Im not sure this is such a good thing, as there are lots of PGAs in the game. Perhaps I'm missing something.

The bounty idea is kinda nice but I still havent figured out how it works. The bounty goes to zero whenever I come back to a table a lil later.

Teams: Meant to be a meta game and not really an in game feature although I see how it may affect in game play in a negative way. Lets see what happens with it in Jan.

Bounty: Its a 20 game bounty. Whoever is in the lead after the 20 games gets the bounty. You'll still get the reward if your not at the table after the 20 games.

Wow, I never knew that! But you get the bounty immediately or only at the end of the month?

What's the bounty, the ammount u earned at the top?

What if it reaches 18 games and the month comes to an and?

The bounty is the amount in the bar on the side. The winner gets it after the 20th game. It will roll to the next month if it doesn't reach 20 I believe.

In terms of team games my idea (somewhere in forums years ago) was to play 2v2 3v3:
Team A versus Team B

Team lineups created dynamically for each game.

Something like:
red+purp+blue=Team A
green+yellow+brown=Team B

Just one game fun.
No month tables/ranks etc.

Thoughts about the bounty-system.

The concept is quite funny indeed, though I did not expect it to be. It is good to have very low bounties on 0 and 100 tables keeping the bots from filling the leaderboard.

For 500 and 2k the bounties can get very high (34k on 2k recently). This large amount of points is given to the guy who had the biggest benefit of the last 20 games further boosting his position in the competition.

A reward for the best and a lower reward for the runner-up is fine in a competitive game.

However, you have the other end of the list with those guys that have either been the worst players or most unlucky. I would assume that some of them cannot join the higher tables any more.

So here's an idea open for discussion:
Reduce the gains of the first two a bit and refund the worst 2 or 3 with their losses or a percentage of that. The idea is to enable more players to join higher tables and to somehow reduce the risk for those that cannot play more games.

What are your thoughts?


Annotation: No, it is not about getting me points back. I don't recall ending up in one of the mentioned positions, although I continuously complain about my bad luck. Just to keep you from comments in that direction and focused on the question. No Louis-bashing please here, open a new threat for that if you have to.

Okay. Will think about it. I like the idea of enabling players to play higher tables.

My idea is to ban Colo and change the game back to how it was aka BC (before Colo)