DUST Search - [Honour] Mercenary stat.

Adipem Nothi wrote:

Talos Vagheitan wrote:

Adipem Nothi wrote:

Downvoting seems like it might have potential to be abused. By alts, for example. Or by "honour-bombing".

I appreciate that the idea is to solve a problem, but the potential negativity here could turn into one more thing which frustrates players. A single match might net a merc -30 honour should an entire squad decide to single him out and burn him. If I invested time working toward a high honour ranking, then got I honour-bombed for reasons beyond my ability to influence or control, I'd be pretty frustrated.

TL;DR: Downvoting affords too much influence over the disposition of other players, methinks. A proposition which potentially adds to player frustration is potentially bad for headcounts.

There will always be a 'potential to be abused'

I encourage you to re read the OP. I've covered pretty much all the ways this could be abused, and the checks and.balances required.

- Must in the same game, on the same team.
- Must have a good honour rating yourself to be able to down vote
- can only down vote someone once, ever. Doing this to too many people downgrades you, to the point you can no longer down vote.

I've reread the OP per your request.

Hypothetical:
Aeon values his hard-earned Honour Ranking. I see Aeon in game on our side, and it occurs to me that it'd be funny to push his buttons and see him go ballistic. I convince everyone in my squad to take the -5 hit to "Honour Bomb" Aeon. Giggling, we impact Aeon's ranking by -30. We recover our individual losses the same day. It will take Aeon a week to recover. We see Aeon the next day and we do it again. Aeon explodes on the Forums. People think its funny, so they do the same thing. Aeon's Honour Rank is perpetually negative, through no fault of his own.

PS: I wouldn't do this, but I don't think it unreasonable to anticipate that others might. I agree that most (perhaps all) systems are subject to potential abuse, but not all systems facilitate spiteful interactions like this.

PPS: Not saying that your idea is bad, Talos. I'm suggesting that we stress test it and consider different ways in which it might be misused.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.23 04:46:00 - [1] - Quote I encourage people also take a look at my Mercenary Career post. It covers a lot of ideas about building up merc stats such as Reputation, Honour, and earning Achievements. Honour would range from -100 to +100 Building a high Honour stat would simply involve: Completing battles regularly, not being 'down-voted'. Finishing 3 consecutive battles would earn you +1 honour. Quitting a battle early will -3 honour. Down voting: You can only down vote mercs who are in a match with you, and on your team. You must already be 'Honourable' (Positive rating) to be able to down vote. Down voting shouldn't be taken lightly, so it will cost you -5 Honour if you down vote a player. A down-voted players loses 5 honour as well, so it hurts you as much as it hurts them. Down voting will only be effective if multiple team-mates recognize a trouble maker and take action together. Once you down vote a player, you cannot down-vote them again, even if you see them in the next game. Meaning a dishonourable rating will have to come from multiple team mates to have a real effect. You won't be able to repetitively down vote somebody. Gameplay effects: None really. This is mostly a novelty stat, high honour is something roleplayers could strive for. However, a sufficiently dishonourable merc (-30 and worse) could be banned from FW until they get their honour higher. This would help with team killers and spies. Additionally, players who maintain a +50 could be given rewards, such as faster SP, ISK bonus in pubs etc. Then there would be a reason for players to not leave matches as often. Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.23 13:37:00 - [2] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Downvoting seems like it might have potential to be abused. By alts, for example. Or by "honour-bombing". I appreciate that the idea is to solve a problem, but the potential negativity here could turn into one more thing which frustrates players. A single match might net a merc -30 honour should an entire squad decide to single him out and burn him. If I invested time working toward a high honour ranking, then got I honour-bombed for reasons beyond my ability to influence or control, I'd be pretty frustrated. TL;DR: Downvoting affords too much influence over the disposition of other players, methinks. A proposition which potentially adds to player frustration is potentially bad for headcounts. There will always be a 'potential to be abused' I encourage you to re read the OP. I've covered pretty much all the ways this could be abused, and the checks and.balances required. - Must in the same game, on the same team. - Must have a good honour rating yourself to be able to down vote - can only down vote someone once, ever. Doing this to too many people downgrades you, to the point you can no longer down vote. Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.23 14:43:00 - [3] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Downvoting this thread So that's how it's going to be hey? So be it. Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.23 16:29:00 - [4] - Quote Liking the feedback. Up voting is an interest idea, but I'd prefer if a high standing reflected consistent match completion, and a lack of negative votes. I'd be OK with up voting as long as it cost you 5 Honour points or so. Meaning to up vote someone you need to sacrifice some of your own standing, preventing corps from just voting themselves to 100. Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.23 16:33:00 - [5] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Talos Vagheitan wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Downvoting seems like it might have potential to be abused. By alts, for example. Or by "honour-bombing". I appreciate that the idea is to solve a problem, but the potential negativity here could turn into one more thing which frustrates players. A single match might net a merc -30 honour should an entire squad decide to single him out and burn him. If I invested time working toward a high honour ranking, then got I honour-bombed for reasons beyond my ability to influence or control, I'd be pretty frustrated. TL;DR: Downvoting affords too much influence over the disposition of other players, methinks. A proposition which potentially adds to player frustration is potentially bad for headcounts. There will always be a 'potential to be abused' I encourage you to re read the OP. I've covered pretty much all the ways this could be abused, and the checks and.balances required. - Must in the same game, on the same team. - Must have a good honour rating yourself to be able to down vote - can only down vote someone once, ever. Doing this to too many people downgrades you, to the point you can no longer down vote. I've reread the OP per your request. Hypothetical: Aeon values his hard-earned Honour Ranking. I see Aeon in game on our side, and it occurs to me that it'd be funny to push his buttons and see him go ballistic. I convince everyone in my squad to take the -5 hit to "Honour Bomb" Aeon. Giggling, we impact Aeon's ranking by -30. We recover our individual losses the same day. It will take Aeon a week to recover. We see Aeon the next day and we do it again. Aeon explodes on the Forums. People think its funny, so they do the same thing. Aeon's Honour Rank is perpetually negative, through no fault of his own. PS: I wouldn't do this, but I don't think it unreasonable to anticipate that others might. I agree that most (perhaps all) systems are subject to potential abuse, but not all systems facilitate spiteful interactions like this. PPS: Not saying that your idea is bad, Talos. I'm suggesting that we stress test it and consider different ways in which it might be misused. I specifically say in the OP that you would be unable to down vote the same person twice, even in different battles. Your evil plan would not work. Also, if you are part of an evil squad to try to go around honour bombing people, then you will damage your own standing to the point where you can can no longer vote. Alts cannot vote either unless they get up to +30 or so. Making Alt bombing a major pain. I've really covered the abusable bases here. Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.24 00:33:00 - [6] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Point taken. A plan like this might well be better off without the human element, as some mentioned, but I wanted a system that would also effect AFKers and AWOXers as well. I just don't think abuse would be that much of a problem though, especially with the checks I proposed. Not everything has to (or even can) be made 100% troll proof. Think of it this way, your hypothetical evil squad of jerks can join an FW match and start team killing, AWOXing, blowing up your own up links etc. And completely ruin the experience for everyone. But you don't, and I've never heard of that happening. And even if it did happen a few times, I think you would agree that wouldn't warrant turning off FF for FW. On a different note: While we debate the potential of abuse, are there any other objections you'd have to this idea? Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.24 15:22:00 - [7] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Talos Vagheitan wrote: On a different note: While we debate the potential of abuse, are there any other objections you'd have to this idea? Voting withheld, I think a system like this could work very well, provided it was paired with changes directed at the reasons behind folks leaving matches. If possible, we should try to understand and treat the cause in addition to treating the symptoms. Think Rattati has something similar on Trello ... digging ... here. That's a good point. I just want to point out, this idea is not intended to fix match-leaving on it's own. The real problem boils down the massive gap in competitiveness amongst our relatively small player base. While I think this idea might help a bit, in rewarding people who always choose to stay, It's mostly intended as just a novelty/vanity reward. Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.25 14:03:00 - [8] - Quote Sicerly Yaw wrote: this could easily be exploited, choose a person that you don't like and or don't want to see in FW and get some high honour players to down vote em, you only lose a few points each but you effectively get rid of a player yes this is a good idea but you can already kick someone out of FW if they are team killing or damaging their own team I dont think the down vote is a good idea otherwise everything else seems fair Thanks for the feedback. To be honest, I really don't think exploitation would be an issue. You and your squad would all have to join a match on the same side to down vote this guy, and you could only do it once. If you and your squad are that dedicated to grief someone, what's stopping you from all taking turns TKing him in FW? Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.25 21:14:00 - [9] - Quote Well, unless the incentives to high honour were worth having. Such as +5% to SP accrual etc. Voting would also be for general griefers, AFKers. Etc Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.25 21:34:00 - [10] - Quote korrah silain wrote: I disagree with the diwnvoting aspect because it will allow anyone who dislikes the tactics you use to down vote, eg: ***** scouts! Rage down vote, damb prohards! Downvote. HES USING A SCANNER!?/SWARM LAUNCHER!? downvote. HOW DARE SOMEONE SNIPE ME!? downvote. My concern isn't intentional abuse, just butthurt sore losers. I'll encourage you to re-read the OP. I've throughly covered the problem of potential abuse Official CPM Platform**

Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.06.25 21:53:00 - [11] - Quote Read the part where they must be on your team. Also read the part where down voting too much will remove your ability to do so. But besides that: A feature doesn't have to be 100% exploit proof. There are plenty of ways we can already grief each other in Dust, such as team killing in FW, but it's really not a problem Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1	Posted - 2015.07.05 21:28:00 - [12] - Quote In the meantime, it might help to record it as a loss when players leave a match. I know some KD farmers leave battle when they die to preserve their stats Official CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 2	Posted - 2015.07.29 21:45:00 - [13] - Quote Bump Real CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 2	Posted - 2015.08.19 14:16:00 - [14] - Quote Bump. Something like this would help with the battle-leaving situation, and reward those who continually stay to the end. Real CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 2	Posted - 2015.08.20 11:59:00 - [15] - Quote Afterthought: It would be interesting if corporations had an honor stat as well. Just calculate average honor of members. Corps might self police their membership to not include dishonorable players Real CPM Platform
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 2	Posted - 2015.08.27 21:42:00 - [16] - Quote Bump for corps with honor Real CPM Platform