Would you guys say it is fair to give someone a negative for having bad strategy in a singles game? I can understand it being done in a doubles game, but when it's 1 vs. 1 the player rating is enough to tell people what one's strategy is. This is the negative I recieved:
bad player, bad strategy, blaims other stuff for losing, easy points though
Game 1205889
As you can tell in game chat, I tried to be pleasant but this player wasn't having any of it. If you ask me this feedback is unfactual and trivial, and really uncalled for when a person is trying ot be nice. Ironically enough, on a couple occasions I left a player a negative for not being a good player, and had them deleted.
He doesn't have any right to complain about your strategy - it could be dice luck killing you, it could be multitudes of things, and someone's strategy could easily be better in different conditions.
As it stands though.... I would say to not worry about it - I don't look at feedback anymore, myself, and from what I've seen not many else do either.
It's a private game... so this "idiot feedback" came from someone you invited to play
except that he didn't bother leaving you any feedback. how about a link next time?
Last edited by oVo on Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
KoE_Sirius wrote:Feedback mods seem to have 1 rule for 1 and another rule for another.I don't understand what is exceptable and whats not.
I concur. While Plutoman makes a good point that feedbacks aren't really all that important, the principle of having an unfair negative slightly irks me. I have found the feedback system to evolve around all kinds of double standards. One of the moderators once told me that leaving a negative for every game is abuse, even if they are completely valid negatives. I had my feedback ban lengthened for asking for a negative feedback in game chat once, even though people do this sort of stuff all the time and get away with it. Then there was the one where the person refused to attack my one country and kept dragging out a speed game till I deadbeated, then left me a negative that the mods wouldn't remove, but they removed my negative for him. Or the fact that there is some kind of a time limit rule now, because apparently I should have reported this feedback earlier, yet I had one of my feedbacks for someone recently deleted and it had been left even before this one.
You needed to elaborate on why he "didn't play a great game". Something like he "had a bad strategy and blamed the dice for his poor gameplay" would do it. See the difference?
wicked wrote:You needed to elaborate on why he "didn't play a great game". Something like he "had a bad strategy and blamed the dice for his poor gameplay" would do it. See the difference?
When I left a nagative feedback like this it was deleted... here are the exact words i said:
Andrewb wrote:Played game very badly, very bad strategy, had lots of unused armies. But yet got very lucky in some unreal attacks like 3vs5 and winning it. Very dangerous combination; stay away from this player...
I had a quick look through some of the feedback left by wrestler and I had a good laugh.
To be fair to wrestler, i did notice quite a few feedbacks that he had deleted that didnt break any guidlines. Anyone skimming through his feedback left can see what i mean.
I'm currently working on a thread with examples to clarify all of this. Basically you need to give specific examples of bad play, and it has to be something legit, not "he got lucky dice". Not liking someone's strategy really isn't a good enough reason to leave feedback, especially if they won the game. Everyone plays this game differently and you need to take that into account. The ones that mention bad strategy that are allowed to stay should have other valid reasons to go along with it. And no, getting lucky with the dice isn't a valid reason to leave feedback.
I leave negative feedback for bad strategy if that strategy is both bad and possibly malicious. I.E. suiciding is a bad strategy and sometimes it is malicious (and not just noobish or a mistake) as well. For example in one of my recent games I kicked a guy out from a continent which was poorly defended because he had twice the per turn bonuses as anyone else and he got mad about this and suicided on me. Well deserved negative.
Exactly. The original intent of feedback was to be used in extreme circumstances. Not for example, things like coming up one man short when trying to take someone out.
Most of the negatives left for me do not follow wicked guidelines.My negatives are all stil there.One doesnt even make sense..IE Is not good English and has no meaning.I did the E-Ticket thing.Doesnt work unless I sit there and open an e-ticket for each feedback.
KoE_Sirius wrote:IE Is not good English and has no meaning.
ie has a meaning, just so you know... not being a grammar nazi.. maybe this makes the neg feedback valid, who knows... anyway, the meaning of i.e.:
i.e. - adv : that is to say; in other words
As my last form tutor said "you are training to be a Diesel Mechanic,not an English teacher.".So I'll take your word for it as will most of the people in CC.
My statement makes perfect sense to me.As for the feedback left.It makes no sense what so ever.
Negative Not sure lose! ! ! ! You made public when an alliance was in the first two places but not like when your ally has been destroyed! ! ! So my advice, care! ! ! ! The player is false and does not like to lose! ! ! Only makes alliances with "winners "!!!! The amount of negative feedback and what they say show the category of "player"
Feed back left by acores2005
Rank:Cadet
P.S...........I didnt make an Alliance.Never have ...Never will
majority of the negs are for so called whining in game chat-- but that's exactly what the most of the players that abuse the neg feedback system are doing.... whining in the feed that you whine in the game. the irony.....
Scott-Land wrote:majority of the negs are for so called whining in game chat-- but that's exactly what the most of the players that abuse the neg feedback system are doing.... whining in the feed that you whine in the game. the irony.....
Actually I haven't abused the feedback system in a long time, unless you count missing 3 turns as trivial.
Scott-Land wrote:majority of the negs are for so called whining in game chat-- but that's exactly what the most of the players that abuse the neg feedback system are doing.... whining in the feed that you whine in the game. the irony.....
Actually I haven't abused the feedback system in a long time, unless you count missing 3 turns as trivial.
Get rid of the negative aspect of feedback..If a person cant play the game.Leave the sad git alone.He already sucks. lol
Honestly, I am amazed at the amount of attention feedback gets. However, if you're gonna have it, I can't see why you shouldn't be able to leave neg feedback for poor play. Hell, I could care less how rude the player is, I want a good game. So, I'd much rather be warned that a player is bad at the game than that they're "mean".
I've left feedback for players for the following reasons:
1) Missing a ton of turns in a game without apologizing
2) Trying to sell us a freaking re-fi mortgage in the game chat
3) Attacking me relentlessly in an assassin game where I wasn't his target (I mean, relentlessly, like taking me down to the verge of elimination)
Now, I leave neutral for players when I think they did something sort of dumb but not insanely stupid.
I've been in games where people piss and moan and cuss and bitch at you for not playing into their game, but I could care less about that in terms of feedback.
