Conquer Club

• allow you to more easily pick out qualities based on other people's opinions
• encourage better and fairer use of the tags and ratings system

Tags seem to describe players more accurately than the stars given to them. With the implementation of this suggestion, I think we could make good use of them similarly to the rating averages displayed for the attributes.


• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most time, on the player's profile.
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes. Indicate % of all tags recieved.

• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most on the player's profile.
  E.g. Rating: 4.7 Good teammate
  
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes.
  E.g.
  Attribute - Average
  Fair Play 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  Gameplay 4.6 (rated by 59 players)
  Attitude 4.7 (rated by 58 players)
  Overall 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  
  Tag - % of all tags received
  Good teammate 25
  Complainer 22
  Good strategy 17

• Provides useful information by highlighting the most common (probably the most relevant) tags.
• Saves time of checking lots of ratings.
• Encourages players to rate others and to use tags. May as well encourage good sportmanship, as the most common tags received will be more noticable.
• Makes it easier to decide whether to join a game with someone or not (for those, who care about it).

Jatekos wrote:Concise description:

Tags seem to describe players more accurately than the stars given to them. With the implementation of this suggestion, I think we could make good use of them similarly to the rating averages displayed for the attributes.


• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most time, on the player's profile.
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes. Indicate % of all tags recieved.

Specifics/Details:

• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most on the player's profile.
  E.g. Rating: 4.7 Good teammate
  
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes.
  E.g.
  Attribute - Average
  Fair Play 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  Gameplay 4.6 (rated by 59 players)
  Attitude 4.7 (rated by 58 players)
  Overall 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  
  Tag - % of all tags received
  Good teammate 25
  Complainer 22
  Good strategy 17

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Provides useful information by highlighting the most common (probably the most relevant) tags.
• Saves time of checking lots of ratings.
• Encourages players to rate others and to use tags. May as well encourage good sportmanship, as the most common tags received will be more noticable.
• Makes it easier to decide whether to join a game with someone or not (for those, who care about it).

PLAYER57832 wrote:Few people even give a tag and those that do are most often those giving negative comments. I cannot think of a single tag that I have gotten more than a dozen times, but I have played thousands of games. So, while well-intended, I think this would not benefit people much at all.

Woodruff wrote:This seems like a good idea to me, and easily coded. Some resolution would need to be determined for "ties for first", if you will.

Jatekos wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Few people even give a tag and those that do are most often those giving negative comments. I cannot think of a single tag that I have gotten more than a dozen times, but I have played thousands of games. So, while well-intended, I think this would not benefit people much at all.

Have you checked the ratings you received? You have good strategy, quick and friendly tags all over the first page of your ratings. On the first page, almost every 2nd rater gave tags to you.

I think that generally there are more thoughts put in those ratings that have tags attached to them than to the ones without tags. These are usually not the 'let's give everyone 5s' type. Agreed, everyone receives negative comments as well, but usually only a few (unless they are given for a reason).

Also, I think that if implemented, it will encourage players to rate others and to use tags more often.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

PLAYER57832 wrote:The real problem is that ratings themselves don't tell much -- with or without tags, in part because they are so changeable. I can play 20 games with someone, then if I play another game where something happens.. maybe we are both in a bad mood, maybe I wind up deadbeating ( I usually don't rate people poorly just for deadbeating).. whatever, but I get a bad rating.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Also, I think the tags, as they exist right now, are just not all that informative. This might be a decent idea, but I would first like to see the ratings averaged, the tags improved, then this might make sense.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Jatekos wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Few people even give a tag and those that do are most often those giving negative comments. I cannot think of a single tag that I have gotten more than a dozen times, but I have played thousands of games. So, while well-intended, I think this would not benefit people much at all.

Have you checked the ratings you received? You have good strategy, quick and friendly tags all over the first page of your ratings. On the first page, almost every 2nd rater gave tags to you.

I think that generally there are more thoughts put in those ratings that have tags attached to them than to the ones without tags. These are usually not the 'let's give everyone 5s' type. Agreed, everyone receives negative comments as well, but usually only a few (unless they are given for a reason).

Also, I think that if implemented, it will encourage players to rate others and to use tags more often.

Yes, I do occasionally look at my tags.
At first, more people (including myself) gave tags, but it was kind of a "fad" that died out. Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Jatekos wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

drunkmonkey wrote:Sure, a lot of people don't use tags, and a lot of people just leave 5 stars across the board no matter what, but that doesn't mean they're useless. If one person leaves a tag of "Rude" or "Deadbeat", it could be a fluke. But what if, say 20 people have left those tags in the last few months? It could be useful information. I like the idea. For the reasons I just stated, I think 2 stipulations should be added:

1) Only tags left in a certain time frame should be noted. People can change, and a rude player who gets his act together shouldn't be punished for his old ways.
2) There should be a minimum # of the same tag before they're displayed. You shouldn't be flagged with poor tags because you ran into a couple jerks recently.

pmchugh wrote:

Jatekos wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

To be honest I'm pretty sure 80% of people will have those three rating as their top 3.

pmchugh wrote:Although I don't mind the suggestion would be nice if added but not essential.

drunkmonkey wrote:Sure, a lot of people don't use tags, and a lot of people just leave 5 stars across the board no matter what, but that doesn't mean they're useless. If one person leaves a tag of "Rude" or "Deadbeat", it could be a fluke. But what if, say 20 people have left those tags in the last few months? It could be useful information. I like the idea. For the reasons I just stated, I think 2 stipulations should be added:

1) Only tags left in a certain time frame should be noted. People can change, and a rude player who gets his act together shouldn't be punished for his old ways.
2) There should be a minimum # of the same tag before they're displayed. You shouldn't be flagged with poor tags because you ran into a couple jerks recently.

Jatekos wrote:

pmchugh wrote:

Jatekos wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

To be honest I'm pretty sure 80% of people will have those three rating as their top 3.

I am not so sure.Tags like complainer, deadbeat, poor strategy, bad teammate and silent are also popular for certain players, especially towards the end of the scoreboard.

pmchugh wrote:

Jatekos wrote:

pmchugh wrote:

Jatekos wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

To be honest I'm pretty sure 80% of people will have those three rating as their top 3.

I am not so sure.Tags like complainer, deadbeat, poor strategy, bad teammate and silent are also popular for certain players, especially towards the end of the scoreboard.

You can usually spot them guys anyway, I suppose it gives a little meaning to the rating number.