I got a €5 banzai ticket and now it's up to €14.45. How long does it take before I can cash this out? How come the expiration date on it is so fast? I got it yesterday and it says I have 6 days left to use it.

Im not a fan of what people suggest here about breaking up tables or joining them together to keep average amounts of players on every table. If Im playing on a table vs several opponents u build up some kind of gameplay/history with people and for the system to just chuck u on another table to keep tables balanced would make me rage so much. I would like to see anyones face here while there is a huge whale on their table and then suddenly u get moved.

Its just the nature of the beast, when lots of people quit its just normal that a lot of tables will end up with fewer players and tbh I dont see the problem in playing 3-4 handed. Mostly a table with 3-4 (decent?) regs is going to break up soon anyway. Is it annoying, maybe but all u got to do is open a few more tables and find some decent ones.

And like jonny2192 said, I find it more annoying when u want to fire up some tables and u see 100 players playing and u need to wait minutes to get on a table. But again what u wanna change here? Its just the way it is as all tables are full and once u get on a table that one fills up fast mostly anyway. I dont think anything needs to get changed at all.

@shedyyl, I noticed this a few times aswell. It is awkward when u are 3 handed and both villains are sitting out. And in some cases u can also join a table like this as a new player which is daft. Think this also happens heads up at times when villain sits out and u leave, then join another table and u end up on the same table heads up again. Think this is because the system can be bit slow at times so u would join that table again before the system kinda noticed there was only one player left. Ive noticed this in normal gameplay aswell as when a player goes busto then leaves the table and it takes a while before the next hand gets started. Not like it takes a minute but its long enough to be noticable as there is nothing happening lol

^ I wouldn't do it just to balance tables like in a tournament (actually if it was up to me, I would have tournament break tables or move single players much more conservatively - if it's random it's fair), I would just do it when they get very short. If you can keep up with a certain number of 6 handed tables and one of them goes heads up you find you can't keep up with the other ones.

Maybe the solution could be like a casino, where you initially join a must-move table, which can be any-number-handed, and as required they move people from it to keep the other tables at the right number, and once you are at your proper table you don't move again.

@Str8Gutter88 when you see a flop the period is reset, so you don't need to finish it this week, just play it at least once.

tyvm

there is a different, i not talking about to close the 3-4 handed table (we have a read on that table(villian) that should not close) but insteed of open a new table there should be a option to fill the old tables first or bring toghether 2x3people table to 1table to fill that up....

thats just example

one weird question can unibet run on dial up internet?

I think current seating system is good, yeah sometimes you will play shorthanded, but usually after a while more people join.
Also, what is so bad about playing shorthanded, even headsup ?
I know, it is intended to be 6 max, but shorthanded is poker too, if you are good it may be even easier to outplay your opponent when you are HU or SH, than usual.
Plus, some challenges are much easier to complete when playing SH.

Also I think there is some kind of reduced rake for shorthanded tables, or something like that

That would be less controversial, though it's rarer that you find tables where you don't have someone already on them both.

Once that's implemented, make it zero rake for the people keeping a game going hu, just like live.

I'm gonna post as well because I really want tables to not break up once 2 left, let the players decide if they wanna continue or leave the table.

Now I'm giving feedback, I think following stuff has allready been mentioned but I'm gonna retry just because I would really like it

a sitout option per table would be really helpfull as well. but I can understand this will make people do more table selecting etc & hurts the game, but let's say you can sit out 1 table for 120 seconds what harm can it do? I really have a tough time sometimes keeping up on all tables & would like to be able to sit out some tables to finish the hands on the others. right now I time out on the others & pay a round of blinds for nothing. I 6 table now because of this reason, with the sitout option I would be able to play 8+(you do the math of how much more rake this will make you). Also adding a color code to players even if it would be just for 1 session wouldn't hurt the game much I think while it would make my life a little bit easier I would be able to play more hands vs the fish = more rake

Dont need color coding and if u cant keep up u are just playing too many tables. No need to change the system, change the way u play as u did keeping it with 6 tables.

Can imagine multitablers arent pleased with every table going to 3-4 handed at times as it speeds up the play and they arent able to keep up with all their tables.

2-3 handed tables have indeed 50% less rake as far I know altho cant find it anymore but Im sure its still active.

Andrew, could you please change my ticket to bonus? Alias: taro. Thanks!

adding color coding and sitting out per table it a bad idea only to help multitabling nits so i am against it.

It seems my comment about the constant 3-4 handed tables mainly at night has caused some discussion thats nice It personally dont hate it but find it strange that when there are 80 people on at stake and i play 6 tables all of them are 3-4 handed and i think it could be that software remembering people leaving a certain table for to long so that software does not fill those spots and at night this might cause alot of tables to be 3-4 handed. Hope to see some feedback from Andrew about it

Yeah, that's a bit weird.
I was on a table once with 5 players. One left, and the other 4 all sat out in the next couple of hands. No one would give me any action (sick brag), and when I closed the table and fired up another one, it just brought me back to the same one. I think you can kind of get around it by opening another table and then closing the first one, but that won't be possible for people already with the max number of tables open.
Dear God, no. Table-camping is the worst. It makes tables die. At least when a seat is empty, people continue playing in the hope that someone will join. If they join and find a bunch of people sitting out, they quit.

How do people feel about the timebanks? I think I'm a pretty quick decisionmaker and play only 4-6 tables, but sometimes the 10 seconds timebank aren't enough for me. I'm not sure how quickly it charges up, but it's not so fast that I never time out from a tough decision.

Please read Posts in full next time. 2min sitout per table Will mean a lot less sitouts than the 10min sitout you now get when sitting out on all tables.

Adding Everyone who quits their session & just clicks sit out like I do. Not Gonna click leave table on each individual table when I quit playing. But you Will have a closed Seat For 10mins.

We can't play this game of pick and choose what serves us. Playing the self serving game is a slippery slope that will lead us to the same problems that plague all other sites. For many on here it's the reason we switched to Unibet.

I play 8 tables and the same thing occurs to me about once a session and it sits me out at all my other tables. And it sucks but the alternative is a further slowdown of the game and that shouldn't happen imo. Already I see some players using the decision time to the max every hand so the real problem could be there's too much time.

How about this idea as a possible solution.

Once second is removed for action to be made prior to the time bank kicking in. Timebank gets 5 seconds added to it. This solution will punish the players who are playing too many tables and can't keep up while giving players who are in a legitimate tough spot get a few extra seconds to make a tough decision.

#

I play 4-6 tables and never had much problems with the timebank. But then again I like a more fast paced game and people using their whole timebank for every action do my nut in lol

I like the fact that Unibet is fast paced but I feel like the timebank could do with an extra 10 or 20 seconds. I don't think this would slow the games down hugely since there's no auto timebank.

Just a quick question. What can I expect if i "rake" €2000 anyway to calculate this sorta thing?

Edit: And if there is "pure" rakeback can someone official here hook me up with it if im already a member?

Think this would be a nightmare in MTTs. Maybe if it was extra time on a per hour basis i.e 10secs extra every hour.

I find the times I time out isnt because of thinking but more because I am trying to watch a particular table and time out on others.

You can only use your timebank once, so not sure what you're talking about. Time to act shouldn't need to be longer. It's just the random time someone 3bets and goes bet/bet/allin postflop and I have a bluffcatcher I sometimes need more than the 10s timebank to think it all through. If I don't have to use it early in the session I never run out though.

Yeh my bad was thinking about normal timer + timebank. Still think there is time enough as normal action timer is 15sec and timebank is 30sec first time, then 20 and then 10 if Im right. If u are always on that 10sec then u are def using it too much.

please change my 25$ SNG ticket to 25$ bonus
alias: cheers16
thank you