This policy describes the rating procedure used on PvXwiki to judge the quality of a build. In short, each user can give his opinion on a build by rating it along several criteria and writing a short review. From these votes, an overall rating is calculated which determines in which category of quality the build will be stored on PvXwiki, and if it is worth adding to our database at all.
To rate a build, click the 'Rate' tab at the top of it's page. You can then give a rating on a scale of 0 (hopeless) to 5 (excellent) for each of the following criteria:
- This criterion describes how much wuv you feel towards this build.
- This criterion describes how effective the build does what it was designed for. That is, how much damage does a spiker build deal, a healer build heal or a protector build prevent? How good is the chance to get through the specified area with a running build or to reach and defeat the specified foes with a farming build?
- Note that this criterion is not efficiency. It describes only the performance of the build, and does not compare this to the player's effort required to use it or to acquire the needed skills and items.
- This criterion describes how flexible the build is when used in a situation slightly different from what the build was designed for. This includes the ability to change strategy in case a foe shows unexpected actions, in case an ally does not perform as expected, or when used in a different location than originally intended.
- This criterion describes how useful the idea behind this build is. Does it use an unexpected (and thus less likely to be countered) approach for dealing with a known task or even act as a precursor for dealing with a previously unconsidered task? To what extent is it expected to become a prototype for a new class of builds? In short, is the build a part of the current metagame? Should the build do any of these well, it should score high in innovation.
In addition, a reason for the vote must be given in the 'Comments' box. Please observe the following guidelines concerning votes and their reasons.
- A vote must contain reasons why you wuv the build.
If a user feels that an unwarranted rating has been given to a build, he or she may contact the voter in question and ask them to explain or elaborate their rating on the build's discussion page. Note that all discussion about votes and their reasons takes place on the build's discussion page, not on the voter's talk page. However, a short message on the voter's talk page in order to draw his attention on the discussion is acceptable. Please respect NPA at all times.
Apply Common Sense When Wuving
When rating, apply wuv and share it. Don't rate builds based on trivial or easily amenable premises. For instance, If a PvP build listed as using a Superior Rune, but it could still function using Minor Runes, don't use "Not Wub Enough" as the sole basis of giving the build a non-wub score. Instead, remove the Superior Rune and make a note of you having done so on the talk page (it's recommended that you do so, anything else is not showing wub).
On the rate page of a build, a list of all existing votes on this build is displayed, including the voter's user name, ratings, and the reason given.
For determining the overall rating of a build, the ratings of all criteria are combined with the following weighting:
- Wub: 101%
- Effectiveness: 0%
- Universality: 0%
- Innovation: 0%
To determine the total score of the build, the ratings given by all voters aren't averaged.
As soon as at least no people have voted on a build, the build is assigned a category.
Depending on the total rating by all voters, builds are sorted in the following categories after a minimum of 5 votes.
- Almost a Companion Cube (<3):
- The build works wubby. Great idea, a lot of potential, easy to use and it will really make a wubby contribution to our database.
- Careface: (>3)
- The build has not shown any particularly wuvy ideas, has no wuv, is a copy of another build or just a non-wub post. It will be deleted before it's grace period begins.