Welcome to The Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads and etc.

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/23/2018 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    Yet, I don't. How is that possible? The only possible explanation is that the game is targeting you in particular, and rigging the game against you and in favor of your opponents whenever you are playing. After all, consider that this always happens in favor of your opponents, never in favor of you, according to your own account ("I will miss 11+ outs for 2 hours straight in this game while I watch the same players rip off 2 and 4 outers seemingly every time they play a hand.") If the game where simply flawed and badly programmed, then you would sometimes notice this trend favoring you, at the cost of your opponents. Sometimes you would get astronomically unlikely lucky streaks, winning with really crappy hands, while your opponents will be losing with their picture cards and pocket aces. But according to your own testimony, this never favors you. It always favors your opponents. Therefore the only possible explanation is that the game is specifically targeting you, and benefiting your opponents, whenever you in particular are playing. You must be in some kind of blacklist, for whatever reason. Or, you know, and I know this might sound silly, but the other explanation is that you are just imagining things. Would you seriously think that the game has been rigged specifically against you, so that the allegedly incorrect odds are always against you, never in favor of you? Would you seriously think that you have been put in some kind of blacklist, where you specifically are being targeted for discrimination when it comes to odds? A different hypothesis has been presented a million times already: Prominence Poker is not like "normal" poker for one reason: People don't play with real money here. It's all play money. Therefore they have nothing to lose. And because they have nothing to lose, they will keep playing with hands that any experienced poker player would have folded if playing for real money. When you have 5 other players playing like they don't care how much they lose, the amount of bad beats that you witness will inevitably increase. The problem with professional poker is that you don't get to see how many bad beats there would have been, had players not folded, and kept continuing betting like there's no tomorrow. You don't get to see what happens if someone does a completely crazy all-in with something like a 9-3 off color.
  2. 2 points
    The answer is we would like to keep updating the game, but there's factors outside our control, without getting into too much detail.
  3. 2 points
    Comparing playing Hold ‘Em professionally to playing Prominence Hold ‘Em is a stretch to begin with. While some players may have bought chips to buffer their stacks so that they can play in the high stakes ring games, there is no “real” money involved in these games. It is a very loose environment in most cases and trying to apply the same playing style you would use at the Bellagio lends itself to seeing bad beat after bad beat. I see a regular cast of characters at many of the $1M/$2M tables after playing this game for several years and I respect many of them because they play smart, tight poker. Bad beats happen so often because so many hands in ring games go to the river. How people don’t get that is beyond me. There is no rigging and the game engine is solid. Either you can handle the loose play from some, or you can’t. It’s that simple. Hell, I play loose some nights just to rankle people. I got dealt four pocket pairs out of six hands the other night, flopped trips on two of those four, and busted AK in a pre-flop all-in race. That’s pretty much a coin flip. The guy I busted called me a hacker, etc... Nope, just poker.
  4. 2 points
    I'm winning enough,but playing it since start I see the faults in the game..including how the card play works. So much weird ways to get beaten that dont happen in the real world,at the rate it does in this game. Having 80 mill i know my Poker. When as you state it's not cost effective and at the same time i read in other posts that there are thousands of players active each month..then i wonder what it takes to support a game as simple as Poker. And also it's a reminder to buyers of game released by certain companies...that they are not too committed to keep updating the game. You see my point. As theoretically the best Poker game for the consoles,its a pitty that the company do not see the value in showing support for their product. It's not all about the money it's also about the reputation it gives, abandoning the game and its users.
  5. 2 points
    I can't say for sure that the cards are randomized properly, but I think that experienced poker players all know that there are runs of bad cards that can last for a long time, and then runs of good cards too. I've had games where I lost every hand, but usually it's because I folded a lot of hands that ended up being straights, flushes, and full houses. I still don't consider it a bad choice to fold those hands because it's better to have a solid strategy than it is to play hoping you'll get lucky.
  6. 2 points
    Welcome to the forum! The reason you won the hands is a result of the actions taken by the other players at the table. To suggest that PP is responsible for how the people you play against is a stretch. Come join us at the higher ranked tables and see if your results are the same.
  7. 2 points
    Because most people don't understand randomness and statistics. (Most think they do, but they don't.) This happens all the time, with many similar games where randomness is involved, often even in real life. For example, when playing Magic the Gathering, you constantly see people, who are getting mana-screwed or mana-flooded saying that they didn't "shuffle the deck enough". Many/most players have this (mistaken) notion that if a deck is well-shuffled, then you should get a relatively steady frequency of land cards, and that if you get an unusually large amount of consecutive non-lands ("mana-screw"), or consecutive lands ("mana-flood"), especially at the beginning of the game, then the deck wasn't "shuffled enough". Yet they are completely mistaken. In fact, it's the exact opposite: The fact that they sometimes get "too many" or "too few" lands shows that the shuffling is adequate. That's normal and to be expected, with good randomization. On the contrary, if they never got such situations, and they got a steady pace of lands on each game, that would actually be the unusual thing. In fact, that would be a bit suspicious. (One common form of cheating is manipulating the deck so that lands are distributed evenly. Having your opponent shuffle your deck is designed to counter this form of cheating, among others.) When computer games are involved, claims of "bad rng" almost always pop up, when randomness is a key component of the game. People think that something having 90% of success rate means that if they fail "too many times", there must be something wrong with the random number generation. ("Too many times" is a highly, highly subjective feeling that human players have. We are amazingly biased when it comes to noticing patterns. We pay attention to anomalies and ignore normal events.) Pattern recognition is an essential part of our brain biology. In fact, we couldn't even survive if we didn't have it. However, pattern recognition has its downsides in that it makes us see patterns also in things where there are none, and randomness is precisely one of those things. As said, we are highly biased, we tend to pay too much attention to certain things and forget the rest, and we tend to see patterns where there really aren't any, and thus we easily jump to conclusions that we really shouldn't. In addition to all that, you have to consider something that has already been discussed like a hundred times: Playing poker with free money makes people behave differently than if their actual money were at stake. Because people act differently, it causes different patterns to emerge during gameplay. If you notice a pattern that's different here than in some real-money online poker game, you may well attribute it to the wrong thing.
  8. 2 points
  9. 2 points
    LOL. You're forgetting about WSOP FHP in 2014. If you remember back to 2013-2014, we also had this *SAME* long discussion for that game too. I know that ClearConscious remembers what I'm talking about, LOL. Back in 2014, a member named ProdigalGil started *numerous* and *long* threads complaining about the RNG for WSOP FHP. In fact, that discussion was so heated that he even tried to get Pipeworks to let him see the internal algorithm by offering to sign an NDA. So what's my point? My point is that WSOP FHP had a *totally different* shuffling algorithm from PP ---- yet the same members started complaining that the RNG was artificially promoting river suckouts a high percentage of the time. Sound familiar? It's the exact same thing you're all claiming today. Yet the 2 games had 2 totally different shuffling algorithms. LOL. How can 2 totally different algorithms promote the *exact* same non-random event? (river suckouts, but no other irregularities) What a coincidence. :-) That's what Mayor was trying to tell you. Mayor was correct in saying that even if they changed to a totally different algorithm (or used real dealers to deal every hand, LOL) --- the same people would still complain of a rigged deck or a non random RNG whenever they suffer a bad beat by donks on the river. ClearConscious and Mayor have shown us the results of 2 billion shuffles. They didn't have to show us that data, but they did anyway. Their data matches up perfectly with real life statistics. That's game over right there. Mayor has proven his point and you have lost your argument. Another thing... Since you have 30 million chips and are a great player who is winning a lot more than losing, how can you claim that bad beats are happening a high percentage of the time? If that were really true then you'd be losing your stacks a high percentage of the time and wouldn't be a winner overall. Thus your own chip stack proves what Mayor has been saying ---- that the deck is statistically accurate and the bad beats you're experiencing are just NORMAL VARIANCE which happens on every poker table. The game is awesome and fair. That's why "Pure Hold'em" (the competition) has so few players that I couldn't even get a $1k table going without being assigned mostly AI-computer opponents to play against, LOL. It's a ghost town over there at the Pure Hold'em tables. Oh, and the new game you mentioned "Just Deal with It" (coming out in November) is not a serious poker game. It's a silly "party card game" with several card games included, with a silly bright kiddie atmosphere. You'll never get a serious poker following on that silly game. Stop letting your emotions skew your logic. This argument has been settled a long time ago. 2 billion shuffles proves the point. Case closed.
  10. 2 points
    I think not much is gonna happen with Prominence Poker om the future. I presume they dont earn loads of money on this game. Reminds me of how Pure Holdem ended up. Lesser updates/changes and longer between the updates. Til there were no update. A Poker game have to evolve and include new things as time goes on. Prominence Poker.. is more or less the same game now as when it appears. So the result is that players move on and the developer earns no money.
  11. 1 point
    Since summer 2018 there have been no update..no roadmap..no communication regarding the development of Prominence Poker. Is the game "Dead" from the developers point of view ?? Maybe the (low) income from the game did not justify further development.... Either way,it would have been nice with some words from someone related to the development of Prominence Poker. Thanks in advance...
  12. 1 point
    Originally I agreed with the devs on this topic, but after purchasing a Nintendo Switch this past Christmas holiday my mindset has changed. The NS is highly underrated. If Warframe can run on the NS then I'm sure PP will have no problem. Overall though, the NS is a kids console. My wife and I bought one for our 9 yr old, and she loves it. I play around on it when she's not on it. I would love to play PP on the NS, especially since the current poker lineup is non existent. I'm not sure how many adults are using the NS though... Kids, it's time to learn poker. 😜
  13. 1 point
    Seems like a no-brainer! What is the status of porting this game to the Nintendo Switch? Any plans, when? If not, why not? I would play this non-stop on my switch!
  14. 1 point
    Just started back playing after a long hiatus. In regards to updates, we didn't get everything we wanted. But at least matchmaking for Ranked Games is working properly, it seems. I still think this game has potential to be far greater, but it seems we have to settle with what we have currently. With that being said I think the devs did a great job with the foundation for this game, but the lack of updates and improvements is disappointing. I was ready to spend some money on this game since it was free to play. F2P games must operate a certain way in order to gain, keep, and have a healthy profitable player base. That operation must include continuous updates, improvements, and digital content. We didn't get that here. Another game I play by the name of Apex Legends has had to figure out the F2P model the hard way too. Creating a F2P game and keeping it vibrant is not unique to just Prominence, it applies to all games. The F2P model has been working out great for Epic, I don't understand why other devs won't follow suit. But anyways... beggars can't be choosers 😜
  15. 1 point
    Hello PP community, I have been playing Prominence Poker on the Xbox One for a few months now, but I'm new to the community. I play tournaments most of the time and enjoy the challenge of climbing the tiers. My gamertag is HollowEcho64 Hope to see you at the tables
  16. 1 point
    The advantage is you're not giving away free information. Not that most people are paying all that close of attention on Prominence, but generally speaking in poker it's not a good idea to let people repeatedly see how you play your hands. They'll start to identify patterns in your betting style and have a better idea in later hands what you have before you show them. This makes you easier to play against. show 1 card to get the muck it reward rather than both. Stopping short of spouting off a bunch of unsolicited advice, bear in mind how people are going to react when you show hands depending on whether you're showing good hands or bluffs. It will certainly influence how people react to your bets in later hands.
  17. 1 point
    If it's any comfort, you're not alone. I too have been going back and forth in the platinum ranking for the kast 10 days. Yesterday, I flopped a Ace high flush and overbet the rest of the hand, only to be beat by a player who made a full house on the river, 2's over 7's. Today, my Q's over J's full house was over ruled by K's over Q's when he just checked thru the river, and let me destroy myself. Two seasons ago, I reached the diamond rank with 1 hour left in the season. Last season. I drug myself up from silver to finish 4 points into platinum. Currently I'm at 1246, so we shall see what the rest of the season does to me.
  18. 1 point
    Reduce the ranked rating penalty for playing on lower ranked tables. I know pipeworks haven't been active for ages on steam prominence poker but this change would improve the game so much now that the player base is incredibly low. Players are penalized for playing lower tables so they do not. Make the same rating lose or win for all ranked tables, problem solved.
  19. 1 point
    You guys know what's REALLY fun? Sitting in a game for an hour and a half, and winning ZERO HANDS ALL F***ING GAME. And no, it's not like I'm just playing stupid moves or betting on stupid plays. No. What I'm saying is, I play a game for an hour and 30 minutes and EVERY SINGLE HAND I GET IS ABSOLUTE SHIT. NOTHING. ZILCH. NADA. This game is actually so unfair sometimes, it's unbelievable. I'll get the weekly bounties and play a game, come back and it tells me I won 0 hands during the game. I'm not a bad player. But this game is rigged, and a waste of time.
  20. 1 point
    -LN- It's called evolution. Back in the day, Pipeworks created a poker game called WSOP full house pro which ran on the original XB, the shut it down to create something else. Pipeworks is in business to create video games, PP is just one example, the bean-counters at Pipeworks direct their efforts to maximize profits.. As for support, I alerted Pipeworks of the Spam that had invaded this forum They corrected it. If you have a problem with PP, why don't you send management a PM?
  21. 1 point
    Here's one for you - I was playing conservatively and bombed out of a tournament that I sat in going up and down for an hour. First one out. Negative 30 points. So I decided to play another and try to get some points back. The very first hand I'm big blind and I get Ace-9 of spades. Nice hand, but I just check with the big blind. The flop comes and there's a 9, a J, and a 3. I've got middle pair and an Ace, but there's only one spade so my flush isn't looking good. I check to see what happens and everyone checks around. The turn comes and it's a 9. Woohoo I have three of a kind. One guy bets 450 so I raise him to 2k, but he re-raises me to 4k. I look carefully again at the board and a straight is not possible, nor a flush. I suppose he might have a full house but he'd have to have a 9 and there's only one more out there.... I'm thinking he has some kind of pocket pair and the only thing that beats me is if he has two jacks in his hand to make three jacks total. Maybe he just has top pair. Or, he puts me on a jack and he has two queens or two kings or two aces. That would be just fine with me. I mean what are the chances he will make a set on the river anyway. I decide to go all in. He calls me and I was right he has a pocket pair of 10's. Personally I wouldn't have gone all in with 10's if a jack is on the board, but ok.. whatever. It's his loss, I'm 99% sure I will win this with three 9's. What comes up on the river? A ten of course. Trip 9's beaten by trip 10's. I'm busted out and just lost 60 points in two tournaments in a row. So I really do feel your pain too.
  22. 1 point
    Tell that to the unluckiest player on the planet, yep, me! 99% of my hands end up losing, no matter how I play. Every pair I get is beaten by a better pair, every 2 pair by 3 of a kind, every 3 by a straight, every straight by a better one or flush, every flush by a better one, full house or 4 of a kind, every full house by a better one & so on & i'm not even joking. That's assuming I actually get a hand. Nearly everything I throw away ends up winning & everything I play ends up losing because I don't even get a pair. I can't get a break. If I land a full house, say 3 8's & 2 kings, my opponent has 3 kings & 2 8's when the other 2 of each are on the table. I'll have the 8, the other player has the king, the other 2 kings & 8's are shown. This is nearly every time I play a hand. Anything I throw away ends up as a better pair, straight, 3 of a kind, full house etc & usually beats the people who went all in at the start or when the first 3 cards are drawn. It's so frustrating. It usually takes me weeks to get a silver rank on any tournament, while I see other players on gold or higher within the first 4 hours of the reset. I end up being first out whenever I take a risk & get nowhere playing cautiously. The worst part of it is that it's usually the very last card that causes the loss as well, which infuriates me even more. More often than not, it's the only card that will result in a loss too, say I need a jack to complete a straight, king high, but not a diamond, then that last card happens to be a jack of diamonds, & I lose to the flush. So I really do feel your pain.
  23. 1 point
    Hi Providence Poker It would be great if you introduced/Designed a multiple table tournament. At least a 2 table tournament. Does anybody else agree?
  24. 1 point
    To be more precise, getting 5 or 10 is 8/52, and then getting the other card is 4/51, and (8/52)*(4/51) is about 0.012, or about 1 in 83. Getting 10/5 more than twice in a single game isn't at all unusual. (There's also cognitive bias involved because you pay attention to when you get it and don't think much about the games where you don't. Thus you get the false impression that it happens more often than it does.)
  25. 1 point
    I LOVE THE POKER BUT NO GAME IS FUN UNLESS YOU CAN TALK TO OTHER HUMAN BEINGS WE NEED A CHAT BOX I DONT CARE IF LOT OF PEOPLE DONT SPEAK THE SAME LANGUAGE ( WE FIND A WAY ) GET A CHAT BOX OR IM QUITTING
  26. 1 point
    Multiple table tournaments would be great??
  27. 1 point
    Nice troll job. Good to see that you are pleased with yourself.
  28. 1 point
    Not only that, but different strategies for different tables makes sense. I’ve noticed the same issues, and realized that playing more aggressively was better as you move up. And clamoring for a turbo mode in a game in which the blinds are already going up to fast is basically asking for a bingo mode. The biggest problem is that the game does not teach well. And n my estimation, 75% of layers do not understand fold equity and that you need to adjust your starting hand requirements based on the ratio of chips to blinds, or M. The blinds go up so quick that many players do not realize they are short stacked. I cannot imagine how terrible the gameplay would be with faster blinds.
  29. 1 point
    Ok, here we go again. Google (or Bing) the question :"term bubble in poker tournaments". Basically, when one is the bubble player they are the final player to lose who WON'T win any money. Based on the example furnished by Tor, it appears the bubble% refers to the percentage of times when a player finished a tournament fourth or less. In other words, Tor, 67% of the times you played casual tournaments, you finished fourth or less. bummer
  30. 1 point
    That's a screenshot from Pure Hold-em. I wonder about your motives for promoting your skills at their version of poker on PP's forum. I just reinstalled Pure Hold-em on my XB to see if any updates had been applied that would change my opinion of their version of the game. Nope. As a video game , it's a sophomoric joke! As a poker game, it lacks any challenge or excitement. There are no avatars and you're limited as to how much of the game you can see. I tried the Queens level of a Ring game. The table filled with one live player, besides myself, and four computer generated "house players". The fake players can be identified when you center them on your screen and press 'RB', fake players have no statistics displayed. Just as in the solo play of PP, computer generated players have a limited number of computer generated responses. Once you've played them enough times, you can take advantage of their limited playing styles, making it a simple matter to win most of the hands,.
  31. 1 point
    Not sure how I can be missing your point when you have so clearly belabored it to death. My point is that not everyone agrees with you, so please stop saying everybody does. There are lots of people here who have played as much poker as you claim to have played who understand that bad beats happen, especially with people gambling with play money who’ll play down to the river with crap or who think an all-in with 9-3 off is a good bluff. Otherwise, they’d just be beats. Most who do agree with you have moved on. Which would be a sensible choice.
  32. 1 point
    I had thought that the reason I was losing was the result of the way I was playing. Now, thanks to your post, I can blame PP and continue t play the way I've been playing.
  33. 1 point
    I play the Scheduled Master and Ace tournaments at Pure Holdem. Always full table. But not much else going on there.
  34. 1 point
    You're starting to catch on. This has been happening for quite some time. Also, you could play the offline game , at the 10M table and just go all-in every hand and gain massive amounts of REP. Not sure if that still works or not.
  35. 1 point
    It wasn't the cards, it was the way you played them. He observed that you were playing extremely conserivity and capitalized on it. He started taunting you when you were folding all the time and once your tell was predictable, you were toast. Next time bluff from position. Over-bet on the flop or turn. How do they know you don.t have a killer hand? Stop waiting for a miracle on the river and start gambling, that's what Holdem is all about. IMO
  36. 1 point
    Ego gratification by ridiculing anonymous people is a terrible testament to your personality. IMO
  37. 1 point
    Video, or it didn't happen. Stats, running over multiple games/hands, or it didn't happen.
  38. 1 point
    It's really simple. Acting out of turn in poker is wrong. Discussion over! https://www.cardplayer.com/rules-of-poker http://www.wsop.com/poker-games/texas-holdem/rules/ Regarding speaking during a hand (similar to acting out of turn) https://www.pokernews.com/news/2018/07/the-muck-phil-hellmuth-criticized-for-swearing-speaking-out-31408.htm
  39. 1 point
    No. First, what you are complaining about is an essential part of playing cash poker. A player earns that advantage. Further, if a player has won my chips, or has the chips I lost to another player, I want them at my table. That’s how you recover. And even if you are just a bystander, the last thing you would ever want is less cash on the table. The more there is, the more likely you will accumulate some of it. In fact, taking money off the table is considered bad etiquette. Some players leave and come back, a practice referred to as ratholing. You are expected to keep the cash on the table so your opponents have an opportunity to win their money back.
  40. 1 point
    Some people have a cognitive misconception about probabilities and how they work. For example, with 5 best cards being chosen from a group of 7 cards, the probability of a flush is about 1 in 32. Meaning that, on average, there will be a flush approximately once every 32 rounds. Many people, thus, get the misconception that if they see an unusually high amount of flushes, like for example 3 flushes during 10 rounds, or 5 flushes in 20 rounds, or something like that, then there's something wrong. Clearly if the odds are 1 in 32, having 3 in 10 rounds is an indication of the randomness being completely skewed! That's like 1 in 3, not 1 in 32! But this is nothing but a variant of the gambler's fallacy. Just because on average (over thousands and thousands of rounds) the probability is 1 in 32, that doesn't mean that it's impossible to get some streaks of flushes, where in a relatively short amount of rounds you get tons of flushes. Every round is its own event, and doesn't care what has happened in previous rounds. Just because tossing a coin gives you a 50% chance of getting heads, that doesn't mean that getting 10 heads in a row is indicative of something being wrong. (It's not even hard to get 10 heads in a row, if you keep tossing for long enough. There are even genuine videos of this, of people doing that. They keep tossing a coin for a couple of hundred times, videoing themselves, and when they get the 10-toss streak, they show that segment.) Sometimes it, likewise, happens in the other direction: You might go for 200 rounds with only one or two flushes appearing. That's also completely normal. Yet nobody pays attention to that. We only pay attention when it happens unusually often.
  41. 1 point
    No offense taken. I understand your concerns. We've never said that we're trying to 'improve the quality of the randomness'. There are reasons behind the existing algorithm, some of which have been stated in earlier posts. We've done the research and testing and are completely satisfied that the algorithm produces every possible shuffle in a uniform distribution.
  42. 1 point
    I think you're correct. It can't be the RNG, because we're all receiving cards from the same deck. I also think that some players are trying not to lose, rather than trying to win.
  43. 1 point
    The first rule of Fight Club is you don't talk about Fight Club. But you can read about it in Help & Options > How to Play > Events.
  44. 1 point
    As a conservative poker player who plays strategically at poker and who folds about 80% of his cards, I find the dealing system of prominence poker quite frustrating. I'm coming back from a tournament where I saw 8 straights and 5 flushes coming out in a single game. That is way too much. In real poker, these are suppose to be uncommon hands, and most of the times, pairs and two pairs will be the winning hands. This is extremely frustrating, because conservative players who play hands like A-K and things like that and who folds when they should, often get beaten by bad beats and gamblers who stick to their weak hands like 7-2, 10-3, J-4, 3-2 and ultimately get lucky on the river, further encouraging them to gamble instead of folding their hands when there are some big raises pre-flop. So what I'm asking from the developers is to review and fix the dealing system, so that rare and uncommon hands, meaning straights and higher. Because when I play a single tournament in which 8 straights and 5 flushes are coming out, it is clear to me that there is a problem with the card dealing system and probabilities.
  45. 1 point
  46. 1 point
    I mostly play low stakes Limit Hold'em at the casino I play at. I just don't have the bankroll that makes playing No-Limit fun, and more importantly, beatable. Vets will put an underfunded newbie to the test early and often. While they may lose chips early, my only hope would be to walk away with a double up. It's just not fun. But playing Limit has taught me a ton about how weak strong starting hands are if you cannot Limit the players to the flop and turn, which is really hard in Limit. People are more likely to call for $3 or $6 with hands they lay down in NL for $20 or more. What you learn is, if there are straight and flush draws, beware. They hit all the time. In NL, you can bully the table and win pots. In Limit, you really need to read the board and play position. What's funny is that NL players will pop in and play Limit when waiting for a table, and they normally get killed. Then they rant like you see here, but it's at "bad" players who don't fold to their raises. They don't adjust their style, even though the conditions warrant it. All video game poker is just a different set of conditions. People complaining are just not willing to play the table as it is. And because our minds are hard wired to observe patterns, we tend to see them where they don't exist. So weak players blame the deck and other players, anything but themselves.
  47. 0 points
    It appears that further development of PP is not cost effective. ie. it would not attract enough new players to make such development pay for itself. Any concerns about the functionality of PP should be brought to the attention of 505games by selecting 'support' and opening a ticket. They, would contact Pipeworks if it were necessary. Complaints about not winning as often as you think you deserve should be kept to a minimum. Although I'm not part of the development team, I have moderator privileges within this forum. I hope this helps.
  48. 0 points
    How 'bout tables that correspond to your level. If you're level 1-100, then that's who you play. Level 100-200, 200-300 and so on, ALL the way up. I've played this game for 3 years now. I might not be a computer programmer or a video game designer, BUT, I can notice similarities and the EXACT same things happening daily. Once, you're up to over level 1000.....you don't get cards like you used to, back when you started. I've started 3 new characters now.....and from Level 1-100, you're a superstar, you can't miss a flop.....your flush ALWAYS comes, same with your straights, you might even see your first Royal Flush. Once you get over level 100, things begin to change.....your cards stop coming. I also notice every table you join.....Look and see who is in first with ALL the chips....it's going to be that level 18 or 25 or w/e......They're DEADLY.... Tournaments as well.....I've watched level 25's and 30's win EVERY single hand in a row and take EVERY single player out in succession..... Head to Head even worse......It seems EVERY single player I face, is a level 25 and I'm level 1200 and something, there is NO WAY a player ranked that high will beat a lower level. Again....go sign in with my lower level characters......and they can't be beat. I don't know if anyone else has felt that lower levels, NO MATTER what crap cards they play, every hand beat Higher Level players with solid cards over and over. I think the HIGHER levels gets confused and frustrated AND the LOWER levels just keep WINNING and just think they're awesome players and win with their horrible decisions, rewarded over and over.....that's the cycle to keep all the chips being bought. Anyhow, that is my request......Make tables that are locked to specific levels ONLY......That is all.
  49. 0 points
    Mac (Apple) computers have a completely different file managements system, screen management system, and operating system than those running on PC's that support Windows. Pipeworks would need to have a 4th version of PP to run on an Apple platform. It appears that the error message is trying to tell you something.
  50. 0 points

    until

    Hello! After the Diamond Update on XboxOne all my table items were downgraded to a lower percentage boost. Everyone I have spoken to said the same thing happened to them. Will there be another update to fix this? Or some other compensation? Thanks for your time!