I think this is what everyone should be looking at with regards to shaking up the levels. It's a good post that didn't get any responses. Does anyone want to show some numbers/do some calcs?

ftp structure and gg

no thx

Let's settle on Stars buying FT, paying us all back, and experimenting over there

In recent months we have introduced a limit on the number of maximum simultaneous registrations for most single table Sit & Gos. Each combination of game and buy-in was restricted to between one and four SNG available for registration at the same time.

Today that has been extended that to all remaining single table SNG, which primarily includes Hold-em games with buy-ins of $1.50 and $3.50. There are no longer any cash SNG that generate a new tournament when the first player sits down.

The best place for suggestions regarding scheduled MTTs or satellites is the OFFICIAL Stars 2012 MTT Discussion Thread at:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/61...hread-1146917/

Higher buyins for hypers sng's please?
yes I know that you just added the $200, but $500 would be just nice

Walmsley, any news on this?

I feel like we were on the cusp of making this a reality and then 2+2 went down and everything got lost in the shuffle.

Did you obtain sufficient data from the SCOOP satellites to get a better understanding of the feasibility of NLO8 hypers?

Walmsley,

Will the issues raised about the rake in hyper tubros be addressed?

i can answer that one,

big wall of text changing the subject without saying anything informative about the rake, the impact of it, and how little pre rakeback winners there are, how 1% is considered good in 9man turbos or hypers, and 3-4% in 18man, some smiley and a catchy sentence about having good luck at the tables, and then just ignoring it, not doing anything about it, and saying things like we mess up people's sne plans if we lower rake (best argument ever).

I do not think we can expect anything else about the hypers, just like the turbos, hypersats and whatnot, and just pray the megarape will be decreased in 2013 and otherwise sincerely think if you want to put in another million vpps with the rakeraping like is going as of this moment.

I think we have a bigger shot in things like chaning the structure, and stuff like that because stars can see a direct result in their bottom line from this,

my vote is more 9man hypers and change the nonturbo structure to something else, Im sure if it was a little faster more turbo guys would be playing a part of their turbo volume on nonturbos...

We still haven't made a decision on the NLO8 hypers, mainly because other things have recently been higher priority rather than due to a lengthy debate on the subject. I think the consensus though is that they would be 6-max rather than 9-max, as I previously suggested.

Apologies for the delay. I hope to tackle this in the next few weeks.

Hi Walmsley,

i asked on the last page about the number of hypers registering vs turbos as it seems to favour the hypers - can you address this please? Also, if you are going to have 200 6-max hypers, can there be 9-max ones as well so as to not completely split the 6-max economy?

thanks

At least just say no the rape rake will not be addressed instead of just ignoring it

forget about it guys, game being unprofitable (due to regfestation - rake ratio) _NEVER_ was a reason to decrease rake.

*fun fact, i think that only spacegravy made more than 5k$ pre rb from all unblocked players in 2010 at 60$ turbos, while multiple people made several times more in 4x lower stakes.

Then what, if any, is a reason to get the rake cut? Ur saying we should just shut our mouths and let Stars run all over us without even voicing our opinion on it?

And yes, its no secret that 9man Med-High stakes turbos have been dead for years.

pretty stupid because it was the most popular format untill too many regs liked them and they became dead.

if the rake is fair at 9man turbos, so many will run, yet now its hard to get 10 30+ open at the same time, what do i say , hard,

thats a lie

****** impossible is more like it.

PS Walmsey or steve, at least answer me this

Why is the 60s hyperrake the same as the 30s? shouldn't it be between 100s and 30s rake?

agree something should be done about the rake in 9max turbo's..theres 1?! single 30$ running right now for me to play.. and sometimes there not even one running

What SNG isn't classified as "dead" by regs? If the answer is none, then obv there's a fundamental problem somehwere, aka rake.

dont want to make PS argument but i think the problem is too many regs and not the rake... any money potentially reserveed for a rake reduction should be used for promotions. Any news for a BoP revamp that has been hinted at for months now?

If they add a $500 6-max hyper, it's finally going to be so more people than the same 10-20 Turbo regs have a shot at BOP Jupiter High Orbit and it's weekly $5k.

The rake on hypers seems espescially higher now it may be because there's 4 times as many regs playing them, with umpteen stacking going on. Not going to last.

all players are talking about hypers, rake, blinds but only thing which is important are promotions and BOP change , that can only change and help game and PS do nothing, random players don't care about levels and buy in change or rake they will not play more sng's if that PS change!

Speaking of hypers, I got a $205.81 refund tonight which I would assume would be entail me playing quite a few games with a cheater.

Anybody else get refunds? I haven't really played anything but hypers and mtts the last few months where that $amount I got back would be that big

I know bbfg found some colluders, but it supposedly wasn't "malicious" so probably not the same peeps.

Honestly like I said before, it has to come with the 2013 megachanges hopefully. If you lower rake nothing changes for them. So why are they gonna lower rake? I'm not trying to be rude but what infact is your suggestion?

Also the idea that "'1% roi is considered good' is a joke" is bad. 1% is $180/hr. Who in 2012 makes $180/hr ? So would you somehow prefer players to be winning at 2%? What does that even mean, so they are going to win $240/hr? Where does this money come from (in 2012 where there is a lot of competition and 4 or 5 regs to every 1 or 2 fish at each table.) Stars doesnt decide the roi through rake, the market does through competition.

I agree with your post in the sense of broad rb and rake changes for 2013. But just asking for a rake cut isn't going to do anything because right now PS has no real reason to lower the rake without any rework of the VIP club (nothing in it for them)