Integrated UI Leadership Rating System

[The Kush]

No.

[The Kush]

And can a mod please move this to the idea vault.

[Red Beard]

Yeah; and for that reason I like the idea of equally weighting "experience generated under your command" with player feedback, or even favouring the former.

You could even compare the two ratings amoung leaders that generated a lot of experience per follower, and come up with an @-hole rating!

[GTGD]

"tower of death on amerish gogogo"

YEAYAYAYYAYAYAYY BEP BEP BEP


^^^ why this is a bad idea

[Zar]

I think even if they implement this i doubt ill follow someone cause he or she has a *Tag* that says *faction or good leader* as the game starts and moves into it's first month on your server you your self will be able to tell who is a freaking idiot and who is general bad ass of the kick ass brigade i follow what i can see not hear say or what people tell me =3 also most people will have outfits leading the charge

[Red Beard]

Originally Posted by Electrofreak

Yep, was just gonna say, popularity != competency.

I'm talking about experience generated *per follower* (ie performance over time), not a popularity contest.

[Knightwyvern]

Originally Posted by Red Beard

I'm talking about experience generated *per follower* (ie performance over time), not a popularity contest.

What we mean is that people tend to go with the "cool," "famous," or "popular" person over the competent ones, even if it is to their detriment. 3 times more people follow Ashton Kutcher on twitter than they do the White House. 11 million to 3 million. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, lol.

[Red Beard]

Originally Posted by Knightwyvern

What we mean is that people tend to go with the "cool," "famous," or "popular" person over the competent ones, even if it is to their detriment. 3 times more people follow Ashton Kutcher on twitter than they do the White House. 11 million to 3 million. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, lol.

*this system does not require twitter to be implemented*

This idea is primarily for addressing the problem of a million 12 year olds on global chat with orbital strike spam.

Buuut, in case Higby is SOLD on twitter...

Would you? I think PS2 players are more likely to go with someone that will advance your character faster...That, in and of itself will allow leaders to gain their own reputation, since that's how it worked in PS1. I just want to see a way to quantify PS1's system, to make it more efficient.

If people want to go with Ashton Kutcher, let them, and then we can compare HIS performance with everyone else's, and PS2 players can decide if we'd rather go with fame or performance (assuming they don't have both ).

[Red Beard]

* Original post updated for you poor kids that can get twitter out of your head!

[Knightwyvern]

Originally Posted by Red Beard

* Original post updated for you poor kids that can get twitter out of your head!

The twitter thing is an analogy, a metaphor, designed to show how people tend to gravitate towards the "cool" kids rather than the "geeks."

You're saying "let people decide if they want flash or substance," (paraphrasing) but the point of what I was saying is that the majority of the time people will pick the flash over the substance.

More people would follow Simon from yogscast than would follow a skilled yet relatively unknown leader.

[Red Beard]

Originally Posted by Knightwyvern

The twitter thing is an analogy, a metaphor, designed to show how people tend to gravitate towards the "cool" kids rather than the "geeks."

You're saying "let people decide if they want flash or substance," (paraphrasing) but the point of what I was saying is that the majority of the time people will pick the flash over the substance.

More people would follow Simon from yogscast than would follow a skilled yet relatively unknown leader.

No I'm not saying that...read the original post again; your original misconception of what my idea was in the first place has us talking about twitter, which I don't even care about.

Having said that, what you bring up just now can be addressed by incetivizing real leadership through the generation of experience. Even if the majority of people go for more flash and less substance, you'll still be able to see how good of a leader people are when YOU are choosing.

I'm not interested in defending twitter, as this system does not require it, but I do think it would work either way.

[LordReaver]

Any rating system is bad, unless it's strictly regulated.

Look no further than Metacritic. It's supposed to just say whether or not the general population likes or doesn't like a game/movie. Yet one hot topic issue, can net a game/movie a 1 or a 2. While almost no game/movie will get a 10.

An example of a good system is the ESRB. Which is strictly regulated, and is really only supposed to give the user a better idea on what to expect out of a game, rather than saying the game is good or not.

I just really can't see any practical and reasonable system being implemented in PS2, for the purpose of filtering out bad commanders. Even if you were to get only good commanders, you can come to an issue where two commanders are giving different orders. Both orders will get the job done, but both are different. Who do you follow? How do you rate both commanders?

Let's say you put in a system that did filter out the junk. How does one prove themselves to be a good commander when they have no experience? Nobody is going to listen to them, because they don't have any rating. Unless the rating system is forgiving enough to let them show on the list. If the system is forgiving enough, wouldn't that allow the junk to show up? So with a proper filter, you make it really hard for anything new to show up on the list...

I think the best system is to just let people figure out on their own if the person is worth following or not. This isn't the military, or politics, people are just here to have some fun. So there's really not whole lot to be done.