Official Supernova Elite Thread

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with this - I've been told that when I'm 12-tabling you can tell which games I'm in from the client window without even looking at the table list because my games are running 10-15 h/hr less (and it's not even necessarily noticeable at the table, it's just that extra .5 sec to autofold 73o in MP because the table focus hasn't popped up yet)

[/ QUOTE ]

please go buy some decent equipment, either more monitors or higher res, or bigger monitors so u dont have to stack tables and wait for table focus to pop up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually have multiple monitors, but in truth, I find it more confusing playing tiled than cascading

[Vedast]

[ QUOTE ]
The tables are already getting filled up with massively multitabling mega nits and ratholing 'system' short stackers, even as low as $400! Increasing the max tables 33% is just going to hurt the games even more since those two types of players are going to make up a huge chunk of those who would gain from 16 tabling possibilities.

Only allow more than 12 tables if you buy in full and have a VPIP > 18. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate shortstackers too, but I don't think the metagame would change if it was possible to play 16 full ring tables. The difference would be that people like HonestRyan would play 16 tables in the same poker room instead of 12 in PS and 4 in FTP, but that wouldn't change his playing style.

[1p0kerboy]

14 for the compromise?

[pattay]

PB any worries that upping the amount of tables you can play will dry out fish faster, in turn hurting the games? i know its not really comparable, but the thing that kept paradise soooooo [censored] juicy back in the day was the 1 table limit, surely this is why stars is limiting tables at all? i know this is a nitty way of thinking about it, but your thoughts?

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
PB any worries that upping the amount of tables you can play will dry out fish faster, in turn hurting the games? i know its not really comparable, but the thing that kept paradise soooooo [censored] juicy back in the day was the 1 table limit, surely this is why stars is limiting tables at all? i know this is a nitty way of thinking about it, but your thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. I think there are very few players that are capable of playing more than the current max.
2. Currently there is not a limit on MTTs or SNGs, and I think the effects on these games have been small, mostly because of the small number of players actually playing >12 tables.

***IMPORTANT***
3. The players who will be playing more than the max are likely already playing more than the max, albeit at different sites. If these players play more at Stars, Tilt becomes fishier, which draws some sharks away from Stars, etc. It balances itself out in the end and the overall games will likely not have an impact.

[Henry17]

[ QUOTE ]
PB any worries that upping the amount of tables you can play will dry out fish faster, in turn hurting the games? i know its not really comparable, but the thing that kept paradise soooooo [censored] juicy back in the day was the 1 table limit, surely this is why stars is limiting tables at all? i know this is a nitty way of thinking about it, but your thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

While I believe this is sound reasoning I think the rate of growth is enough that the games would not dry up. It would kill off some fish faster but I think new fish join at a greater rate. The level of play is so soft that it would take a long time to dilute the fish.

[1p0kerboy]

Also,

the additional rake that Stars would receive could be used in advertising to bring more fish in. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
PB any worries that upping the amount of tables you can play will dry out fish faster, in turn hurting the games? i know its not really comparable, but the thing that kept paradise soooooo [censored] juicy back in the day was the 1 table limit, surely this is why stars is limiting tables at all? i know this is a nitty way of thinking about it, but your thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. I think there are very few players that are capable of playing more than the current max.
2. Currently there is not a limit on MTTs or SNGs, and I think the effects on these games have been small, mostly because of the small number of players actually playing >12 tables.

***IMPORTANT***
3. The players who will be playing more than the max are likely already playing more than the max, albeit at different sites. If these players play more at Stars, Tilt becomes fishier, which draws some sharks away from Stars, etc. It balances itself out in the end and the overall games will likely not have an impact.

[/ QUOTE ]

The players who will most benefit from the increase in the number of tables (particularly the ratholing shortstackers and massively multitabling nits) are often very marginal winners/losers against everybody except the fish, who they clean out about nearly as well as anybody. Nothing like seeing the 80/2/0.5 guy (who you haven't been able to hit anything against) drops 2 buyins to the 11/9/4 guy with top pair on a T62 board.

Rant aside - it won't balance out. The fish will just go away faster. I mean the tables on Stars are generally accepted to be the some of the toughest online already. The games getting worse more quickly than they already are probably isn't going to send any significant chunk of the regulars over to Full Tilt. The games are already at the point where alot, if not most, of your money comes from the weaker regulars anyhow.

It is just delaying the inevitable, but I see no reason to make the fish:shark ratio even worse than it already is. It's probably not good for the site in the longrun and it's definitely not good for the games.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
It is just delaying the inevitable, but I see no reason to make the fish:shark ratio even worse than it already is. It's probably not good for the site in the longrun and it's definitely not good for the games.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe if we roll back to 4 tables max it would be good for the game then.

[yoshi86]

[ QUOTE ]


Maybe if we roll back to 4 tables max it would be good for the game then.

[/ QUOTE ]

They could make SNE 100k vpp's then and make the porsche like 50k fpp's [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]