In for a level structure change once again. There were many suggestions earlier in this thread; the feedback was positive, but nothing got done. There were talks about a survey afaik(?)

The play at bb50-200 is awkward and straight up boring imo. I can see why they aren't interesting in adding more bb<100 levels, but introducing antes at bb100 would be nice regardless.
Both recreational and regular players would most likely enjoy more play at these levels, maybe at the expense of people's hourly rates, but definitely a change catered to improving the actual format and its climate.

I'm more interested in a level structure revamp than a payout reset. The 27 payout structure is probably preferred by the more recreational players, which is good.

+1 to introducing antes earlier. Sucks to be shortstacked when there is no antes.
27$ TKO would be awesome 90 or 180 man. Could replace the 27$ non guaranteed MTTs, and should be seen in the Tournament lobby.

Theoretically a 7$+70ct+R 180man might be interesting, if it needs to be raked, could have 7$+35ct rebuys.
But if that would mean the 3.50 rebuys would be raked as well Id rather have that not introduced

+1 to introducing antes earlier.

+1 to this +1

+1

Im ok with this assuming they add in more levels such as:

1) 250/500

2) 700/1400

3) 12.5K/25K

I understand the main focus is to attract more rec players. The best way to do this imo would be with a mixture of added levels making the FOs a better and more attractive structure as well as changing the payout back to 10% making the prizes more top heavy/attractive.

What do you guys think?

please for the love of god change the payout structure back to 18

Something like this would be a good starting point imo:

1 $780.76
2 $532.90
3 $297.43
4 $198.29
5 $136.32
6 $104.10
7 $74.36
8 $53.29
9 $37.18
10 $29.33
11 $29.33
12 $29.33
13 $29.33
14 $29.33
15 $29.33
16 $29.33
17 $29.33
18 $29.33

With these added levels:

1) 250/500

2) 700/1400

3) 12.5K/25K

= way more attractive structure/payouts which will obviously bring in more rec players, and therefore more rake money for stars!!!

is there a PS-rep in this thread or?

Agree with both earlier antes with a couple of added levels.

18 paid!!!!!!!

Maybe change something for the 9th place? because there is no real big payjump between 10th and 9th..

Please yes to early antes and please please more time bank for FTs

+1 earlier antes

Yes.

+1 for this.

I whipped it all together in 5 minutes. I'll fix that.

Current:



Proposed:

Agreed. Also I don't think stars wants to really add more levels since games run longer.

imo:
2k starting stacks (or ideally 2.5k), eliminate first level (10/20), add 250/500 level.
Same amount of levels, antes kick in earlier, pre-ante levels will be less awkward, still start with roughly same amount bb (a bit less) but higher chip count to start which should appeal to recs.

Include 30$ 45-man SnG in the tournament lobby just like the 180s. This type of SnG has a great potential cuz its first prize is appealing for low-mid stakes regs but currently it runs rarely except sundays. Cheers!

Adding in antes earlier will speed up the game and with better structure/payouts the games will likely run more often to make up for the bit longer average durations.

Eliminating the 10/20 level will only be good for those button clickers who are clueless playing post.

I agree that adding in antes earlier will speed up play, I just dont think stars is going to add a new level without taking another one away. I also don't think they believe the second part. I base that off earlier responses in this thread from the stars rep.

I'm not sure why you think this (given that the starting stack is raised), can you elaborate?

+1 for something like +10 seconds to timebank for FT

The starting stack wasn't raised though?? Even then I don't see any point in taking out the 10/20 level.

Do I understand this correct. That if we add antes to a blind level, we add the opportunity to pick up edge, on the amount of ev available from the number of hands played on average at that level, in respect to the added antes.

We expect to make a little more when we open since there are antes. And we expect we can open wider.

But then we expect our average opponents to open up a little too in response to our wider range and the added antes.

And if we can estimate that (quite accurately?), we might then look at the change in BBs and compare it to the $ev value of those chips,

And then talk about the actual value of the change in antes, in terms of the effect on a player roi% (probably distributed vs variance and different roi's over a years time).

If these numbers are available, i worry about those that give their opinions, without doing their homework or the math to back it up. Or why we don't post the value of a proposed change.

Huh? I'm saying to eliminate the first level and raise the starting stack. The point is to introduce antes earlier + adding the bb500 level while not adding an extra level in total or drastically changing the starting amount of bbs. That's exactly what I said in the post you replied to.

So what effect will this have on a regs hourly? And what will be the change in average game length?

I don't know. I'm not one of those guys I've seen in here who attempt to calculate all these things, I wouldn't know where to start doing that. I'm just throwing some ideas out there that seem workable to me, in orde to encourage discussion as to why this is or isn't a good idea

My only guess would be that game length would be slightly shorter, though barely noticeable.

Isn't it true then, if we haven't looked at the value of the change...then we are throwing out ideas with little (no) regard to whether or not they are + or - ev changes for the players?