People already have the option to use 4 colour deck at the moment and they don't. I agree that if we made it default, the majority would use it - but we don't, and they don't. We have to cater to what's already there, not what might be.

Q1, but I can't announce a date yet.

just for the sake of arguing:

I get that it´s not an important issue or anything, but your arguments are more than surprisingly childish regarding this feature.

There isn´t a single reason to bring up the past use of the 4c deck in the old client. It does not matter, because the group you are targeting does not mostly know about the feature.

I remember, when I was an even bigger fish than now and I first saw the 4c deck in FTP many years ago, it seemed such a cool and better way to represent the suits.
It was much more clear. It was easier to follow hands (MAKES IT EASIER TO PLAY MORE TABLES QUICKER FOR THE RECS TO WHOM SOMETIMES EVEN 2 TABELS IS TOO MUCH) and it honestly just looked (and still does) good.
I was even more amazed by the lean mods on various softs which seem such a superior way to present the UX.

It is a feature that will be very refreshing and logical to a lot of those players that you are trying to innovate and could even marginally help your bottom line, as it could possibly make it harder to make mistakes on tables by recs.

The argument that you have to cater to what is there is just plain laughable. Think about it.
You are innovating a platform not taking your players and moving them to a standalone platform so that they could find the old and familiar surroundings.

It is such a small feature that would look extremely cool to recs and plainly help them play.

You can just say that there is other things to do and that is fine, but those arguments that you present here are completely pointless and wrong.

To quote you:
Way to destroy your own argument ...

Care to elaborate?

Firstly, name the benefits of a 2c deck over the 4c deck.

Secondly, it is extremely funny to state that one has to cater for what is there when the company is going through the biggest overhaul and innovation, changing most of the core features with the focus to the recs.

I still believe that every company can do what ever they want with their products, but saying that keeping the 2c deck because they are catering for what is already there is just funny. Does not make any sense.

Ok, I give up. In this thread you are correct 99.99% of the time but in 2-deck vs 4-deck you are clearly wrong, or atleast your argument is bad.

Why you do not want to understand that you cant compare DEFAULT vs OPTIONAL settings statistics?

MOST USERS ON EVERY BUSINESS, GAME, WEBSITE ETC. USING DEFAULTS SETTINGS! Mostly they are the best and optimal settings but argument: «our most users using 2-color deck, then we keep it» is bad.

To get objective statistics you should send out survey and compare how many users know the feature, how many used it, how many using etc.

And its pointless discussion anyway. No-one do not quit poker-room because they do not have 4-color deck (or 4-color deck in default).

When you have a limited number of features you can include, you have to prioritise the default over the optional. Like I say, I'd love to include 4c deck as soon as possible and I'll use the posts in this thread to help do so.

A default 4 color deck will help recs play much better.

I kiiiind of agree, but I think it'll likely put some people off too.

I also think that recs aren't really people who misread the suits or don't know how many outs they have. I think they're people who know how to play, maybe have seen it on TV or who play in a home game, but they aren't going to four table or really know what ranges are or understand you when you talk about equity.

The limit to the features is completely understandable, but I would not put a 4c deck on the same list as ranges and equity.

I do agree, that somebody still might see a 4c deck weird. And that is why I personally would use the 4c deck by default and on the first point of contact with the deck for the player the software client would present info like "The 3c deck makes it easier to follow the game and to play more tables at once but you can switch back to the classic look whenever you want."
This way you present the choice and also plant the idea for the rec to try more tables than 1. He might start to like playing on 2 if cannot yet manage 3 or 4 but still more rake for the room and more table liquidity as well.

Anyway I all for rooms optimizing the ability to take rake out of the games. They truly are the greatest winners in online poker.

I was talking about recreational players as people who don't misread suits, so a 4 colour deck doesn't help them much in that regard. I agree that a 4 colour deck isn't in the same category as hand ranges etc.

I misread suits all the time when playing 2 color deck. And I am playing at most two tables at a time.

I would love still being able to qualify for Unibet Open, but frankly I will not be able to play on your new client if you dont have 4 color deck.

not sure if serious.....

Anyway, I am still arguing just for the sake of it.
Years ago ranka recommended to post advice in strategy threads, because people are more inclined to share information if they want to prove a point and to break an invalid one.
Never got anywhere meaningful with my game. But it works anywhere, although an annoying habit.

I think we should just give up on the 4-color deck for now. I also find it disappointing, but it's not happening in the release, but will likely be one of the first features to be added afterwards. Might as well move on.

If you are still reluctant to share the official release date, can you at least tell us if the new site will be up within January? That's when it was initially meant to happen and I am curious if that still holds true and if it's worth it to start a Supernova chase or not.

It won't be up in January (and there was never an official release date). The site will launch in beta this quarter though. Hopefully I can post an official date in the near future. I'm also hoping to post a gameplay video quite soon but the current software needs a couple of updates first.

i read a news with "end of january" as launch-date

ill bet they will lose at least 40% of their traffic

Guys, this is a great move by Unibet. Seems like this thread is kind of trying to tell a different story. As far as I understood after talking with some medium level employees and representatives, the idea is to make poker fun again. They are investing a ton in it, so I really don't have anything other than 'kudos' to them.

lol, r u serious or a unibet-representatives

theres only one reason to leave a network.

- to seperate their playerpool, to participate on their game
- to rake more
- to make more money
- to refer new hobbyplayers
- oh i forget something.. to make more money.

this software looks like a online-gambling-page
like a one-armed-bandit in las vegas

its horrible. like the playmoneygame-site of phil ivey

a player wants to play, a hobbyplayer also

only online-gambling-addicted people like to play with this kind of software
and some female players, who likes the bling bling

its a shame.. that remembers me of the playstation-karaoke-game...

a shame for poker, like adrenalin-rush of fulltilt.. a shame

that doesnt belongs to poker.. why they offer poker.. it seems like they want to offer online-gambling-casino-games in future
and now they test the 1step..

lot of 5nl players in here it seems

I've already addressed all of your bullet points so I'll refer you to those posts, but there are quite a few reasons to leave a network that you didn't include.

- The most common one is loss to network. If you spend your money attracting new players but a rival on the network spends theirs on rakeback, your players are going to lose to theirs. This means you're effectively subsidising the other site. MPN's plan to fix this is called truevalue and I think it has largely worked (but maybe not in time for Ladbrokes, for example). I don't think ipoker have as good of a solution for this so we may see more sites leaving networks in the future.

- When you join a network you agree to abide by certain network rules. You may have a limit on promotional spend or have affiliate rules and so on. These are rules that some sites on a network flout (just try asking for under the table rakeback), but are also rules that most of your competitors don't have to stick to.

- Networks with centrally run promotions may have different priorities to some of the sites on the network. Perhaps I want to run a SNG promotion but the biggest operators on the network want to run MTT promotions. They outvote me (if a network even has that mechanism) and I don't get to spend my money on what I want.

- Similarly, the software development priorities of one operator on a network may differ from the others. I may want to improve the lobby layout but maybe the other operators want to design a sidegame, and I get outvoted.

Standalone operators get to avoid all of these problems. It's true that they have their own problems (chiefly liquidity).


I'm not sure if this is meant to be a negative that "female players" like it, but if that's what you meant it does not reflect well on you.

It's true that the new software looks different to most sites. Most sites were built in the early 2000s and that's obvious when you play them.

pleease, dont try to prank my iq.



thats what it is.. a animated playstation-software.

but I know/understnad why u have to argue in this way (2000made software, this is brandnew)

--

for me, it isnt understandable why u would like to leave the network ?!?

its like there are some managers who r bored and want to increase the annual revenue again and again to get the maximum.

but if your eyes r bigger than the stomack, u gonna die.

why you wont to talk with microgaming nw to open tier 1 and tier 2
like ipoker ?!?

I went into a meeting so missed a couple of other network points - by going stand alone, you have your own unique selling points. On a network you have the same selling points as everyone else on there.

You also potentially have different regulatory priorities - maybe Unibet want to be more active in a region than the rest of the network does.

And finally, you have different technology requirements. Maybe Unibet have their own fast poker version but then MGS make their own. That leaves Unibet torn between two different products.

I think I've addressed this with my last two posts. I've also (heavily) addressed the "you are in it for the money" type points throughout this thread.

And I've addressed this too with all the other reasons a site might want to leave a network. From what I know of ipoker2, I'm not sure it fixed the loss to network (also known as drain) problem very well - there are lots of sites on ipoker2 that offer under the table rakeback, and the sites don't spend the same proportion of their money on advertising as each other. I would not be at all surprised to learn that drain was still a big problem for several sites on the sub-network.

Yes. The reason is money. What's the problem with that? This may come as a shock, but Unibet, as well as every other running poker site(except ponzi schemes like FTP ) is a company that's attempting to make money.

The Microgaming software is awfully outdated, the rake system is ******ed, and having to share the network with plenty of small skins is a liability. I don't even have a Unibet account, even though it's probably the most reliable site of the Microgaming network. Why? Because it's way too easy to get a high under-the-table rakeback through a smaller skin that has probably never contributed a cent to the welfare of the network. That's a problem that's always going to exist in any networks with more than 3-4 sites.

What's the problem you have with a site leaving? You can still play there if you want, or if you are worried about the fish leaving you can head to iPoker or so.

ilikemilkncookies will hopefully grow up and understand that his ideas were shockingly ******ed in a similar fashion as somebody might think back to their childhood music taste, styl of clothing etc.

Also, are Unibet and Maria migrating at the same time?
Asking because Maria already mentioned somewhere about getting a new software in March. I cannot atm. remember where though.

I am fairly sure they're migrating at the same time but I'll check when I get in tomorrow. Maria don't have any more (public) information about the date than I do though I'm afraid.