Reputation System

[SomaZ]

Hello, I'd like to propose a reputation system in hopes of improving the community since it does receive a lot of hate (it's not that bad though but could use improvement). First of all, I don't think I'm a good example of a nice HoN player since I like to flame for small mistakes but I do want the players that are nice and helpful to be rewarded and for them to feel like they're needed.

I gave this a lot of thought and would like to post the results in this thread.
My goals for the system:
+ Positive only
I have heaps and heaps of reasons, real life analogies and deep thoughts on why the system should not involve anything "negative". No "Bad Karma" or "T-Downs" or "-"s of any sort or kind. There should be no way to be bad in this system. I want to fix the community not by punishing bad behavior but by rewarding good behavior. Again, I have tons of reasons, too many to list here. In other words: Nothing negative, deal with it.
+ Makes a difference
I don't want "rep" that is just for show. I want it to mean something and I want it to have an impact on players. This means that it should be simple and intuitive because otherwise nobody will bother. I also want it to carry a reward because otherwise nobody will care. The system should not be a waste of resources it should make the community better.


That being said, the details:
+ Each player is given 3 votes. After a vote has been used it takes 5 games for it to be restored.
+ After a Matchmaking (only) game is over a player can "T-Up" a person on any of the teams from the match stats screen.
+ It is possible to use all 3 votes on a single game.
After a game is over you can use up your "votes" to give out "T-Ups" to anyone you see fit. You can use 1, you can use all 3. After you do it takes 5 games to get them back (you get it on the 5th game, i.e. you vote at the end of your game, you play 4 more games afterwards, then when you play a 5th one you'll get the vote back at the end of it).
+ Using all 3 votes on a single game will reduce the cooldown from 5 games to 4.
If you're feeling generous and give out 3 T-Ups in a single game I'd like the system to reduce the cooldown of votes. This means people that are extra nice get to be nice a bit more.
- You cannot give a T-Up to a player who was in your group (TMM).
This is pretty self-explanatory, to prevent abuse. You can only T-Up someone if you've played a game with him and you can't T-Up your buddies.

Edit: Another potential rule to prevent abuse since one of the posters raised a concern?
- You have to be verified to give or receive T-Ups.
Although I don't really see people creating tons of new accounts just to give out free T-Ups to random people at a faster than normal rate. Frankly, I don't think this is needed.

The rewards:
+ Every T-Up is recorded on your stats page and gives you +5 silver coins.
+ Every 10 T-Ups give you 30 gold coins.
+ Amount of T-Ups shows in "quick stats" (when you hover over the stats icon in a game).
Players should be rewarded. I don't want a system where every T-Up gives you 1 silver coin and nobody gives a damn.


The questions:
Q: Why 3 votes and a cooldown of 5 games?
I would say 3 votes is to give the player the option to reward several players on his team if he happens to meet a lot of nice people in a single game. However, I based 3/5 on the mathematical (or statistical?) average so to speak. On average you will win about 50% of your games. You are most likely to give out a T-Up when you've won a game (because you will feel nice). You will most likely give out 1 T-Up at a time. This means that on average in 5 games you will give out 2.5 T-Ups (relatively speaking). The choice for me then was: Do I make it 2/5 (2 votes max) or 3/5?
2/5 (below average) would force the players to be more careful with their votes. As a result people would be afraid to spend them and remain "maxed" on votes for potentially long periods of time. I don't want it to feel like that. I want the people to feel relatively free to give out positive karma without giving them complete freedom. I think an above average such as 3/5 would be perfect here as people are encouraged to spend more votes.

Q: Why can you T-Up players on the opposing team?
I thought about this and the conclusion I came to was: Well, why the hell not? Removing this possibility would only promote hate. Why not give the players the option? How good would it feel to receive a T-Up from someone on the enemy team?

Q: Would this be anonymous?
I believe this should be anonymous (makes it easier to give out T-Ups and adds that hidden "Omg someone likes me" factor to the equation) but it should tell you which team was the voter from (hellbourne/legion). If the voter feels the need he will let the player know himself.

Q: What if I receive a T-Up from the enemy team as a mockery i.e. "scrub you lost so hard noob here enjoy this T-Up dumpster"?
That would be one nice "mockery" :P

Q: What if instead of nice players T-Ups will go to players that carry well?
First of all, I don't think many people will T-Up a carry that flames his teammates (like me). A player would have to be a carry and a decent person. Secondly, why not? Some players think they deserve more for being really good players, often blaming the MMR system and bad teammates. If they are truly good players and nice teammates why not reward them, I think this would do the system much more good than harm!
Imagine a game where a player goes on a crazy streak (15-0) but still loses because of his teammates. Instead of flaming like he would do in 90% of cases he will be more inclined to be nice. Be nice when losing with a 15-0 score. Just think about it.

Q: 5 silver per T-Up and 30 gold per 10 T-Ups? Won't S2 go bankrupt?
No (I hope). I've already mentioned this but I want the system to make a difference, not be a weird unused system that holds no benefits.
If you receive 100 T-Ups you get 500 silver and 300 gold coins. Is that fair? Well, I think that if a person was nice to 100 other players (on average in 100 games) I think he deserves those coins. I want players that are nice to be paid for what they do. I want this to make a difference.
Nice players will enjoy extra perks. Some sales will potentially be lost because of this but arguably some sales will be gained because of an overall nicer less rage-inducing community. This also gives another argument for S2 in the "Can't buy everything in the shop" case. You can! Even EA, even premium alts, provided that you're a good guy.

Q: You suuure S2 won't go bankrupt?
Numbers can always be tweaked! I think numbers should be high on the system's release and afterwards adjusted to be lower if required (after people have started using the system). That being said there are a lot of complaints for silver prices being too high.

Q: What is the lowest reward you're willing to accept?
No less than 3 silver per T-Up and 10 gold for every 10 T-Ups.
Edit: As of the recent changes to HoN I can now agree to not giving a gold reward.


That about covers it. Hope this gets somewhere, please vote and tell me what you think.

Updated thoughts (Edit)

I've had time to read some feedback and I've also had some time to think the system over again so here are my updated thoughts.

The "T-Up exchanges" problem, I'm on the fence here. We would have to see if it would be a problem or not. An easy solution would be to make it reportable with RAP (the act of asking for an exchange or begging) with the consequences being reputation reduced to and frozen at 0 for a while. But that introduces something "negative" to the system and I'm not sure I want that.


For new players:
Another idea I had was kind of a new idea but the reputation system goes well with it. I thought of creating some kind of "message" that is sent to all teammates ingame saying "Player xyz is new to the game, show your support if you can!". Basically it would tell everyone on the team when there was a new player. This would hopefully make the first games much easier and much more pleasant for newbies so that people wouldn't complain how everyone was flaming them. I'm not sure what the criteria for this would be, like a certain number of games or something the player can select himself if he wishes to.
The idea with the reputation system is to give these "new" players a voting power of 2 or even 3. What this would mean is that a single T-Up would count as 2 or even 3 reputation. I think everybody understands what impact this would have.


I also found ghnurbles' idea of rewarding nice players by reducing their queue times interesting but that could separate the community a bit where high rep players would be a form of "elite" where finding games for the rest would be more difficult.

[Mist_au]

I think the concept is fantastic, to get the HoN community to see good in people instead. However I doubt s2 would implement it in its current state. This is because offering gold coins as rewards would be too good to be true. This is because i can see me and my friends farming T-ups to get coins and making new accounts etc. to farm the coin. Great idea though :).

[SomaZ]

Glad you like it! But I am curious, how would you be able to farm the coins? According to the system I proposed you can't T-Up anyone you queued with (in a group) and trying to abuse the MM system with a large number of fake accounts would require a tremendous amount of effort for at most 20-30 T-Ups on one of those fake accounts.

[RandyCow]

Personally, I think it's a great idea. People need to be rewarded for the good things they do, and people that do negative things should not go unpunished. This is a great way to deal with the current attitudes of some people and will change the way that they play (hopefully). I hope this does get implemented in the game as it will cause a lot more people to "play nice".

[MrMaoam]

It's defently a great idea I think. Everytime I play I want to be nice to my teammates and so I want them to be nice to me too. The Problem is that the players normally don't know eachother and because of that they think "Hey they are just random guys and I will probably never meet one of them IRL, also I don't get anything when I'm nice to them and being an ******* is just way easier."

[Zarothe]

I voted no simply because this type of system has been implemented yet for a reason because it is far too easy to be abused. First of all you only get 12 coins max for winning a game(this isn't counting getting a immortal or annihilation because those happen very rarely) so you are basically upping the silver gain by 60% and as we all know S2 doesn't like that and we know this with recent price changes *cough cough* 3k silver alts * cough*.

And what is stop people from making a new account constantly and boost other peoples silver? If the game was not f2p then I would yes YES YES! But sadly it is not so No No NO.

[SomaZ]

There are ways to prevent abuse like making it verified only and numbers can be tweaked but I don't really see how people would just create new accounts to give out free coins to everyone. I mean, based on what you said right now you can already create new accounts and give people "free wins" but that's not really happening.
And silver gain is upped by roughly 25% (on average) and only for people that are nice, I don't see that as much of a problem.

[Danijela_]

Hmm... I think the major problem is that there will be too many smileys ingame. There are not just people who are nice and people who are not. I like to write something when its necessary and ofc in a polite tone, but just that wont be rewarded. So people will just try to be as friendly as possible without the meaning behind it, only for getting the T's. That is bad karma. Ofc u notice when theres someone whos really nice but in that case i couldnt give him a T without thinking 'was that pretended? or not?' and that is bad karma, too. Additionaly Im not sure that even the really nice ppl would be rewarded because most players might just give their Ts to the 'coolest' ppl -> in fact the ones with the best or atleast good stats or who won the game for them (and didnt flame). Its sure that ppl wont appreciate players with bad stats, this is simply a thing of emotion. Well if that makes the flamers stop hate, it would be good ofc, but there is always a 'dark' side. In that case it could create a 'wrong' politeness that could be annoying when overwhelming, and the reason of this is that the reward is too high. Imo a lesser reward would reduce it more to a thing of the good feeling when someone T'ed u up, and this is the essence and what we need, i think.
S2 could also react with some harder bans on flaming issues (and raise the infraction point limit on 3), but its definitely the better way to push nice ppl instead of punishing the bad, youre right ;)
So anyways i think your idea would definitely be a great advantage to the game and the community, kind of a revolution

[SomaZ]

Hmm... I think the major problem is that there will be too many smileys ingame. There are not just people who are nice and people who are not. I like to write something when its necessary and ofc in a polite tone, but just that wont be rewarded. So people will just try to be as friendly as possible without the meaning behind it, only for getting the T's. That is bad karma. Ofc u notice when theres someone whos really nice but in that case i couldnt give him a T without thinking 'was that pretended? or not?' and that is bad karma, too. Additionaly Im not sure that even the really nice ppl would be rewarded because most players might just give their Ts to the 'coolest' ppl -> in fact the ones with the best or atleast good stats or who won the game for them (and didnt flame). Its sure that ppl wont appreciate players with bad stats, this is simply a thing of emotion. Well if that makes the flamers stop hate, it would be good ofc, but there is always a 'dark' side. In that case it could create a 'wrong' politeness that could be annoying when overwhelming, and the reason of this is that the reward is too high. Imo a lesser reward would reduce it more to a thing of the good feeling when someone T'ed u up, and this is the essence and what we need, i think.
S2 could also react with some harder bans on flaming issues (and raise the infraction point limit on 3), but its definitely the better way to push nice ppl instead of punishing the bad, youre right ;)
So anyways i think your idea would definitely be a great advantage to the game and the community, kind of a revolution

Very interesting thoughts there, especially with the people being too nice! I even agree to some extent that the reward should be reduced but that's all just numbers that can be tweaked. The main point is the idea.

[SmiLey0]

Hi , Somaz.
This is a very good idea cause for f2p players cannot get many alts heroes and annoucer cause they are low lvl and they get lower coins but this would be great for em and me too and for everybody thats nice to peole.That people should be rewarded ( not you cause you are raging all the time ) but its a great idea!

[Wyverex]

Great idea, but I would not reward this with gold coins.
If possible, I'd rather reward this by giving the player a priority in Queue or some similar benefit

[Moonlight]

Voting this system up!
I hope S2 will implement it as soon as possible!

i aint playing hon to jump in a pool of ragenerds,
i play hon to have a good gaming time.

losing is part of the game, but sadly most people cannot accept that fact and start blaming on everyone but themselves.

[chaos763]

I like this one more than the Thumbs-up suggestion (a little ways down) which is proposing to have the matchmaking games be based on one's thumbs-up. This system, on the other hand, simply rewards players, as opposed to punishing those who are in a bracket where no one appreciates the role that a player has except for a semi carry. Are you a Sand Wraith? Flame. Are you a Magmus? Flame. Are you a Glacius? Flame. Only semi carries and hardcore gankers are ever appreciated. If your team consists of PM, Valk, FA, SS, and Devo, your stupid teammates will be really happy. And if you step out of line with a *gasp* SUPPORT or INITIATOR or HARD CARRY then you aren't going to get thumbs up and instead be placed with trolls who actually deserve to have their thumbs (or lack thereof).

On the other hand, this incentive based system is a lot more fluid, and if you don't get thumbs up then you simply just don't enjoy goodies, which is much better than having to play with trolls and feeders and perhaps even smurfs.

EDIT: Here we go right here: http://forums.heroesofnewerth.com/showthread.php?427795-quot-Thumbs-Up-quot-System

[Windows1997]

Ok, my story be short i voting ofcourse it's great idea but i thinking that s2 community won't accept your with giveaway gold with ''T-ups'', cuz it's to much risk with those gold coins you can get rich and 20% people could not donate cuz they have their own free gold. That's all i don't care you like it or not but it's my comment and i giving away my thoughts.:pebb2:

[CobaltBlue]

I really like the over-all idea of a reputation system. We all know the HoN community needs something to raise its self up. I do however take issue with some of the specifics of the proposal. First, there is no way S2 is going to give-out gold coins like that. Giving out gold coins is simply not an option. The whole purpose of gold coins is to make them distinct from the rewards that can be given-out in-game.

Another issue is the amount of rules involved in making your system work. I think your system WOULD do a fair job without needing too many tweaks, but it isn't an elegant solution, and there is a lot to be said for elegant solutions in gaming. IDK if I would advocate this example, but here is an example of a more elegant solution:
1. up-votes only work in MM
2. can't up-vote own group
3. up-votes transfer 2 silver from giver to recipient
4. you cannot up-vote someone who has just up-voted you

Only 4 rules and it meets all of the same objectives. It even meets extra objectives. --because another issue I have with the proposed system is the lack of value to a vote. In your system, it would be much more likely that 2 people could have the same number of total up-votes and have no where near the same level of nice-ness. The jackass could happen to have been in games with people who give-out up-votes freely, and the nice-guy could have happened to be in games with people who didn't have up-votes to give-out or were stingy with up-voting. The problems being the use of a quota system, the lack of cost to the up-voter, and the exception made to up-voters who give-out up-votes like they were nothing.

Side bar: What is the "T" supposed to stand for in T-up?

My final issue with the proposed system isn't a deal breaker for me, but good behavior and bad behavior are not mutually exclusive. If this system has a goal of reducing the bad behavior in our community, its not being met. Example: Guy 1 is always polite and never upgrades courier. Guy 2 is sometimes a dick and always upgrades courier. Guy 2 has higher reputation in your system. Guy 1 never gets upvotes because he never does anything that stands-out as up-vote worthy. Guy 2 sometimes gets up-votes in the rare games he ups the courier and doesn't act like a dick. While Guy 2 could be doing optimally better, he is comparatively successful.

The facebook "like" system does not have the goal of curbing bad behavior, thus its perfectly reasonable that they don't address bad behavior. Even the positive reinforcement method of training dogs involves negative reinforcers. Without addressing bad behavior directly, crucial information is being withheld from the actors exhibiting the bad behavior. Addressing only good behavior is voodoo pop psychology, and won't be as effective at culling bad behavior as a system that takes both into account.

[Baer]

It's a nice idea, but I think giving out gold coins in any case should be a no-go.
People will always find a way to abuse these thinks, I can think of this one: "Hey random guy, give me t-up and I give you t-up too."

All in all I don't even see something good to come from this (except free coins). Why? If I look at some random stats, see how many t-ups he got, what does it tell me?
If I see a player with many t-ups, does it mean, he is automatically a friendly player (which it should reward for)? No, cause Karma systems like this, in this community, don't work like this. Unfortunately.
I really like this system you created, but I don't really see a brighter future with this one. I voted for "Yes" either way, since why not? It's not that it hurts to have it.

[SomaZ]

I really like the over-all idea of a reputation system. We all know the HoN community needs something to raise its self up. I do however take issue with some of the specifics of the proposal. First, there is no way S2 is going to give-out gold coins like that. Giving out gold coins is simply not an option. The whole purpose of gold coins is to make them distinct from the rewards that can be given-out in-game.

Another issue is the amount of rules involved in making your system work. I think your system WOULD do a fair job without needing too many tweaks, but it isn't an elegant solution, and there is a lot to be said for elegant solutions in gaming. IDK if I would advocate this example, but here is an example of a more elegant solution:
1. up-votes only work in MM
2. can't up-vote own group
3. up-votes transfer 2 silver from giver to recipient
4. you cannot up-vote someone who has just up-voted you

Only 4 rules and it meets all of the same objectives. It even meets extra objectives. --because another issue I have with the proposed system is the lack of value to a vote. In your system, it would be much more likely that 2 people could have the same number of total up-votes and have no where near the same level of nice-ness. The jackass could happen to have been in games with people who give-out up-votes freely, and the nice-guy could have happened to be in games with people who didn't have up-votes to give-out or were stingy with up-voting. The problems being the use of a quota system, the lack of cost to the up-voter, and the exception made to up-voters who give-out up-votes like they were nothing.

Side bar: What is the "T" supposed to stand for in T-up?

My final issue with the proposed system isn't a deal breaker for me, but good behavior and bad behavior are not mutually exclusive. If this system has a goal of reducing the bad behavior in our community, its not being met. Example: Guy 1 is always polite and never upgrades courier. Guy 2 is sometimes a dick and always upgrades courier. Guy 2 has higher reputation in your system. Guy 1 never gets upvotes because he never does anything that stands-out as up-vote worthy. Guy 2 sometimes gets up-votes in the rare games he ups the courier and doesn't act like a dick. While Guy 2 could be doing optimally better, he is comparatively successful.

The facebook "like" system does not have the goal of curbing bad behavior, thus its perfectly reasonable that they don't address bad behavior. Even the positive reinforcement method of training dogs involves negative reinforcers. Without addressing bad behavior directly, crucial information is being withheld from the actors exhibiting the bad behavior. Addressing only good behavior is voodoo pop psychology, and won't be as effective at culling bad behavior as a system that takes both into account.

T-Up stands for Thumbs Up, you gotta know this stuff lol. What you are proposing is an entirely different system where T-Ups are really rare and don't make a big difference (one of my goals). As such, I can't agree with it. Extra explanation: Your system requires people to use their own coins which makes votes less likely to happen, your system is also not anonymous (because of the no return vote rule) which makes it even less likely for people to vote. Finally, the reward is small which means that very few people will bother using it, a waste of effort.
Your system would only work if the community was already good and fixed (in which case there would be no need for it).

"There is no way S2 is going to give gold coins" - I simply don't care. The greed of others does not depend on me, I proposed a suggestion that I thought was fair.
In the example you provided Guy 1 is a "polite" douchebag ("I will politely not upgrade the courier and screw you guys over"), the Guy 2 is a nice guy inside but acts like he's not ("I hate you all noobs but here's a courier for you"). Guy 2 gets rewarded, working absolutely as intended.

Facebook analogy - you've said it yourself, it serves a different purpose, as such, there's not need to bring it to the argument. If anything, facebook is incredibly successful. Furthermore, bad behavior is already addressed in HoN and it's not working too well. No idea about the voodoo pop psychology, I have my own thoughts on things. I'll put it like this: I'm against punishing bad behavior but I'm not against fixing it.
Problem is people think "fixing" requires too much time and effort and "punishment" is the easy way out for them. The results, however, are accordingly bad.


I can think of this one: "Hey random guy, give me t-up and I give you t-up too."

Now, this could be a valid concern. However, there are already measures built in to avoid this type of abuse:
1. Players doing this will mean that they are nice to each other, as such, the system will be working as intended. It is entirely possible for 2 people to like each other enough to be willing to exchange votes.
2. The system is anonymous and guarantee-free. People could easily not vote you back. As such, people are less likely to agree to the exchange, especially so if they don't like the player.
3. There is a voting limit. That makes it more likely for "exchanges" to be impossible and even less likely for people to agree to them.

With the above in mind the amount of abuse would be minimal compared to the amount of true votes. With the exchanges being incredibly risky people will instead use their votes in a "safe" way - T-Upping players that they liked.
If this type of abuse becomes a big concern a simple solution would be making the limit more strict. For example, if people can only vote once in 5 games exchanges become highly unlikely.


If I look at some random stats, see how many t-ups he got, what does it tell me?
If I see a player with many t-ups, does it mean, he is automatically a friendly player (which it should reward for)?

It means that you will most likely enjoy playing with him more than with someone with less T-Ups. Period.

[Radw]

your logic is wrong.
Example: exchanges will be more likely to happen when you restrict the number of votes, if you have only 1 vote you will surely don't want to give it for free.
This would not make the game reward the nicer players as you say.

The votes from other players was discussed since closed beta and the outcome was the same every time: the vote system can not guarantee that the voters will vote with the right cause and restricting the system will cause more players to vote for their own gaining.

Anyway, i think the reward system is very good right now and the vote system doesn't belong here. I know that other games has it, but they don't give any rewards and they don't guarantee either that one players votes are for what they say they are.

The only potentially good thing i can think : "Hey, let me mid, i`ll give u a T-up" or "Buy me a bottle, me and my mates will give u a T" and the bad thing is that some will give the T but the majority won't, of course u can restrict the numbers of T-ups u can gain to 1 from 1 match, or 2 if you allow the other team to vote, but still this can be and it will be abused by players if you give them rewards just for votes. And surely this system wont reward nice people.

btw, in my opinion, just for being nice u don't get such rewards irl, u will get flowers if you are a woman or a kiss from a woman if you are a man(a nice good looking man :)).

[LebbyX]

Good idea. I disagree on gold money ... no gold money bonus ... it is a reputation system. Silver money could be enough.
- A Best Buddy Gamer is good idea ( t-up a player )
- 3 vote on 5 game ... no ... 1 vote for game, optional. Simplier.
- No poll show until it finished
- No gold bonus, only silver.
- You can't vote yourself

- To obtain an extra reputation bonus you must have a minimum of BiggerInt((Team Member - Team Leaver -1) /2) vote ( + X silver )
(i.e: Normal: 5-0-1/2 = 2 ... 1 leaver 5-1-1/2 = 1.5 -> 2 ... 2 Leavers 5-2-1/2=1 , 3 Player 3-0-1/2 = 1 )
This allow to encourage 3vs3 Map and to battle until the end.

- T-U is given in game ( before disconnects )
- Each T-U given is 1 silver ( only 1 ? ... yes )
- Each X T-U received is a rewards ( silver ? )
- Not available if you play in Groups ( TMM ) ( as most says )
- Reputation give you a priority in queue

So i think that if someone saves me or someone wards jungle and rune, or support upgrade courriers,or it wins game for me ... i'll give a T-up easy.

[sadek2002]

great idea i think silver is enough.

[SomaZ]

The switch to all heroes free has been made and store prices have been revised so it's now possible to buy more stuff with silver. I can agree for only giving silver as a reward now.

[sefan]

Have played a lot of Dota 2 lately becose it is to much rages in HoN. But think I will come back to HoN if they add this to the MMR system. It's more fun to play if ppl don't rage on you or other ppl all the time. I think this can help the community to become better. Hope S2 add this.

[OPZ]

Great idea, I've voted yes! I really liked the concept!

My question to you, or a suggestion, why not differntiate T-Ups like: "great support" "good carry" "intiator" (Similar to what dota 2 has) then people will see and understand that if other people T-Up him in that category he must be good at that area. I don't know just a suggestion

[ShAdOw_LaNcE]

Your way of executing this I disagree with almost entirely, as it's riddled with problems. However, having the ability to say that someone on your team was good is O.K.

What I have problems with:
- Coin rewards. There shouldn't be any reward for this except the number of +s you have. I don't want a bunch of kids acting like goody goodies just for coins. A nice person doesn't need to be compensated for being nice.
- Not being able to T-up your MM buddies. Why not? If you have MM buddies, you play with them for a reason, usually because they're nice. Rather it should be that the same player can't T-up you more than once. If you play with a LOT of friends, don't you deserve to be considered a nice guy for having THAT many people want to play with you? I don't think there are too many, "Leagues of Trolls" in HoN.
- All of your numbers. You should be able to T-up whoever you want whenever you want, but not be able to do it twice. You're not gonna find someone who randomly T-ups everyone they find if they're horrible.

If you have any rebuttal to what I've said I'll happily respond.

[n00buaddib]

I'm against giving any rewards to nice people. If you wanna have a karma system that's fine by me, but giving out silver (and especially gold lol) is excessive, not necessary and frankly missing the point. If you're nice anyway, you're probably doing allright without extra silver coins and if you want to 'buy' nice attitude, that's hypocritical. The only award I could see them getting is a unique alt avatar (kindda like Prof. Repulsor), account icon or something. But again for god's sake, no coins. People would farm them, mark my words.


- 3 vote on 5 game ... no ... 1 vote for game, optional. Simplier.

I also think I like this idea more. Simpler indeed.

[HecticLebo]

I like the idea, but getting rewarded for being nice? No. People will abuse this and will defeat the whole purpose of it, and trolls will be the ones with all the "T-ups". You're not a toddler; you're supposed to be nice for the sake of being nice, not to be rewarded with something.

[SomaZ]

You have too much faith in people. I don't think most people will suddenly get nice because of this system if there's not even a bit of reward. I liked the idea of separating it into categories (Good Support/Carry) but that could clutter up the interface.

[LeftHandFury]

I voted yes to this. I read a lot in the end about you should be nice for the sake of nice.... Well obviously in the HoN community that is not working. If you take any undergrad level psychology class you will learn that positive reinforcement is a powerful tool to modify behavior. We do it with children and pets, why would this not work in HoN?

After reading I can understand why people are against gold coins, but I am still for them as a reward but maybe lowering the reward a bit. From the rules posted it seems like they will be very very difficult if even possible to farm by cheating. Also I would argue that these people deserve perks, I mean they make the game more enjoyable for everyone... I think playing with decent people brings a better game experience than any ult avatar.

And some of you don't seem to understand. It is called a T-up for thumbs up, you give it to a helpful person, not to the guy who tells you to remember to buy items at the start. You give them a reward for making your game more enjoyable. "They may be overly nice just to get coins..." Why is this a problem. If every game I went to there were nice people willing to help me with the game and learn to get better I would not care if they were mean people irl... You will only give a T-up to people who are genuinely nice, and if they can fake it who cares, it was real enough to make you have a better game experience. I think the people who down voted this are probably the people who just enjoy being trolls....

[Eatsyourhead]

Seems like a good system. I'd support it.

[dpunk]

I voted yes because I think it's a 'good idea'. But OP, your system needs to be completely redone. Only allowing a vote every 5 games isn't enough. Quite frankly the chance of reward is so low it isn't going to be enough of an incentive for most people, but more importantly, I believe players will feel it is too random.

Your current system has too much variance in the amount of points a player can receive. There will be some games where no player has any votes available yet others with every player in the game with 3 t-votes saved up, meaning a player could potentially receive 27 t-votes = 195 silver coins.

[ghnurbles]

A relevant Gabe Newell quote:

“We’re trying to figure out ways so that people who are more valuable to everybody else [are] recognized and accommodated. We all know people where if they’re playing we want to play, and there are other people where if they’re playing we would [rather] be on the other side of the planet. It’s just a question of coming up with mechanisms that recognize and reward people who are doing things that are valuable to other groups of people.”

I absolutely agree HoN should have a system to this effect. How it should be implemented is a trickier question, but I think there's no way S2 hasn't been thinking about it.

[Chipson]

I love this idea! Well described suggestion, the only thing I would want to change is 30 silver for 10 T-Ups. 10 silver (and +5 silver for that single 10th T-Up) would (to me) be more than enough I believe. Other than that, a Yes-vote without doubt from me!

EDIT: Now that I think of it, perhaps the 5 game cooldown should be lowered as well.

[dragons_rise]

This is a great and well thought out idea! It would be another step in the transformation that the community has has been going through leading to the increase in enjoyability of gameplay.

I approve! (For whatever that is worth.)

[ghnurbles]

Here are my thoughts on implementing a community rating system:

Goal:

To improve the behaviour and attitude of the community through the offering of incentives. To achieve this there needs to be a consistent reward for being at least mannered and not flaming in games, and also a reward for being enjoyable to play with, as we want to encourage both behaviours.

How to Obtain Feedback:

In order for the reward and hence behaviour to be consistent, feedback needs to be gathered after every game. For that to happen, the feedback system can't be optional. If feedback is mandatory it needs to be unobtrusive and take as little time as possible, or players will simply give bogus answers to get through it quickly. Asking a player for feedback on all four members of their team is definitely too obtrusive, so players should be asked for feedback on one team-mate at most. This is still effective because as long as players don't know who is going to provide feedback for them, they're still obliged to behave well for their entire team.

So, players would be given a splash screen or window for feedback on a single team-mate after each game. It would need the team-mate's name, maybe their hero and chat-log (to jog the player's memory), and a simple feedback mechanism. Given the goal of rewarding players for being mannered and enjoyable to play with, a simple Mannered? Yes/No and a Fun? Yes/No would serve the purpose, with the window closing once both are answered.

How to Keep the Feedback Accurate:

Players who are rude or upset are more likely to give inaccurate negative feedback to team-mates. To mitigate this, feedback should be weighted based on the community rating of the person giving feedback (so if you behave poorly your feedback has little effect). So how do we produce a rating from the Mannered/Fun feedback given?

In order to encourage consistent good behaviour a rating has to be based on a player's most recent feedback. I would say basing the rating on the last 15 responses received is enough to avoid spikes while still being accurate to the player's current behaviour. Say for example ratings are on a scale of 0 to 10, with all players starting at 5 rating. A ridiculously fun player who received only Yes/Yes in their last 15 games would have the highest rating of 10, while an angry flaming troll who recieved only No/No in their last 15 games would have a rating of 0. Weighting the system means that feedback from players with a rating of 0 will not affect other players at all, while a player with a rating of 10 will have twice the effect of a player with a rating of 5 (because the better behaved you are, the more likely you are to be giving accurate feedback).

Obviously players would not be asked for feedback on group-mates or friends (or ex-friends, if possible) to avoid bias and abuse. So how would the system handle the situation of a 4-lock group with a pub? Given the asking limit of one piece of feedback per player the pub would only provide feedback for one of the 4-lock players, chosen at random. But if the 4-lock aren't asked for feedback on each other, should they all provide it for the pub? Receiving 4 pieces of feedback for a single game makes your behaviour in that game more important than in other games (which it shouldn't be), so there should be a limit of 1 piece feedback RECEIVED per player per game also. This means that 3 players won't be asked for feedback and 3 players won't receive it, but that's fine - they'll get feedback in other games.

How to Reward Good Behaviour:

In order for the system to be effective the reward has to appeal to everyone involved. I don't believe coins fit the bill, as there are plenty of people who don't care about coins, and so good behaviour will have no reward for them. So if not coins, what does everyone care about?

Queue time.

Yes, I'm serious. The reward has to appeal to everyone. Players with a higher community rating should have increased queue priority. This is easily implemented by by having the average rating of a group modify the "Time Waited" of that group (as queue priority is based on time waited). For example, players with a rating of 5 could start with a bonus of 1 minute waited, and players with a rating of 10 could start with a bonus of 2 minutes.

But obviously, queue time doesn't effect players who play public games rather than Match Making. So how can the rating affect public games? Quite easily, actually. Badly behaved players (around 3 rating or below) could lose hosting privileges, and games could be have a "Community" option available to the host that prevents players with a rating of 3 or below from joining.

So the reward for good behaviour would be Match-Making queue priority, hosting privileges, and the ability to play "Community" public games that have less flamers in them.

Visibility:

Feedback should be anonymous to discourage flaming, and rating should only be privately viewable (or viewable to friends only) for the same reason. Arguably stats should be private too, but that's a different discussion.

Summary:

- Players give feedback on whether a team-mate was "Mannered" and "Fun" after a game.
- Players give at most 1 piece of feedback per game, and receive at most 1 (anonymously).
- Players who are reasonably behaved will receive queueing and hosting privileges.
- Players who are exceptionally fun to play with will recieve an additional queueing benefit.

I believe that achieves the stated goal. It is possible I missed something, though.

[Alfawarlord]

Do this, perfect idea

[lumpor7]

There's one flaw with the system though.

"T-up 4 T-up?"

Also, people will still continue shouting at each other. As most people who have been angry know, anger has alot to do with pride. People aren't going to be willing to swallow their pride for 5 silver.

Also, being rude garuantees that you won't get a T-up, but remember that NOT being rude does NOT garuantee you will get a T-up.

Nice try though.

[Senfei]

Could a S2 Employer say something?

I like this and want it to be implemented asap.

[Shioya]

There's one flaw with the system though.

"T-up 4 T-up?"

Also, people will still continue shouting at each other. As most people who have been angry know, anger has alot to do with pride. People aren't going to be willing to swallow their pride for 5 silver.

Also, being rude garuantees that you won't get a T-up, but remember that NOT being rude does NOT garuantee you will get a T-up.

Nice try though.

I'd stop shouting for 5 silver o.o . In fact, I'd be super nice to people even if it means having only the chance to get 5 silver. Coins *-*
He clearly stated that the purpose of this is to incentivate good behavior, not "neutral" behavior.
And you should stop trying to figure out what's wrong with the ideia when you didn't even consider the benefits.

Supported! Implemention required!!

[ghnurbles]

I'd stop shouting for 5 silver o.o . In fact, I'd be super nice to people even if it means having only the chance to get 5 silver. Coins *-*
He clearly stated that the purpose of this is to incentivate good behavior, not "neutral" behavior.
And you should stop trying to figure out what's wrong with the ideia when you didn't even consider the benefits.

Supported! Implemention required!!

Actually lumpor7 is correct about the problems with OP's suggestion: If you only reward people for being *super* nice, then there is no incentive to move from bad behaviour to neutral behaviour. And reducing flaming should surely be the most important goal of a system like this. Additionally a lot of players are likely to use a simple thumbs-up system to reward players on their team for carrying the game, instead of using it as intended to reward players for being nice.

[Radio_Raheem]

I thought of something the other day concerning this and wanted to post it here. Reputation points need to be treated like any other resource in a game, and one of the rules of game resources is DISPOSABILITY. Remember in Diablo2 when gold became valueless because there was too much of it and SoJ became the standard currency? Remember in Guild Wars 1 how ectos became currency because gold devalued so fast? That would totally happen with a reputation or karma system like this unless there was a way to remove karma. What I don't want is a -1 system. Too easy to abuse. Instead it has to be automated.

In short - there needs to be a sink for rep points, otherwise your number of games will directly affect your rep more than how nice you are will affect your rep. +1's you receive either need to expire after a certain amount of time or they need to be displayed in a ratio with your total number of matches, that way the guy that plays 5 games every day doesn't immediately outclass the guy that only plays 5 games every week.

Solution 1 - +1's expire after after a certain number of matches
Pros - this removes the inherent imbalance created by having a volume of games played higher or lower than the community average
- once the first expirations happen there will be commonly recognized "high" karma and a commonly recognized "average" karma
Cons - players that play more will have +1's dropping off very frequently, and infrequent players will have +1's that stay on their stats for months or even a year.

Solution 2 - Karma is displayed as a ratio of [Karma/match]
Pros - eliminates the need for a sink or a way to get rid of Karma
- Total Karma can still be an available stat for bragging rights
Cons - Player's total games played at implementation will throw the ratio out of whack
- it will take a very long time to establish what a 'good' ratio should be, unless games played before Karma implementation aren't counted in the ratio.

MacroHard might be able to weigh in on this with some good mathemagical insight (and I hope he does).

[IronManzl]

I love love LOVE this idea! I think this is exactly what HoN needs, and I agree completely with the notion of rewarding positive behaviour instead of punishing negative behaviour (I use this philosophy a lot in my study) and having much better outcomes!

I honestly hope they do implement this, if done right, it has the potential to not only change the game for long term good, but bring in a flood of new players who aren't turned off from the community.

Obviously this won't stop everybody from being pricks and trolling/raging etc., but there will be people who will love being rewarded for doing something like this!

I hope S2 seriously considers this, it is something amazing and like I said, could impact the game in an incredible way!!!

Much respect SomaZ! :D

[MoDuZzz]

Simply wouldnt work properly... I see people in Dota 2 asking for these 'likes' (so to speak) when they are not even in the game, just sitting in chat, trading stuff.

[PiefPoefPaf]

Best idea ever.

[Frood]

Simply wouldnt work properly... I see people in Dota 2 asking for these 'likes' (so to speak) when they are not even in the game, just sitting in chat, trading stuff.
Why not? you can only reward people you play with, and you can't reward people in your TMM group.


I think one thing to consider is in-game T-Up trades. "Hey blue, ill up you 3 for 3"

I can think of 3 scenarios where this will occur.

2 people carry a team and forge a comeraderie and agree to up eachother

any two people make arbitrary trades

teams organize "we all up eachother" systems where all 3-5 players all end up with 3 votes.


The second two i think, are not problems, because they require teams be amicable. It's mildly exploitative, but it requires a degree of trust that won't be accomplished without people actually being nice to eachother, and besides it can only happen in 1-5 games.



One suggestion that might be worth consideration. Give a player a block that doesnt renew for 10 games. If they see or suspect unfair trades, simply allow them to block all transactions, only between the 2 suspected players. 1/10 games wont be particularly abusable, and if a player is genuinely nice A) people wont do it to them, and B) if a player is genuinely nice they'll likely get coins from more than 1 person. Obviously this should be anonymous as well.

[IgorEMC]

I read the entire Thread and got some conclusions. First of all, if OP agreed to change the gold coins for silver coins, he should edit the post so people who just read the first post and vote doesn't have the wrong idea about the whole thing.

Well, I'll put here what I liked and what doesn't seems to be appliable.

I liked the ideas of...

Rewarding somebody for good behavior (faking to be nice isn't easy as people are sugesting)
Not punishing somebody for bad behavior (punishing isn't always a good method. If someone is clearly breaking the rules, you can either kick him or report)
T-Ups appear in stats (I'd like people knowing that I'm a Good Guy Greg of HoN)
Silver Coins as Rewards (Coins are pretty nice, and since Alt avatar and stuff are pretty expensive in Silver coins, a few coins - or just one per T-Up - wouldn't hurt)
People can't reward themselves or Friends from their group. (To avoid abusing)
Rewarding is anonimous and after disconection. (People should have some time to think about giving away his T-Up)
One Optional T-Up per game (Like the creator of the idea said, simplier. I agree that big rewards and limiting T-Up too much would promove abuse)
Max o 3 T-Ups stored (So you can T-up more than one dude in a game if people are really nice with everyone)
Verified only players can T-Up (To avoid abusing, though I find it hard to happen that way, like OP said)
Cummulative reward are unique Alt-avatars, account Icons and other purchasable stuff. ( Would work like that. First 50 T-Up you can choose an unique item from HoN store made just for nice players with thumbs-Up. When you reach 100 T-Up you can pick another thing. From 200, and every 100 T-Up, you can choose an Unique Alt-Avatar. That would be a nice reward, wouldn't mess up HoN market, currency and stuff, the purchase of alt-avatar would be as slow as if you only buy them with silver coins)
People may T-Up someone from enemy Team (well, why not?)
Appliable only in MMS. (Public matches do not give you silver...why should it give any other rewards?)

What I do not like about everything

Gold Coins as rewards (You're not tipping someone for the good service he made you when saving you from a gank. This system should work like a tap in the back and a "GJ guys, hope you win next game")
Shorter Queue times (wth, can't you wait 2 minutes for a game to start? Go check your facebook while that. Go take a pee, eat something. HoN will yell not once, but twice when the picking phase starts. Plus that would be a nerf for new players that did not play enough games for a good T-Up score)
Differencial rewards, like good supporter, or good carrier (that would make the system too slow. Feedback must be fast and confortable, like a simple T-Up)

And I REALLY think HoN should be nicer to new players. These MOBA games are these kind of games which are hard to learn and Harder to master. To use as example, Tetris is an easy to learn and hard to master game, God of War is an easy to learn and easy to master game. HoN tryed to overcome this with tutorials and in game guides, but still pretty hard to learn every concept, at least enough for you to jump right into online gameplay with experienced players, and that's what usually happens. And a lot of people learns to play by the help from other players. Unfortunally, HoN is so full of rage and pride that noobs are usually flamed. People forget that they were noobs one day. In adition, the fast gameplay aspect of MOBA games make comunication hard, so it's almost impossible to teach someone how to play with a character or the entire game in the first 2 min before the game really starts. It's hard enough calling miss without missing a creep last hit!

I didn't vote. I agree with the concept but not with the details. I'd be glad if OP reply my post. And I must congratulate you for the initiative.
Well, that about covers what I think about this subject. Sorry about my bad english, not my first language.

[SomaZ]

In Dota 2 the system is not implemented in a nice way.

[_Blopper_]

In Dota 2 the system is not implemented in a nice way.
I can aggree with you. I played Dota 2 and it was like no one cares. It's just there so they can say they are doing something community. It doesn't has a effect overall.

But now some thought about this topic I made:

- I think you should have 2 votes after each game. It's not too much so you waste it for no reason and it's also not to less so you won't want to give it away.
- There should be a separation between pubs and MM. You should be able to receive feedback in both as it's not the goal to be a reward system. So why not making it possible to T-Up somebody in pub games. Nevertheless, there should be no rewards and stuff for those pub T-Ups, it should be just a stat.
- The question is, if you should give them silver coins or give them rewards in another way. But first the categories ->
- Making different categories would be a good way, too make it work with those rewards. For example:
-> (Nice behaviour)
-> (Good Teamplayer)
-> (Beneficial communication)
-> Good teaching
-> Good support
-> Good carrying
-> Good initiating

When u have this categories now you can not only see, what strengths somebody has, so you can be prepared how his playstyle will be, and you can create achievments and special bonuses.
My idea would be, to give everything in the store a flag which will tell you, wheter it has one of these categories or not. When it has been flagged as " Good support", you would get some discount on the silver price, which will increase with every T-Up you get in this categorie.
Example: (notice the amount of discount is just as an example and may be changed between the categories of feedback and store)

Your stats: Good teaching: 2 Ups, Good support: 5, Good carrying: 3, Good initiating: 0

You want to buy this Alt Avatars:

Magebane skin (500 silver) (Carry)
Magmus skin (500 silver) (Initiator)
Glacius skin (500 silver) (Support)

Good teaching Ups would give you 0.2% discount each for every item in the store.
-> Glacius skin

(5 * 0.5%) + (2 * 0.2%) = 2.9%
2.9% of 500 = 14.5 rounding up to 15
You would get 15 silver coins discount on the Glacius skin.

-> Magebane skin

(3 * 0.5%) + (2 * 0.2%) = 1.9%
1.9% of 500 = 9.5 rounding up to 10
You would get 10 silver coins discount on the Magebane skin

-> Magmus skin

(0 * 0.5%) + (2 * 0.2%) = 0.4%
0.4% of 500 = 2
You would get 2 silver coins discount on the Magmus skin.

I don't know what I should do with the ones in the brackets yet.

- When you choose to implement achievments for the categories, you should be rewarded like this ( my opinion)
5 Carry Ups = 5 silver coins
10 Carry Ups = 10 silver coins
15 Carry Ups = 11 silver coins
20 Carry Ups = 12 silver coins
and so on...
Ofcourse you should also gain some experience but I don't know how much should be given :D

- You shouldn't be able to give players in your friendlist Ups, as this would be like a 5-10 free Ups for you :D
- You shouldn't be able to give more than 1 Up to one player in like 1 or 3 months.

That's all for now :)

[SomaZ]

Bump because I think we really need this.

[Tay_z0nday]

Yes if we can give a message with it!

[opamp]

I think your "t-ups" should be shown as a percentage. I would assign a very low coin value to it.

I think it would be more useful to be in the game with someone and say "wow you have 20% t-ups, nice"

[Dukez95]

this is a pretty decent idea

[Respond]

this sounds terrible

whats to stop people from just constantly using their votes every single time they can on random people in the hopes that others do the same


maybe every 100 recommendations you get some coins but every single 1 would just make it corrupt

[SilverHorus]

I love the idea. I'm with you 100%

[SomaZ]

this sounds terrible

whats to stop people from just constantly using their votes every single time they can on random people in the hopes that others do the same


maybe every 100 recommendations you get some coins but every single 1 would just make it corrupt

What's to stop random people from posting random stuff without thinking? Nothing!

[Master_One]

I love your idea! I hope you don't mind, that i put the link to this poll into my sig.

[Millikin]

Reward part should be reworked.
This wouldl become a simple hand out rewards to get coins over time.
If any rewards it should come from getting "T-Up" and not giving.
Flamers and ragers would simply just use their votes for personal gain (as would mostly everyone else as well). And no change in the community would happen.

So if any rewards would be to speak of it is probably better to be of a recieve basis rather than a give basis.

[Riftster]

no idea what the **** this is but up voted it anyways ^^

[I3lackSoul]

I dont think this will make a huge difference but its still an improvement to the better non the less

[Lboy]

Great idea, minor things I would change are:

1. Remove the restoration and the limit.(Ofcourse there will be the limit for 4 T-Us per game and 1 per player) People are not going to give T-Us willy nilly, why would u?
2. S2 should make a special section in the RAP-function for players who ASK for T-Us or who want to trade T-Us. (Optional: this report requires to use 1 or no silver coins at all).
3. Silver coins as rewards are enough, gold coins are a bit too much.
4. The message about new players. If S2 implements this idea, when a new player finishes a game he should be immediately informed about the T-U system with a message saying "Don't forget there is also a choice where u can reward/T-U players who have been nice to you! And if a player has asked u to thumbs him up or ask for a trade for whatever reason, u should report him/her!"(Might want to change the choice of words and give it a feeling of u don't have to do it, it's optional). IMO this would encourage players to be nice to new players. (Optional: give bonus coins if a new player thumbs u up. This would encourage u even more to be nice to new players)
And in the message where u are informed about the new player in your team, it should also contain "Remember to be nice! And who knows u might get bonus coins by doing so!".

Thumbs up for being nice is sufficient. No need for other options.

People might say this will not help the community, but hey it's a step in that direction. Everything starts of somewhere, and your idea may be it.

[Gringoire]

Somaz's suggestion is really really good and I love it. +1!

The only real flaw is T-up trading, but it could be solved or at least made harder.

If two players vote each other, both t-up are canceled. Of course you can't see it immediately in after-match (if not you could change target), but at the next match end your T-up will be still there.
That solution could still be workarounded with a "triangular trading": I T-up him who T-up you and you T-up me. But it would be a huge complication...
Also we can suppose that the two more nice and gentleman guys of the match will vote each other and their votes are lost, but I'm sure they will accept this small loss in order the system works.

Someone else wrote that such a system will push griefers to be polite just hoping to receive a T-up... well, why not? I by far prefer to play with 9 polite guys than 9 flamers, even if they are doing that just for silver coins. Furthermore acting positive for some matches (regardless of motivation) could became a habit even for flamers, when they will realize that ii is much more rewarding for gameplay too.

[Gringoire]

more than 92% positive votes.
C'mon S2 :)

[Haku`s_Love]

Keep linking this page on other posts guys .. Let it be heard