Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CalenLoki

Reputation network

Recommended Posts

After reading quite a bit of the forum, it seems that a lot of players in game may be not exactly honest and honourable (scamming, trolling, stealing, ect.).

While it's more interesting that way (emergent gameplay and stuff) it should be possible to punish such nasty players in some way. Bounties are planned, but that's one time thing AFAIK.

 

So I suggest reputation network system. I'm well aware of similar ideas, mine is a bit different. 

 

 

To the point:

1. You can give + or - rep to any player. Once (but can change it at any time). That's quite the same as in any rep system. You can also write something (i.e. "scammer" or "great builder")

2. When you watch other player's profile, you can see how he's rated by players that received + from you. Because you trust only opinion of people that you marked as "trustworthy".

3. You can't see how many + or - you got. As it serves no purpose. You can even mark someone + when he marked you -.

 

System is simple, and quite abuse-proof. After all you ignore all those fake accounts and his crime buddies that gave scammer +. Unless you give them + too, but that's your fault.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CalenLoki said:

System is simple, and quite abuse-proof. After all you ignore all those fake accounts and his crime buddies that gave scammer +

3

And that's wherein the problem lays, especially among organizations, they can just be one + rep circlejerk fest, just like it would be on the forums with negatives (in my experience). How do you ignore the fake reps from the real ones?

 

The only thing you could really do to curb this is to prevent people from the same organization from giving each other a rating, but this can become problematic with people that have a part in many orgs.

 

Even then it doesn't seem quite as fool proof as you say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think about the reputation ... let the player determine. You can go to forum to smoke some drama and learn about people then.

With your form like DarkHorizon say, easy to fake it. And if it is a scam organization how you avoid it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think that'll work as intended. 

 

So you rate your xp with a player on the basis of a ONE TIME INTERACTION. If you upvoted a guy because he's a great builder, fine. But that guy may just be a jerk himself and annoy others a LOT. So you basically then see every + he sent to others.....yeah, bad system imho.

 

Every system with some kind of +- thingy for one time interactions is a bad system. Maybe the other guy just had a bad day and was pissed? Maybe you had a bad day and got smth the wrong way? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DarkHorizon said:

And that's wherein the problem lays, especially among organizations, they can just be one + rep circlejerk fest, just like it would be on the forums with negatives (in my experience). How do you ignore the fake reps from the real ones?

Only if you + rep someone, you see his opinion on other players. Thus unless you consider half of that org trustworthy, you won't even see what they say about their fellows. If you +rep someone just because you meet him once, then I'd say you're a bit to naive.

3 hours ago, ShioriStein said:

I think about the reputation ... let the player determine. You can go to forum to smoke some drama and learn about people then.

With your form like DarkHorizon say, easy to fake it. And if it is a scam organization how you avoid it ?

If you get scammed, then you can bad-rep all the players that vouched for him,cuz their opinion was false. And if you want even his whole org for not throwing him out.

3 hours ago, Lethys said:

Don't think that'll work as intended. 

 

So you rate your xp with a player on the basis of a ONE TIME INTERACTION. If you upvoted a guy because he's a great builder, fine. But that guy may just be a jerk himself and annoy others a LOT. So you basically then see every + he sent to others.....yeah, bad system imho.

 

Every system with some kind of +- thingy for one time interactions is a bad system. Maybe the other guy just had a bad day and was pissed? Maybe you had a bad day and got smth the wrong way? 

You rate players wherever you feel you trust them. May be after one interaction, may be after month of working together. It's up to you.

Maybe there should be more fluent system that let you +0.1 someone "he seem quite honest, but need more data" and you wait with full rep opinion.

Maybe there should be requirement to write at least 10 letters of description?

 

It's more of a open notebook, so you don't need to remember all the names, and you have access to your friends notes as well.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, hi!

 

 

 

Sitting here thinking it over, my first impulse or question was: What's with the good old days where you would judge reputation by yourself, with your mind instead of, say, abstract values and numbers.

 

I also think too many aspects that may play a notable role in judging people or making up your mind would be over-simplified or "washed away" in a simplified +/- system where it's kinda like trying to judge something based solely on simple "likes" or "dislikes".

 

Now, if I get this right, you ask for an implemented system rather than people just doing this "somehow", e.g. making notes for themselves or rating things for themselves. You may likely guess what I'm about to refer to at this point: The implementation effort and whether NQ can or wants to cover this at this time, or the near future (not counting if the larger community wants it or not, that is).

 

Of course "it takes resources" cannot be a universal argument or explanation to possibly shoot down ideas that may be interesting or useful for the future, no doubt, but so far I simply think my mind (or manual notes) can cover what you suggest so far. While it might be easier to track a few things with such a system, with a bit of inquiry you could do the same. The possible downside I see is that, eventually, some people or many might rely on it too much. This could, maybe, lead to false conclusions solely based on + or - values.

 

In short, even with that system you'll likely can't stop thinking or inquiring. I can get that it might be a good idea or useful at times, but on the other hand I currently think it can't be "too reliable" in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, CalenLoki said:

Only if you + rep someone, you see his opinion on other players. Thus unless you consider half of that org trustworthy, you won't even see what they say about their fellows.

 

That just makes things worse in my point. You can't see peoples reputation unless you assign reputation yourself?

 

I feel like the only real reputation system we could have is something that is automatic based on players actions. If you've played WatchDogs, it's something like this, but that was a single player setting whereas this is live, but for the sake of examples lets just go with it for now.

 

You, as person-A, shoot and kill a person who is either unarmed and non-combative or does not have their weapon drawn, -5 rep for person-A

You, as person-B, shoot and kill a person who has their weapon drawn or has physically attacked you, -3 for person-B.

You, as person-C,  shoot and kill a person who has fired at you, -1 for person-C

-after the above fact-

You shoot and kill person-A, +5 rep.

You shoot and kill person-B, +3 rep.

You shoot and kill person-C, +1 rep.

 

From a human perspective, this would still be highly subjective. Were they defending themselves, who provoked who, was it an out of game event that triggered this, etc. I'm trying to look at this from a computer's perspective, but there is only so much that can be done before we get to something a computer can't do, since again, we are talking about a live, person to person-environment here.

 

Things like assigning a person reputation because they provided good service not only requires a human input but is way more subjective. In events like this, people will build up a social reputation in a natural way. If someone is known for selling good products at a reasonable price, people with past experiences with that merchant will direct their friends there so they can get in on it. Is a pirate killing everyone they meet in an unprovoked manner? People will talk about it, word will spread, they will be avoided, and bounties will be set to have them taken out.

 

While I'd love to look at someone and just get an overview of their past history so I can determine how positive or negative their interaction would be, it just won't be easy to implement, if even at all. It's hard to do it automatically because you don't have enough context, and doing it manually leaves it entirely open to human manipulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In practice the idea ends up working like a social network.  You have friended (+1) some people, so you can see how many of your friends (the people you have +1ed) have friended(+1ed) the person you are deciding whether to negotiate with.  So if a bunch of people you trust do themselves trust this person then you can make a judgement that they are likely trustworthy.  Add that you can only +1 each person once, and you can't really artificially increase your reputation.

 

I don't really see any downsides to the idea, but I don't really see a necessity for it either.

 

TL:DR  I'm ambivalent whether a system like this is implemented, but if it is this isn't a bad way to do it.

Edited by Felonu
Added a little

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DarkHorizon I don't think automated system would work at all in game with so much freedom. Someone is digging out your base, you shoot and kill them (only thing you can do to stop them). You get -5 because he was unarmed. His friend is just waiting for that around the corner with a big gun. He kills you and get +5. Then raze and loot you base.

 

Way too many variables for automated system.

 

14 hours ago, DarkHorizon said:

Things like assigning a person reputation because they provided good service not only requires a human input but is way more subjective. In events like this, people will build up a social reputation in a natural way. If someone is known for selling good products at a reasonable price, people with past experiences with that merchant will direct their friends there so they can get in on it. Is a pirate killing everyone they meet in an unprovoked manner? People will talk about it, word will spread, they will be avoided, and bounties will be set to have them taken out.

That's what my suggestion is for - ability for people to direct or warn their friends about other players/organisations. Just not through messages, but more accessible system.

 

@Felonu Thanks for understanding :)

 

EDIT - The same system could be also used by orgs. As they are "legal persons". So you can bad-rep scammer org. But you can also up-rep police force, thus receive their opinion about people who broke their law. And if the system support short messages, it can be also used to set bounties "he broke the law by devastating area around the town. Any information about his current location will be rewarded accordingly".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On ‎21‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 11:33 AM, CalenLoki said:

@DarkHorizon I don't think automated system would work at all in game with so much freedom. Someone is digging out your base, you shoot and kill them (only thing you can do to stop them). You get -5 because he was unarmed. His friend is just waiting for that around the corner with a big gun. He kills you and get +5. Then raze and loot you base.

 

Way too many variables for automated system.

'

That's the problem with assigning reputation with DarkHorizon's method. Don't get me wrong. His idea is a good one in theory, but if we're judging people based by reputation assigned by other people, there are good ways to 'grief' players like that. 

'

On ‎20‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 2:10 PM, Warden said:

Sitting here thinking it over, my first impulse or question was: What's with the good old days where you would judge reputation by yourself, with your mind instead of, say, abstract values and numbers.

(appended)

In short, even with that system you'll likely can't stop thinking or inquiring. I can get that it might be a good idea or useful at times, but on the other hand I currently think it can't be "too reliable" in the end.

'

Frankly, I can't but agree with you here. What's the point of the reputation system? Punishing bad behaviour? Birds of a feather flock together. All the player needs is to find a SomethingAwful group in DU and they will be nasty, rep points or no. Last year we went through something similar like this on the forums: the bounty system. A year after, it seems like people have forgotten...or they never knew. Ultimately, bounty doesn't stop people from killing you. Some people enjoy having large bounties on their head, because it's a kind of trophy. You see someone with a 200 Quanta bounty on his head: you're probably going to relax a little or panic a lot less. You see someone with a 3,000,000 Quanta bounty on his head coming for you and you know without knowing that you're in trouble. 

 

The same thing will apply for the reputation systems being discussed on this thread. -10rep? Possibly, a new player who decided to get his hands dirty, or some casual player that did one too many 'wrong' things. -767 rep? Panic mode on. For the lone low rep player, the threat posed might be less. But, when low rep becomes haute couture for players, you will find bands of 50, 100 players with reps below -70. And some of the 'good' guys will definitely join the band because the cool kids are doing it. Unlike Eve, there is no CONCORD in DU, to enforce the penalties of low security status. Through interaction with certain players, organisations can tell apart the good bad guys from the bad good guys and the bad bad guys. I doubt there'll be many good good guys for obvious reasons. Someone who is -999rep can still make an awesome mentor and there will be people like that in DU. A +189 rep player can be a total jerk - he may play by the rules and be a scammer, have a flock to bring is rep up, or know how to 'farm' rep points. 

 

What is the point of the reputation system? To ascertain the character of players? Again, the reputation system - like the bounty system - stands little chance of great improvement. If I'm bent on bypassing the bounty bar (no pun intended) I can let myself get shot and have the bounty eliminated. Then, I'll go hunt again. When the bounty gets too high, I allow myself to be caught and reset it to zero. Is my rep getting too low? Well, I hang around new players showing them how to get around the game. Then, I come for you. Angel at day, devil at night. Or, I join an org that helps me farm my points. Problem solved. You may imagine the yammering we will hear about this system anyway:

 

'I did good to you!', says he. 'Why won't you give me good rep? I made up for my wrong!' 

 

'Get away.' says you, feeling smug. 'Cry all you like.' 

 

Then, you get a negative rep yourself, and because this is emergent gameplay, you'll get negative rep by 50+ people you never knew. Because this is emergent gameplay, he can pay others to negative rep you, at a rate as low at 50 Quanta per rep. If quest boards get implemented, I pity you. You've never seen what -1000 rep looks like until someone with cash pays 500Q for each - rep. But, now, you're one of the 'bad' guys or bad good guys for a sin as little as refusing to withdraw your negative rep from a disgruntled player. 

 

So, what is the point of the reputation system?

 

Cheers.

 

'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vyz Ejstu said:

So, what is the point of the reputation system?

To share your opinion about someone. To quickly access opinion of people you trust. To know at glance what should you do when you meat someone. To allow creating in-game mechanics for player-set law enforcement.

To save players from using external sites and forums for doing exactly same thing, just in a lot more clunky way.

 

Compared to forum, it corresponds to followers. You have 7 of them, and they are interested in your opinion, so they follow you.

 

And bounty system has major flaw - you see opinions (bounties) of everyone. So it's easy to manipulate. Especially by rich people. Also it's a one-time thing (when he dies, the bounty is paid and over), while should be permanent. In most cases it's also too limited by the system - you get reward for kill, rather than i.e. information about location of outlaw base or ships.

 

 

Also you can't see your total rep, unless you use separate character and follow everyone in game, then check your main char profile. You also can't see if someone that you met rated you in any way, so no instant revenge.

 

 

EDIT: Another idea: make reputation fade away. Like -10% of current value every month. This way your recent actions will affect rep much more than what you've done two years ago. Players can of course re-new rep manually, but I doubt anyone will bother with that (except for their closest friends and worst enemies). And for sure those who stopped playing won't log in just to update rep.

Edited by CalenLoki
Another idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'

I see. 

 

Sharing opinions about someone through reputation points is a good idea, no doubt about that. I think you should consider proposing time-out mechanics. You see, I plan to play this game for years and years. Reputation points, unlike word of mouth will lose reliability the longer the character stays active. Say I was a bounty hunter in my younger years: rash, devious and fearless. I earned a lot, lost a lot, and undoubtedly got a lot of negative reputation, parting gifts from my victims. Was I 'bad' because I was a bounty hunter? By universal standards, no. But the people I killed had a negative opinion of me because I killed them. So, while my wallet grew, my reputation status dipped. 

 

Two years later, older and wiser, I am industrialist, supplying both peaceful players and warmongers with elements. I trade on the market, so people rarely see me, or bother to thank the person who produced engines they bought. My reputation remains abysmal, but I have 'changed'. 

 

You see, were someone to ask another player about me when I was a bounty hunter, they would no doubt be told to stay away, or keep their bounty low. Now that I am an industrialist, people will say the opposite, because my interests have changed. If they ask, they will know. If they don't ask they won't know. The new player that's struggling against tax collectors won't understand that I'm here to help via my combat experience. What he will see is a relic of my past behaviour: reputation points that are now inaccurate. 

 

Stereotyping saves time, but getting to know someone always makes you the wiser and the experience richer. That's social content, understanding and judging people by direct interaction or by interaction through others that know people. 

 

With the Forum, it is different. The forum is not a game: it's an extension of a game, but it is real life. I may have seven followers, but what is that out of several thousand players? Most people don't consider the follower count when talking on the forums, they consider the spoken words and attitude. I have followed people and I have forgotten most of the people I followed or when I followed them, but like the reputation system being proposed, I didn't bother to unfollow them. 

 

There is a difference between an MMO and a Facebook wannabe. The Forums allow us to judge people based on what they say, not how they play. The reputation system judges people based on how others perceive them at that particular time, not who they are or they will be. Unless you give the reputation system a finite and short duration, its importance will fade with time. That aside, it is still subject to the manipulation through points discussed by other players above.

 

The purpose behind your idea is a good one. I simply find fault with the way you propose to execute the idea. 

 

Cheers.

'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lethys said:

that's certainly not how it will work as such a system can be trolled and abused to oblivion

I've just read all topics that could be found with "bounty" or "contract" in title. Took a while, but totally worth it.

 

But still, even if we have good bounty/quest/contract system, something to keep track of personal opinion would be nice as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

One persons villain is anothers freedom fighter. 

 

I appreciate the energy of thinking this up, however Rep systems are worthless in games like this.

'I wouldn't say worthless. I'd rather say crude.

There could be a way social influence works, as it was mentioned in the lore - unless that has changed. 

On 16/11/2016 at 6:26 AM, NQ-Nyzaltar said:

2100: Mankind is entering a new era where robotics and AI have profoundly transformed society. Work as we know it has long disappeared, and social influence has replaced money as the currency of value. People do not “work” anymore, they have “activities” that can get them socially recognized. Money is still used, via a Universal Revenue, mainly as a way to control the scarcity in production, and balance the availability of goods against their rarity.

 

I'm sure NQ had ideas for some kind of social influence metric in the game. It might not be the reputation system, or the reputation system might not be it. Either way, as far as sharing opinions goes, no news travels faster than bad news. I would pick intel. reports over standings on any day. 

 

Cheers.

'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

One persons villain is anothers freedom fighter. 

 

I appreciate the energy of thinking this up, however Rep systems are worthless in games like this.

Totally agree on this. The idea behind DU makes all reputation systems void. Bounties will work, reputation within an organization will work, but no overall reputation system. Since i go in DU neutral i will get reputation on all sides, but those will be positive and negative to all sides, so in the end what does it mean? If someone crosses me i am just gone rig their ship with a nasty nuke :P

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

One persons villain is anothers freedom fighter. 

 

I appreciate the energy of thinking this up, however Rep systems are worthless in games like this.

That actually doesn’t really apply to the system presented. Though I think it could go 1 more step and have a group that you consider trustworthy, and a group that you have trust in their opinions.  

 

That might be necessary if you want to trust a vendor, but don’t necessarily trust all of their customers (who they are likely to “+1”). 

 

So you’d have a “friends” group and you would see how anybody that you marked as a friend rated this person.  Again each would only be able to +/- 1, and no more.

 

 I think a lot of you are reading rep system, and are applying your own perception of the system without reading what the OP is actually saying.  The post already points out ways his system might try to solve the items that keep being brought up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2018 at 6:22 AM, Vyz Ejstu said:

So, what is the point of the reputation system?

 

On 3/22/2018 at 7:51 AM, Vyz Ejstu said:

But the people I killed had a negative opinion of me because I killed them. So, while my wallet grew, my reputation status dipped. 

 

Two years later, older and wiser, I am industrialist, supplying both peaceful players and warmongers with elements. I trade on the market, so people rarely see me, or bother to thank the person who produced engines they bought. My reputation remains abysmal, but I have 'changed'. 

 

19 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

Rep systems are worthless in games like this.

 

All of you have good points, but I think we're looking at this through the wrong lens. Keep reading...

 

5 hours ago, Felonu said:

 I think a lot of you are reading rep system, and are applying your own perception of the system without reading what the OP is actually saying.  The post already points out ways his system might try to solve the items that keep being brought up.

I'm not trying to sound like I'm against the OP or their idea, but no, it doesn't.

 

If anyone has heard of the conspiracy theory of having a social rating and how a low rating would restrict you from services, get you imprisoned, or be your end-all, that's almost where I imagine this going to a small degree. People with the big green will be heaped praise upon while those with the big red will be smitten.

 

Now that I think about my idea in contrast to the one originally presented, I'm not actually in favor of having a reputation system period but would refer the whole word-of-mouth/networking thing that I ended my previous post on.

 

Furthermore, we all know how Google Glass rolled over. Sure, having green or red numbers at a glance is handy and all, but for some, this might be damaging either rightly or wrongly so. Being allowed to toggle it is no better since if it's not visible, then people will think you have something to hide.

 

In my opinion, even the forum reputation system is controversial, but that's something else entirely...

 

Screw my previous ideas, I'm against any reputation that isn't word of mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DarkHorizon said:

 

 

 

All of you have good points, but I think we're looking at this through the wrong lens. Keep reading...

 

I'm not trying to sound like I'm against the OP or their idea, but no, it doesn't.

 

If anyone has heard of the conspiracy theory of having a social rating and how a low rating would restrict you from services, get you imprisoned, or be your end-all, that's almost where I imagine this going to a small degree. People with the big green will be heaped praise upon while those with the big red will be smitten.

 

Now that I think about my idea in contrast to the one originally presented, I'm not actually in favor of having a reputation system period but would refer the whole word-of-mouth/networking thing that I ended my previous post on.

 

Furthermore, we all know how Google Glass rolled over. Sure, having green or red numbers at a glance is handy and all, but for some, this might be damaging either rightly or wrongly so. Being allowed to toggle it is no better since if it's not visible, then people will think you have something to hide.

 

In my opinion, even the forum reputation system is controversial, but that's something else entirely...

 

Screw my previous ideas, I'm against any reputation that isn't word of mouth.

'

So, you have 'changed'. Will that be +1 rep or -1 rep? :P 

'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that instead of having the name of REP system a better name and mechanic would be "Friend or Foe/Standings" system that can be set up on both personal and organisational levels, maybe even on an alliance level as well (inherited perhaps?).

 

This would allow like minded groups to determine who are friends, and foes. Relatively 'simple' to do and would work for all manner of groups.

 

This way one persons enemy can be another persons hero with no conflict within the Standings System.

 

Cheers :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2018 at 2:09 PM, CoreVamore said:

I think that instead of having the name of REP system a better name and mechanic would be "Friend or Foe/Standings" system that can be set up on both personal and organisational levels, maybe even on an alliance level as well (inherited perhaps?).

 

This would allow like minded groups to determine who are friends, and foes. Relatively 'simple' to do and would work for all manner of groups.

 

This way one persons enemy can be another persons hero with no conflict within the Standings System.

 

Cheers :)

Honestly, just a way to tag notes to players is all we need. Just a "This guy screwed me over" note and I'll remember not to deal with him. Maybe even allow that to be added via RDMS to an organizational note set? Of course, if orgs get Notes, then you'll need a filter system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, AzureSkye said:

Honestly, just a way to tag notes to players is all we need. Just a "This guy screwed me over" note and I'll remember not to deal with him. Maybe even allow that to be added via RDMS to an organizational note set? Of course, if orgs get Notes, then you'll need a filter system.

Problem, even with that, is that these notes can be faked too. 1000 people from the same org could simply defame someone innocent in this way. Its very open to abuse. Hence the 'friend or foe' system I mentioned above, has nothing to do with rep but with if that individual, or org, or alliance is a known hostile to you, your corp or alliance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree with the word of mouth way of reputation system. As was mentioned earlier, this system is most often up-to-date with the latest happenings of what a person/group of people did. It also allows for people to turn over a "new leaf" so to speak, and not be judged from standings that happened a long time ago. This does create more work for the user in knowing where to go and who to talk to to find about "x" person.

 

The one thing that I like about the +/- system is that it helps new players get some idea of who to trust as a seller. It will not always be accurate, but it does help to guide the new players with this game as it does seem to have a high learning curve. Think of Space Engineers. Say you just started playing that game for the first time, you would have no idea what the heck you are doing. Even if you have watched videos on the game, being able to apply what you have learned from those videos to actual gameplay for the first few times will not always be easy.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...