An In-Game Reputation System

[JudasMaiden]

Just as the title suggests, I think if DE implemented an in-game rep system, it would be a lot helpful in spotting the good and helpful players from the salty and cringy ones. Also, it would solve the problems of keyscamming, platscamming, saltiness within squads, and also help the Devs in spotting malicious players, and take appropriate steps against them.

It should work in the following method:

• Addition of a "Rate Player" button in the profile screen of a player.
   
• A player can rate another player only once either positively or negatively, (to be more precise, a player can rate another player positevely once, but if he misbehaves or does something questionable, that same player can also rate him negatively, which will cancel their previous positive rating; and vice-versa) to prevent spamming of positive (or negative) reputation by friends (or personal foes) of the player being rated.
   
• On clicking the "Rate Player" button on the profile screen, a popup box will appear, having a "+" button (for postive rep) and a "-" button (for negative rep). On clicking either button, another popup will appear, which will have reasons for the selected reputation. (For example, clicking on "+" will show a popup box having options like "Friendly", "Co-operative", "Helpful", "Encouraging", etc., while clicking on the "-" will bring a popup with options like " Keyscamming", "False Promises", "Misleading", Un co-operative", etc.)
   
• The reputation system will have 5 "Caps", both in the positive and negative scale, based on the amount of accumulated reputations by other players. On reaching each of these "Caps" players will be given a title, or a reputation rank, which will be displayed alongwith the name of the person in the profile screen, in brackets, and also alongside their names in chat. Each "Cap" will need a minimum amount of either positive (or negative) rep to be accumulated, much like the mastery rank, but on a smaller scale. (And no, you don't have to give reputation tests, like we do mastery tests for mastery, that's just silly)
   
• On reaching the Topmost "Cap" of positive reputaion, players will be awarded a Special Sigil, or a Syandana, which signifies their reputation ingame. However, those players could still be rated, but those points will not be accumulated anymore. This is because some players might exploit this system to get more reputation points beyond the final cap, and then change their attitude, which won't scratch their reputation, given that they have way more rep points than the max "Cap" threshold. (For example, a player has reached max rep rank at, say 1000 votes. He keeps accumulating votes by being good, until he has large enough number of votes, way beyond thefinal cap limit, and suddenly he starts misbehaving. This way, even if he is negatively rated, he won't change from his position, and that is a bit counterproductive IMO)
   
• On reaching each negative "Cap" on the negative scale, the player will be penalised in some way (the means of penalisation, I haven't yet thought of, feel free to suggest some), and on reaching the final "Cap", the player will be banned for a given duration.
   
• After the ban duration is over, the player can start playing again, with his reputation reset to zero. However if he doesn't change his ways, and keeps misbehaving, and reaches the lowermost "Cap" for a second time, he will be permabanned.

In my opinion, this will be a much better and efficient way to sort the good players from the bad. It will also provide a means to penalise players who keyscam and platscam ingame, offenses which do not have any penalties currently, and such offenders can play without any leash or worries. This system will force them to rethink what they are about to do.

What do you think, guys? Is this a good enough system, worthy of implementation? Or are there some aspects I am overlooking, which makes this system harmful for the game?
Feel free to discuss. But please don't get salty or offend anyone else for having an opinion. Have a civilised discussion. Peace. 

[SilvaDreams]

Horrid idea, people would abuse it and just give negative marks because they are salty for one reason or another.

Same reason we will never have a vote kick system 

[Jaysus41]

I remember a time when they were talking about a rep system, they even had stuff in the game for it. It would occasionally glitch and pop up after mission results. Haven't heard about it in a long time.

Giving players the power to permaban other players? Um... How about no? In fact, I'll give it a Hell No.

[JudasMaiden]

19 minutes ago, SilvaDreams said:

Horrid idea, people would abuse it and just give negative marks because they are salty for one reason or another.

Same reason we will never have a vote kick system 

Like I said, A person can vote for (or against) any player just once, so abusing it is out of the question, unless you have a large group of people salty against you.

 

2 minutes ago, Jaysus41 said:

I remember a time when they were talking about a rep system, they even had stuff in the game for it. It would occasionally glitch and pop up after mission results. Haven't heard about it in a long time.

Giving players the power to permaban other players? Um... How about no? In fact, I'll give it a Hell No.

The rep system has a positive scale too, and having postive reps has some perks, like I mentioned in my posts.
Although I do agree that implementing it would require a lot of coding, which will inevitably give rise to glitches.

As for the permaban, maybe replace it with a temporary ban? Or confer some penalties on the player to keep them in check, I think?

[SilvaDreams]

8 minutes ago, JudasMaiden said:

Like I said, A person can vote for (or against) any player just once, so abusing it is out of the question, unless you have a large group of people salty against you.

 

The rep system has a positive scale too, and having postive reps has some perks, like I mentioned in my posts.
Although I do agree that implementing it would require a lot of coding, which will inevitably give rise to glitches.

As for the permaban, maybe replace it with a temporary ban? Or confer some penalties on the player to keep them in check, I think?

You fail to understand how salty people can be for no reason.

I've had people rage at me just for using limbo before, some quit ext and never even using my powers.

[GDSK-NXS]

25 minutes ago, SilvaDreams said:

Horrid idea, people would abuse it and just give negative marks because they are salty for one reason or another.

Same reason we will never have a vote kick system 

I don't think so, even salty people have a limit, doesn't matter if 10 salty people give you a negative mark, if you're not a piece of trash you probably will have more than 10 positive ones, after all, reputation is subjective to both the good and the bad people.

6 minutes ago, Jaysus41 said:

I remember a time when they were talking about a rep system, they even had stuff in the game for it. It would occasionally glitch and pop up after mission results. Haven't heard about it in a long time.

Giving players the power to permaban other players? Um... How about no? In fact, I'll give it a Hell No.

As up there, people couldn't "permaban", by what the OP says, thinking that the negative and positive cap are polar oposites, you would need 1K negative votes to be banned for a short duration, and what? are you telling me one guy will convince his entire moon clan? Yeah sure, think about it a little more.

As suggestions for this, I would recommend banning the player not from the game, but from the multiplayer experience for a week, that way he can't be annoying to other players, and also he would be stripped of the harder content himself, giving him a slap of "behave or suffer", and I agree that's needed on some cases.

Also, I am against both the name in the chat and the aesthetic things you said people with good rep would get, that' would only further the greed, and that's not the objective here. Also, I don't think a cap should be implemented. The threshold for ban I'm all about, also about it displaying in peoples's profile, but a cap would make things worse for those who are too good, meaning, after 1K votes they can't get any more votes, or any negative vote gets them to 999. However, to prevent an exploit, it should be prohibited for members of the same clan/alliance and friends to rate a player, since they may have personal motives rather than actual criticism.

The pre-written messages may be a good idea, as the dota 2 commend and report system suggests.

[JudasMaiden]

9 minutes ago, GDSK-NXS said:

I don't think so, even salty people have a limit, doesn't matter if 10 salty people give you a negative mark, if you're not a piece of trash you probably will have more than 10 positive ones, after all, reputation is subjective to both the good and the bad people.

As up there, people couldn't "permaban", by what the OP says, thinking that the negative and positive cap are polar oposites, you would need 1K negative votes to be banned for a short duration, and what? are you telling me one guy will convince his entire moon clan? Yeah sure, think about it a little more.

As suggestions for this, I would recommend banning the player not from the game, but from the multiplayer experience for a week, that way he can't be annoying to other players, and also he would be stripped of the harder content himself, giving him a slap of "behave or suffer", and I agree that's needed on some cases.

Also, I am against both the name in the chat and the aesthetic things you said people with good rep would get, that' would only further the greed, and that's not the objective here. Also, I don't think a cap should be implemented. The threshold for ban I'm all about, also about it displaying in peoples's profile, but a cap would make things worse for those who are too good, meaning, after 1K votes they can't get any more votes, or any negative vote gets them to 999. However, to prevent an exploit, it should be prohibited for members of the same clan/alliance and friends to rate a player, since they may have personal motives rather than actual criticism.

The pre-written messages may be a good idea, as the dota 2 commend and report system suggests.

Those sound like good enough alternatives. It will make the players think twice what they are about to do, and what the consequences for their action might be.

I agree, some points I mentioned might not be liked by a majority of the community, about how, it can give rise to issues like honest players getting banned if implemented improperly, but that doesn't change the facts that a player, as of now, can get away by Keyscamming or Platscamming, without any consequence for their actions. IMO, that is not fair for people who farm void keys/beacons/buy plats. They do all the work, and someone comes along with a false promise, gets their job done by the honest players and leaves without contributing anything, and that too for free. 

[DuskLegendary]

No, the community as a whole is too immature for something like this. I say this for the same exact reason I don't beleive a vote to kick button should ever be implemented at all.

Edited June 4, 2016 by DuskLegendary

[GDSK-NXS]

1 minute ago, JudasMaiden said:

Those sound like good enough alternatives. It will make the players think twice what they are about to do, and what the consequences for their action might be.

I agree, some points I mentioned might not be liked by a majority of the community, about how, it can give rise to issues like honest players getting banned if implemented improperly, but that doesn't change the facts that a player, as of now, can get away by Keyscamming or Platscamming, without any consequence for their actions. IMO, that is not fair for people who farm void keys/beacons/buy plats. They do all the work, and someone comes along with a false promise, gets their job done by the honest players and leaves without contributing anything, and that too for free. 

To be fair, promises (including keys and beacon shares) are not in DE's hands, the trade chat message says they don't condone it, so you take the risk, don't cry after you get scammed. Now, in some cases, like bad behavior and harassment, you can contact support, so they can take any action needed. Still, most people don't know they can do that, but you can. You actually can go to support and, providing evidence of the players actions, get them to "justice".

3 minutes ago, DuskLegendary said:

No, the community as a whole is too immature for something like this. I say this for the same exact reason I don't beleive a vote to kick button should every be implemented at all.

Bad people will keep doing bad things, good people will keep doing good things, this systems makes bad people repent for their behavior. Even in the same amount, bad people will be stuck down harder than good people. comments like this, with no hope in the community, are the far cry of either a bad player who doesn't want to have their *ss handed to them, or a fearful newbie who thinks there's any kind of bad thing that could happen to them.

Also, votekick is a different measure altogether from a reputation system, comparing them is useless since one is a one-time vote from 4 players in a mission and the other one is a permanent upvote or downvote to a player account. They bring different issues into the table, for instance, if a player gets angry, they can downvote another player, that will do NOTHING against the player since 1 downvote has no value, while getting kicked from a mission not only means the player wasted time, but he also got kick for no real reason (if, he was actually behaving).

If you think this two issues are the same, or are related to each other, you don't understand the measures that are being discussed here. 

[Mastikator2]

40 minutes ago, SilvaDreams said:

You fail to understand how salty people can be for no reason.

I've had people rage at me just for using limbo before, some quit ext and never even using my powers.

How often does that actually happen vs people are fine with it vs people like that you use limbo in a useful way?

[GDSK-NXS]

5 minutes ago, Mastikator2 said:

How often does that actually happen vs people are fine with it vs people like that you use limbo in a useful way?

Is there a useful way? :O

 

[SilvaDreams]

3 minutes ago, Mastikator2 said:

How often does that actually happen vs people are fine with it vs people like that you use limbo in a useful way?

9 out of 10 times people whine and *@##$ the moment they see a Limbo, some continue to whine through the whole mission no matter what if they don't just quit right at the start.

And a very few come to enjoy having me around like the squishy frames like Nova.

[Mastikator2]

2 minutes ago, GDSK-NXS said:

Is there a useful way? :O

 

Sortie Defense.

2 minutes ago, SilvaDreams said:

9 out of 10 times people whine and *@##$ the moment they see a Limbo, some continue to whine through the whole mission no matter what if they don't just quit right at the start.

And a very few come to enjoy having me around like the squishy frames like Nova.

So what you're saying is, 9 out of the last 10 games you did with Limbo someone called you out and rage quit?

Either that is a gross exaggeration bordering on deception or they're reacting to you and not your frame.

[SilvaDreams]

19 minutes ago, Mastikator2 said:

Sortie Defense.

So what you're saying is, 9 out of the last 10 games you did with Limbo someone called you out and rage quit?

Either that is a gross exaggeration bordering on deception or they're reacting to you and not your frame.

No people in this community have a herd mentality a lot of the time.

One person says a new mod or weapon is crap and then everyone is till someone actually does the footwork and shows how good they are and even then there will be groups who will keep their heads buried in the sand.

Just look at the Prime Bane mods for a perfect example.

[DuskLegendary]

47 minutes ago, GDSK-NXS said:

To be fair, promises (including keys and beacon shares) are not in DE's hands, the trade chat message says they don't condone it, so you take the risk, don't cry after you get scammed. Now, in some cases, like bad behavior and harassment, you can contact support, so they can take any action needed. Still, most people don't know they can do that, but you can. You actually can go to support and, providing evidence of the players actions, get them to "justice".

Bad people will keep doing bad things, good people will keep doing good things, this systems makes bad people repent for their behavior. Even in the same amount, bad people will be stuck down harder than good people. comments like this, with no hope in the community, are the far cry of either a bad player who doesn't want to have their *ss handed to them, or a fearful newbie who thinks there's any kind of bad thing that could happen to them.

Also, votekick is a different measure altogether from a reputation system, comparing them is useless since one is a one-time vote from 4 players in a mission and the other one is a permanent upvote or downvote to a player account. They bring different issues into the table, for instance, if a player gets angry, they can downvote another player, that will do NOTHING against the player since 1 downvote has no value, while getting kicked from a mission not only means the player wasted time, but he also got kick for no real reason (if, he was actually behaving).

If you think this two issues are the same, or are related to each other, you don't understand the measures that are being discussed here. 

Well no, it's not that I'm a bad person or even a noob. I say this because what if for example you're playing with someone in a match and they don't like that you're spamming the Synoid Simulor or the Tonkor. They decide they get fed up and give you a bad rating all because they despise those weapons and anyone who uses them. So, they then proceed to down vote you or lie in some way just to give you negative rep, all because they didn't agree with your play style. How can you not see this becoming an issue? And this is just one example, I could list many more. The community shouldn't have that kind of power, nor should they have a vote to kick option.

No, not necessary. While they are a different system all together, I simply stated that like a vote to kick system, a reputation system would be heavily abused as well. My most recent example is me doing a raid. I was doing a raid the other day and it started storming all of a sudden really badly, and I lagged out at the worst possible time: the button part. Well, I lagged out and caused issues with the team which wasn't my fault. The host then told all of his clanmates to steer clear of me, because I leave LORs and I'm not to be trusted. Naturally, they listened to him and a clan mate brought this to my attention, and he then explained what actually happened and cleared up the misunderstanding.

So, in a situation like this, what do you think would have happened had we had a rating system? That salty guy, along with all of his close clan members, would have down voted me and given me a bad repuation, all because I lagged out of match. I do understand the measures being discussed here my friend, I think it's you who doesn't understand what I'm getting at. I never stated that they were the same, I simply stated that the community isn't ready for that much power, that much control. In the end, this would simply cause many more issues than than it would really solve.

Edited June 4, 2016 by DuskLegendary

[Mastikator2]

1 minute ago, SilvaDreams said:

No people in this community have a herd mentality a lot of the time.

One person says a new mod or weapon is crap and then everyone is till someone actually does the footwork and shows how good they are and even then there will be groups who will keep their heads buried in the sand.

Just look at the Prime Bane mods for a perfect example.

Well it's funny because I've never been on the receiving end of what you describe. At least not without actually deserving it. Maybe you and I just live in different universes, or we play on different servers and the people on your server are jerks.

[GDSK-NXS]

1 hour ago, SilvaDreams said:

No people in this community have a herd mentality a lot of the time.

One person says a new mod or weapon is crap and then everyone is till someone actually does the footwork and shows how good they are and even then there will be groups who will keep their heads buried in the sand.

Just look at the Prime Bane mods for a perfect example.

I can see it, I see Limbo as a frame exclusive to games with friends, where we are going to have fun and we all know eachother, and we know we aren't peasants who die every few seconds even with limbo for lack of experience. Limbo has some good combos (for example, excalibur exalted blade wave hit's through rift and with low enough energy drain you can keep it active infinitely while being immortal) but the frame is most commonly annoying in the battlefield making who use guns useless, being useless because they don't help and just stay alive, or troll in many ways I will not describe as to keep those from reproducing.

When I see limbo I ask them to change, if they don't want to, then I ask them to leave the place for a more fitted warframe. This is only on missions where the frames matter of course, or those with a special setup going on (like the draco one, as the easiest example). If I don't want to play those missions with a Limbo I should have the right to tell them to leave. and if they don't want to first of all that would put me in a bad mood and second that would force me to rearm only because one player was too selfish.

There is people carried away for this "hate limbo" trend, but it's not 9/10, it could be about 2/10 with luck (in the setting I gave, of a mission with no specific build needed).

1 hour ago, DuskLegendary said:

They decide they get fed up and give you a bad rating all because they despise those weapons and anyone who uses them. So, they then proceed to down vote you or lie in some way just to give you negative rep, all because they didn't agree with your play style. How can you not see this becoming an issue? And this is just one example, I could list many more. The community shouldn't have that kind of power, nor should they have a vote to kick option.

No, not necessary. While they are a different system all together, I simply stated that like a vote to kick system, a reputation system would be heavily abused as well. My most recent example is me doing a raid. I was doing a raid the other day and it started storming all of a sudden really badly, and I lagged out at the worst possible time: the button part. Well, I lagged out and caused issues with the team which wasn't my fault. The host then told all of his clanmates to steer clear of me, because I leave LORs and I'm not to be trusted. Naturally, they listened to him and a clan mate brought this to my attention, and he then explained what actually happened and cleared up the misunderstanding.

So, in a situation like this, what do you think would have happened had we had a rating system? That salty guy, along with all of his close clan members, would have down voted me and given me a bad repuation, all because I lagged out of match. I do understand the measures being discussed here my friend, I think it's you who doesn't understand what I'm getting at. I never stated that they were the same, I simply stated that the community isn't ready for that much power, that much control. In the end, this would simply cause many more issues than than it would really solve.

First of all, for every peasant raging at my loadout there are more peasants happy that I save their asses with those guns. I haven't find one person to complain about my playstyle of full nuke spamming, and I have played with people who don't like me too, they don't like me for reasons other than my playstyle. The setting you give is possible, but so rare that unless you're also a piece of sh*t as a player, it won't be a problem at all. And this is my experience, as someone who has played all the meta for 3 years.

Okay, I was going to write something but I know there's a barrier between us, and instead of keeping this useless push forward, let me give one more suggestion to the idea: you can only be up-voted/down-voted up to "mastery rank" amount of times a day (so if you're MR20 you can be up voted 20 times AND downvoted 20 times). That way, if someone want's to F*** with you, they will have to pull through with the most complex agenda, also, you can find MORE than 20 people in a day, so if you are helpful, most probably you can fight out their "downvote rain" like a champ. This could only be abused by luna clan leaders or big alliance leaders, who have a big amount of users and also a big amount of organization, but even then, if a player is abusing the down-vote, you can always go to support with the proof, you have more than enough time, I mean, how many weeks will it take to get you 1000 downvotes at 20 each day? You take screenshots of them or any proof you have of their abuse, they ban their asses. The reputation systems is not to replace the warframe support, is to lift some of it's weight.

You can also only be downvoted by someone ONCE and they all get neutralized by any upvote you get, so I don't see the problem.

[(PSN)AngelShur]

I think the ignore and report method will be forever chosen above a reputation method. Also, look around you. Many have high reputation for being childish or tickling others ears if you know what I mean, I'm not generallizing, while others who really help get 0 reputation. 

[Hatzeputt]

Several games had a plus rep and neg rep function on their forums and some in game as well. Every single one got rid of it and kept only the "+ rep" function since the neg rep function would be abused like no tomorrow. 1 guy feels offended by something, he would neg rep on every instance he has a chance, if his clan is vindictive or small minded enough and boy are there many vindictive and small minded people out there, the entire clan will neg rep you. No matter how sophisticated a system you try to invent, people will find loop holes to circumvent your system.

Even if you only have a system with + rep votes what happens if a dude that is a 99% solo player joins a match/sortie for one reason or the other and he has 0 rep points, people WILL assume he is a bad players since obviously he has no + rating at all and we are back at square one.    

It should be plain obvious why a neg rep system will not work and why a + rep limited system also is no help.   

[Zdeadfallout]

It will end up like this...kinda

Edited June 4, 2016 by Zdeadfallout

[Cosmosframe]

This is warframe man, don't think we need that here. will poison the community,but would be cool to have bonding points between players. 

[Kevyne_Kicklighter]

Can't have nice things like this in games as it will be abused.

"Hey, guys give me some favs!" in his own guild/clan, for example.

The only indicator to anyone else if they're good in games -- but not free of cheese -- is looking at their stats. Then hope he isn't an AFKer.