• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Warp last won the day on October 16

Warp had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

137 The Beast

1 Follower

About Warp

  • Rank
    River Trollin
  1. Reflections usually use environment mapping (which is a technique for "cheap" reflections that has existed for almost as long as 3D computer graphics rendering has), and it's a relatively imprecise technique. (There are newer and better, and of course heavier, algorithms for better reflections, but from what I see, I estimate that PP is using a simple environment mapping technique.) OTOH, even environment mapping wouldn't cause eg. the top of a table being red to make reflections under the table to be likewise (unless the underside of the table is red as well). Of course this is just for mirror-type reflections. Lighting is different, and the oldest and cheapest way is by using lightmaps. These are usually generated with a radiosity algorithm (which causes light to be realistically bounced from walls. While light maps are extremely efficient and light to render, their downside is that they only work for static lights and scenery.) Perhaps they pumped up the radiosity in Unreal Engine way too high.
  2. In these situations you should always save a video capture. On the PS4 you do it with the "share" button. To my understanding, the Xbox One has a similar feature. (In other words, both consoles constantly keep the last n minutes in a video capture stream that can be saved to a separate file. IIRC on the PS4 side it keeps up to the 10 last minutes, or since the last save or screen capture. I don't know how much the XB1 keeps.) On the PC side this doesn't happen automatically. If you are using an Nvidia card, you can turn on this exact feature by using the GeForce Experience app (with Nvidia cards it will have a very minimal, essentially almost zero, impact on performance. This especially so with light games like PP.) I'm sure AMD cards have a similar feature. On the consoles you don't have to do anything to have this feature; it's always on. On the PC side you have to actively turn it on, and it's understandable if you don't, but it would of course be nice to capture such happenstances.
  3. Slow-playing is a perfectly legit strategy (and can net you quite a lot), but of course you have to always be aware of the risk of letting the other players get more cards to possibly make a better hand. I would be very wary of slow-playing if I had two-pair or even trips after the flop. A straight and a flush are probably very safe, and of course a full house is even better (of course the chance of still being beaten is non-zero, but extremely small). Quads would be the jackpot, and you should probably always slow-play if you get them. As for somebody going constantly all-in every single round, rather obviously your only choice (especially if in head-to-head) is to call at some point. It would be interesting to know what the game-theoretical threshold for your pocket cards would be to maximize your chances of winning in this kind of game where the opponent makes an all-in every single time.
  4. I suppose lowering the amount of rep gotten from table refills would disincentivize people to some extent from spamming refills, but I would have preferred a lot more if a delay would have been implemented between refills (ie. after refilling somebody else's table item, there would like something like a 5-10 minute delay before you could do it again). But anyway, thank you for doing something about it.
  5. That expression confused me as well. It's not like this was a bug report about some rare glitch, or something. But anyway, thanks to ClearConscious for responding. I really hope this isn't solved by simply making the notification appear less often (such as just saying how many times you have been gifted in the past 5 minutes or something), and instead they limit the number of times you can refill the table by putting a cool-off period to it. It would make levels mean something again. (Another possibility is to make refilling more and more expensive the more you do it during a single game. If it eg. doubles in price every time, that ought to stop people from abusing it to level up.)
  6. (Disclaimer: I'm a complete noob at poker. Essentially my only experience is with PP. It only applies to PP. Don't take anything of what I write as serious advice, especially if you want to play somewhere else with real money.) I don't know how well this translates to real-life poker that uses actual money, or online poker that does likewise (because when real money is at stake people tend to be more cautious), but at least in PP I have noticed certain patterns to look for. For instance: - If a player loses a very large portion of their stack in one round (eg. they go from about 10k to 4k or less), it's highly likely that they will go all-in in the next round, or within the next few rounds. (I'd say, based on experience, there's at least an 80% chance of this. The larger the loss, the higher the chance.) Thus you should be aware of this, and for the next few rounds fold pre-flop unless you think you have a hand that you can call that all-in from that player. (If you try to limp with a bad hand, there's a high chance that player will go all-in, and you'll just fold and lose that bet.) Learn to "read" your opponents by observing their betting behavior: - If somebody raises pre-flop, it's highly likely they have at least one picture card or ace in hand, or a pair. (Sometimes, of course, some people raise pre-flop even with a bad hand, but from my experience this tends to be rarer.) - If everybody just limped pre-flop, and a high card hits the table at any point, and somebody makes a largish bet, they probably have that card in hand. (If this is post-flop, they might have one of the earlier cards in hand, and they checked just to see what others would do.) Of course they could also have something even better. For example, if an ace hits the table on the turn, and somebody goes all-in, they have an ace in hand (or something even better), or they are bluffing like mad. In either case it's better to just fold unless you have something better. (Be wary of slow-players, though. Some people try to lure others to bet by pretending they have nothing. But these tend to be rare.) - If everybody just checks in the flop and in the turn, try making a "feeler bet". If they have nothing, they'll fold. This especially so the less players are participating. If somebody raises your feeler bet, they have something good (or are bluffing, but that's hard to tell, of course). - Note that just because somebody called your feeler bet, that doesn't mean they have something; they might be simply wanting to see what card comes next. If you think they might not have anything, make another feeler bet. Sometimes maybe make a larger "feeler" bet to induce people to fold. (If somebody calls your large bet, then they might have something good.) - Slow-playing: If you have an absolutely unbeatable hand prior to the river, very often you should "slow-play". In other words, just check and see if somebody else will bet. If you rush to make a large bet, there's a high chance you'll just scare everybody to fold. - However: Slow-playing can also bite you in the backside, especially if your hand was not all that good after all (eg. two-pair and trips are the most usual case where slow-playing might backfire). If you slow-play with a decent (but not absolutely crushing) hand, chances are that somebody will get a winning hand later. Not large chances, of course, but chances still. Remember the old poker wisdom: It's better to win small than lose big. If you think it's better to scare the others to fold right now, then bet rather than slow-play. Learn when it's good to fold: - When somebody makes a big bet, and you are completely unsure whether you have a better hand, consider if you can afford losing that much. If you can't afford it, then it might just be better to fold even if they are bluffing, or your hand is only semi-strong (eg. you have a pair of jacks, for instance; one of the jacks being on the table). This depends enormously on the situation at hand. (I believe this is part of the "playing like a rock" strategy. It's not necessarily bad.) For example in a ranked tournament, if there are still six players left, it might be better to still play cautiously. If there are only three players left (you included), then it may be more advantageous to take the risk (because you have significantly less to lose). - You should use the same principle with bluffing: Can you afford to lose the amount you are thinking to bluff with? (Remember that if you bluff too little, somebody might just call to see if they get lucky.)
  7. Levels used to have meaning, and I think it's a complete shame that they don't anymore. Before, at the start of the game, you could look at people's info and get a quick picture of, approximately, what to expect. Levels <50 meant noobs (or possibly good players who have just recently started), and >100 meant experienced players, perhaps to watch for. Nowadays, when people get to the thousands of levels, they mean nothing. (Not that levels were an absolute indication of anything even before, but now they are completely meaningless.) It's an abuse of the system. People are essentially buying levels, and spamming people with notifications at the same time. Removing the notification would solve the latter problem, but I think putting a cool-off period to table refills would be a better one. I don't think anybody needs to be able to do this. As for "it's their chips they are wasting", when you are in the tens of millions of chips, those table refills are for all intents and purposes free. You can easily gain that money back.
  8. Have you ever noticed that even though there are literally thousands of people participating in all top pro poker tournaments every year, you always see the same faces in the finals? Why do you think that is? Is the game rigged to favor them?
  9. Oh, so you are just a troll, in the actual sense. If you are here just to annoy and make fun of people, then perhaps a moderator could do something about this?
  10. How about just limiting how many times you can refill the table (or anybody else's table item for that matter) in a given time? In other words, when you have refilled, you can't do so for the next 10 minutes or so. The option would simply not be available during this cool-off period. Unlikely for this to happen, though. A popular thread asking for this has been there for like a month, and developers have not responded to it. Or to anything else for that matter. Somehow I get the feeling that they aren't even reading the forum anymore. Even troublemakers aren't getting warned or sanctioned anymore by any moderator or staff member.
  11. Yeah, I'm sure that the game selects the winners right from the start. After all, the game has been created by the Illuminati in order to control your mind and make it easier for the Reptilians to invade the Earth.
  12. VR has turned out to be pretty much effectively a failure already, especially so on the PC side, perhaps (so far) a bit less on the PS4 side. (I do own a PSVR myself, so I would really love for it to be successful, but I can't deny reality.) All three major VR headsets combined have sold in a year less than a typical console sells in its first week. (Oculus Rift and the HTC Vive, combined, have sold significantly less than a million units. A typical console sells that in its first week. I don't have PSVR sales figures right now. It might have sold more than the other two combined.) And, what's worse, sales of the PC headsets has been pretty much effectively on a halt for the last half a year or so (PSVR might still see some sales.) Of course VR headsets aren't exactly comparable to a game console, but I think the comparison isn't completely unfair either. The other major sign is the abysmal library of triple-A VR games. There are tons of small indie games and demos, and some "mid-sized" games, but only a few games that could be considered "triple-A". (Even on the PS4 side there aren't many VR games that could be considered "triple-A". The only one that comes to mind is Resident Evil 7, which barely qualifies. Great game, by the way.) This actually creates a vicious cycle: Game developers aren't creating many triple-A VR games because adoption rates are so poor, and adoption rates will remain poor as long as there are no triple-A games. So the problem just feeds itself. In this context, it's understandable why game developers might not be rushing to add VR support to their existing games. After all, adding support is not completely trivial. It's not like you just turn a switch in Unreal Engine and presto, we have VR support. It requires more than that. Even though PP is the kind of game where such support would be unusually easy, as things like motion sickness wouldn't be any problem, it's still not completely trivial. The user interface would need serious redesign for the VR mode (both in menus and during the game). Code needs to be tweaked to work in VR mode (for example they need to decide what should be done if the camera (ie. the player's "head") goes through the table, for instance). All the animations that currently happen when someone wins a round, or goes all-in, would need to be tweaked (if nothing else, not shown in VR mode). It would all of course be completely doable, but it's not a zero amount of work. And the benefits would be dubious. I would love to be able to play PP with the PSVR, but I suspect that I would just try it a couple of times, and then return to the normal mode. It would be more of a gimmick than anything else. The VR headset is a bit cumbersome to use in the long run, and the marvel of playing the game in VR would fade relatively quickly. The effective low resolution of PSVR doesn't exactly help matters (in PP it would probably be horrendous, unless they significantly pump up antialiasing settings, at least on the PS4 Pro.) For the developers it would mean countless hours of work to adapt the game for VR, just to have most PSVR owners try the game a couple of times in VR, only to return to normal mode. I'd rather first see proper 4k support in PP. I believe this would be much less work than PSVR support. (It might even work more like just turning a switch in Unreal Engine, although I'm not acquainted with PS4 development using said engine. The only source of trouble would be if turning 4k resolution on would drop the framerate significantly, in which case some tweaking, and thus work, would need to be done.)
  13. If it's using an ELO ranking system, the scoring is consistent. You get less points for beating weaker players and more for beating stronger players. If you play the exact same game again, with all the participant's ranking points being the same, and the result of the game being the same, you will get exactly the same amount of points. It's not random. It's completely consistent. As for having "no control over" who you play with, that's standard practice in all kinds of online games. The alternative with PP is that you'll probably have to wait for an hour for a game that has exactly the kind of players you want. And it might never happen. If you are eg. a platinum player and you get a game against 4 golds and one silver (like happened to me yesterday), just play smart and don't lose. (Me, I was this close to winning, but then the other guy got a really annoying lucky streak and I ended up second. I still got points.)