Reputation System And Player Archetypes

[JackBeloved]

I'm just now watching livestream 16, and the dev's are talking about a reputation system where, as I understood it, people basically "thumbs up" other players and over time boost their reputation. People with similar rep's might matchmake more often and get a "synergy bonus" of some sort.

 

My question, or I guess suggestion, is this: why don't they make player archetypes- speed runner, explorer, newbie, defender, troll, etc., and after each game you can nominate a player into one of these categories. Then, over time, eventually all the "explorers" could mathcmake and go exploring together, all the "speed runners" can speed run together, all the "trolls" can troll each other, etc.

 

Alternately, maybe you could nominate a play-style before you play the mission, and it could matchmake based on that. For example, some days I want to speed through to the boss, so I'd select the speed run option and get matched with other speed runners. Other days I want to farm mods or resources or nav points or whatever, so I pick "explorer" and then matchmake with other explorers.

 

I don't know what the coding would be like, but it sounds like a win for everyone.

[Ned_Wiki]

I like the idea but it would fall flat.

Because I can tell you right now me and a lot of people would just vote people as Trolls and Newbies until DE changed it. I don't know... it just seems so easily abuse-able that I wouldn't be able to resist. Even having a thumbs down option would be abuse-able.

I remember when I first started playing on Xbox Live on my 360 and I'd play tons of Quake 4 and I'd always win every match and kill everybody. I'm not exaggerating when I say I had a 80% Aggressiveness reputation rating with the other ratings being trash talking and other mean ones.

I DIDN'T HAVE A MIC AND I DIDN'T MESSAGE ANYBODY... I think it's too abuse-able.

[taiiat]

player Archetypes has been talked about before, and may very well end up in the game at some point (though the reputation system could very well be it).

and the drawbacks to having such a system has been talked about before. and that's probably why we don't have anything like it yet, because like Damage & Resistances 2.0 - it's something that should be treaded a little slowly.

[Phatose]

I'm not opposed in principles, but it wouldn't actually help much.

 

The playerbase is too small and too divided across the solar system for archetypes to significantly affect grouping.  It really doesn't matter if the system will preferentially group you with others of a particular archetype if there are only 3 people doing the mission you're on anyway.

 

Plus, the Rush/Explore archetype has problems of it's own.  I think you'll find most Rushers rush so they can get back to Defense or Survival.  Any tags they acquire would reflect that preference, not the speed running they do only when they absolutely have to. 

[bejuizb]

I like the concept the Devs had. Only the players who benefit the team get a reputation score. Trolls and griefers don't. That isolates them from the rest of the player base if they stick to trolling or griefing.

[Relkin]

I'm not opposed in principles, but it wouldn't actually help much.

 

The playerbase is too small and too divided across the solar system for archetypes to significantly affect grouping.  It really doesn't matter if the system will preferentially group you with others of a particular archetype if there are only 3 people doing the mission you're on anyway.

 

Plus, the Rush/Explore archetype has problems of it's own.  I think you'll find most Rushers rush so they can get back to Defense or Survival.  Any tags they acquire would reflect that preference, not the speed running they do only when they absolutely have to. 

That is a good point, perhaps changes to the way lobbies are handled are in order then?  Like a general lobby but you list your top three preferences regarding maps or something....idk......I just want more people on phobos T_T