MunkiLord

[ QUOTE ]
The first is that, at base, people don't enjoy doing the same repetitive thing over and over and over. They'll do it, if the reward is really great (think factory workers and getting paid at a job), but they won't actually like doing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is what you said. Of course you know your mind better than I do, perhaps you should communicate what you're trying to say better. You said people don't enjoy repeating it over and over. I didn't make that up. It's there. You are stating something as fact that you just flat out don't know(ya know, making stuff up).

[ QUOTE ]
Nice insults though. Well, actually, not so nice. Kind of unoriginal and bland. Try again?

[/ QUOTE ] I didn't throw any insults. I accused you of making stuff up, which you in fact did do by saying "nice insults"

edit: What kind of person talks in the third person? Really?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With that said the best ideas are what I think Posi already posted.

If you exploit you get the hammer.

[/ QUOTE ] This.

The OP assumes that nobody likes repeating content. The OP is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, the OP assumed that nobody enjoys doing the exact same thing over and over for zero reward. Tons of people like doing stuff they will get rewarded for, and doing stuff more then just once can be fun because you can do it different ways or pay more careful attention to details.

In other words, you made assumptions about the OP, and those assumptions were wrong.

[/ QUOTE ] I didn't make any assumptions. The OP said this:

[ QUOTE ]
The first is that, at base, people don't enjoy doing the same repetitive thing over and over and over. They'll do it, if the reward is really great (think factory workers and getting paid at a job), but they won't actually like doing it.

[/ QUOTE ] There were no qualifiers in that statement. It was a flat statement saying people don't enjoy it. Which is an assumption. And a wrong assumption about many people.

So I didn't assume anything. I went by what he typed. Nice attempt at making stuff up though.

[ QUOTE ]
With that said the best ideas are what I think Posi already posted.

If you exploit you get the hammer.

[/ QUOTE ] This.

The OP assumes that nobody likes repeating content. The OP is wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
A short, disgruntling sleep that will end in disappointment.

[/ QUOTE ] You have a date?

Get a better computer or runner a cleaner system.

[ QUOTE ]
The developers can read my posts. I think that gives me an advantage to be heard; coherent sentences, and whatnot.

[/ QUOTE ] That's discrimination!! Not reading somebody's post because they aint be educatimified is wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
I care less what you guys say

[/ QUOTE ] Then why do you keep responding in attempts to defender your position?

[ QUOTE ]
The second method wouldn't work because different servers experience different population plateaus at different times and different days, so the only way to create a fair "bonus reward" structure would be to make it dynamic.

[/ QUOTE ] I just assumed they would use a daily average. But that is really beside the point, because it is a stupid idea.

Did the OP every say why he/she doesn't just move to Freedom?

[ QUOTE ]
Between us, who are the developers going to try to please?

[/ QUOTE ] Their significant other?

What would the cap be? How hard would it be to reach it? Could a fire/kin doing Battle Maiden reach the cap? What about teams doing speed runs on the ITF? More details please.

[ QUOTE ]
As Munkilord pointed out

[/ QUOTE ] You get credit for that one. I stoleded the point.

[ QUOTE ]

My only real request to this idea is that the actual mission selection terminals be put in a room with power suppresion to minimize frustration caused by AoE powers and buffs. Each AE building has one such room.

[/ QUOTE ] Makes sense to me.

[ QUOTE ]
Not looking for any input here

[/ QUOTE ] That sucks.

[ QUOTE ]
My Thoughts: Personally I don't think Co-Op below 35 should happen with the current game. I don't see how it would fit in Pocket D

[/ QUOTE ] Snaptooth?

[ QUOTE ]
ust something about a novice hero and an amateur villain both going down opposite paths deciding to team up at the beginning of their career, it would make both of them look bad.

[/ QUOTE ] Since your entire reason for being agianst it is RP, can't you just roleplay that your characters refuse to do it? See, now both sides can be happy!!!

For your suggestion: /signed.

[ QUOTE ]
And no one benefits if people get griefed and their arcs never get played, even thoe they could be awesome. You would never know because some j*ck*ss came along and 1 starred the arc and got all their friends to do it too. Because they are jerks.

Don't think it doesnt happen. It has already happened to me twice (with 19 people 1 starring me and informing me about it through their feedback), and I am currently in email with NC Support.


[/ QUOTE ] Sounds like you are getting the problem taken care of. That is what support is for.

[ QUOTE ]
The rating system we have right now works great for YOU. Well, gee... If everything is great for you, then it shouldnt matter that other people are being reemed. amirite?

[/ QUOTE ] Actually I don't use the rating system anymore. I decided not too long ago that I don't care enough to rate arcs(good or bad). If I find one I really enjoy, I just save it to a running list I have in Notepad++. I also don't go by other peoples rating because quite honestly I don't value most peoples opinions on entertainment.

So in all honesty the proposed changes wouldn't effect me at all. I'm just against the idea of giving out participation trophies.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or it's been around a very long time. Arcs will accumulate 1000 favorable ratings over time, even crappy ones. If they had your rating system, it would need to be "1000 favorable ratings during less than X amount of time", where "X amount of time" would be a reasonable timeframe, perhaps three months, maaaaaybe six months (but that's pushing it IMO). Which means the arc needs to continue to get favorable ratings in order to stay in HoF. Which is what the HoF is supposed to be doing anyway, and not reward old arcs that just got there by way of being really old.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would that be so? There are people in the rock and roll HoF that got there because people started to appreciate them only long after they were on the charts.

And really. So what if an arc makes HoF after three years (or whatever). It really doesn't hurt anyone. It's not a contest.

[/ QUOTE ] Aggelakis demonstrates how it is potentially rewarding mediocrity. I realize it doesn't hurt anyone, that's why I'm not dead set against it. I just feel its a bad idea. IMO, a rating system is made for the benefit of the consumer(in this case people playing and arc), not the content creator. I don't feel mediocre arcs getting to Hall of Fame just because they are old helps the consumer. Then they just have to sift through a bunch of crap that is supposed to be the best of the best.

I realize people put a lot of time and effort into their work, but they need to realize that they don't deserve special status just because they tried. I don't believe adults should get participation trophies, and that is what your system could turn out to be as you suggested it.

Overall I don't think its horrible, just needs some tweaking.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like your suggested idea, Geko. It covers a nice area for ratings.

[/ QUOTE ]

Geko's suggestion.

And NO, for the last time, you should not be forced to play an entire arc to be able to rate it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look, if you dont like an arc DONT PLAY it. But don't 1 star someone who put EFFORT into their arc and its NOT on a damn BOAT, and its NOT a FARM.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is why my suggestion works as it does. In my suggestion, a "Do Not Recommend" is just information. It has no negative effect on the author, other than it might encourage people not to play your arc. But every person you get to "Recommend" your arc gets you one step closer to HoF status.

No more griefing, no quasi-objective, but not really numeric system. In such a situation, it no longer matters if you played the whole arc or not.

[/ QUOTE ] Your proposal seems like it would reward mediocrity. Why would we want to do that?

/unsigned. Options are there to remedy your problem. If you choose not to take advantage of them, then you are the problem. You are 'punishing' yourself.

/unsigned. I don't see a problem, therefore I don't think anything needs to be fixed.

Why would that be good for the game? What is the point?

I'm not being difficult just to do it. I think making people complete the arc to rate it is probably the stupidest idea I've heard relating to AE. Does griefing happen? Sure it does. But this isn't the solution. Sometimes something just stinks and I don't want to finish it, that doesn't mean I haven't played enough of it to decide it deserves a poor rating.

Content creators need to have thicker skin than your average person. Not everybody is going to like your creations, the fact that you spent a lot of time on it and it means a lot to you is completely irrelevant. If somebody doesn't like it, that is all that the player should take into account. Content creators have to accept that.

And the griefers are idiots, I'm not sure how to handle them. One thing I do know is, if you're having a large problem with them maybe you shouldn't piss off so many people.

p.s. I was using 'you' and 'your' as general terms, and not talking about you directly Perfect_Pain.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like your suggested idea, Geko. It covers a nice area for ratings.

[/ QUOTE ]

Geko's suggestion.

And NO, for the last time, you should not be forced to play an entire arc to be able to rate it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look, if you dont like an arc DONT PLAY it. But don't 1 star someone who put EFFORT into their arc and its NOT on a damn BOAT, and its NOT a FARM.

[/ QUOTE ] You seem to misunderstand who the ratings are for. They are not for the creator, they are for other poeple. If an arc sucks it doesn't usually take the entire thing to figure out.

If influence is your goal then AE farming is easily the most lucrative way to farm. Not even close.

[ QUOTE ]
also agree with "Only allow those who complete the arc to rate it"

[/ QUOTE ] Why? What good reason is there for a change like that? Are you telling me it takes you until the very end of a movie or TV show to realize if it is crap or not?

<QR>

Everyone seems to be concentrating on the recovery percentage, and IMO that is looking at it the wrong way. Concentrate on the net end/sec you gain so you can also take into account max end set bonuses.

I agree with NeverDark and TeChameleon. No reason to make the game any easier than it already is.

Well you gave an incredibly simple suggestion without much though or explanation, how is it not pointless?

Also, people that like to farm will farm, people that don't like to won't farm. Pretty simple. People are smart enough to figure out what they like.