View Full Version : Karma System
Bindin
12-02-2009, 05:35 PM
What is it?
A simple system of points that will display the community's opinion towards that player, which will allow/prevent certain things.
Why do it?
Any player's specific amount of karma will serve as a well representation of what the community thinks of him/her. This would aid in making sure you play with people that will make your gaming experience more enjoyable, and it would help weed out the people that would make your gaming experience less enjoyable.
How does it work?
Certain things would add/remove different values to a person's karma level.
Things that would increase your karma level include(these numbers are just an example):
Completing a game (possibly more for playing with less than a full team) :: +1
Getting +karma-ed (being a good team player, helping someone out in the forums etc.) :: +whatever
Successful vote kicks :: +whatever
Things that would decrease your karma level include(these numbers are just an example):
Leaving a game :: -3
Having a post on the forums deleted :: -5
Being -karma-ed (bad team player, feeder, wont stop annoying others in game)
Unsuccessful vote kicks
What would high levels of karma allow me to do?
Only players with above a certain karma level would be allow to start vote kicks, remakes(hmmmmmm), and pauses.
Why would low levels of karma prevent me from doing?
Having low karma levels would result in not being able to use chat, neither voice nor type. You would not be able to start any sort of ingame vote. Players would not want to play with you because the community does not like you.
EDIT also maybe preventing access to the forums.
Can't this system be abused?
This system would allow each player a certain number of votes per week. This would also prevent you from using all your +/-karma on one person.
EDIT forgot to add that one player would only be able to recieve 3+/3- karma from karma votes per week, this does not include any other forms of +/- karma
That is all I can think of for now, I'm sure I will think of something to add later.
Cool guys give a reason why they voted.
mods, i accidently voted no and it counted multiple times, HALP
you ******* idiots are voting no when this is the best thing that could happen to this game to prevent stat whore ****s from ruining it. gj
OP,
******* noob.
what a constructive and mature way to respond..
OnT: I like the core idea. Not so sure about the restrictions though.. Not being able to use chat means you wouldn't be able to call out missing and such. I still like the idea of being able to give +- karma to people, but maybe it would be better as just a "stat", rather than something that makes you able or unable to do certain things?
ShadowsCrush
12-02-2009, 05:44 PM
Know what else prevents people from ruining the game.
The fact that only people who pay for the game will be playing it.
Even if you only get a certain amount of distributed karma per week or w/e, it could still be organized by friends or clans to systematically -karma a person.
Know what else we don't need, more stats for people to judge others on, seeing as judging based on stats is what causes the problem in the first place.
it worked well for counter-strike 1.6 (ESEA), and it can work well in here.
No, you can't measure things like this in points. It's just too subject to opinion.
Bindin
12-02-2009, 05:49 PM
OnT: I like the core idea. Not so sure about the restrictions though.. Not being able to use chat means you wouldn't be able to call out missing and such.
Well, I see how you are looking at it, I was more thinking along the lines of talking **** to the other team or whatever. Even though the other players can ignore them, it will make them rage a lot harder knowing that there is zero chance of them being able to say anything towards them in "all" chat.
, but maybe it would be better as just a "stat", rather than something that makes you able or unable to do certain things?
If there were no restrictions, there would be no incentive to gain karma. Players who are respected should be rewarded, and players who are not should be "punished"
iDrizzt
12-02-2009, 05:50 PM
No, i'm sry, but the whole concept of a community rating people can't work imo.
Bindin
12-02-2009, 05:54 PM
Know what else we don't need, more stats for people to judge others on, seeing as judging based on stats is what causes the problem in the first place.
Yes, but any smart minded person would be able to notice that you can play carries every game just to get your K:D up or whatever, but still be a horrible team player. I know when I join a game I don't automatically hate everyone, the fact that they are horrible team players/feeders cause me to hate them. This would eliminate me/you from having to play with these types of people.
Stats didn't cause problems in the first place. If you played DotA, you would remember that there were no stats. The DotA community was and is still a community filled up with 90% bad people. This could possibly help the situation with such a horrible community.
KaiOni
12-02-2009, 05:56 PM
It's a good concept, but fundamentally flawed.
Abusable in so many ways, I don't think it'd work. You can't forget people are bastards.
As Isin said; It's far too subject to opinion.
Not to mention you could gather a group of friends together and just Karma rape a target. Then that person no longer has any privelages in game. Good way to spite someone that beat you in a game, no? Or just someone you don't like.
Chilitoke
12-02-2009, 05:56 PM
i like that you get karma for kicking dudes? lets start a karma and kick fest!
btw i voted no since its way to easy to abuse and just lol dump someones karma.
Bindin
12-02-2009, 06:04 PM
i like that you get karma for kicking dudes? lets start a karma and kick fest!.
It would help if you could actually read and comprehend things and/or speak proper English.
KnightDavion
12-02-2009, 07:08 PM
I voted yes. This type of system and matchmaking might actually make most games fun.
Zadam
12-02-2009, 11:59 PM
No I disagree with it. It is a great idea in theory, but I have seen this kind of thing implemented in other games and it is constantly abused. For example someone gets annoyed for no good reason at someone else (eg a noobie playing in a "noobs only match", and not doing too well), and hurling insults at them. The noobie quite rightly gives negative karma. The abusive player then also gives negative karma, and tells the 20 people on his buddy list to also give the newbie negative karma. They then get all the people on their buddy list to give them positive karma the next day to more than make up for the negative karma the newbie gave them. Now the newbie through no fault of his own looks like the one with bad karma, and the douche has a high karma.
KnightDavion
12-03-2009, 01:12 AM
No I disagree with it. It is a great idea in theory, but I have seen this kind of thing implemented in other games and it is constantly abused. For example someone gets annoyed for no good reason at someone else (eg a noobie playing in a "noobs only match", and not doing too well), and hurling insults at them. The noobie quite rightly gives negative karma. The abusive player then also gives negative karma, and tells the 20 people on his buddy list to also give the newbie negative karma. They then get all the people on their buddy list to give them positive karma the next day to more than make up for the negative karma the newbie gave them. Now the newbie through no fault of his own looks like the one with bad karma, and the douche has a high karma.
Limit the power to +/-karma to people you have played against and it works fine...
Zadam
12-03-2009, 02:51 AM
Limit the power to +/-karma to people you have played against and it works fine...
Until the rest of the people on the team are the douchebags clan buddies, poor newbie gets -4 karma, douchebag gets +karma from his clan buddies every day.
KnightDavion
12-03-2009, 08:53 AM
Until the rest of the people on the team are the douchebags clan buddies, poor newbie gets -4 karma, douchebag gets +karma from his clan buddies every day.
Meh poor noob puts out 4 -karmas and recieves a -4 himself. This seems fair. Buddies can only get 1 +karma from each other, so thats balanced.
This system would work.
ShadowsCrush
12-03-2009, 08:54 AM
Fairly certain there was a thread in the Mods section requesting an addition that involved putting a 5 star system for each player, then after each game you could rate each player.
Difference being, his system was for each player, the ranking was not shared in any way.
Hence why it was a better idea.
You don't want a certain person in your games, or thought they were average, rate them as such, but not everyone gets the hero they are strongest with in a random, bd, or even in ap sometimes.
Some people play what the team needs even if it's not what they are best at.
@Above poster:
Look at my signature ;)
And ye, i don't see this happening as community rating. Sorry.
Dordanov
12-03-2009, 09:24 AM
Sorry no, As others have stated, it's too easy to abuse. In a perfect world it would work, but then again, you wouldn't need the system, as it's a perfect world already.
I'm up for a "personal view only" rating like Varp suggested, that should be enough imo.
ShadowsCrush
12-03-2009, 10:29 AM
@Above poster:
Look at my signature ;)
And ye, i don't see this happening as community rating. Sorry.
Lol yeah that guy!
PooTer
12-03-2009, 04:23 PM
It would help if you could actually read and comprehend things and/or speak proper English.
Criticizing foreigners and ratards does not make for a valid argument. If I had the option, I would kick you in every game you played with me because you feed.
Bindin
12-03-2009, 04:23 PM
I'm up for a "personal view only" rating like Varp suggested, that should be enough imo.Your example: Player A plays a game with player B who is awful, a feeder, a leaver etc. Player C plays a game with player B who repeats his same actions.
Result: 2 games are ruined because because player B is the type of player that he was. This situation could have been avoided if there was some sort of pre-warning system for player B's playstyle. Instead, you would rather have your own rating of someone which only you can see. I don't see the point of this because they are either terrible, or they are good. I don't see how you would distinguish the difference between someone with "4 stars" than someone with "5 stars." For most people this would be completely pointless because if they are bad they simply add them to their banlist. If they aren't bad, they arent added to your banlist and you can play with them again. The only reason I would see people having this for is to keep their "5 star" players on their team or off the other team. At this point there are tens of thousands of people playing this game and the odds you will play with someone you have previously played with are very low.(Not including friends) I have yet to play with a random multiple times and I have been playing the game since early August, causing this "system" to be completely useless.
My example: Player A plays a game with player B who is awful, a feeder, a leaver etc. Player A then gives -karma to player B, and it is most likely that his karma level would be somewhat low from previous -karmas also.
Player B joins a game with player C in it, when player C realizes that he doesn't want his game jeopardized by playing with player B, he either kicks/leaves that game.
PooTer
12-03-2009, 04:29 PM
Joinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoina gamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamej oinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinag amejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejo inagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinaga mejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoi nagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagam ejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoin agamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagamejoinagame
Zadam
12-03-2009, 09:50 PM
Meh poor noob puts out 4 -karmas and recieves a -4 himself. This seems fair. Buddies can only get 1 +karma from each other, so thats balanced.
This system would work.
It's NOT fair though, because the noob is only getting -karma for being a noob. As long as he is playing "noob only" games there should be no negative repercussions to being a noob, we all have to start somewhere before we get decent at this game.
RuffNite
12-04-2009, 12:07 AM
In xbox live I had a favorite game that I played online religiously. From day 1 to a month later, my negative rep went from 0% to 75% just from winning games. So yeah, I don't like the idea of getting bad rep from winning games (legitimately).
Although your proposed system is nothing like xbl, it will still fail from abuse. Plus yours is restricting privileges to players with "low levels", which makes it a worse experience for some players, who might be actually innocent.
It's NOT fair though, because the noob is only getting -karma for being a noob. As long as he is playing "noob only" games there should be no negative repercussions to being a noob, we all have to start somewhere before we get decent at this game.
As long as he is playing noob games, he would be surrounded by other noobs, in which case there would be no reason for fellow noobs to neg him, so i don't see the problem. if he joins games outside of his current level and ruins games by feeding, then i see that as being a perfectly legitimate reason to -karma him.
Although your proposed system is nothing like xbl, it will still fail from abuse. Plus yours is restricting privileges to players with "low levels", which makes it a worse experience for some players, who might be actually innocent.
You provide an example of how the rating system on xbl was abused, then say it's nothing like the proposed system here, and conclude that it will somehow fail without providing reasons. solid argument!
I have yet to play with a random multiple times and I have been playing the game since early August, causing this "system" to be completely useless.
This is where you are wrong, you can't possibly remember all the names you have played with once.
So there is no truth in saying you have never played with the same person before.
With my rating system, you would remember better and have an indication on how good the player actually was.
Dordanov
12-04-2009, 05:30 AM
My example: Player A plays a game with player B who is awful, a feeder, a leaver etc. Player A then gives -karma to player B, and it is most likely that his karma level would be somewhat low from previous -karmas also.
Player B joins a game with player C in it, when player C realizes that he doesn't want his game jeopardized by playing with player B, he either kicks/leaves that game.
Your Example: Player A plays a game against Player B. Player A is a good player and he and his team win an easy match. Player B dislikes the fact he loses and rates all Players on the opposing team with a negative.
Result: Player A and his team got a negative rating for doing nothing negative. That's just the way some people use these kind of systems. It's sad but it happens, and you can't do anything about it. RuffNite's example of XboxLive shows it.
Other than that, I don't like the fact that people with low karma get certain limitiations in what they can and cannot do. Everyone pays the same amount of money for this game (at least when it's released) so It's not fair to limit players by other players' (easily abusable) opinions.
Sorry, I just don't see it work no matter how many arguments you can put up. I'd like to be proven wrong, as the idea is good, it's just that this community (in my opinion) can not work with these kind of systems.
The random ranting, *****ing, namecalling for no apparent reason in these forums proves that time and time again sadly..
Tamachan
12-04-2009, 05:44 AM
The people have spoken, thanks but no thanks. THe less stats the better.
Bindin
12-04-2009, 10:41 AM
Result: Player A and his team got a negative rating for doing nothing negative.
Which means nothing because they just finished a game.
Bindin
12-04-2009, 10:45 AM
This is where you are wrong, you can't possibly remember all the names you have played with once.
So there is no truth in saying you have never played with the same person before.
With my rating system, you would remember better and have an indication on how good the player actually was.
See, I didn't say that I never played with someone more than once, I said that it would be very rare to play with the same person multiple times.
The only thing I need to know is which players are bad, which would be easy because the bad players that I have already played with are on my banlist. It doesn't matter to me how "good" they are by ranking them with "4 stars or 5 stars," all I need to remember is who is bad.
Dordanov
12-04-2009, 10:54 AM
Which means nothing because they just finished a game.
Sorry, I forgot to calculate in the 1 karma gained by the completed game. My bad.
Anyway, good chances are (at least one of) the other 4 people that were trashed did the same because they got steamrolled by a better team. So there is still a negative karma for the players in "team A" even though they didn't deserve it, they did nothing besides outplaying their opponents.
Logic can't make up for people just being utter twats, hence it will be too hard to balance out all the "incorrect" distributed karma.
By looking at the vote totals it seems most people have the same opinion about the playerbase I have. Once stats are involved people tend to do the craziest things..
When people have a limit of such few karma votes per week, it's very unlikely that they'll neg someone who was simply a noob that fed. I mean, it's certainly possible and even acceptable (see previous post, he was playing in a game about his league). But if it was just a random person that fed who doesn't **** talk and just got outplayed, it's unlikely you'll waste one of your limited votes on that person.
why?
Because there are plenty of annoying *******s out there who you'd rather save that sweet neg karma vote for. And guess what? the person you find annoying who feeds and then blames his team will also most likely be found annoying and neg karma worthy by others.
What does this mean? It means that generally, people will agree on giving the same type of people negative karma - people who actually deserve it for being bad players who are not noobs. why is this relevant? Because if they are generally getting the majority of the neg karma votes, they will generally be the few people who have low karma, which is actually representative of them. The rare votes that noobs and others just learning get are easily offset by playing games, because games give you +karma.