Dont*

I agree with potato. I do not give Vanilla Dice any benefit that I don't give to everyone else at the table. I already posted on this, but if I am stopped from playing with players that play at big tables a lot I will not want to play.

Now if Vanilla Dice and I are both online I will feel bad if I take his spot in a game. =(

What is the RC?

And yes, I am serious.

Its a monteism standing for redicilous correlation.

I blame Monte for the stupid term but it does describe the PGA dector very well

how about:
change how RC affects the game:
if someone is rc'd with someone else at the table, they get some lil icon or other visual indicator.
when a game starts with any RC'd members, there is a 15 second window for any players to opt to stand.
Then noone has to play with RC ppls, but anyone can, if they personally think the RC is faulty.

I know it's not ideal, but it'd be an improvement, no?

Flagtardation killed kdice, this was just exploited by monte, so as much as I give the credit to monte Ryan deserves some as well.

Bring back the surrender flag, stop the madness.

PS. You get RC'd less if you don't flag like a bitch in the 3rd round every game (This comment directed at everyone, not one specific player). If you don't think you do this you are ignorant. I even admit to doing this, although it tends to be for laughs more then serious but whatever. Flagtards.

PPS. Yes I know it is hard to take advice from the person calling you a fucktard, but it doesn't mean that it is bad advice.

You wouldn't have such a problem if you just stopped cheating...

AHAHAHA^^^ YEA........ RIGHT!!!!!

The problem isn't really that the RC is flawed. It's that the group of people at the top score tables is small and people know each other and tend to do well with each other consciously or subconsciously. They typically play against relatively unknown players (and there's nothing wrong with this as an individual strategy).

The RC is still fair since it works the same whether you and another player do well together against 2000 other players or against 20 other players. If you consistently do well with another player against only 20 other players with a correlation that is "too much", then i think its fair to the other 18 players to mix up the games a bit. If this means less games at higher tables then it's ok... its better than having a friend-barrier to players.

I believe the RC helps make the game to game relationships a little less important which leads to purer games at the top tables.

In the short term I see how its frustrating not being able to get a game together. This however is just a table limit issue and not an RC issue. The solution to getting more higher games going is simply to have more players with higher scores. I could drop the top table limits down a bit next month (maybe 1000 and 2500 instead of 2500 or 10000) or increase the point flow at the lower tables to inject more points into the system. I think this would be a more positive solution to the RC issue. Thoughts?


PS, yellowfin: The RC wouldn't detect something if you came 7th or as the result of a single game. It takes time for it to make a decision. If anything, that game would push you in the right direction to show that you're NOT RC'd with someone.

Ryan, I think that if you increase the point gain at the lower tables that it is just more incentive for players to stay at that level, since they can now score points more quickly at that level.