Fencer, I think the creation of real-time, multi-player games is kinda cool. I hope my ideas and suggestions were not obscured by too many posts. This forum seems quite active. But, I think I am done here at the "Poker Tables". If I see an announcement about changes/fixes, I will be happy to come check them out again. Here are my final notes:
1. Wealthy players...This is not an issue of players having too many chips, if there is a max buy in at the tables. In fact, its what will keep players coming back. that drive to have the most chips or reach the next award level.
2. Speed...As I play the tables, it seems really "laggy" most of the time. When I make a choice, like clicking the "Call" button, there is too long of a delay when I see confirmation.
3. Graphics...I hope the graphics improve before you go "Live" with the game. Even if you just added a nice background image. Another suggestion is to get rid of the Square border around the players portraits. Or give a nice background...There is just to much "White Space".
4. Chips...When people place bets and those bets go to the pot (or Side Pot), Show a picture of chips along with the count. Set the font style of the chip count so it can have a transparent background, but still be easily seen againt the table image.
5. Seats...When you sit at a table, the whole table is re-drawn so you are always at the bottom. I don't like this. I think your portrait should sit where you click. Of course, this can be an option.
6. Time-out Players...I really think the way this is handled will affect how many long-term players there are. It should NEVER be possible for a timed-out player to win the pot! Other players should NEVER have to endure multiple, back to back timeouts from a player. I understand not wanting to be too harsh to players that legitimately have issues...but forcing a fold and dealing them out of subsequent hands (until that player takes some action) is not too harsh.
7. Expanded games...I hope this leads to other card games, like Hearts and Pinochle. There are many free poker (fake money) sites out there with AWESOME interfaces. It will be hard to compete against them. There are sites with good Hearts games. But, I have yet to find a sight with a good feature-rich Pinochle game. In fact, the only two reasons I play poker on THIS site is to help provide suggestions for you and because (at work), the other sites are blocked.
Fencer: So in the example of the flush, whomever has the highest spade in their hand is the winner, unless there are 5 spades all on the board that are higher than any in someones hand.... then it is again a tie and split pot
Fencer: I will search as well for something more official too..... but my understanding has always been that a kicker has to be any one of the five cards used in the hand.... but not one that makes up the hand.... for example, if we tie a hand with 2 pairs KK and QQ, then the next highest card is the kicker, if that card comes from someones hole cards, then they win the hand, if it comes from the board cards then they both share the same kicker and the hand is a tie and a split pot....
Speaking of bugs, I would like to clarify the kicker card problem because I was searching the web for a proper definition and some sources say that a kicker card must be always taken from player's hand (hole cards), while others describe a kicker as the highest unused card, no matter if it belongs to the table cards or not.
Currently, we use the first approach. But if there is a reliable and official source which proves that a kicker card can be any card (not used in the winning combination), I would like to know about it.
Thanks everyone for valuable comments and suggestions. I have been already thinking of a reward system and I think that Brains could be used in some way as well. All details will be closely described soon when the remaining bugs (flush comparation etc.) are fixed.
Czuch: Well there are some who currently do that just for ratings - and even though that bugs it, I think it is at a minimum of who does that (since there really is not point.) Yea, there will always be some to do it just because they feel they can or something.... but when there is nothing real at stake, then I believe cheating is kept to a minimum.
rod03801: Like Czuch said, some are saying to stop people from getting 1 million chips, reset everyone back to 1,000 chips every so often to restart everyone - that I'm against. (Players being about to get some chips daily so they can play daily - I'm all for that - and should be a goal to at least allow some to play at least once a day.)
Trading chips for Brains (or anything worth money) - I don't like that idea since it would encourage cheating. My opinion is to keep it worth nothing - with awards or ribbons or something as just "decoration" - making it something cool that people want to get to be "ahead", but not really worth anything of value other then respect & bragging rights.
rod03801: I dont think that is what he is suggesting.... when we are talking about resets, we mean that everyone be set back to a set number, like $1,000, and basically starting over.
But, people will always be able to get a new $1000 when they run out, but only once a day, which helps prevent people from just taking their $1000 and going all in pre flop, and if they lose they just go back get more money and try it again until they get lucky.... you have to have some sort of way to make free play money hold some sort of value, or the game integrity is really compromised (more than it already is using play money anyway)
coan.net: But if there are no "regular resets" of chips, are you suggesting that once you use up your 1000 chips, you can never play poker again? Seems to me the number of potential opponents will dwindle down to the point where there are only a few people playing.
I don't like the idea of regular resets of money either (other then the one after the testing is done because of some bugs)
But as I've mentioned before, I like the idea of awards & such for poker players (suggest before about possible "buying" awards - things that can be displayed on your profile & such) - "buying" them, as in turning in chips for them is a way to take some chips "off" the "market" so to speak.
But also the idea brought on another one - maybe weekly, there There should be "stats" of sorts, like:
Top Chip holder (once some people gain, this list would not change much) (along with a how long they have held a position)
Czuch: One problem I see with that idea is that people will play foolishly with their money if they know it will be reset later anyway.... play money already makes poker play different from the real thing, and resetting money would only make it worse.
puupia: Another option to keep the game interesting would be to reset everyones chips back to 1000 for example weekly. At the time of the reset the player with most chips would be announced the weekly champion. And after resetting the chips everyone could compete at same level again.
Czuch: Yes it will help. On daily basis house should collect rake the same amount it inserts new chips into the game. Of course there already is a lot of money and over long period of time the best players will get large portions of it. But if the overall amount of money in the system does not increase, also the money a single player can have is limited.
Another option to keep the game interesting would be to reset everyones chips back to 1000 for example weekly. At the time of the reset the player with most chips would be announced the weekly champion. And after resetting the chips everyone could compete at same level again.
puupia: Im not sure if this is the answer to help... but most poker games the house takes a cut of every pot, that does take back some money off the table, but I am not sure if it would really matter or not?
Czuch: The audit is that if there are any problems or cheats, nobody will play at your site.... poker sites are likely some of the best managed sites for bugs and hacking that there are!
Considering people are complaining that there are players here to use multiple nicks to inflate their ratings, I'm won't bet my money they won't use multiple nicks to play poker.
Note also that my main worry isn't bugs and hacking. How would I know of a poker site, that the software isn't rigged against me? How what I know which laws apply to a poker website, and how (if at all) those laws are enforced?
puupia: Players with 100k chips can force you to go all in all the time
Actually, they cannot not. They can do that 6 times, the 7th you will have 63.000 chips against their 38.000 chips (assuming you win - if you lose, there won't be a 7th time). While it's certainly an advantage to have more chips (although the advantage is less with limited bets), it's not a situation they can maintain for ever.
puupia: The people with the 100k stacks got that much by using a bug which Fencer has already fixed - so once Fencer takes the games out of testing mode, he is going to reset everyone's chips back to 1000... so hopefully no one will get ahead by using a bug.
Right before the bug was discovered (about a day ago or so), I had just broken 10,000 - being the 2nd highest with Pedro breaking 20,000 being the highest. So up to that point, the 10,000 MIN room with 100/200 was a pretty good high level.
(Side note: Once people do start getting more & more chips, bigger tables can be created - just no need right now while Fencer is still testing.)
******* PLUS - I would also agree to having a "max" amount you can bring to the table. Not a big deal on the limit tables, but on the no limit tables - Maybe something like can bring up to twice as much (so min 250 / max 500 - min 500/max 1000 - min 1000/max 2000)
puupia: If there were no bugs in the system, the overall chipleader would have approx. 25000 chips, a few others would be above ten thousand and most players would not exceed five thousand. That's not what I call flooded market.
And if we can agree that it is more fun to play with players who have similar amount of chips, we come back to my favourite subject: flooding the market :)
If money just keeps coming into the system and no money gets out, the difference between rich and poor will get bigger. However the amount of players is limited, so there will be less players you could have a nice game with. Poker here has been online for only few days(?) and the highest stacks already are in the 100k range. Imagine how many chips the best players will have for example after a year of playing?
puupia: It would be like black jack without table upper limits... all you have to do is double your bet every hand after you lose, and eventually you will win all your money back....
If someone makes you consider putting all your chips in on every play, you are either going to lose all your money or you are going to fold a lot of good hands... every once in awhile you will get hot, and double up a few times, then leave the table with your winnings, but you also have to remember that there is likely other people at the table as well, making it even harder to win.
Gordon Shumway: Of course the size of your stack compared to others is very important when considering betting. If 1000 chips is all you have you have it is very hard playing against someone witk 100k chips. Players with 100k chips can force you to go all in all the time, and someone who has lot less does not really want to call with all of their chips, unless they have a very good hand. And with 1000 chips its nearly impossible to bet 100k stack player out of the game if they have any kind of a hand. This is why maximum buy-ins should be in use.
To keep the game balanced everyone at the table should have similar amount of chips available! All the real poker sites have minumum and maximum buy-in limit in ring-games.
And no there is no games with high enough blinds. 100/200 are the highest and thats nothing for the 100k stacks allready around.
Gordon Shumway: You can't "bully" people in a cash game.
Well, if I have a gazillion chips to your 100, I can put you all in pre flop every hand, with very little risk to my stack.... sure you can fold, but even if you have pocket aces, i will get lucky and beat you, I guarantee that I can wipe you out or at least make it so you dont want to play anymore....
Czuch: The audit is that if there are any problems or cheats, nobody will play at your site....
There has been cheating on both Absolute Poker and Ultimate Bet, yet there are still people playing on both sites, and they still make a healthy profit. And even the owners were involved in the scandal.
poker sites are likely some of the best managed sites for bugs and hacking that there are!
True for some sites, like PokerStars, definitely not true for other, more shady, sites.
I would never play for real money anywhere but on one of the big, trusted sites. Brain entry tournaments would be fun though.
Czuch: I just noticed that after the hand, it says the winners and how much they won, but not the hand they won with, and before it did?
Well, it seems to be work ing properly right now again.... I know when everyone else folds it will not show what hand won.... but there is probably some sort of bug.... I think it was when we both went all in, or maybe three of us did, and it said who won, but didnt show what hand won it, I will keep an eye out for it to happen again though....
I think it would be more convenient, after entering a raise, to be able to use our "enter" button to submit it, as well as the "raise button in the game..... just like when we type a message, simply using our enter button works there very well.
Fencer:real cash would be cool...but keep in mind you would have to expand your means of accepting money...ie usd it would also be a form of income for brainking...as the house should keep a small percentage of the pots, or tournament buy-ins.
Fencer: Would people be interested in real cash games here?
No doubt some people would. I will not be any of them. And even if I were to play poker for cash in real life, I wouldn't do so on a website. There's audit that garantees me everything works as it should work.