Rating system (instead of win/loss records)

posted on May 10th, 2010, 6:49 am

Is a 5 star rating system any better than a win/loss record (and calculating one's rating based on some standard gaming rating system)?

posted on May 10th, 2010, 6:54 am

don't we have the point system?

posted on May 10th, 2010, 6:55 am

Yes, you could consider the resources spend, destroyed ships and maybe game time.

res + ships *1000 / (time in min or sec)

posted on May 10th, 2010, 12:49 pm

I am assuming it means attached to the forum? I still dont think it prolly a good idea.

posted on May 10th, 2010, 4:49 pm

If it meant attacked to the forum, in the sense that we get a table showing peoples record in kills, wins, losses, ect, I'd agree with such a thing.

It works for Steam, why not FO?

posted on May 10th, 2010, 5:18 pm

We talked about this and it seemed like it would just foster eliteism

posted on May 10th, 2010, 5:20 pm

Something that always turns up eventually, anyway.

Besides, I think it was talking about exclusive to the Admirals Log.

posted on May 10th, 2010, 5:31 pm

I think a rank system could be employed here, if done correctly.  Maybe have it reset every time FO or just multiplayer is closed out.  That way, when we're on playing a few games in a row, we know if we're gonna get schooled or not.  And make the ranking system fun.  Follow Naval traditional ranking systems.

posted on May 10th, 2010, 6:42 pm

I think it would be great if it was only in the admirals log. hmm since doca is working on integrating tunngle and FO there could be a lot of possibilities. Actually a ranking system could be very useful for arranging multiplayer games unless you have played with x person you dont really know the best way to arrange teams based on skill level (skilled player with a learning player vs skilled player with learning player) that could make the process much simpler.