Rate My Battle!

Ffancrzy

Ffancrzy

I am a part of a few different Competitive communities, Magic the Gathering, Major League Gaming (Halo 3) and of course our very own Smogon. In the MLG boards we have threads for "Critique my Gameplay" They don't all get watched, due to the length of a Halo Game, but the option is there none the less.

Here at Smogon we have RMTs. Now some of these are from reputable Battlers sharing their team for one reason or another that has been proven successful. But the majority of these are people trying to improve their game.

On the other hand we have Warstories, which are intended more as a showcase of a great game, and any sub par play is simply put down, and the thread locked. But what if we had a subforum/category of Warstory where you look to the help of others to fix your mistakes in a game? I think this could potentially have a positive effect on peoples overall learning experience, after all, we are a University.

Any thoughts on this?
 
As a sub-par player, who has had some good battles riddled with misplays from both sides, I support this feature.
 
While it seems like a good idea, there is one major problem with it. It would be too much. Think about how easy it to press save log, and c/p into at thread. If we're going to do this, I see one thing working. Kind of make your battle into a warstory, detailing your thought process. This will do two things:

1. Reduce the clutter by a lot, down to probably a little less then the RMT forum.

2. Give people a much better way to help you. It could have been a stupid move, or really a smart one. Either way, it will help the raters help more.

I'm sorry if this is what you originally meant, but it kind of sounded like c/p a log.
 
I also like this idea but I agree with Rook that explanations of every move should be mandatory. Otherwise it would be far too easy to just copy a log and leave the analysis to everyone else.
 
I completely agree, Similar to a RMT being closed if not enough info is put into it. I just would like to see this backed in a more formal manner. I had never intended it to ba just a c/p or a log, but more of a "warstory" type thing.
 
Mister Militia said:
I completely agree, Similar to a RMT being closed if not enough info is put into it. I just would like to see this backed in a more formal manner. I had never intended it to ba just a c/p or a log, but more of a "warstory" type thing.
Click to expand...

It seems exactly like a simplified Warstory. I think it would function best if it is formatted like the RMT forum. The idea seems good on paper at least.
 
The only problem I can see is that we may need to create a new forum for this. Because Stark Mountain already has Warstories in them and other discussions. Adding Rate my Battles may just be increasing the amount of stuff people have to go through.
If RMB was implemented, then there would need to be a new set of rules, moderators etc. I think it may just cause too much mess to be worth the trouble.

I personally think that, if in doubt of what happened (IE you lost and you don't know what went wrong), a player should save a log, look at it and say 'Ah, this is what I did wrong and next time I should [insert action here]!" This way, it helps the player become better at seeing a match-up and being able to better react to that match-up.
 
Sheshi said:
The only problem I can see is that we may need to create a new forum for this. Because Stark Mountain already has Warstories in them and other discussions. Adding Rate my Battles may just be increasing the amount of stuff people have to go through.
If RMB was implemented, then there would need to be a new set of rules, moderators etc. I think it may just cause too much mess to be worth the trouble.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by increasing the stuff people have to go through. It's not like it's mandatory to look at every forum every day.

I'm pretty sure a new set of rules and some new moderators are not too much trouble to add a significant forum to Smogon.

I personally think that, if in doubt of what happened (IE you lost and you don't know what went wrong), a player should save a log, look at it and say 'Ah, this is what I did wrong and next time I should [insert action here]!" This way, it helps the player become better at seeing a match-up and being able to better react to that match-up.
Click to expand...

Well I don't really know how this decreases the need for RMB. Having a good player look at what you did wrong is more helpful then looking at the log yourself.
 
I love this idea, but this does have some major kinks to work out. It's waaay too easy to copy and paste an entire log of a battle. That, and having commentary on all moves being mandatory would make it too hard to make one of these threads with good reason (since you'll be answering your own question when you type up why you made the move).

I gladly support the concept, but I think at the most it should be limited to maybe a technique posted in a RMT sticky or something.
 
I mean to say that Stark Mountain has many different discussions going on at once. I am questioning whether it would be worth placing RMBs in Stark Mountain or creating an entire new forum for them. I think it would be worth creating a new forum but then there's the whole process of how the moderators will be selected, what the rules will be etc.

On your last point, it helps a player understand what another person's reaction would be under those circumstances, so the next time that person found themself in that situation, they would be able to act differently, knowing that they tried one course of action which led to the loss.
 
I support this idea, but would like to see rules on this.

1) A user may only post one log per week.

2) A user must make a good faith effort to explain every move. This means that you can't have one sentence unless its an obvious choice; you should at least put some effort into it.

3) Players rating the battle must have knowledge of the current metagame.

4) The teams involved must be decently constructed. This one has some fine lining to it. But if your team gets 6-0ed by DDGyara who can set up relatively easily, fix that before we help you.

The problem is coming up with the moderation staff required to enforce such rules. Also, there needs to be incentives for people who give excellent rates, like ladybugs or higher badges, i don't know. This could be great, but it also could be a problem.
 
I completely intend for this to be closer to the Vein of RMTs, where considerable effort must be put in. Just as the RMT forum has its restrictions as far as posting goes, the RMB's would be similar. I just think it would be beneficial. I know myself I don't always see what mistakes I've made.
 
Right but if you've ever looked at a Warstory where the game play is lacking, people just say "you didn't have very good prediction or comments and warstory a better battle. They never go in depth as to what the player did wrong. I clearly stated this in the OP so I'm not sure why you are harping on that...

In short
Warstories= Entertainment
RMB's = Getting help
 
The purpose of this "rate my battle" is so that people can rate the player's performance and improve their battling skills. Isn't this purpose very similar to the Battling 101 program, where tutors try to improve their tutees skills? I feel it would be better if these "rate my battles" would become a part of this program - a tutor would watch his tutee play, and then gives feedback on his performance, or instead the tutee sends him a "rate my battle" and the tutor responds with feedback. Some tutors might already be doing this, but I am unsure as I've never participated in the Battling 101 program.
 
Darkmalice said:
The purpose of this "rate my battle" is so that people can rate the player's performance and improve their battling skills. Isn't this purpose very similar to the Battling 101 program, where tutors try to improve their tutees skills? I feel it would be better if these "rate my battles" would become a part of this program - a tutor would watch his tutee play, and then gives feedback on his performance, or instead the tutee sends him a "rate my battle" and the tutor responds with feedback. Some tutors might already be doing this, but I am unsure as I've never participated in the Battling 101 program.
Click to expand...

I participated in this past round with kd24 as my tutor. For a while he had me save some logs, and he would go over them with me. Even know, well after the end of 101, he still watches some of my battles.

I think the rate my battle would be good for someone to point a few things out here and there, while 101 goes more in-depth. I also feel like just because there's a waiting line for participation in 101, numerous people would take advantage of this.

Something that might happen though, is that 'rates' in this might turn into just lessons on prediction, whereas a an article over prediction would be better suited.
 
Who would actually rate battles? It seems really boring, and a lot of the times you can figure out what went wrong by reading your own log...
 
Darkmalice said:
The purpose of this "rate my battle" is so that people can rate the player's performance and improve their battling skills. Isn't this purpose very similar to the Battling 101 program, where tutors try to improve their tutees skills? I feel it would be better if these "rate my battles" would become a part of this program - a tutor would watch his tutee play, and then gives feedback on his performance, or instead the tutee sends him a "rate my battle" and the tutor responds with feedback. Some tutors might already be doing this, but I am unsure as I've never participated in the Battling 101 program.
Click to expand...

The only downside with it being kept between Tutor and Tutee is simple, people learn from reading RMT threads and rates, if they read a log similar to a bad battle they had, they would learn from that.

It would be like a warstory, but all the warstories that we have now are close, balanced battles, where both the players had a good idea of what they were doing. This, in theory, could be the opposite.
 
I'm inclined to agree with the point that a warstory should be an example of excellent play where both players are good battlers with well-designed teams. A posted battle is for players who aren't so sure of themselves, and probably have made mistakes in the battles they are posting.
 
mtr said:
I'm inclined to agree with the point that a warstory should be an example of excellent play where both players are good battlers with well-designed teams. A posted battle is for players who aren't so sure of themselves, and probably have made mistakes in the battles they are posting.
Click to expand...

Look through a battle you screwed up in. I looked through a few dozen losses and could EASILY tell why I lost each time. I was either careless with a prediction, used a Pokémon too early and didn't preserve him, or had a flawed team. Do you know of anyone who can't look through an old battle and figure out why they lost? It seems like one of the most trivial things in the world; if people can't figure THAT out "on their own" I don't exactly think they are destined to become good Pokémon players.

Like, seriously. I encourage anyone who cannot figure out where they made a bad play to post and say they have ever had this problem... I just don't believe it exists.
 
Chris is me said:
Look through a battle you screwed up in. I looked through a few dozen losses and could EASILY tell why I lost each time. I was either careless with a prediction, used a Pokémon too early and didn't preserve him, or had a flawed team. Do you know of anyone who can't look through an old battle and figure out why they lost? It seems like one of the most trivial things in the world; if people can't figure THAT out "on their own" I don't exactly think they are destined to become good Pokémon players.

Like, seriously. I encourage anyone who cannot figure out where they made a bad play to post and say they have ever had this problem... I just don't believe it exists.
Click to expand...

I would ask some people who went through the tutor program, as I'm quite sure they have their tutor help them go through old games. Additionally judging by some of the RMTs out there, I would say there are quite a few. You seem to think that because you are experienced enough to notice mistakes it means everyone is. I am an Avid Magic the Gathering player and many of the Pro players there say they make multiple mistakes per game. Having played both games I would say this pretty often happens in pokemon too, and not all mistakes are as obvious as "Mispredicting" sometimes more subtle things are the reason.
 
I heard it mentioned with reference to chess, that most decisions you make in a game are relatively unimportant, but a few are critical. Good players recognise when the critical points are. I think it will be the same to an extent in Pokemon, though most moves will have more impact. Something like you're facing a Gyarados that has Dragon Danced and just KOed what was meant to be your Gyara counter - choosing who you bring in to try and stop it sweeping your team is a critical moment.

Maybe a discussion of common mistakes in Pokemon battles would be good. Novices like myself will frequently make mistakes about the game mechanics, things like not knowing entry hazards hit before Lunar Dance heals (that lost me a match), or not realising a sleeping outraged Pokemon can't be switched out. (Coming back to my point about critical moments, that DIDN'T cost me the match.) Mispredicting can cost you the match. You can have a mistake at the metagame level too - if your team lacks a way to deal with Gyarados, that's a mistake.
 
Though I do not support making this a full-fledged part of the community, I do think rereading logs is something that tutors do with their tutees. A lot of early battlers don't recognize their errors and, therefore, can't learn from them. If someone more expereinced is able to work with them (insert tutor here), they can easily learn what their weaknesses are and how they should overcome them.

The problem with making it a section like RMT is is the fact that battles and playstyles are so volatile and unique that having a ton of people telling you what you did wrong won't lead to a solution, but more problems (seriously, how many times do you find yourself in the exact same situation battle after battle?). Inexperienced members are able to rate teams, so why couldn't someone ratnig a match feed you a load of bull that you wouldn't ever know was erroneous?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top