Drop" or "Went 1st on a huge map" or "3 card sets" could be added to those "three 1s" to help others realize why. Bottomline is that (more often than not) the ratings are based more on how the rater felt at the time he/she gave the rating, rather than what logical determination of how fair play the opponent was in the game.
It certainly is possible to win by the dice and/or win by the drop on many of the maps on CC. In some instances (Doodle and Lux) the first to get a set in escalating or flat rate tend to win. There are a few maps (Feudal comes to mind) and some settings (no spoils) where poor dice and a poor drop at the outset can be overcome by exceptional strategy. Still other times what appears to be the worst strategy imaginable is saved by dice and spoils. If you don't account for emtoin, and for luck, then every winner should be tagged "Good Strategy" and every loser should be tagged "Poor Strategy" and that would be the end of it.
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:52 amThis would be awesome.
We could see who REALLY has the good dice here, because they would be tagged "lucky" the most.
Would help with dice complaints.
We could see who REALLY has the good dice here, because they would be tagged "lucky" the most.
Would help with dice complaints.
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 9:30 pmholy shit queen... you need a hobby. you could write for the times... to the point... if luck was a tag, everyone who won would get tagged with "lucky"... lame
Re: New ratings tag : Luck
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 9:49 pmrhp 1 wrote:holy shit queen... you need a hobby. you could write for the times... to the point... if luck was a tag, everyone who won would get tagged with "lucky"... lame
exactly my point...the tags and ratings are useless....thank you for being my pawn.