Quote:
Originally Posted by wotutalkinabaaat
im not saying the games arent beatable. Im saying they should be beatable by more than the top 2% of players
edit: obv more than 2% are beating 2-50nl etc but you get my point
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellatrix
Can you come up with an argument why they should be?
Not sure if serious...
I would honestly hope that your position, as a
player, isn't that a game of skill should have such a slim edge that only the best of the best can beat it.
Yeah Stars can do what they want as a business. But there are 3 scenarios here from a players' perspective:
- Think rake decrease would be good for you personally --> lobby for rake decrease, non-zero chance you end up with more money.
- Think rake decrease would be good for the economy --> lobby for rake decrease, non-zero chance that you and the player pool end up with more money.
- Think you're paying the right amount --> good for you but for the love of god why are you lobbying against something that has a non-zero chance of getting you and the player pool more money? There is no ****ing upside to any single player in lobbying against a rake decrease and putting yourself on Stars' side of the fence.
Whether you're in this for yourself or think it would help games or improve liquidity or think it would do nothing at all or is unnecessary, there is absolutely no logical position you can take in support of saying the rake is fine if you like money.
Players who are playing stakes where they are largely not affected by rake since they hit the rake cap with a very high frequency arguing that money should stay trapped
way down the ladder preventing them from even getting a whiff of it = mind blown.
Last edited by JH1; 01-14-2012 at 05:43 PM.