denied Player interaction rating/ Player reputation system

[Dextrax]

I have an idea to reduce toxic and annoying behavior among players. Players interact with each other during PvP, chats (such as All, Trade, and Help), and trading. My proposal is to introduce a rating system that allows players to rate each other without affecting the rated player's PvP/PvE gaming.

 

The rating system could help in several ways:

1. During PvP, if a player time-stalls, abuses, or taunts others, a low rating would show that the player has a poor attitude in PvP.

2. In All chat, players may share irrelevant or personal information, which other players could ignore if they notice a low rating.

3. During trading, if a player tries to scam others or engage in any bad behavior, they may receive a low rating.

 

The rating system would not impact players' gaming experience, but others could see their reputation. Each player would start with a 3/5 star rating in each category and could build a good reputation from there.

To provide positive reinforcement, a reward system could be implemented for players who achieve a full five-star rating in all three categories each season.

I have also attached a concept image for reference, so you can better understand what I have in mind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 16, 2023 by Dextrax

[Olker]

I like the general idea. We have to prevent people to abuse this somehow though.

 

Specially in pvp, where saltyness of a losing player will probably make him give a low rating to the winning player.

 

Needless to say something about stall players.

[Avanox2]

-1 

 

The idea to fight against toxicity is a great one to support but doesn‘t solve the existing problem. I have provided reasons why we shouldn‘t implement such a feature in the game.

 

1. So said toxic players or trolls will purposely give others negative ratings to sabotage their own title. The competition in PvP is highly big and some people will send the opposite player a negative rating as soon as they start losing. 
 

2. People would start to exchange their free ratings for money. Besides pokemon and items a new currency will be implemented in the PRO market. This also causes fake identifications to players who just want the rewards at every season. Toxic players on the other hand receive the opportunity to boom their low rating by buying ratings. 
 

3. Scamming will still remain. It‘s almost impossible to fight the negative attitudes of toxic players. 

 

I respect every opinions. Please share your thoughts about my comment. 

Edited April 15, 2023 by Avanox2

[Avanox2]

PS: I would recommend an edited form of the rating system. The current one brings up more problems on the table as it should.

[Lacomus]

@Dextrax I like the concept. As others have said, I do see people abusing such a system too. If the honest / reasonable players outweighed the toxic / disingenuous players, that would be a nice world to live in. The first class of players mentioned would give people a fair rating, its just that percentage of people on the side that would spoil it. Would even be neat if a smart AI could individually assess each rating (weighing up mitigating factors, a players tendencies in-game and other data), without such a system being affected, by that second class of players  

Edited April 15, 2023 by Lacomus

[Dextrax]

@Olker, @Avanox2and@Lacomus,

Thank you for your opinions. The system I have in mind do have these above mentioned faults. I am hoping a discussion here might sort out some of these problems. 

Since everyone do agree the general idea against toxic players,The system I have shown is just a prototype and i hope you could pitch in some ideas to beat these problems too.

Possible ways to counter these problems in my opinion are:

1. Salty players unreasonably rating opponents low in PVP.

-Limit the number and frequency of times a player could rate others per day. (Eg; 5 ratings, with a cool down of 2 hours)

This could significantly reduce the spamming of low rating by these Salty players at their opponents.

-Allow only players with a minimum experience to rate others. (Eg; you require minimum 250 hours of playtime to rate other players.)

In my general observation, 'most' experienced players act more matured in the game and don't get salty over a lost battle.

 

2. Exchange of Ratings for money.

- If the above said cool down is set, it automatically makes it hard for players to sell 1 rating per 2 hours. (But then again, buyer can buy it from multiple people.)

- Best way i find is to make it not worth to buy the rating. If the reward is like 5 rare candies or a master ball (a reward worth around 40k) and people don't usually sell nothing below a minimum price, lets say 2k, or its not even worth the time.So if a person buys like 10 ratings, he already spend 20k (half the reward). It would be worse than the system where players buy gems for $500 each for a chance of getting good items at item recycler.

3. If Toxic players outnumber honest/reasonable players.

-I find this problem much similar to the 1st problem. So i hope minimum game play time and the rating cool down might sort it out.

I only hope if these ideas don't find suitable please suggest any alternate ways or ideas against Toxicity.

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

[Olker]

I like the idea of limiting the rating you can give to one every certain hours, and the playtime requirement. It doesn't completely solve the rating for money problem. If not solved, that would, in fact require a little more mod workforce.

 

Maybe make it possible to give rating not only after several hours, but also after several actions? Like having traded something significant? A criteria will have to be created about what is something "significant", though. 

[Isildurr2x]

How will rating actually affect pvp/trades/etc?

 

Like if you que for pvp and get a low rating player, will still have to play through that match

 

Trades as well, if a super low rating/toxic player was selling something in demand, people will still buy.

 

Some people might even try to become the lowest rated xd 

 

Maybe I am not understanding this concept, but so far I don't think ratings will actually affect anything 

[Acetzy]

Nah. My rating would go to negative 5

[Lyn1311]

54 minutes ago, Acetzy said:

Nah. My rating would go to negative 5

That will still higher then most players