Honor rating?

[Cardinalsrule]

Could someone in Majcom Command please give us a quick explanation of what the honors number means? And perhaps how it is calculated? I'm currently a little over 200, is that good? mediocre? poor?

 

[Dreadnought]

Mostly I am also ignoring the Honor rating. If I see a person with a really low honor (under 70?, not sure since I still don't fully grok the calculation) but a good diplo (at least 970) I might be more wary of diplo messages and non-diplo-agreement understandings. Otherwise there is too much variability in what each person on this site feels is honorable.

Ok so that would make you trust a truce with me but basically expect a knife in the back if I just sent you a diplomatic message. Problem with conclusion is that it is completly untrue as I have never done that. No, my terrible honor rating most probably comes from the fact that i tell people when I think they In my view did something dishonorable like breaking a truce against me or anyone else. This of course draws attention even tho I tell them in no harsh words that I think it was a dishonorable act and that I will vote them as such. This however leads to a them voting me the same way.

The point of this being that the honor rating says absolutly nothing at all and any attempt to draw conclusions from it will be flawed.

 

[FLAGG]

Dreadnought - AGREE COMPLETELY.

Should just drop it........

Dread - Maybe you and I should play a TON of 1X1 games together - agree to each win half of them (or whatever calculation does not hurt either of our overall ratings). Then rate each other honorable in every game. Why we could work to make each other have the best rating on the site!

And the system would really be working at its best them

FLAGG

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Flagg,
that won't work. Your rating for each player 'sticks', meaning that if you rate them once, that will follow into more games. You can't rate them individually in every game. Otherwise, people might actually do what you suggested tongue-in-cheek (hopefully)

 

[Badorties]

well before shelving the honor rating, i think we need to give it fair shot. that means promoting it, explaining it, and seeing how its used. I have not done that yet.

There is also a side benefit. Since ratings are persistant, i may join a game and then check the honor tab and see that i have rated two of those players dishonorably in the past. I may not remember why or what they did, but I would keep my guard up regarding them.

Also, there will always be people who misuse any system. We can only do so much to account for that.

This next week I will do a post which explains everything you need to know about honor, then promote it site wide. If there are major issues that come up after that, we can deal with them.

 

[mark]

It was a great moment when Shep only attacked a neut so as to not take advantage. I believe that everyone in the game followed suit, although all of us didn't mention it.

Wasn't saying you didn't do it. Just didn't take the time to check. ;-)

 

[mark]

Ok so that would make you trust a truce with me but basically expect a knife in the back if I just sent you a diplomatic message. Problem with conclusion is that it is completly untrue as I have never done that. No, my terrible honor rating most probably comes from the fact that i tell people when I think they In my view did something dishonorable like breaking a truce against me or anyone else. This of course draws attention even tho I tell them in no harsh words that I think it was a dishonorable act and that I will vote them as such. This however leads to a them voting me the same way.

The point of this being that the honor rating says absolutly nothing at all and any attempt to draw conclusions from it will be flawed.

We are in agreement, my point being that no one is using this as the designers intended. I was showing how I use it. In the use case you mention I would honor the diplo understanding but not move my troops significantly away from my barricades. What did Reagan <shudder/> say? "Trust but verify."

Not everything works.

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Wasn't saying you didn't do it. Just didn't take the time to check. ;-)

I know, mark. Isn't that a great game, though? Every single person (I believe) followed suit and attacked a neut for a round so as not to take advantage of the outage. If only all the games could be played with that spirit of fair play. We wouldn't need an honor rating.

 

[FLAGG]

So you can rate every player only once, but you can change your mind, and thus effect a players overall rating, in a future game???? I am just confused because this thread says different things about that continuously. I like the idea that Bado says of being able to see how you personally rated a player so that you could double check in future games.

So now I am thinking that when you start a game with players that you have personally rated before, and check the honor status, you will SEE your personal rating of that player right then. AND could change it? I don't think anyone knows clearly how it is working. I know I am not quite sure.....

------------------------------------

BADO - I look forward to your big post on how to use the honor system later this week. Then things will once and for all clear up.

NOW - ONCE YOU MAKE THIS BIG EXPLANATION CLEAR TO ALL, would it be a fair idea to wipe everyone 'honor rating' clean???? Then the site would be starting with a clear slate with everyone actually knowing how the system worked???????

Just a though.

FLAGG

 

[mark]

...
NOW - ONCE YOU MAKE THIS BIG EXPLANATION CLEAR TO ALL, would it be a fair idea to wipe everyone 'honor rating' clean???? Then the site would be starting with a clear slate with everyone actually knowing how the system worked???????
...
FLAGG

+1

 

[mark]

I know, mark. Isn't that a great game, though? Every single person (I believe) followed suit and attacked a neut for a round so as not to take advantage of the outage. If only all the games could be played with that spirit of fair play. We wouldn't need an honor rating.

Perhaps we can say that Shep brought out the best in all of us for that turn?

But then he basically gave up the game by going skiing! Where's the commitment?!

 

[Robinette]

NOW - ONCE YOU MAKE THIS BIG EXPLANATION CLEAR TO ALL, would it be a fair idea to wipe everyone 'honor rating' clean???? Then the site would be starting with a clear slate with everyone actually knowing how the system worked???????

Just a thought.

FLAGG

Ohhhh Nooooeeessss.... please don't do that, I just FINALLY got an actual honor score to replace that less than 5 thing.


Now let me just add, that I love the idea of being able to see how you rated a prior player, and I was wondering if this could actually be enhanced to allow for some private notes as well... that would be really cool, and it would make me WANT to rate others just so I could keep a Dossier on them.

And i just know Bado would create some awesome graphics for it too...

Kinda like this, but way cooler... and way more room to add notes.

 

[steelrain]

How can we best promote Honor?

Here is an idea that might encourage fewer players to AWOL as well as award honor.

Each player earns one 'honor point' per game which they can anonymously award to another in-game player or lose the point. 'Honor points' could leads to 'honor awards.' In time, a person could evaluate a player's 'honor' based on how many honor points/awards they had accumulated versus their number of games. Honor would be a in-demand commodity and players would be directly competing against each other to win.

Secondly, 'honor points' might encourage fewer players to AWOL. For example, a player in an impossible situtation might stick with a game they would otherwise abandon if they knew that there was something that could still be won. It would be another way to award new players for finishing games as well as challenge all of us to play more honorably.

PS: One possible problem I can forsee is that friends could agree to swap 'honor points.' However, this could happen just as easily with our current honor system.

Feedback?

Steelrain

 

[FLAGG]

Steelrain,

Not a bad idea - seems much less confusing then the current system on the table. Plus, what I like is that you are awarding honor - not tearing up someones honor because you are pissed that you lost.....

Couple things:
1) You could say that you must be in a game of 4 or more to get your honor point that you can give someone. That would make it a little harder for friends to give them to each other.
2) You could not give your honor point to a teammate. That would also make it a little harder for friends to give them to each other.

I like the basic idea. I like having POSITIVE incentive - then everyone trying to be the most honorable. You could post the top 20 honor scores on the main page......

Flagg

 

[steelrain]

Flagg, thanks for your insights. You totally got what I was trying to communicate.

Regardless of honor ranking system we use, there is bound to be loop-holes and indescrepancies. In the long run, probally the best honor ranking system is our memory. After a couple of games with a player, I generally have a good idea of their honor, or lack thereof.

Steelrain

 

[Badorties]

Good ideas guys.

Here is the video i posted on the blog.

 

[FLAGG]

Bado,

Watched tutorial. Questions:

1) Can you be rated more than once by a single player? Or does the number in () mean the total number of DIFFERENT players that have rated you?

2) If you rate someone dishonorable and the game closes.........and then later you start another game with him:
a) if you look at the personal tab will he already show up as dishonorable?
b) is this your one time opinion of him - so if you LOVE his play this time you could change him to honorable (and there would be no increased number because you would be the same person adjusting your rating of the same player). This would be cool - because someone could piss you off, then win you back and improved their rating (without effecting the number that have voted for him)

3) If you leave someone as neutral - does it not count as a vote for them - because in a sense you did not vote?

Look forward to hearing back..........and then I guess I will try to rate someone for my first time.

Flagg

 

[Badorties]

Flagg..

1. One vote per person. The second number is the number of unique people who have voted you.
2. option a, but they can change their rating of you in any active game, meaning you can win back their vote.
3. Neutrals do not count as votes.

 

[FLAGG]

Good enough - I will give it a shot. And tell the people in my games to try it. I like that you can only vote for everyone once - and that you can earn back a players trust (or vice-versa).

Flagg......

 

[mark]

Now I have to do math! What number is 83% of 13? (10.79) This indicates that 13 people have rated and (assuming rounding) 11 of them rated me honorable. Two have not. I am pretty sure I know which two. Which is easy to know when you only have two...what happens when this number is (83)50?

Could we have the total number split out to be something like (83)13/11 ((% Honorable)total raters/total raters honorable)? It makes the percentage clearer, IMHO.

BTW, Bado, I actually yelled at the screen when watching the video! What did I ever do to you? ;-)

 

[Cardinalsrule]

According to the info post that Bado posted, the ( ) is the number of people who have voted for you, and the first number is the percent who voted you honorable. I have a rating of 72(35). So, according to that, 25.2 people have rated me as honorable. Not sure who the 0.2 of a person is....... Even accounting for rounding, there's no way that you can get that number... if it was 25 out of 35 people voting me honorable, it would be 71.428%, which should round to 71, and if it was 26 out of 35, it would be 74.28%, which would round to 74. So, I'm a bit befuddled as to how I have a rating of 72(35).