Allow similar build threads?

I know and agree that you should only rate if you have tested it the same as you should only post if you have tested it. As such a ride along video always accompanies my builds.

However after you have tested like 10+ Atlas D builds it becomes difficult to know which ones you have tested and which you haven't and I thought ratings visibility would be the easiest thing to monitor that with.

Plus I see many fairly reasonable builds posted that have no rating at all.

 

Test a build, come and rate it, move on to the next.

[quote author=Athariel link=topic=2220.msg15213#msg15213 date=1375200627]
Plus I see many fairly reasonable builds posted that have no rating at all.
[/quote]

This I can not control. If they aren't rated they aren't rated. There is no way to force a user to rate a build once they have viewed it nor would I institute such a protocol if I could.

 

Well, sometimes I see a build, but I choose not to rate it on grounds that I do not own that mech and vairant, and cannot give any reasonable rating without any tests.

So rather than randomly giving a random rating I choose not to rate it

Afterall, the stars are supposed to be a guide to other members, so the rating should mean something.

 

That is the way it is supposed to be.

If you don't own it and/or haven't fought in it then how can you accurately rate it.

What is crap in your hands might be a god machine in someone elses so don't know it until you've tried it.

 

Mostly true. But there are things that are obvious. Like my little jenner with 4 flamers, or something that are more for cooperative tests than function, or just plain old n00bish dumb builds like this.

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=25&l=a78b03002e658e2138e9489fd3798d8ca11dd569

Don't tell me this deserve anything other than a 1 star, amusements aside. You don't have to play it to know that.

 

LOL you have taken it to extremes with that build but yes, I hear what you are saying.

This reminds me I need to check to see how SoLo is coming along with the next version of our Ratings Engine.

 

Ok, sorry guys for being away soo long here. I'm not really sure what you all expect from the next version of Post Ratings Pro. If we can gather all options/features that you would like in the next version within a topic somewhere, I'd be happy to finish the coding on this and release an update for Michael to install here.

@Michael - There are topics over at Dream Portal within the Post Ratings Pro Board that we've discussed about in the next version, could you just reply to these topics with Approved for the next version, or Denied in the next version? Also, if you are wanting additional features, please create topics in the Post Ratings Pro Board with each additional feature that you want in the next version. Keep in mind that the next version will definitely not be the last version.

Thank you,
Solomon

 

Done.

 

Oh, it would be good if "Cross variant" builds are posted in root of the model, or just to be posted once in each subforum?

Speaking of builds, the descriptions of the subforums in Quickdraw is still WRONG!
It says "commando" instead of "quickdraw". The hardpoints are fixed also. Specking of which, it would be nice if number of JJ are listed in the description.

 

If it has different weapons it gets posted in its own thread. I am working on a guide to show people how to search the forums using the subject lines to find some of the things they want; for instance "What other mechs will my XL300 fit in? What if I want mechs that fit my STD250 engine? What if I want 3x PPC weapon mechs etc".

[quote author=enileph link=topic=2220.msg16270#msg16270 date=1375876214]
Speaking of builds, the descriptions of the subforums in Quickdraw is still WRONG!
It says "commando" instead of "quickdraw". The hardpoints are fixed also.
[/quote]

The descriptions have been fixed and I confirmed that the hardpoints were indeed correct, only the Commando name/word was in there for some reason.

[quote author=enileph link=topic=2220.msg16270#msg16270 date=1375876214]
Specking of which, it would be nice if number of JJ are listed in the description.
[/quote]

Some people do it, some do not. Subject titles can only be so many characters before you just can't add anything more and so I have not put them in myself to preventing screwing up the format.

 

What about adding subthreads of roles for each Mechvariant, so that builds with similar purpose are placed together

E.g.
Mechlab - Heavy Mechs 》Jagermech 》JM6-A 》Brawler

Mechlab - Heavy Mechs 》Jagermech 》JM6-A 》Indirect Firesupport


Just a suggestion to clean up some very overfilled threads

 

In an ideal world that would be great, and I would say yes, but then you get Forumception and that tends to get annoying. The forum tree is already about as deep as one dare take it before it becomes inconvenient.

 

no man....i want forumception so bad that i could hide my life savings in the folders and know one would know.

 

Rent the movie then tell me that LOL

As for the rest, I will be checking with SoLo later today or tomorrow to see how progress is coming along. We are getting more and more builds that are being ranked 5* (especially by two guys who are friends and drop together all the time, you know who you are) so it will become more important to filter then by NUMBER OF RATINGS as well as the TOTAL STAR RATING.

 

who would that be?????????????? i hope its not me

 

Sound's like Michael and Soy

 

So, similar builds aside for a moment. Should joke builds be allowed in the subsections or be moved to the crazy build thread? I'm for nr 2 myself. Enough with real builds in there.

 

Why? you can downvote them also, or upvote them if you think they are usable.

I don't think mods should judge what is joke build and what is not.

 

Well, if we are gunning for structure and putting similar builds together, it's a valid question wether to allow joke builds among the serious ones. I like order but it's not a big problem, as you said, the ratings will show usability.