Conquer Club

I do like the new system, however, I discovered a flaw.

Players giving bad ratings for attendance because you dont play real time.

I just got the first one. A new recruit joins the site and doesnt understand the rules. He sets up a game with options of making a move once every 24 hours and than leaves a false rating because he wanted to play real time. How can we avoid this ?

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:I do like the new system, however, I discovered a flaw.

Players giving bad ratings for attendance because you dont play real time.

I just got the first one. A new recruit joins the site and doesnt understand the rules. He sets up a game with options of making a move once every 24 hours and than leaves a false rating because he wanted to play real time. How can we avoid this ?

What do you consider a "Bad rating?" If he gave you a 3, or even a 2 (if you waited until the last minute, I guess) I could understand. 2 might be stretching it, but everyone's opinions differ.

FabledIntegral wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:I do like the new system, however, I discovered a flaw.

Players giving bad ratings for attendance because you dont play real time.

I just got the first one. A new recruit joins the site and doesnt understand the rules. He sets up a game with options of making a move once every 24 hours and than leaves a false rating because he wanted to play real time. How can we avoid this ?

What do you consider a "Bad rating?" If he gave you a 3, or even a 2 (if you waited until the last minute, I guess) I could understand. 2 might be stretching it, but everyone's opinions differ.

the game lasted like 5 or 6 rounds and only a couple hours. I joined the game at work and finished it at home. It was set up for 24 hours per move...not a speed game which is why I joined. I cant play a speed game at work. I define a 5 as a good score. anything lower is bad.

so I guess this will be the new trend. Dont sit there for a full game and get nailed with low ratings because players dont understand the rules. is this example permitted to be processed through the e-ticket section ?

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:I do like the new system, however, I discovered a flaw.

Players giving bad ratings for attendance because you dont play real time.

I just got the first one. A new recruit joins the site and doesnt understand the rules. He sets up a game with options of making a move once every 24 hours and than leaves a false rating because he wanted to play real time. How can we avoid this ?

PM them explaining how things work here and ask them to adjust their rating?

Matroshka wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:I do like the new system, however, I discovered a flaw.

Players giving bad ratings for attendance because you dont play real time.

I just got the first one. A new recruit joins the site and doesnt understand the rules. He sets up a game with options of making a move once every 24 hours and than leaves a false rating because he wanted to play real time. How can we avoid this ?

PM them explaining how things work here and ask them to adjust their rating?

did ...and no response. most likely since he doesnt understand the rules that he doesnt understand how to use PM's either.

[quote="JOHNNYROCKET24"the game lasted like 5 or 6 rounds and only a couple hours. I joined the game at work and finished it at home. It was set up for 24 hours per move...not a speed game which is why I joined. I cant play a speed game at work. I define a 5 as a good score. anything lower is bad.

so I guess this will be the new trend. Dont sit there for a full game and get nailed with low ratings because players dont understand the rules. is this example permitted to be processed through the e-ticket section ?[/quote]

Sorry JR, but not everyone sees a 5 as good. A 3 is perfectly average.

I'd give it some time then. But, in general, I suppose it is an issue that needs to be addressed.

They gave you a 3 though, which is not bad, it's average. It even says that on mouse hover now.

Night Strike wrote:[quote="JOHNNYROCKET24"the game lasted like 5 or 6 rounds and only a couple hours. I joined the game at work and finished it at home. It was set up for 24 hours per move...not a speed game which is why I joined. I cant play a speed game at work. I define a 5 as a good score. anything lower is bad.

so I guess this will be the new trend. Dont sit there for a full game and get nailed with low ratings because players dont understand the rules. is this example permitted to be processed through the e-ticket section ?

Sorry JR, but not everyone sees a 5 as good. A 3 is perfectly average.[/quote]

you just said it yourself...."A 3 is perfectly average" meaning not good

every player that cant play speed games because they refuse to pay 25 bucks, will now leave false ratings because players will not sit there and play a full game for them in 1 sitting. perhaps non premium members should not be able to leave ratings? saying you have bad or average attendance for not playing a game real time when its set up for 24 hours is not right.

And the way I see it is that a 3 is for a player who takes all their turns. A 4 or even 5 is a person who plays very frequently. Each person is going to interpret things slightly differently, but the ratings are going to average out, if you're patient.

And not allowing freemiums to rate people is not a good idea.

Night Strike wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:the game lasted like 5 or 6 rounds and only a couple hours. I joined the game at work and finished it at home. It was set up for 24 hours per move...not a speed game which is why I joined. I cant play a speed game at work. I define a 5 as a good score. anything lower is bad.

so I guess this will be the new trend. Dont sit there for a full game and get nailed with low ratings because players dont understand the rules. is this example permitted to be processed through the e-ticket section ?

Sorry JR, but not everyone sees a 5 as good. A 3 is perfectly average.

NO, there IS NO standard. Some people think 3 is for average, some people think it should be a 5 unless you do something bad ...

Add to that issues of folks creating their own little rules ... like "you gotta play real time" and so forth. (basically a free speed game). That isn't even counting the whole group that thinks anyone who beats them (or anyone lower ranked, at least) ought to get a negative..... etc.

getting a 3 from a premium because he thought it would be a rt game when it didnt turn into a casual game is like getting a neg for it on the old system. personally a 3 isnt bad, i thought he gave u a 1 or something.

over-reaction?

what the hell is wrong with average?

a honda civic. average. it's still a great car.
a salary of $32,000. average. still would feed half of africa.
a death at age 70. average. but i hope like hell i live that long.
a 3 in conquer club. average. not great, not bad. just run of the mill.

live with average. most of the experiences we have in life are average. most of the people we meet are average. most everything is average - hence the term. stop expecting every meal to be fois gras. it's not going to be. it's spaghetti and meatballs tonight and next wednesday night, too.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:I do like the new system, however, I discovered a flaw.

Players giving bad ratings for attendance because you dont play real time.

I just got the first one. A new recruit joins the site and doesnt understand the rules. He sets up a game with options of making a move once every 24 hours and than leaves a false rating because he wanted to play real time. How can we avoid this ?

pm him and explain him the rules.

btw, he didn't give you a bad rating, he just gave you a normal rating.tho i might have given you a 4, for being quite fast to take your turns even while at work, still a 3 is just average, hover your mouse over it and you'll see.

Night Strike wrote:And the way I see it is that a 3 is for a player who takes all their turns. A 4 or even 5 is a person who plays very frequently. Each person is going to interpret things slightly differently, but the ratings are going to average out, if you're patient.

And not allowing freemiums to rate people is not a good idea.

your entitled to your own opinion. why should we allow players that play here for free to have access to everything on the site?

hephestes wrote:what the hell is wrong with average?

a honda civic. average. it's still a great car.
a salary of $32,000. average. still would feed half of africa.
a death at age 70. average. but i hope like hell i live that long.
a 3 in conquer club. average. not great, not bad. just run of the mill.

live with average. most of the experiences we have in life are average. most of the people we meet are average. most everything is average - hence the term. stop expecting every meal to be fois gras. it's not going to be. it's spaghetti and meatballs tonight and next wednesday night, too.

your right, I keep high standards in life and set high goals to achieve. Im not satisfied with being average. I like to excel at everything I do and to me thats having fun.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:And the way I see it is that a 3 is for a player who takes all their turns. A 4 or even 5 is a person who plays very frequently. Each person is going to interpret things slightly differently, but the ratings are going to average out, if you're patient.

And not allowing freemiums to rate people is not a good idea.

your entitled to your own opinion. why should we allow players that play here for free to have access to everything on the site?

but they dont.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:the game lasted like 5 or 6 rounds and only a couple hours. I joined the game at work and finished it at home. It was set up for 24 hours per move...not a speed game which is why I joined. I cant play a speed game at work. I define a 5 as a good score. anything lower is bad.

so I guess this will be the new trend. Dont sit there for a full game and get nailed with low ratings because players dont understand the rules. is this example permitted to be processed through the e-ticket section ?

Sorry JR, but not everyone sees a 5 as good. A 3 is perfectly average.

NO, there IS NO standard. Some people think 3 is for average, some people think it should be a 5 unless you do something bad ...

Add to that issues of folks creating their own little rules ... like "you gotta play real time" and so forth. (basically a free speed game). That isn't even counting the whole group that thinks anyone who beats them (or anyone lower ranked, at least) ought to get a negative..... etc.

wrong, there is a standard, read the instructions page or the rating page itselfs, hover your mouse over the ratings, you'll see it yourself.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:your right, I keep high standards in life and set high goals to achieve. Im not satisfied with being average. I like to excel at everything I do and to me thats having fun.

Doesn't mean the rest of us want to hear you complain when someone thinks you're just average even though you think you're better. And jako's right, freemiums don't get everything on the site.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:

hephestes wrote:what the hell is wrong with average?

a honda civic. average. it's still a great car.
a salary of $32,000. average. still would feed half of africa.
a death at age 70. average. but i hope like hell i live that long.
a 3 in conquer club. average. not great, not bad. just run of the mill.

live with average. most of the experiences we have in life are average. most of the people we meet are average. most everything is average - hence the term. stop expecting every meal to be fois gras. it's not going to be. it's spaghetti and meatballs tonight and next wednesday night, too.

your right, I keep high standards in life and set high goals to achieve. Im not satisfied with being average. I like to excel at everything I do and to me thats having fun.

then if you want a perfect rating, behave. be nice, play fast and work like a team in team games. if not: you'll just be average. or maybe slightly above average.

i think everyone is missing jr's point... he is more than correct. this new system is going to be more abused on a regular basis, by those that do not understand the rules, than the old system. at least under the old system, JR would have had a chance to fill out an e-ticket and have the neg feedback removed. now, worst case scenario, you are going to have people join the site for a few games, and hit people with 1's and 2's, because they don't know the rules, and then never come back. how is this fair? and, although i disagree with freemiums not being able to leave feedback, i do believe a player should have to complete a certain amount of games to leave a rating. make sure they are acclimated to the rules, the site, the rating system, etc... only makes sense. anyway, JR is 100% correct on this. there is no recourse for a bad rating other than pm'ing the person, and hoping they are willing to reconsider.-0

p.s.-following the rules in a standard game is not grounds for a poor rating, period.

you can't say, "you got a 3 and that's average so you should be happy." We have no idea what a 3 means to that person. If they have him a 3, but everyone else in the game a 5, obviously that player is saying something is different.

You can't just look at a number alone without context. That's part of the problem with this system.


No matter how many times you say "3 is average. 3 is average. 3 is average", people will rate how they feel and you have to look at how it compares with other ratings they have given. Without that it's just a number and we have no idea what it really means.

Night Strike wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:your right, I keep high standards in life and set high goals to achieve. Im not satisfied with being average. I like to excel at everything I do and to me thats having fun.

Doesn't mean the rest of us want to hear you complain when someone thinks you're just average even though you think you're better. And jako's right, freemiums don't get everything on the site.

your right, they dont get speed game which is why the low rating was left for me. the game he set up was for 24 hours per move. its not a speed game. so how could my attendance be average ? my attendance was great. every move played super fast compared to the game settings. the entire game played within hours. im sorry it takes me an hour to travel from work to home.

I like the idea of new players not being able to give feedback until they complete 5 games. Same as getting rid of the ?.

I also think JR is right. 3 is not good. It is negative, because it brings your average down. With the old system, neutral feedback did not affect your positive, but with this system, nuetral feedback (Average) will bring your rating down.

If people who have not completed at least 5 games cannot leave feedback, I think it will eliminate a lot of un-necessary troubles.

If I was to fill out an employee evaluation with a 3 ( average ) because he missed 1 day the entire month im sure he would question it too.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:If I was to fill out an employee evaluation with a 3 ( average ) because he missed 1 day the entire month im sure he would question it too.

This is a game, not work. Just ask him to withdraw it. If he doesn't, then just deal with it and wait for the ratings to average out.