|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
As we speak: $10/20 party - ~60 games stars - 10 $15/30 party - 25 stars - 4 $20/40 party - 25 stars - 0 $30/60 party - 23 stars - 7 No, not yet. [/ QUOTE ] It is because they do not reward mid/high limit players well enough. Hint to Lee: double FPP for $3 raked hands, you need more mid/high limit players. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
Hint to Lee: double FPP for $3 raked hands, you need more mid/high limit players. [/ QUOTE ] |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Hint to Lee: double FPP for $3 raked hands, you need more mid/high limit players. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Actually... don't you need more fish? I'm not saying there are none, but there could always be a little more. Am i right, or am i right... or am i right???? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Hint to Lee: double FPP for $3 raked hands, you need more mid/high limit players. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Actually... don't you need more fish? I'm not saying there are none, but there could always be a little more. Am i right, or am i right... or am i right???? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] This will attract fish as much as it will attract sharks. Quicker to get that TV etc.. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Hint to Lee: double FPP for $3 raked hands, you need more mid/high limit players. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Actually... they need to do something at $2 rake too. I think they should go by Full Tilt's example, and give 1 FPP per $1 in rake,thus $2 rake = 2 FPP's and $3 rake = 3 FPP's. The VIP bonus should be calculate after that. Lots of time's I am playing at a 6 max table with less than 6 players on it, so the rake gets capped at $2. So I shouldn't be punished for the situations where rake cannot reach $3. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
Currently 1,640 active real money Party Hold'em tables vs. 876 Pokerstars.
1522 tourney tables at Party vs. 1357 Pokerstars. They are very close in tourney play, but Party still dominates the ring games. Source: www.whichpoker.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
Lots of time's I am playing at a 6 max table with less than 6 players on it, so the rake gets capped at $2. So I shouldn't be punished for the situations where rake cannot reach $3. [/ QUOTE ] You might want to rethink this last sentence. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Lots of time's I am playing at a 6 max table with less than 6 players on it, so the rake gets capped at $2. So I shouldn't be punished for the situations where rake cannot reach $3. [/ QUOTE ] You might want to rethink this last sentence. [/ QUOTE ] Your right -- I worded that badly. What I mean, is that the number of FPP's should increase with the amount of rake paid -- It shouldn't give out x at $1 and x*2 at $3 -- it should go up incremenetly with the amount of rake paid. (I was in no way advocating that the $2 cap is bad). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars bigger than Party, gotta Love it! :)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Lots of time's I am playing at a 6 max table with less than 6 players on it, so the rake gets capped at $2. So I shouldn't be punished for the situations where rake cannot reach $3. [/ QUOTE ] You might want to rethink this last sentence. [/ QUOTE ] Your right -- I worded that badly. What I mean, is that the number of FPP's should increase with the amount of rake paid -- It shouldn't give out x at $1 and x*2 at $3 -- it should go up incremenetly with the amount of rake paid. (I was in no way advocating that the $2 cap is bad). [/ QUOTE ] I'll take any increase at all. |
|
|