StarCraft® II

The game has a 16 year Age restriction, but I play against many toddlers, if you look at their behavior, when they loose....Tossing their toys out of the cot"

Think it's bad for the gaming experience, as a whole, and should be frowned upon ;-<<

And I have a thick skin ;->

they might be older then you think, even some grown ups are behaving strangly when you nail em....just check out for some Idra epix rages....:-D and he is far from his toddler´s age

personaly i get lot of insults in the game, sometimes i bother to type some times i dont, sometimes i pick and prod em to rage more when i find em funny, like last game there was a guy (toss) who thought he won the game when he built a momma ship and i proved him wrong thx to mass fungals and surrounding him from all angles....and what he got for me was just epix.....a-mover.....back in replay i had apm peak over 500 and "I´m a-mover"....well i guess my A key would go off after such intense moments....so i just couldnt resist to give him the most annoying "L2P" then i got more insults and he went of.....:-D and i was laughing for next 30 minutes....sadly though i´ve encountered rly BM even in tourneys, like last ESL i played there was some german guy who spammed my chat with lot of german writing (sadly though i dont speak that language) but due to no GG after the game and rage quit i guess it wasnt rly polite

back to OP, thing is, i dont see it viable since most of those BM wont give you any pts cause they´re too angry to be objective and therefore no pts for you sir....also u´d have to have only positive pts since thx to those bmers any chance of negative evaluations would results in abuse of such system

just wondering do you know what rage is?

10/08/2012 12:41Posted by SoulPrisoner

just check out for some Idra epix rages....:-D and he is far from his toddler´s age

Physically maybe. Mentally... not so much.

10/08/2012 12:41Posted by SoulPrisoner

back to OP, thing is, i dont see it viable since most of those BM wont give you any pts cause they´re too angry to be objective and therefore no pts for you sir

I don't think this is a problem. Sure, you won't be picking up points from those who hate you because you crushed their dumbass strategy, but on average you'll get more points if you are polite than if you are not. Meanwhile, that BM rager, if he does that every time he loses will be getting a lot less points.

I think it would encourage people to be polite. I'd make an effort to be gracious in victory as well as defeat because I'd want my 'polite player' score to be high. Not that I don't do this at the moment, but it would give an extra incentive! It would also be really useful because when someone rages at you, you can see if its a one off bad day thing, or if they have a history of doing it. And if you have to report them this is useful data for Blizz. In my experience very few people bother to submit reports even for seriously bad behavior, so serial rule breakers don't get punished cause only one or two reports go in on them. But if they are reported for BM and Blizz sees they have a very low score for politeness that would be really telling.

I've been thinking it over and I can't see a downside so I vote yes to this idea.

dumb idea sorry

If you beat people... these people will never give you well-mannered points haha.

If you lose, the winner may give you points for sympathy... I just don't see this working.

Regards,
Umbra Diaboli

meh, if you take things on the internet seriously... well then i cant help u.

10/08/2012 15:59Posted by Vaneras

they are open to abuse in one way or other

What ways do you see this idea as being abused?

10/08/2012 16:35Posted by Spirit

they are open to abuse in one way or other

What ways do you see this idea as being abused?

I believe it's about "I lost against him, I'll give him a minus"; "Me and him won this team game, so I'll give him a plus"; "I have DT rushes so I'll downvote". There isn't enough interaction in the game to make people rate others objectively; the rating would (probably!) nearly always be influenced primarily by the game outcome.

There is only one way to make it objective and it's really expensive way.

Every rating would have to be followed by comment why the player gave - and then it would have to be read by some Blizz employee to verify that giving that - is justified and not just given in anger after lost game.

That would require hiring many people who would have to be paid.
Sorry, this idea is not gonna happen.

10/08/2012 17:08Posted by Moriquendu

I believe it's about "I lost against him, I'll give him a minus"; "Me and him won this team game, so I'll give him a plus"; "I have DT rushes so I'll downvote". There isn't enough interaction in the game to make people rate others objectively; the rating would (probably!) nearly always be influenced primarily by the game outcome.

Well, the OP made no mention of giving negative feedback. Negative feedback is prone to griefing; heck, I've even been reported by some guy who could not take a loss. Having a system that gives players a choice to reward well manared players does not have this kind of issue.

10/08/2012 18:51Posted by Aerohank

Well, the OP made no mention of giving negative feedback. Negative feedback is prone to griefing; heck, I've even been reported by some guy who could not take a loss. Having a system that gives players a choice to reward well manared players does not have this kind of issue.

My apologies then, I for some reason thought of a +/- system.

Well, I still think it would be far too game-outcome-dependant, but I can't say it would be a bad thing at all. Perhaps if amount of upvotes is summarized in some visible profile place, then it would encourage people to be more communicative and polite during games.

Naturally, you wouldn't be able to upvote friends or people you partied with, as well as couldn't upvote the same person twice within short period of time (Had you encountered him/her twice in a row, for instance). Then I don't see any issue with that kind of system.

I don't think any kind of reward would be needed. The positive chat interactions are almost enough. Also such numbers need not be public. It's not about the rep just confirming that you have gm.

I thought that maybe persons that have marked each other as jerks would not be matched so easily against each other. So if I am waiting in the queue and there are only similar MMR matched persons available I would be willing to wait a little longer whether a similar MMR matched non-jerk would be available. Potentially jerks would wait a little longer in the queue and play against other jerks. And people that are picky about who they play would wait a little longer than non-picky players. This would be per player pair if that is not too much book-keeping. Althougth I am not sure that queue time is a neutral enough consequence.

If it's only for a portrait or decal, only a positive system for mannered opponents, and only applies in random matchmaking, how could it possibly be abused?

And why would anyone bother abusing it if eventually most people would get the portrait anyway through mannered play?

10/08/2012 21:00Posted by Shalkka

I thought that maybe persons that have marked each other as jerks would not be matched so easily against each other.

Then everyone would downvote players who they lost against and upvote players who they won against. That is not a good solution.

10/08/2012 21:00Posted by Shalkka

I don't think any kind of reward would be needed. The positive chat interactions are almost enough.

For you, for me, for a lot of others, yes. But there would be a lot of people who would either miss out the entire thing completely, or just proceed to vent out as normal. As in the case of achievements, we already know that people often need some kind of "virtual bait" to become attracted to certain kind of activities.

I was just about to go to the forums to make an almost identical idea.

You should have a clickable bottun, which leads the other player comment your game (on what you could improve etc.). So you will only see this if you have it enabled.

Then the player getting the feedback can rate the feedback. Useful, not useful, BM.
The idea being that you can get achievements for helping the other player to improve. And the bm field for blocking/ignoring people who use the feedback field for bm only (on a temporary basis).

You could even make it without text, just as check buttons.

Economy
Unit composition.
Positioning.
Scouting.
Build order.
Over aggression
Over passivity
Tech

I am sure it would be very helpful for people starting the game to learn what they are doing wrong.

but maybe not all players are as retarded at game understanding as my self :P

It's a bad idea. Most people would use it to "downvote" "noob race players who need to l2p" and cheesers.

Besides, I can't count with my fingers the amount of people who have called me bad mannered because I didn't open with GLHF (I never do) and then pouring at me a ton of insults just because I was completely ignoring his attack.

Now this kind of person would probably downvote me with this karma system because I was the poorly mannered guy whilst I wouldn't even bother. That's me with lower karma and himself with the same amount. Is that fair?

I'm not sure about the OP's proposal but, somewhat in connection and just in case, I believe players shouldn't have the opposite option, i.e. to give their opponent a BM rating. BM ratings would be awarded for anything like not saying "gg" or using a cheesy tactic, which shouldn't really be an issue.

Without the ability to award BM points, I'm not sure how the ability to award "GM" points would work out. Also, yes, players could keep asking for it to the point everybody you play just bugs you to get it and it loses value because many people actually comply to be left alone.

Also, while I'm in favour of cracking down on teamkillers, people who go AFK in team games etc., I wouldn't like anybody to receive BM points for merely being unskilled or not understanding English or something like that. At the same time, being a good player that essentially gives "taxi" (wins the game for the teammates) shouldn't be cause enough to earn manner points.

I also have to agree on those who posted before me. The main problem is that these up and down votes will not be made based on rational decisions, but on simple emotions.

While I agree that players who seem to have nothing better to do than to defeat you and then say stuff like "OMG! N00b! Pwned!!!" and nobody likes these people, players will vote others down for far lesser reasons.

This, as usual, reduces itself to the problem of the "impartial arbiter", which in this case doesn't exist. (If Blizzard employees had to rate every player, they'd never see the end of it). Don't get me wrong: The system is a great idea (in my opinion). It is just not readily implementable in an environment where tempers run hot and many will vote out of spite or condescension to others.

Cheers

I think rating your opponent after a match would be a very good start.
makes it something like a 1 through 5, or 1 through 10 scale for how well mannered you think your opponent was. Where a 5 (from 1 to 10) is someone that said gl hf and was otherwise completely silent. a gg wp earns you like a 6 or a 7. BM gets you lower. Once a system gets implemented a short guide should explain guideline scores so everyone is sort of on the same line.

- should obviously only come up with quick matches not created matches.

-there should be a limited to the amount of times you can get judged by 1 specific player. Say once a week or something. To avoid people "sniping" eachother to raise their level in any significant way

-once a guild/clan system gets implemented guild/clan members can't judge eachother.

-Someone that gives consistently very high or very low scores will be banned from voting for a set amount of time. Probably only neccesary for consistent low grades.

-If you feel you where really mistreated score wise, (say given a 1 where a 8 might have been more approriate) you can report that match. If you are judged correct the result will be scratched and the other player will be banned from judging for a month (or a similar penalty) If your report was completely unjustified, your reporting privelidges get revoked for a week. It should be stressed that this functionality is only for severe cases

-either: 1 requirements for rewards should be steep
or: 2 after a season your total added score gets devided by your matches played to average out your score and only the consistently high scoring players will get rewards (also averages out the abusers and jerks with the good sameritans)

just some stuff off the top of my head

All the reports and bans from judging and that sort of stuff just gives Blizz employees stuff to do that are not directly supporting the user.
I think there should be a hotkey sequence to mute chat for one game (So next game chat is back online). The other player should be notified for that.
BMers hate to be silenced.