I15's "Other Improvements to MA" ...such as?
By
Chyron HR,
Posted on: 2009-04-28 07:56 in Mission Architect
If you make it to the last mission of a four-mission arc, then you have seen enough of the arc to form an opinion. If you click "play" and immediately quit the arc, you have not. We need an in between solution, so people in the first situation can express their disappointment, while keeping people from using the second to either 5-star arcs "as a favor" or 1-star arcs just to be jerks. I highly doubt the ratings griefers are going to want to play through a 5-mission arc just to kill a 5-star rating.
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
They should weight the scores, like 10% if no enemies are fought or glowies clicked. 30% if some activity is done but no mission is completed.
Then 50% if at least one mission is completed.
100% if at least half of the missions are completed.
Would need at least 50% to reward any tickets on the rating.
There needs to be a way to accumulate values for "This is unplayable." I went into one arc with a level 8 that had 3 EBs spawned within 50' of the entrance.
I'm at the point where I think it's better to let the unplayable arcs languish among the mass of the unrated, just to close the door to griefers. Besides, if you give somebody a legitimate 1-star rating they can just unpublish and republish with a clean slate. Somebody targeted by a griefer can't do that without wiping out their legitimate high ratings.
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
[ QUOTE ]
I'm at the point where I think it's better to let the unplayable arcs languish among the mass of the unrated, just to close the door to griefers. Besides, if you give somebody a legitimate 1-star rating they can just unpublish and republish with a clean slate. Somebody targeted by a griefer can't do that without wiping out their legitimate high ratings.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let me lay out a few basic assumptions right off the bat: First, I assume that the rating system rounds in a logical way (for instance, a star rating of 3.51 to 4.49 shows as a 4 star rating one from 4.5 and up shows as a 5). Second, I assume the Devs are not using a system where they "throw away" the outlers for display purposes, but keeps them to determing what an outler is (if a arc is rated consistently at 4-5 stars and someone drops in a 1 it ignores it for the purposes of the rating, but if the arc consistently rates 4-5 stars with 5 ratings, and suddenly gets deluged with 20 1-2 star ratings it shifts and considers the higher ratigns to be outlers now).
With those assumptions in mind it becomes obvious the weaknesses of the current rating system.
If an arc is performing well (4-5 stars registering as 5 stars) and has a nice number of ratings (not huge, say soemthign in the 50-150 range) it is very easy to knock it down with just a few people posting 0 stars. There are several reasons for 0 staring a "good" arc, but the one that most catches my eye is the straight up advantage 0 staring an arc gives.
If you have an arc that you want people to play, and it's been performing moderately (again in the 4-5 star range) but isn't being played a lot, you languish near the bottom of the list as a single low rating knocks you down by 2 hundred or so pages. As well all know, gettign into the 1-5th pages is a major advantage, so it is in yoru best interest to 0 Star anything above you to knock them out of their spot and below you thus moving you up. If you have friends willing to help or multiple accounts then you're golden. For every 0 star rating given the creator now needs 10(!) 5 star ratings to pull them back up to near where they were before you hit them with a few 0s. You just countered 10 voters with your one vote to get what you wanted and it took you less than 10 seconds to do it.
That is a seriously flawed system especially since you can, with little effort drop an arc with 100 5 star ratings to an overall 4 star rating (4.46 and thus under the assumed 4.5+ range for a 5 star display and that's assume all of the 100 votes it had was 5 stars, any 4s in there knocks off the number of 0s you need at a rate of about one 0 less per four 4 star votes) with 12 votes. You just dropped that arc down over 200 pages on the list (and moved yours up until someone does it to you) until they get 10 times the number of ratings (all 5 star, more if you toss in some 4s which don't really help the overall rating but does harm your griefing attempt slightly) you gave them.
While I like the "more refined" tuning of the 5 star system, it does lead to problems. I'd like to see a different system in place, a four tiered system: No Vote, Up Vote, Star Vote and CNC (Could Not Complete) with each being scored sperately. It would break down for display something like this:
Number Of Plays: ---- Up Votes: ---- Star Vote: ---- CNC: ----
Number of Plays is the number of people who started the arc (just started it at all, even if they didn't run a signle mission or ran it end to end). They cannot vote instantly either way.
Up Votes are basic "Thumbs Up" votes mentioned earlier inthe thread. There are used in part to determine HoF Status. This vote is only avaliable at the close of the arc.
Star Votes are a single "Star" indicating it was an "excellent or very good arc." These are used in part to determine HoF status. This option is only avaliable at the end of the arc.
CNC is just that a notation the arc couldn't be completed, it is available at the close of the first mission.
HoF statue is determined by weighting Up Votes and Star Votes (for example, you need 2,000 Up votes or 1,000 Star Votes for HoF but a combination of the two, say, 1,000 Ups and 500 Stars would do the trick).
Yes, it's more complex, but it eliminates instant griefing, takes care of many complaints about the current system and is more simple than most other methods that do the same. You have na option to not vote, to vote, to rate excellent or to put a notation that it's difficult (or impossible) to complete, giving players more nformation and making it so the downvoters can't do anything to hurt good arcs.
And yes, it's not perfect, but it is the best I've thought of so far.
I'd be happy if they just auto-shuffle the arcs presented in the window. People are lazy, and they don't even scroll the page down if they don't have to. It's the only way you're going to put new arcs in front of people's faces.
I'm also in favor of the simplified up/down rating of arcs, since functionally that's how it works now anyway.
Arc #41077 - The Men of State
Arc #48845 - Operation: Dirty Snowball
[ QUOTE ]
"Force player completion to rate" option on missions
Oh please oh please oh please.
[/ QUOTE ]
If I am on the last or second-last mission of a four or five mission arc, and I am unable to complete it due to a sudden horde of AVs, I think I am still entitled to some say on what I think of the arc.
I'm willing to settle for a rating option which basically says "did not complete", along with my actual rating.
Current main:
Schrodinger's Gun, Dual Pistols/Mental Blaster, Virtue
Avatar: Becky Miyamoto from Pani Poni Dash. Roulette roulette~