Mission: Revive Ephesus: Rate the Player Above You!

DeletedUser

Guest
broddugan

In Game- 7/10. Huge BP. Kudos on that. But get conquering your enemies mate!
Alliance- 8/10. Number 1 in size, my communication with them is fluid and reciprocated. Need to conquer more enemies.
Forum- 6/10. Civil, logical, but not very active.
Likeable- 10/10. I can't fault him

Total 31/40
 

DeletedUser

Guest
StillSetanta,

Completely agree with you on the conquering enemies, but in my defense I have been really busy helping my team land their CS's and defend them. Been trying to move people to the front.

Leaves me kinda weak on my own conquests so I've been taking the internal conquests, while I crush the enemies defenses for my teammates. But I'm looking to move to the front more and I'm sure I can live up to your expectations :) .

Between the internal forums and here I don't know how anyone keeps up with both, lol.

FYI, I think OSG (especially slobdablob) would like to thank the Eternals group for your gracious offering of Defense BP. I know slobdablob alone earned over 40k in DBP this past 24 hours and is enjoying over 100 VP's he will be running until tomorrow.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Rate the Player above you on these criteria

1. InGame Persona (is the player a good player/bad player?) x/10
2. Alliance Persona (Is the player's alliance a good alliance/bad alliance?) x/10
3. Forum Persona (how much of a spamma is the player/Forum noob?) x/10
4. Do you personally like him/her? x/10
5. Overall/Average x/10
Click to expand...

These ratings seem arbitrary to the point of misleading, although contributors' comments are sometimes interesting.

For example:
Point 1 often depends upon reputation or contact with the scorer - or those whose opnions the scorer values.
Point 2 is basically an average of a collective reputation minus it's relationship with the scorer.
Point 3 only rewards sycophants or those that the scorer may not want to 'upset'
Point 4 rewards how well the person being rated 'sells' themself, if they care at all, to others on these forums

The most amusing thing about all this, is that in order to be rated upon personal experience, the rater will need to be in the same alliance (indicating sycophants, or mutual admiration societies) or conversely, those being battled with (leading to frustration, irritation or an urge to bait). Rare is the rater that lasts long enough to give a balanced impression, although those that do would likely be long-term adversaries.

On the other hand, it gives readers an excellent snapshot of the rater's personality.

Just thought I'd write a few comments about the above, and believe me, they are not about anyone in particular. After all, this thread was started to create some out-of-game contact between players, right? Fire away!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Of course you'd say that.

GrepoStats gives an unbiased oversight, something not possible with contact.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
WAVEBREAKER said:
Of course you'd say that.

GrepoStats gives an unbiased oversight, something not possible with contact.
Click to expand...

Grepostats gives you numbers, not an unbiased opinion. Only the person interpreting those numbers can put a bias on them.

I would agree that an 11k player with low Attack or Defense Points may deserve a low rating but that I would think that would depend on the time they have been playing in that world. If you started a few weeks ago, 11k seems reasonable. If you started 2 months ago then that seems horrible.

If your 11k but have huge Defense Points and no Attack Points, then that may be because a larger alliance is or player is trying to conquer you. If that's the case the fact that you are able to properly defend and still maintain any cities might deserve a good ranking.

To me the bias is when you simply look at a number and compare it to other players in the world without examining what they may imply about what that player is trying to do or how other players are affecting his growth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top