![[Unibet] Official Thread](https://d30akgybcov179.cloudfront.net/icons/hamburger.svg){kind=icon}
![[Unibet] Official Thread](https://d30akgybcov179.cloudfront.net/icons/close-sidebar.svg){kind=icon}
[Unibet] Official Thread
![[Unibet] Official Thread](https://d30akgybcov179.cloudfront.net/icons/quote.svg){kind=icon}
01-12-2016
, 11:31 PM
Last edited by OldBurf; 01-12-2016 at 11:36 PM.
Reason: Added Furo quote
01-13-2016
, 06:33 AM
Don't forget the alias
01-13-2016
, 07:39 AM
Quote:
I always thought a system that automatically incrementally shortens the time to act before a hand is folded for each additional SNG you play is the fairest solution (or if you are playing on more than one site it shortens the time to act by 2 seconds each time you let the time to act get below 5 seconds and so on). If you can play 8 tables as fast as someone can play 2 or 3 then fine. If you can't, well, play less tables or play faster because my lack of enjoyment in waiting is being used to subsidize your multi-tabling and that's not equitable.
Quote:
Anything that makes SNGs less quick and less enjoyable --- like someone using up all the time each and every decision because they are playing many tables as I have encountered a few times --- is a reason why you will not or cannot play them at that moment of the day as I have for fear of running into that same player.
Reducing the number of tables that someone can play isn't a particularly good solution to this problem because it harms people who aren't timing out but also encourages people to play on two or three sites at once instead, which doesn't stop the problem. It's analogous to getting false positives AND false negatives with the same system.
So I'm interested in better ways to do it.
I don't think this works as well for us due to how our timebank works.
Quote:
In my opinion, slow multitablers contributed greatly to the reduction in popularity of sng's on stars once faster forms of poker got introduced. I don't see the problem to the same extent on unibet, yet, but would be great to see something implemented, not convinced that a hard table cap is the answer.
Quote:
It's been stated repeatedly here that unibet want to create an environment friendly to new/rec players, it's never been said that they want to deter pros/regs, one does not neccesarily follow the other.
The table cap idea was mentioned by Andrew only as a way to speed up the action (and reduce software issues), my point is that there's more effective ways to do this.
The table cap idea was mentioned by Andrew only as a way to speed up the action (and reduce software issues), my point is that there's more effective ways to do this.
Although both approaches probably make us more money, the former benefits only the regs, the latter benefits every player on the site.
I suspect we'll end up implementing a lower table cap in the medium term just because of Adobe Air problems. In the longer term, once we solve the Air problems, I'd prefer to have a, say, 10-16 table absolute cap, but reduce the cap for people who are timing out a lot. That solves the multi-site problems too.
It's pretty hard to tune that kind of algorithm though, so I think it'd take a long time to get to the stage where we're happy with it. To do real analysis on it we'd need to do a lot of development work too, because we'd essentially need to know how long people take to act on each street and be able to summarise it accurately. That's database work, and that's going to take a lot of time to build, and that makes it hard to prioritise. We'll discuss it internally and see though.
Quote:
Yeah I got it too, I assume it was the collusion going on in the SNGs. There is actually a log in history but it is separate from poker logs. If you go to your Unibet account history and click "Money" on the left then in the dropdown click "Account History". There should be a log called "Premium Win". I know this because I asked about it a previous time.
But yeh, I agree in principle. I'd like to make it so that SNG are also included, but I'm not sure on MTT. The problem with MTT is that if you lose €20 by entering a couple of tournaments and don't cash, that isn't really a surprise. It seems that the higher variance in tournaments doesn't work very well with Double Trouble.
If we included cash & SNG and made it so that there were two double troubles per week (say Tue & Sat) and increased the joint prize pool then I think we'd end up with a better system. There'd be more entrants due to SNG, and there'd be more entrants due to two days per week. We'd still only award one ticket per eligible person per week, so each one should have fewer entrants.
I think that by doing that, we'd need to make SDT include SNG too, but I don't expect we'll increase the number of entrants there too much.
Quote:
Aloha Andrew,
you don't happen to know, or have heard any rumours about the UO stop after London? I'm not sure yet if I will be able to attend my seat due to work obligations. So if it's possible I might have to move my package to the next one. Would be cool to know where that would be though or when that will be made public.
you don't happen to know, or have heard any rumours about the UO stop after London? I'm not sure yet if I will be able to attend my seat due to work obligations. So if it's possible I might have to move my package to the next one. Would be cool to know where that would be though or when that will be made public.
Quote:
Reporting one more visual bug in the Charlotte and the Squid Spectacular tournaments which have a bounty on the streamer. It seems like if the bounty player leaves the table, either due to an elimination or due to table balancing, some other player will get the bounty graphics on them.
From what I've heard from the players, most of them (probably all) will see that bounty graphics on that same (wrong) person, if they were at the table when the "move" happened. If you spectate the table, the bounty graphic will not appear (on that wrong person). Also I believe that new players joining the table later won't see it either, but I'm not sure about this one.
It's not a big deal tho since most of us know who's the bounty.
From what I've heard from the players, most of them (probably all) will see that bounty graphics on that same (wrong) person, if they were at the table when the "move" happened. If you spectate the table, the bounty graphic will not appear (on that wrong person). Also I believe that new players joining the table later won't see it either, but I'm not sure about this one.
It's not a big deal tho since most of us know who's the bounty.
01-13-2016
, 11:17 AM
btw, I'm missing NL4 ticket from Monday stream
