Forum
upping the ante
|
Ryan wrote
at 3:49 PM, Thursday September 6, 2007 EDT
Currely we have this:
min: 0/10, 100, 500, 2500 ante: 2, 4, 20, 100 Where min is the table minimum and ante is the ante per round. Things are a little bit too stable. I'd like the scoring to be more dramatic. So I'd like to up the ante and lower the table minimums to this: min: 0/10, 200, 1000, 5000 ante: 4, 20, 100, 500 With this points will be introduced into the system faster, (current points will be devalued somewhat). You can also play higher risk games quicker. This will let you get a high score quicker if you're winning games. Thoughts? |
« First
‹ Previous
Replies 21 - 24 of 24
|
RNDbot 1 wrote
at 4:52 PM, Tuesday September 11, 2007 EDT But rnd would roll straight 6's.
|
|
leekstep wrote
at 6:42 AM, Wednesday September 12, 2007 EDT Adeimus-
It seems that way to me, too. You can still have fun with this game, as long as you completely ignore the score. In the new system, playing for points is rarely playing to win. You're almost always better off resigning without trying to win the game (unless you happen to be the guy with the lucky start). I wish they would change the payout to give more weight on the final standings rather than the round-by-round dominance. |
|
fuzzycat wrote
at 11:28 AM, Wednesday September 12, 2007 EDT Doubling the ante just doubles the inflation.
Why not tenfold the ante, and simply add a null to any number, same with min tables as ante! Or why not add 2 or 3 nulls to the points! Bigger numbers is bigger dynamics? This is just redicolous! |
|
nodice4u wrote
at 2:28 PM, Friday December 3, 2010 EST More
|
