I'd remove the win/loss or you'd probably see some guys refusing to command noob teams as it would give them a chance of losing. Ego is a big thing.
Yeah I'm kinda in the same boat, but for an extra reason. I know my win/loss rate would be horrible because I constantly command scrub teams/against stacked teams. So I might be a bit miff if I lost a vote because a bunch of new players voted for that loud vocal guy that installed empires 3 weeks ago. I would be less worried about a team of decent players, because most of them know me already so they know what to expect.
lol i was gonna just repost your thing in the CODE tag but i cant even copy and paste stuff from pastebin
I agree, no win/loss please. I would not command a team that even has a chance at losing. Only have it so people can rate them.
I don't think a rating system like that is necessary to be honest. It will not be accurate, a lot of players blame a comm for losses instead of understanding that the other team is stacked etc. It will not really be used by most players, just a lot of salty ones and create a bad dynamic. It will probably discourage players from commanding games they know that they will lose (not just because of the w/l, but because they will receive a bunch of unfair negative ratings from players) I would simply prefer a stat tracking system. that automatically displays to each player. Time spent in the command vehicle. (someone might have got in the comm a lot of times but kicked out) Number of wins (instead of w/l, I think this would encourage commanders rather than dissuade them ) Number of times kicked from the CV Questionable losses (some way to track resource rate, if the teams res rate is significantly above the enemys when they lose). Research delay. (percentage of time with a radar that is not researching, only when like less than 10 items have been researched, dont want anyone to be penalised for not researching once everything has been researched. ) bunch more.. Don't really know if some of them are possible. they probably are with a lot of fiddling.
I disagree with negative info being displayed publicly, commander in Empires is not the most pleasant job to begin with. We should only display positive information. Here's an example, you want people to see that you killed me for 25 times, but you don't want people to see that you only have a 0.05 k/d over me. I disagree with these rating as well. People will just rate whatever they want because they feel like it. As Mikleo kinda touched, most people, including vets, can't really tell the reasons why they won/lost. You are basically asking a bunch of elementary students "how good is this graduate student at Quantum Physics?" Most vets will give you bad rating if you are not following his "BE should rush w/e" path. There are a couple of categories that deserve a special mention. Map awareness is equally, if not more important for field players, because commander is stuck in the CV and you can run around. Strategy? This is something that I could write a whole essay. If I am a Ph.D. student in the Institute of Empires Commanding, this would be the title for my dissertation : " Theories on the effective time of individual players and the negative impact of over-strategizing and micro-managing." In short, the comm might be able to come up with some fancy strategics, but if you view those strategics from above, you'd see that they are pretty inefficient. I am not saying all fancy strategics are inefficient, but "quite a few" of them are actually less efficient than just letting players do their own job. If you won games with those fancy strategics, that's because you got a nice team. So again, hardly anyone can view things from above and correctly analyze the strategics. We can simplify the whole thing : If you think the comm is good at something, type !upcommuni !upresearch !upstrategy ...etc To prevent spamming, you can only upvote the same comm once a week and only one category. Because we probably don't want this to end up as "who has more friends?" Stats would show 1: Time spent in CV. 2: Received upvotes for all categories. 3: Number of wins. This is really all you need.
i like what security suggested. a very simplistic, purely positive rating system. id reduce it even more and just give a good commander a point (yes one single point, not categorized) if he showed a decent performance. over time the better commanders still should be identifiable easily and ultimatively isnt it what this mainly is about? itd be cool if this could be implemented directly in the game and gets data from a centralized database so you have this info from all servers, but my main reason for this being a "real feature" and not "just some plugin" (as a plugin could use a central database aswell) would be that it could show in the voting window next to the comms name. but aside of that. is this really needed? its not like you have an abundance of people willing to command. most of the time noone opts in anyway.
