Conquer Club

It seems a lot of people (OK it’s only been two) have been upset at the way I leave ratings. Perhaps it is me, but I have found that almost all of my games have no chat whatsoever. I always at the very least start off with a “Good Luck” and end with a “Great Game.” A few of the players will respond in turn but that’s the extent of the conversation.

According to the “Instructions” attitude, “Covers behaviour in chat, foul language, sore losers, gracious winners, ‘great chatters!’, whining about luck, etc...” Therefore if there was no chat at all in the game, how can I rate the player? And since a zero score means “no score” (as opposed to 1 = Bad and 5 = Excellent) is this not the most logical response when there is no chat whatsoever and no way to determine the player’s attitude?

I may be wrong, but I may be right. Am I wrong here?

wow tzor, you are right. A zero for no chat is fine.

i would agree with that i stopped rating people a while ago now i only rate speed games and if someone really pisses me off cause otherwise you would see me rate people all the same i play to many people to know and remember how everyone played.

Yes. Leaving no rating is absolutely better than helping the rating system inflation by leaving 5's all around for no reason. I wish people would realize this

tzor wrote:It seems a lot of people (OK it’s only been two) have been upset at the way I leave ratings. Perhaps it is me, but I have found that almost all of my games have no chat whatsoever. I always at the very least start off with a “Good Luck” and end with a “Great Game.” A few of the players will respond in turn but that’s the extent of the conversation.

According to the “Instructions” attitude, “Covers behaviour in chat, foul language, sore losers, gracious winners, ‘great chatters!’, whining about luck, etc...” Therefore if there was no chat at all in the game, how can I rate the player? And since a zero score means “no score” (as opposed to 1 = Bad and 5 = Excellent) is this not the most logical response when there is no chat whatsoever and no way to determine the player’s attitude?

I may be wrong, but I may be right. Am I wrong here?

Personally, I do the following...if it's my first game with someone, and they're completely silent, they get a 4 for "attitude". If it's the second game with them and they already have the 4, then it moves to a 3. And so forth...losing one point for each "silent game". If they do speak (in a positive way) in a game, then it gets bumped up 1 also.

Metsfanmax wrote:Yes. Leaving no rating is absolutely better than helping the rating system inflation by leaving 5's all around for no reason. I wish people would realize this

Thats another big reason why i do not do it if i play a player who i had a lot of fun i and remember them then yes i do leave a good rating. but since i got the medal i only feel like those that leave an impression on me should be rated good or bad

Idr the last time I left a rating.

I usually do say 'Hi, and GL' at the start of most games, but you must realize when you're playing over 100 games, it becomes difficult to do that in every single game...

It seems that many players feel themselves somehow obligated to rate everyone they play against... Why?
You should rate somebody if s/he made particularly good or bad impression. If you don't have any meaningful (good or bad) information about some player and you rate him anyway - it's a kind of spam, IMHO. (Especially if you don't give him all fives)

Zemljanin wrote:It seems that many players feel themselves somehow obligated to rate everyone they play against... Why?
You should rate somebody if s/he made particularly good or bad impression. If you don't have any meaningful (good or bad) information about some player and you rate him anyway - it's a kind of spam, IMHO. (Especially if you don't give him all fives)

Obviously freemiums try and rate as many people for the medal (which i guess is why the medal is in place..), after people have gold I'm sure the ratings slow down for everybody.

thats what i did i rate teammates that i enjoyed though right now

I never rate silence 5 stars. I also take into account how long it takes for someone to take their turn. If they always wait almost the whole turn length or if they miss a turn it will always reduce that rating.

If they take their turns timely, even if they are silent, I will usually rate them 4 stars attitude.

Leehar wrote:I usually do say 'Hi, and GL' at the start of most games, but you must realize when you're playing over 100 games, it becomes difficult to do that in every single game...

I disagree.

Evil Semp wrote:

Leehar wrote:I usually do say 'Hi, and GL' at the start of most games, but you must realize when you're playing over 100 games, it becomes difficult to do that in every single game...

I disagree.

Evil is being confrontational. So he would get 3 stars.

Evil Semp wrote:

Leehar wrote:I usually do say 'Hi, and GL' at the start of most games, but you must realize when you're playing over 100 games, it becomes difficult to do that in every single game...

I disagree.

I agree. With your disagreement.

Evil Semp wrote:

Leehar wrote:I usually do say 'Hi, and GL' at the start of most games, but you must realize when you're playing over 100 games, it becomes difficult to do that in every single game...

I disagree.

This is actually true, because even if you are a slowpoke at typing, "hi and gl" should not take more than 5 seconds to type.
5*100=500 seconds, 500/60=less than 9 minutes to greet all the players in your games if you have around 100 games active.

targetman377 wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:Yes. Leaving no rating is absolutely better than helping the rating system inflation by leaving 5's all around for no reason. I wish people would realize this

Thats another big reason why i do not do it if i play a player who i had a lot of fun i and remember them then yes i do leave a good rating. but since i got the medal i only feel like those that leave an impression on me should be rated good or bad

I do the same targetman. I don't leave a rating unless they leave an impression either way

um... so basically you are just saying

"It really riles me up noone wishes me a good game or good luck"

lol

jaja?


It pisses me off when mcdonalds only gives me one syrup in the mornings with the pancakes.
And I dont even like syrup.. its just the point. I give mcDonalds a big friggin 0 for attitude here in Reynosa MX...

We will show them!


LOL...

why did I even care or think I thought I cared enough to post this? I have no clue... Why the op posted this.. I still have no clue. MAny things boggle my mind.

but just 5 more hours till this shitty mcdonalds will open with their woefully dry pancakes... I would make a thread about it, but lol... you really wouldnt care huh?

boggle.

army of nobunaga wrote:MAny things boggle my mind.

Things gobble my mind too.

army of nobunaga wrote:It pisses me off when mcdonalds only gives me one syrup in the mornings with the pancakes.
And I dont even like syrup.. its just the point. I give mcDonalds a big friggin 0 for attitude here in Reynosa MX...

You miss the point; 0 is not a "bad" rating it is "no rating." A better example is when you are completing a customer sastifaction survey on a web store that was, in every way, flawless. You come across the following question: "How did customer service handle your problem?" Well I never had a problem and never asked customer service to handle the problem I didn't have so I give it a "no rating."

Now if people ant positive ratings on attitude (for whatever reason) then it is up to them to chat with a positive attitude. If they do that, they get a good score.

One other point; I suppose one could argue that in theory attitude is expressed through all channels of communication, both verbal and non verbal. Non verbal lines of communication are not carried over web based games (you can't see the other person smiling or giving you the finger). Thus it is possible for the McDonald attendent to now say anything but still give you either a positive or negative attitude. That, however, doesn't apply here.

I don't say "good luck," because I don't want my opponent to have good luck. I can't believe that the rest of y'all actually do.

Metsfanmax wrote:I don't say "good luck," because I don't want my opponent to have good luck. I can't believe that the rest of y'all actually do.

It is a concept known as "manners" or "good sportmanship". Like if two athletes are preparing for a competition, they may well wish each other good luck without implying that they work any less hard towards winning the race themselves.

tzor wrote:It seems a lot of people (OK it’s only been two) have been upset at the way I leave ratings. Perhaps it is me, but I have found that almost all of my games have no chat whatsoever. I always at the very least start off with a “Good Luck” and end with a “Great Game.” A few of the players will respond in turn but that’s the extent of the conversation.

According to the “Instructions” attitude, “Covers behaviour in chat, foul language, sore losers, gracious winners, ‘great chatters!’, whining about luck, etc...” Therefore if there was no chat at all in the game, how can I rate the player? And since a zero score means “no score” (as opposed to 1 = Bad and 5 = Excellent) is this not the most logical response when there is no chat whatsoever and no way to determine the player’s attitude?

I may be wrong, but I may be right. Am I wrong here?

here let me play them i will join every game of theres until there a the last player on the scoreboard

natty_dread wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:I don't say "good luck," because I don't want my opponent to have good luck. I can't believe that the rest of y'all actually do.

It is a concept known as "manners" or "good sportmanship". Like if two athletes are preparing for a competition, they may well wish each other good luck without implying that they work any less hard towards winning the race themselves.

Okay, but luck isn't really a factor in athletic competitions - the person who wins is generally the most skilled competitor. So saying "good luck" isn't really a lie in that case - you want it to be a fair competition, you don't want some really unlucky thing to happen in a game of skill. But in a game principally based on chance, I don't want my opponents to get good rolls. I think that good manners implies not lying to your opponent...

Metsfanmax wrote:I don't say "good luck," because I don't want my opponent to have good luck. I can't believe that the rest of y'all actually do.

I would rather loose because of the skill of the other player than win because of a very bad streak of dice by the opponent.