Mentor Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 I think event criteria needs to be tweaked. Currently the only thing which matters is quality of the card and amount of bookies relating to that event + the newspaper articles give the event a small bump. I think things such as: - Event Reviews - New posters - Event "interest" Should also get some type of consideration. I mean there are some "top orgs" which do not both doing either. It is like the UFC not pumping their event and not promoting the card at all. If these type of things go into the formula (taking up 10% of the rating) then you will see smaller orgs being able to compete better and larger orgs which put in a little bit of effort also get more recognition. Event interest could include total amount of people which looked at the card / review or which visited the org page during that week. Interest is the social factor which needs to get much more recognition. The social factor should be worth a good 10% or more as well. I also think the newspaper article publication should get a bump from the 3 hype it is now because orgs have expanded since the time that 3 hype was worth much more. It should be at least 5x more than that, which will mean that little orgs getting a publication can get a massive boost in popularity if they can get a quality article published in the news. If not it is just some random formula and guys pumping out figures which = to tycoon cash. I mean sure the event fight quality will still be a good 2/3 of the formula, so you cannot just get interest, put effort and move all the way to the top, but those factors need to matter more, if not then it will kill the little orgs (actually they are already dead, but it will give new orgs more of a chance). 5 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cymon123 Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Yep, I think this should be considered as well. For a new org. This would be great and help them attract more fighters and also help people get into being a writer in an org. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 it would be great if we could integrate a social aspect to the ratings but it's very hard to quantify and im not sure how we stop people abusing it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manta Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Plus, being an org owner takes a looooooooot of time... do we really wanna add more shit to take care of? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted March 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Plus, being an org owner takes a looooooooot of time... do we really wanna add more shit to take care of? This shit as you call it, is things some org owners are doing anyway. Adding posters, reviews is what some managers consistently do. I know most org owners are way too lazy to do that and simply book the same fighters against each other 5-6 times to milk the system, but i think the org owners which put in the effort should benefit. it would be great if we could integrate a social aspect to the ratings but it's very hard to quantify and im not sure how we stop people abusing it. Every thing which has a criteria in this game is being abused in one way or other, be it the ranking system, the way FA's are being picked up and money raped, they way training is done (with private gyms), money laundering, i mean everything is in one way or other being manipulated and abused. You could argue the thing which separates a good manager from a bad one, is that the good ones know details the others don't and take that to their advantage. You can call it abuse, you can call it simply being well informed. Also nobody said you need to tell everyone the exact formula which determines social relevance. Google already has this formula figured out and it is called page ranking (PR rank). Basically it is a combination of 1000s of criteria which evaluate how popular a site is or is not. Just so that you get an idea how PR works: - Social buzz (how often a site is mentioned), in terms of tycoon it can be factors such as forum mentions, in game mentions through mail etc - Fighter profile views (if one of the orgs fighters is being viewed) - Unique views (so if it is the same manager seeing all the profiles it wont count) - Content quantity (an org with just 1 article per month or just 1 sentence in each article will get penalized, total articles will play a role) - Content quality (newpaper approved articles) - Org voting (total votes, positive votes) - Bookie betting related to the org - Smack talk in forums / on the org pages - Administration (interaction between org owner and managers inside his own org) - Org age (in google they have longevity criteria as well, to push consistent sites) - Design (google has factors related to how often their site is updates, for us that can be the posters, belt designs, logo's) Put it this way. To get the best rating you fill in the biggest arena, put your card on PPV and if you have 2 very hyped fights, you basically get 2/3 of the rating. Your whole card can basically be empty, nobody can care about your org, nobody will talk about and and you do not put any effort whatsoever other than borrow 4 fighter from EVO for 3 fights in a row and you will make it to the top 10. I think there should be a lot of other factors out there. In fact, by adding the criteria i mentioned it will become A LOT more difficult to abuse the system. Now it is relatively easy to do actually. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKevi Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 This shit as you call it, is things some org owners are doing anyway. Adding posters, reviews is what some managers consistently do. I know most org owners are way too lazy to do that and simply book the same fighters against each other 5-6 times to milk the system, but i think the org owners which put in the effort should benefit. Every thing which has a criteria in this game is being abused in one way or other, be it the ranking system, the way FA's are being picked up and money raped, they way training is done (with private gyms), money laundering, i mean everything is in one way or other being manipulated and abused. You could argue the thing which separates a good manager from a bad one, is that the good ones know details the others don't and take that to their advantage. You can call it abuse, you can call it simply being well informed. Also nobody said you need to tell everyone the exact formula which determines social relevance. Google already has this formula figured out and it is called page ranking (PR rank). Basically it is a combination of 1000s of criteria which evaluate how popular a site is or is not. Just so that you get an idea how PR works: - Social buzz (how often a site is mentioned), in terms of tycoon it can be factors such as forum mentions, in game mentions through mail etc - Fighter profile views (if one of the orgs fighters is being viewed) - Unique views (so if it is the same manager seeing all the profiles it wont count) - Content quantity (an org with just 1 article per month or just 1 sentence in each article will get penalized, total articles will play a role) - Content quality (newpaper approved articles) - Org voting (total votes, positive votes) - Bookie betting related to the org - Smack talk in forums / on the org pages - Administration (interaction between org owner and managers inside his own org) - Org age (in google they have longevity criteria as well, to push consistent sites) - Design (google has factors related to how often their site is updates, for us that can be the posters, belt designs, logo's) Put it this way. To get the best rating you fill in the biggest arena, put your card on PPV and if you have 2 very hyped fights, you basically get 2/3 of the rating. Your whole card can basically be empty, nobody can care about your org, nobody will talk about and and you do not put any effort whatsoever other than borrow 4 fighter from EVO for 3 fights in a row and you will make it to the top 10. I think there should be a lot of other factors out there. In fact, by adding the criteria i mentioned it will become A LOT more difficult to abuse the system. Now it is relatively easy to do actually. Amen to that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eveas Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 It would be nice if there was a link off the event page that would lead to a formatted page specially for previews. There could be a general section to type in, and then there could be a check box next to each fight. The ones you check show up in the final review. Each would have a text box to type in. Once submitted it would have a nice looking formatted preview. Each fight you wrote about could have a weighted value that would help the ratings and sales. There would be a minimum character setting to get credit. If someone sees a review and it is just garbage to fill space there could be a punishment like loss of profits and ratings to keep people from abusing it. The number of different managers to read the preview could also help. 1 view per manager. Anyways, that would be just one way we could add in the social aspect to event ratings I believe. Those who don't do it should see lower ratings than they get now while those who do it should see better ratings. Those who only do a couple fights might break even or do slightly better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted March 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 Yeah that is another good idea. More criteria needs to come in for sure though. It should not be as easy as simply putting fighters on a card. It is also crazy to see how some of the top level orgs DO NOT BOTHER at all. Milking the system to the fullest, not providing any fighter, event hype or anything. Where as at the same time some other little guys are trying their best and all they can really do is get a +3 hype boost from the newspaper and get a few bets in their direction through the bookies. There should be significantly more to the formula that what we have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 I think the amount of fights put on spoilers should count too as long as people dont start spamming mass mails Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted March 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 What you mean by the spoilers? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nandorossi Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 I think he means how many fighters click add this fight to my spoilers. Personally that would get abused way to bad, as owners would just ask the mangers to add them to help rating. I do love the idea though Mentor. I am not an org owner but I am a writer and owners spend a lot of money on my services and they don't get all in all that much in return. I would love to see something like this added as it would push org owners to higher poster designers and writers which I feel enhances the game a lot. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted March 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Most certainly. It will open up the market for designers and writers. Currently orgs can pay for these services, but besides the cosmetic value, they are not really getting much in return. This way it will encourage org owners to put more effort, which will also mean writers and designers can make a "serious living" out of their services. They can do that now as well, but the org owner is losing money in the process. Better designs, more content on the site and more of that content being "SEOed" also improves the overall site rankings on Google, bing etc. This is not only something which improves the gaming experience, it also improves the chances of the game attracting more members. If Mike does the really clever thing, he should open up the option for orgs to add keywords to those articles and make those articles visible outside the site (i think that happens now anyway). If those articles then make it to some forums, social media etc related to fighting, then they could act as "storylines" which get followed by people off the site, eventually drawing interest to the game. Put it this way. Content, social interest and quality design should be the goal of any top level org. The level of fighters is obviously still the main priority, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted April 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2014 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markyosullivan Posted April 19, 2014 Report Share Posted April 19, 2014 it would be great if we could integrate a social aspect to the ratings but it's very hard to quantify and im not sure how we stop people abusing it. One way which could be possibly done is through tracking unique page views on the event and/or fight page. Those who are hyping up fights/ events on the forums should provide a link to the fight / event and then any unique page views for the event / fight will give orgs additional hype, maybe this bonus hype can't be obtained unless there is unique page views on the fight / event so it would encourage the org owners to post about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 19, 2014 Report Share Posted April 19, 2014 One way which could be possibly done is through tracking unique page views on the event and/or fight page. Those who are hyping up fights/ events on the forums should provide a link to the fight / event and then any unique page views for the event / fight will give orgs additional hype, maybe this bonus hype can't be obtained unless there is unique page views on the fight / event so it would encourage the org owners to post about it. Great idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted May 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Mike told me to bump this in a few weeks, so i am doing this now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 As Mike has said, it is difficult to quantify this type of thing. It is also hard to create a system that is both easy to implement, easy to understand, and difficult to abuse. I'll take a stab at it. Let me know what you all think: Currently, our system for previews and reviews leaves a lot to be desired. We can send them out via org mail, which gives no opportunity for discussion, or we can post them on the forums, which doesn't qualify the preview for any sort of hype bonus. I suggest a system where org owners can publish an event preview and an event review on the in-game event page. Put a "like" button (or thumb up/down) so that users can express if they are satisfied with the preview/review. More likes equals better hype bonus, so good writing and more exposure will be rewarded. I understand that we may be worried about multi accounts created to vote up reviews, but I think it is better to simply punish the abusers than to never develop new features out of fear of abuse. These previews and reviews should appear at the top of the "event discussion" on the in-game event page. This way, people could comment on the previews/reviews and hype up their fights on the actual in-game page. Posters could have a similar type of reward. More likes for a poster increases the event ratings. To reward writers and designers who do a good job at both creating content and driving people towards the event page to "like" posters and articles, org owners should be given an option of paying commission. If I offer someone 5% of my event profits to write a preview, and that preview will affect how much money the event makes, a writer will be directly rewarded for helping create a successful event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted May 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 This is much more simple that people thing and much more difficult for anyone to manipulate in the long run. In fact how it works now is the easiest to manipulate. All you need is to be part of a decent alliance and get the financials setup right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Mike told me to bump this in a few weeks time, those few weeks has just came 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMould Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 If their was a way to implement this it'd be great, I just see it being a lot of work for mods and mike to stop idiots from exploiting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 If their was a way to implement this it'd be great, I just see it being a lot of work for mods and mike to stop idiots from exploiting it. Mods wont be involved in this at all. Neither will mike. It will happen on autopilot. I can create criteria which will be EXTREMELY tough to exploit and even if they do, it will take loads of effort. I have been studying Google algorithm for ranking sites for quite some time and although some people do manage to break their formula temporarily, they cannot do it consistently. We can easily use a lot of their criteria for this without it being too tough to implement. Put it this way, manager, fighter and org rankings are easily the most important in this game. We need to get this right. The same way fighters were spamming fights to increase their rankings, the same should apply here. It should not be so easy to get the top cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMould Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 If you can do it auto then sounds alright, just with reviews didn't know if anybody here could create anything that would be sound proof or if it'd be like avatar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 If you can do it auto then sounds alright, just with reviews didn't know if anybody here could create anything that would be sound proof or if it'd be like avatar Now you know one such person. Obviously nobody can create a system which will rank the quality of an article, besides that is subjective because some people can rank an article 10 and others a 6. You can easily rank quantity, regularity and social interest though. Even org quality there is ways to rank it through member interaction with the org owners, voting points + % and loads of other factors. In fact you can rank org management as well. For example, how many active members are there in an org? How many of those are of the same alliance/manager? How often are the same fighters being booked against each other. Often poor orgs use the same fighters over and over, book the same fights again and again and have little to no interaction or updates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts