FTP Answers 6/7

[cat923]

I tried the site after reading some of the recent replies. The lag is better, but it is still there. However, the time outs are killing me. I usually play 4 tables at a time sometimes 5 or 6 and I could hardly play 3 tonight. The time is so short I had to let two tables go when I was in a serious pot.

I know that PS added fast tables, but the FTP tables seem to be much quicker to time out. Of course I played at FTP mostly rather than PS because I liked the way the tables ran.

You may do more rake per table due to the shorter length of decision time, but from me you will lose tables. I will be forced to cut back to 2 or 3.

I have played at the site since the beginning and have played daily. I would like to see some tables as they were and some labelled as "fast" so there would be a choice for players like me.

[demon102]

so what is full tilt doing about rakeback? One of u ftp reps were talking about experimenting with something for the people who had no rakeback back in march, Im wondering what that was

[ADBjester]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is there anyone who IS able to play? This really sucks, because while I'd like to play because I need to get in my days for Ironman, I'm not going to if this lag is so unbearable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm playing the 5K FTP WSOP satellite right now, and am not lagging. I have never lagged on FTP, though, and have both uber hardware (quad core, 4 GB RAM), and uber ISP (10 MBps cable, rock solid).

Jester

[/ QUOTE ]
Nice computer. I think it's kind of ridiculous that people would need a computer like that to play lag-free though. Unfortunately, the only stat that I can compare in is my internet connection (5Mbps FIOS).

[/ QUOTE ]

What's worse is... about 30 minutes after I wrote that, I noticed the lag. It must not have been as bad for me, but there was a series of a dozen hands where it was painful, and from then on it was noticeable.

If *I* was experiencing lag, then it 100% wasn't my computer (a "money is no object" system), and as a 20-year network administrator I'd lay long odds it wasn't my network -- not with the other reports of lag going on here.

I'll have to change my vote (like I have one). A rollback is probably called for... and my guess is it is server side, not client side. Here's hoping they roll back the server code overnight. It that necessitates a client-side rollback as well, then it's likely to be an ugly process. Saddenz.

Jester

[Stake Monster]

Awesome, the new speed is really nice.

[ADBjester]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just hopping on to say we're actively working on a fix for this new periodic freeze people are experiencing. If all goes well, we should have something before the weekend is over (and if it goes really well, even sooner).

Doug

[/ QUOTE ]

cant u go back to the old software and release the new software when its fixed

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I'm late responding (and probably this has been pointed out by other developers), but would it were that easy.

If it is server side, the server code must be replaced. Like it or not, the best time for that is the wee hours. The lags are inconvenient, but are not likely worth a prime time shutdown/restart.

Then, if its server side, the question is "will the new client that so many of us have function with the rolled back server?" If not, then a plan has to be worked out to roll back the clients as well, with a "reverse update" to downgrade the clients.

I've been in FTP's situation when it comes to software releases. The worst thing they can do is rush out a half-thought-out fix due to user pressure to fix it NOW.

Contrary to what most are posting, the lag problems seem to be new to yesterday's build, and aren't associated with resiazble tables. I'm willing to give them reasonable time (2-3 days) to come up with a well-thought-out plan to fix the problem.

User riots are not the answer.

Jester

[GDadsForever]

Lag is quite prevalent still. thanks for the effort, doug, but a rollback is necessary.

[ADBjester]

[ QUOTE ]
Guys I don't know what all the fuss is about. You have to be willing to dish out a little dough to play a 2d card game on the internets these days. I am running an OctCore, with 10 exabytes of RAM and nitrous and have had no lag issues whatsoever on FTP.



[/ QUOTE ]

Feh, FTP worked fine even before this update (and I've since noted that I, too, have lag).

But you should see F.E.A.R. at 1600x1200 on this rig.... Mwhahahahahahaa....

Jester

[beach_bum]

[ QUOTE ]
One feature I would love to see:

If I get stacked at my table, give me a chance to reload immediately before the next hand. Currently it sits me out and then I have to post a dead blind to get back in. Not only did I just lose my stack but I have to pay more to get back in. Thank you.

Mega

[/ QUOTE ]


Yes, this is a glaring oversight on the part of the designers. How ridiculous that there is not an "auto-rebuy" preference.

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">
1. What are your thoughts on the fairly large bot thread (Mr. Gatorade etc etc...)?

- I'm no expert, but I've seen some of the evidence, and it looks damning to me. I can't publicly share that evidence, but I'd be willing to provide someone like Mike Haven with a sample of what we have and he can post his opinion.
</font>

[/ QUOTE ]

DO THIS.

[/ QUOTE ]



[/ QUOTE ]

[Snipe]

Lag certainly still occurs, and I also got a Yellow Screen of Death for the first time in a long time tonight.

Technical issues aside, the decreased decision time IS [censored] TERRIBLE. As someone who likes to play 6 - 10 tables, I feel as though FTP sent a very clear message that you do not want my business.

While in the long run, perhaps you speed up the game so single table fish can play at a reasonable pace and not get bored, you're going to lose a lot of support from high volume players who simply don't have enough time to make decisions.

Worse still, you'll gain play from bots who appreciate your putting human multi-tablers at more of a disadvantage.

NH FTP