"True" kdice players? You're off your nut.

Maybe if us established players didn't act so high and mighty all the time and if the newer players would actualy use the chat box and communicate a happy medium could be reached.

Honestly table limits that force intregration of the 1k tables with newer/older players would go a long way to solving the problem of a kidce "elite" class.

truce kdice player? do you mean those who cheat and spam?

I mean I think I'm not the most credible person, fine, whatever.

but I know problems when I see them. Not a single day goes by that a new 1ker says it's hard to play on the 1k tables.

that's isn't fair, and shouldn't be the way this game is played.

doesn't say?

With the monthly reset, everyone has the same odds to reach higher tables. After a week, every month the same players are on the top spots. Elite? maybe, deserved? maybe too.

Monte explained us in the forum some advices about the behaviour in your first 1k games, he did it for free, what was his profit on do it?... being insulted. Nice.

@ Int: "shouldn't be the way this game is played"... I agree you, but another thought on the matter: if we are always the same 15-20 people playing at the same tables, we have high probabilities on play together again. I don't play the games like if they were the only game I play, I guess it's a process, I'll try to be fair and I'll wait people to be fair with me in future games. If there is a new player you can't see this process clearly, that's unfair, but I guess that's the right way to play this game. That's what I did in may when I reached the old 2K elo tables.

@ Sam: I totally agree with you. Table limits are necessary and would help a lot to the "integration", 500 tables would help too, sure. I feel ridiculous playing a 1000 account on a 10 table, as much as I feel ridiculous playing a 5000 on a 200 table, so I won't do it. Easy.

I am reviewing what I have written and my english sucks, sorry about it.

I know what you mean nuff, but the problem with being nice to someone to hope they will be nice in the future is that it causes a cycle of favours which newer players don't have.

I want to use the ebay example here, like feedback, in that regular players have higher feedback (you're more likely to truce with them/place them higher) than someone you don't know (low feedback, uncertain of intentions, they will get angrier because they feel they are singled out).

in the long run I think it's the newer 1ks that are more likely to get negative points when there is an unspoken truce at the table, or when a "regular" player starts whining.

which brings me to another point, a trustworthy meter?

kinda like a digg/ebay system?

obv I'd be pretty low, but someone like nufflis would be pretty high.

thats a great idea. and you can only vote on the person's trustworthiness if you play at least 5 games with them. otherwise, there will way too many bad judgments of pgas that simply werent there. in order to make a worthwhile judgment, you must play at least a certain number of games with the person.

I've just learned 3 new words with "worth" on it. Cool.

Thanks int & monte.