[SUGGESTIONS] Commander Rating System

[Calanthe.3857]

I suggest allowing squad members to anonymously rate Commanders with a simple rating (such as 1-5 stars, or Bronze/Silver/Gold medal).

The ratings submission could be (1) a squad tool manually initiated by the commander, with a simple prompt like a Ready Check, inviting squad members to privately submit their rating of the Commander

and/or (2) an automatic prompt at the conclusion of each dynamic event the squad participated in, allowing members to rate how well the Commander led the event.

Commanders could receive some in-game currency or other reward for high ratings, and maybe have their ratings recorded in a Commander Rating Leaderboard.

I think this could be a good idea because it would incentivize veteran players to lead events more often, and it would reward players for Commanding well.

[Wolfb.7025]

Something similar would be nice, i'm against currency or leaderboards or any other kind of advantages versus normal players, or even unlockables stored behind being a commander. But a generic ranking would be something cool, similar to the map completition star or the pvp symbol on your name., and maybe some command like the /deaths one where it shows you how many people gave you thumbs up.

[T G.7496]

I think this would be a terrible idea.

[Omega.6801]

Nope.

Here's why. If commanders get anything for good rating, it will lead to abuse of the system. And if they don't get anything for good ratings then there's no point in the system beside maybe the reputation. On the other hand, a system to handle reputation can also be abused. I just don't think such a system would have any merit to the game.

[Khisanth.2948]

Sounds good initially but rating without context is worthless.

The rewards parts just leads me to wonder what your real motivation is for suggesting this in the first place.

[Danikat.8537]

What would stop my guild from getting 50 people together once a week (or however frequently it can be done) to take turns tagging up as commander and getting 50 5* ratings each?

I'm not against the idea in principal (although I don't think it's necessary) but that problem would need to be solved first, because otherwise that is exactly what will happen. Along with people selling commander ratings in LFG and chat and any other system that could be set up to artificially increase ratings. (Or on the other side players who are upset with a commander encouraging their friends to join the group purely for the sake of giving them a negative rating.)

I also think if a ratings system was put in place it would need to be seperate by game mode. Partially because leading a squad in PvE metas is not the same as leading one in WvW so rankings in one mode shouldn't carry over to another, and also because otherwise commanders who mainly use smaller squads for things like raids would be at a huge disadvantage in the rankings purely because of the number of people available to rank them.

[Calanthe.3857]

@TwoGhosts.6790 said:I think this would be a terrible idea.

Why?

[Wolfb.7025]

@Khisanth.2948 said:Sounds good initially but rating without context is worthless.

The rewards parts just leads me to wonder what your real motivation is for suggesting this in the first place.To incentive people to tag up for stuff.I'm one of these people that would definitely tag up for stuff and capable of but i'm too lazy for it and prefer to scratch my chin until a strike lfg appears.

[gert.7698]

2 thoughts:

• I tag up for doings things, bringing ppl togheter. Can be in wvw, open world, strikes,... i do this for fun, but if ppl can/gonna be evaluate me whole time... idk, i think i don’t gonna like this. I don’t want to have the fealing of constantly being evaluated
• I assure you that if a squad fails a few times the ratings of the commander are gonna be bad, also if this was not the commanders fault... even if hè tried to explain thing etc..

[kharmin.7683]

People AFK farm now. Imagine AFK farming and tagging for rewards?

[SlitheSlivier.1908]

No. This leads to everyone being able to see commander ratings and that's bad. Commanders will get bad ratings at first when learning but then people won't join one they see that, thus they won't get good ratings ever and no one will follow them.

This is a bad catch-22.

Also i think reward for commanding will lead to everyone trying to command and there will be too many ppl taking charge. But who knows.

[HnRkLnXqZ.1870]

Many people own tags and have enough experience and knowledge to lead certain events or activities, but lack the confidence - which is normal. Leading people in general is rather difficult. On the other hand, we have also many people who can technically lead groups very well, but do not own tags. Locking the ability to lead behind a paywall was not a very smart idea.

Normally when a squad forms up under one commander, it remains active until they leave. Then the squad either instantly disperses or someone else volunteers to try. The second commander often fails to keep the squad functioning, so these guys would always receive a bad ranking.

Certain events require large zergs to split up. Dragonstand for example. You gain optimal results if you have a commander tag up for each of the three lanes. Sometimes there is only one commander or sometimes only two. So they keep asking in map/squad for some volunteers to tag up. In some cases they find a volunteer who did the meta a few times but never lead that lane. They require the assistance of their squad-members to direct the squad properly. They would also receive a bad rating, just because they did not do their job very well. Is that a thing? It is. A certain part of the community wants commanders to be experts in what they do. One single mistake = bad commander. A few weeks ago we had a nice commander in Drizzlewood Coast, nice person. But he had a bad connection, lots of lagg and delay. He always arrived a little too late to the events, due to the extended loading times. Response on the map? Horrible commander! Worst commander ever!

In addition we have our nice LFG where you can purchase EVERYTHING that is not on the list. Almost 8 years of GW2, I know there would be players to sell their votes and others who buy them. Just to get a high score. Then you meet a commander in Bjora Marches who tagged up but has no squad open. All shiny gear, Legendaries, Infusions ... your computer laggs so much for just standing next to this guy and then realize, the raiting is his newest accessory :S.

If any change to the commander-system at all, please re-think the paywall idea and maybe limit the total number of visible tags per map to reduce confusion.

[Tiilimon.6094]

I would probably fumble it up by rating everyone with a whole fiver xD

[Lottie.5370]

This would be a nightmare when leading pug squads. The amount of people that don't read your lfg and get salty when you kick them is unbelievable.

It's just too prone to manipulation.

[yoni.7015]

This is a terrible idea, I would stop tagging up if they implement this. I don’t want to be rated in a video game I play for fun.

[LucianDK.8615]

all too easilly exploited.

[Danikat.8537]

@HnRkLnXqZ.1870 said:Certain events require large zergs to split up. Dragonstand for example. You gain optimal results if you have a commander tag up for each of the three lanes. Sometimes there is only one commander or sometimes only two. So they keep asking in map/squad for some volunteers to tag up. In some cases they find a volunteer who did the meta a few times but never lead that lane. They require the assistance of their squad-members to direct the squad properly. They would also receive a bad rating, just because they did not do their job very well. Is that a thing? It is. A certain part of the community wants commanders to be experts in what they do. One single mistake = bad commander. A few weeks ago we had a nice commander in Drizzlewood Coast, nice person. But he had a bad connection, lots of lagg and delay. He always arrived a little too late to the events, due to the extended loading times. Response on the map? Horrible commander! Worst commander ever!

I've been in that position a few times. I have the tag and I've done Dragonstand quite a few times, but I can never remember where all the side-events are, so I'll tag up to be a portable map marker but I'm always reminding the squad that they need to help me find the events and speak up if I miss one. It works well but it would be misleading for me to be the only one being rewarded (or punished) for how well the squad coordinates.

I've also done a similar thing for bounties where literally the only thing I'm contributing is the tag (mainly to keep people away from the bounty until we're ready to start) and someone else is giving instructions on the bounty mechanics because they know it better than I do. It would be completely unfair for me to get the credit for leading in that sitation when it's really someone else doing it.

I should mention I have also genuinely lead squads as well, I can be more than a portable map marker. But as other people have said there isn't a 1:1 match between people with tags and people who know the content well, so sometimes it makes sense to share it out. Also sometimes the tag needs to be right in the middle of the action to direct people to the right place, but that makes it difficult to type instructions, so having someone who is willing and able to hang back a bit and spend more time typing is really helpful.

[Solvar.7953]

Beyond on all the above, I could also see extortion - a member of the squad PM the commander - 'send me 2 gold, I give you a 5 star rating. If you don't, I give you a 1 star rating.'

[Pifil.5193]

We live in a world where people give 1 star reviews for products because the delivery guy messes up. This would be an awful idea.

Want to join a meta event but the commander is in a full instance? 1 star!

Commander doing a hero point tour but has already done the one you need before you joined? 1 star!

Similarly with bounties. Killed the one I need already? 1 star!

Commander doesn't immediately stop fighting to res me after I'm killed despite the fact that the Waypoint is right there? 1 star!

Commander won't instantly drop whatever they're doing to do whatever you want? 1 star!

People are not reasonable.

[LucianDK.8615]

Power corrupts, utterly so. People cannot help themselves when given power, and will indulge their petty grievances.

[killermanjaro.5670]

This sounds unnecessary and completly terrible. In additon some comms would exploit it, offer gold in exchange for ratings etc, and some comms would undoubtably get the dellusional idea that their higher rating means something or that it means they're better than others causing them to try and claim maps / argue with other comms who are doing other things in the same map. And as people have mentioned it also would work the other way, where even good comms who led well could be penalised by players giving low/negative ratings for numerous reasons like what Pifil.5193 has mentioned. Incidently an automatic prompt/rating based on dynamic events couldn't possibly work as there are so many other reasons a comm might tag up which have nothing to do with events (leading JP tours/portal services, walking tours, chat/quiz type things etc).

I'd also say that in general a rating system for how well a comm has led something is pretty redundent as for most metas/events comms are mostly just there for taxi purposes or to show somethings happening on the map, if a new player asks they'll probably explain whats going on, but lets face it most of the time they aren't required to lead or communicate with the squad because players know the events and just get on with them, so they might not 'lead well', but that's not because they're a bad comm, it's because leading/issuing instructions just wasn't needed.

As for rewards that should'nt be an incentive to tag up, that would result in every map having 10+ tags trying to do the same event in the hope to get extra loot/currency (no matter how miniscuel the amount is), and as it stands at the moment if a comm has led something well or run a fun squad then some players reward/tip as a thanks, I'd say players choosing to say 'thank you' or tip you is a better benchmark that you've led well, and is far more meaningful than getting some pointless gold rating because everyone in the squad has been prompted to rate you.

[Solvar.7953]

The reward for tagging up can also be completing the event you want to complete. When I was going through the ascended PoF weapons which required killing the caffeinated skritt, I'd tag up and announce it map chat after finding a chest. That let other people take part in the event, by my reward was that the event would complete successfully, where I probably couldn't solo it. Same for some bounties.

[Friday.7864]

The moment I started thinking how this could be abused I got a headache.

[Danikat.8537]

@Solvar.7953 said:The reward for tagging up can also be completing the event you want to complete. When I was going through the ascended PoF weapons which required killing the caffeinated skritt, I'd tag up and announce it map chat after finding a chest. That let other people take part in the event, by my reward was that the event would complete successfully, where I probably couldn't solo it. Same for some bounties.

That's pretty much why I got a tag. I don't use it often, but there's been enough times when I found myself thinking it would be helpful to have a commander around to attract people or point them in the right direction that it seemed worth the gold to get one because it can make it easier to complete events. I agree that being able to do that is it's own reward.