Jump to content
Tartantyco

Suggestion concerning "Global Teamwork Score"

Recommended Posts

 

 

Our base concept right now is to integrate a global teamwork score into every players profile and use that as a mertic to govern how much responsibility a player can take on. 

 

IronTaxi made this comment in the Realism vs Commercial realism thread, and I just thought I'd suggest a Subscription system for this. The point of this system is to provide a curated popular reputation system that can give player aggregated information on a lot of players with limited playtime and workload on behalf of the player. It can also be used to rank players' abilities in certain roles for use by players and servers.

 

A normal reputation system simply aggregates the amount of upvotes/downvotes, likes/dislikes, etc., and provides a universal ranking based on the total score. This is an absolutely horrendous system because it is prone to manipulation and is heavily weighted towards extreme opinions. The subscription system instead relies on independent player ranking networks that increase signal strength based on overlap. You basically subscribe to other players' opinions about other players, and as their opinions overlap, other players' reputations increase or decrease based on positive or negative overlap.

 

For the individual player, it's a pretty standard ranking system. You can assign a +1 or a -1 to any player(0 being default). Giving a player +1 obviously means you think he is a good player, but also means you subscribe to his opinion of other players. 0 is obviously neutral. -1 means you think he's a bad player. This is all you do as a player, you rank those you play with like this.

 

As players start ranking other players, the independent networks start emerging. If I rank Player B as +1, the players he ranks as +1 to show up as recommended to me in the game and the server browser, and those he ranks as -1 are marked as such.

 

As I subscribe to more people, their overlapping rankings enhance recommendations. Just being subscribed to Player B gives me a pretty weak signal, but when I subscribe to Player C, and D, and E, and their rankings of other players start overlapping, the signal gets stronger and stronger. If Player B, C, and D all give player X a +1 ranking, that player will then be strongly recommended to me. The opposite holds true for players who have received overlapping -1 rankings from those I am subscribed to.

 

The value of a player's opinions is also weighted by this ranking. If you subscribe to someone who often positively ranks those you rank as -1, then the impact his rankings have becomes lesser. If many other players that you subscribe to rank someone else you subscribe to as -1, then the impact of his rankings again becomes lesser. This means that if you accidentally subscribe to someone, or catch someone on an extremely good day, their subsequent rankings will not severely distort the aggregated ranking.

 

Rankings should be anonymous, and numbers should not be concrete. If someone has a +23 ranking, that number should not appear anywhere. This is so that people can't demand that you +1 them to join a clan or play on a server, and then be able to check if you did. Score ranges should provide general descriptors like "Highly recommended" or "Not recommended".

 

There are obvious advantages to this system:

 

Voter manipulation becomes pretty much a non-issue.

 

Nothing based on in-game scores or anything like that.

 

Low individual workload compared to feedback.

 

Newcomers can quickly get a get a fair share of recommendations very early in the game.

 

It still has an underlying normal aggregate reputation system that can also be employed. If, for instance, someone has nothing but -1 rankings, that player may be universally tagged as a bad player regardless of subscriptions. Or the information may be used by server admins to weed out obvious problem players. It's a two-fer!

 

It can also be used as a ranking system for various classes and roles in the game. This should require a separate subscription system.

 

Additional thoughts:

 

You may want to have an option to recommend a player without subscribing. I can't see any real value in it, but that might just mean I haven't thought it through yet.

 

You may want additional ranking levels. Maybe have a +3 to -3 range instead of a +1 to -1 range. This could help in weighing the value of someone's reputation. I haven't thought everything through yet, damn it!

 

If possible, you should be able to rank people during load times between games. It is a point in the game where they are more likely to do so, as they'd otherwise just be staring at their screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torn on this. I only skimmed through, but if someone gets practically buried in negative ratings, it means they're going to carry a bad reputation even if they try to improve, it may even discourage potentially good players from trying to improve. This is also somewhat open to abuse or people up/downvoting on a whim. That said I'm all for weeding out players who just waste assets, teamkill, grief or are arseholes in general. Having it categorised between separate assets, leadership and general attitude would be good too.

I would additionally suggest an in-built report system, with a minimum character count which would stay attached. Also, battlerecorder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torn on this. I only skimmed through, but if someone gets practically buried in negative ratings, it means they're going to carry a bad reputation even if they try to improve, it may even discourage potentially good players from trying to improve. This is also somewhat open to abuse or people up/downvoting on a whim. That said I'm all for weeding out players who just waste assets, teamkill, grief or are arseholes in general. 

 

Well, that depends on the voting threshold. If someone is buried in negative ratings, there's probably a reason. Maybe, if you've behaved in a manner that's drowned you in negative rankings, the cost of restoring your reputation is to buy another copy of the game and start fresh with a new account? There's also no way to target someone if you can only rank them while/after playing with them. You also have to remember that that person starts with a clean slate to any new players, who can rank him out of his hole over time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback Tarantyco..  you are obviously very passionate about seeing this done well. 

 

definitely will not be a cumulative system.

 

Will be an averaged system that degrades at fixed rate.

 

ie. whether daily player or casual player your teamwork score would be the average amount of teamwork you have  contributed over X round/time. 

 

Obviously. there needs to be some dynamics to how that score degrades as you don't want chronic players being able to game the teamwork score via insane amounts of playtime over a short period. 

 

Teamwork score could be used to do things like take leadership roles and gain access to advanced assets (maybe)

 

really. the function of the teamwork score will be to serve as a clear indicator of which players you want to play with. Would be great to know somebody rep before joining a squad or inviting them into a squad. 

 

Could also help systems auto assign squads / SLs / Roles in certain situations. 

 

All theory here at the moment though. welcome to discuss. 

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

definitely will not be a cumulative system.

 

Will be an averaged system that degrades at fixed rate.

 

ie. whether daily player or casual player your teamwork score would be the average amount of teamwork you have  contributed over X round/time. 

 

Obviously. there needs to be some dynamics to how that score degrades as you don't want chronic players being able to game the teamwork score via insane amounts of playtime over a short period. 

 

Teamwork score could be used to do things like take leadership roles and gain access to advanced assets (maybe)

 

really. the function of the teamwork score will be to serve as a clear indicator of which players you want to play with. Would be great to know somebody rep before joining a squad or inviting them into a squad. 

 

Could also help systems auto assign squads / SLs / Roles in certain situations. 

 

I simply don't think it is possible to create a system where you can quantify teamwork based on any sort of statistical analysis of gameplay. Basing player access on that is just a recipe for disaster, and I doubt any server admins would ever utilize such a system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply don't think it is possible to create a system where you can quantify teamwork based on any sort of statistical analysis of gameplay. Basing player access on that is just a recipe for disaster, and I doubt any server admins would ever utilize such a system.

i dont think it would be used for access. never said that. ;)

 

it would be up to you to manage your teamwork score and yes.. i think it is likely possible to quantify.

 

Definitely needs to be thought through, tested, refined and refined and refined and refined. 

 

We are staying open minded to any ideas but very likely we will use some kind of teamwork score. 

 

Who knows what its final form may be..  we will be testing and getting input from people like you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont think it would be used for access. never said that. ;)

 

Teamwork score could be used to do things like take leadership roles and gain access to advanced assets (maybe)

 

Could also help systems auto assign squads / SLs / Roles in certain situations. 

 

.....

 

it would be up to you to manage your teamwork score and yes.. i think it is likely possible to quantify.

 

I'd go a little further then, and say that it is provably  impossible to quantify, based on over half a century of computer science and design theory. Massive corporations have been trying to quantify these kinds of things for ages, and have little to nothing to show for it. Even with simple reputation models like ebay or PageRank the signal-to-noise ratio is pretty bad,while content recommendation systems are almost completely non-functional. I can pretty much assure you that any time spent on such a project will be largely wasted. You will be trying to create a single definition of teamwork, one that the majority of people will not agree with, and as a consequence the system will not be utilized.

 

You can't quantify a good FOB position vs. a bad FOB position.

You can't quantify somebody covering a flank without seeing any action vs. someone staring at their feet for an entire game.

You can't quantify reconnaissance.

 You can't quantify good communication protocols.

You can't quantify a good attack expertly defended vs. a bad attack poorly defended.

 

My system can. Because people can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.... Basing player access 

 

your statement was quite vague. I thought you were implying access to servers..  which seemed odd. 

 

You can certainly find adequate metrics to track in any situation, I do it everyday in my daily business. 

 

I'm not even going to dig into your other points. (we haven't defined the data points even internally)

 

 

I would say your system is a great option for sure and could be a critical component of a teamwork system. 

 

It might be that we really need to collect alot of data from multiple points to get a comprehensive average of teamwork. 

 

That is the challenge before us.  

 

I agree its a dangerous road lined with trouble.. but to be so black and white as to dismiss our ideas 

vs yours seems very stark. 

 

The reality is success is going to take A LOT of ideas and testing. 

 

I would prefer a collaborative tone... but. you and I can disagree.. that is certainly allowed.   ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer a collaborative tone... but. you and I can disagree.. that is certainly allowed.   ;)

 

I always come off as combative because of my direct tone, so please don't take it the wrong way. I do, however, think that the points I've mentioned are pretty much a settled matter within computer science. Which is why recommender systems, like the one I've laid out(Although mine's more of a hybrid), are becoming increasingly common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are ignoring the fact that people are not able to rate anything in a very objective manner.. especially in a videogame..

 

If you attack in a way that you think it works, and it might work, but i would say you could make it much better i rate you a -1?

And if you fail one attempt i rate you a -1?

 

Also you ignore the fact that friends dont rate eachother bad, however bad they might play.. you system gets only better the more people are rating..

thinking of that you wont encounter the majority of the playerbase, especially not between continents.. also we wont get a 2 million playerbase (would be a nice thing though)..

 

Your point of view is an adult point of view.. you can get more objective the older you get.. but most minds wont be old enough to rate someone in an objective manner ^^

 

The only thing i can think of is giving a teamplayscore, roundwise of course, where it counts like the squadcohesion, like "the more people of your squad are in a 100meter radius together, the more teamplayscore points you get"...

because i really cant think of a reason why someone of your squad should ever be more than 100 meter away from anyone else in your squad.. you cant have teamplay like that (in my opinion)

 

Even my idea might be worse and stupid to anyone else, but the devs have to decide, or the majority of the playerbase have to decide how a rating system oder pointsystem might work out for their purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is more like a player rating system, not a player ranking system.

I would like to see some of the sort though, it's always annoying to die from bad transport pilots. It would be cool if there was a ranking when it comes to piloting skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is more like a player rating system, not a player ranking system.

I would like to see some of the sort though, it's always annoying to die from bad transport pilots. It would be cool if there was a ranking when it comes to piloting skills.

 

that does not make my point invalid.

As soon as a squad dies from a pilot, wether its his fault or not, he is ruined and noone ever lets him get into a chopper again.

Doesnt make sense at all does it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that does not make my point invalid.

As soon as a squad dies from a pilot, wether its his fault or not, he is ruined and noone ever lets him get into a chopper again.

Doesnt make sense at all does it?

 

I agree with you. Voter manipulation would be a huge problem.

 

Scenario 1. Pilot crashes a squad full of clan members on their server. Whether it is right or not they'll negatively vote brigade that pilot to hell. That spreads and maybe even others would jump on board and bring down his score further.

 

Scenario 2. Squad A wants a certain asset but Squad B is already using that asset and denies Squad A permission to use it. "Let us or we'll downvote you."

 

Scenario 3. A popular streamer/youtuber/forum user/community member just because he is known by everyone naturally has a high score regardless of them being a particularly good player or not. Maybe he powertrips out and doesn't give a shit about people downvoting him or has a collective power to unleash all hell on players who don't do or give them what he asks for in-game.

 

Not all community members are the height of maturity and responsibility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a personalized reputation network. You're only hurting yourself if you downvote people for reasons other than to mark them as bad players. They're independent networks, voter manipulation is hugely impractical as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×