Yet another^2 wish list!

Add your suggestions for improving Poker Mavens
Post Reply
cchervit
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:18 pm

Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by cchervit »

Kent,

A few more features I'd like to see. Hopefully they'd be beneficial to others as well:
  1. Place a checkbox in account settings/account creation so the user can agree or not to receive poker invitations and/or email communication from site.
    • I had been using BCC's on my poker emails to keep everyone's account private but Google is starting to get pissed at me and already closed my email account once. Yes, I know I could use a email blast service like ConstantContact, but I'm also trying to keep this site friendly.
  2. Admin to be able to add/remove chips to table play in ring game
    • someone recently accidentally got disconnected from the table (even with Disconnect protection on) and there was no way for him to come back to table with same chip stack. really would like to be able to fix this.
  3. Round Structure Flexibility
    • Move Breaks into Round Structure to allow for more flexible scheduling of breaks.
    • Move RoundTime to Round Structure to allow for more flexible round lengths (in our friendly social tourneys, we often like longer rounds up front so people can play longer and shorter rounds towards the back end).
  4. The Double Rebuy button also shouldn’t appear when there are unlimited rebuys but one rebuy will put you over the threshold for doing rebuys.
  5. Add optional on-demand 2-7 bounty in cash games in Hold 'Em games
    • If you win with a 2-7, everyone gives the winner $x amount of chips to add to their table stack
Thanks,
Chad
Kent Briggs
Site Admin
Posts: 5878
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by Kent Briggs »

cchervit wrote:Place a checkbox in account settings/account creation so the user can agree or not to receive poker invitations and/or email communication from site.
You can disable the account creation feature in the client and just make your own, with whatever agreements or additional fields you like. Then create the account with an API call.
someone recently accidentally got disconnected from the table (even with Disconnect protection on) and there was no way for him to come back to table with same chip stack. really would like to be able to fix this.
Just set the "Rathole minutes" setting for that table.
Move Breaks into Round Structure to allow for more flexible scheduling of breaks.
Since v6.16, the Break Interval now represents number of levels between breaks (when Break Sync = No). Or perhaps I'm not understanding what you mean here.
The Double Rebuy button also shouldn’t appear when there are unlimited rebuys but one rebuy will put you over the threshold for doing rebuys.
It won't actually let you double rebuy even though the button appears. I was aware that this could happen but it's a complicated fix so I punted it for later. ;)
cchervit
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:18 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by cchervit »

Kent Briggs wrote:
cchervit wrote:Place a checkbox in account settings/account creation so the user can agree or not to receive poker invitations and/or email communication from site.
You can disable the account creation feature in the client and just make your own, with whatever agreements or additional fields you like. Then create the account with an API call.
Ha! I'm a systems architect not a coder! But ok, I hear where you are going with this.
Kent Briggs wrote:
cchervit wrote:someone recently accidentally got disconnected from the table (even with Disconnect protection on) and there was no way for him to come back to table with same chip stack. really would like to be able to fix this.
Just set the "Rathole minutes" setting for that table.
Ah, so that's what that means! So, if I set Rathole to 120, it will remember the chip stack for every person who sat at the table for 2 hours. If they sit back down, it will have them sit back down at the table with however many chips they left the table with...even if that's more than the max buy-in, correct? What happens if they suddenly have less than what they left with in their balance b/c they lost it on another table? Is that corner case covered?
Kent Briggs wrote:
cchervit wrote: Move Breaks into Round Structure to allow for more flexible scheduling of breaks.
Since v6.16, the Break Interval now represents number of levels between breaks (when Break Sync = No). Or perhaps I'm not understanding what you mean here.
I get that. But there are two situations that are tough to model.
  1. In one tourney we only have one break after the rebuy period is over to give time for add-ons and doing some accounting work for the payouts. There's no way to build in just one break.
  2. In another tourney, we have one break about 1/3 the way in for 5 minutes, then just another smaller 3 minute break a few rounds before the final rounds begin just to give the people who have been playing a while a breather. I realize that an admin can pause the tourney, but it'd just be really nice to just have something like "break, 5" and "break, 3" be permissible rows in the round structure.
    • If it's an array that stores the levels, then an array structure of "SB/BB/Ante/Time" with a value of [0/0/0/5] would signify a break of 5 minutes. If you had a time per level entry slot in there, we could have flexible level times as well (longer rounds up front, shorter rounds in back). If all level times are zero or null, then just use the existing round interval time constant for all rounds.
Kent Briggs wrote:
cchervit wrote:The Double Rebuy button also shouldn’t appear when there are unlimited rebuys but one rebuy will put you over the threshold for doing rebuys.
It won't actually let you double rebuy even though the button appears. I was aware that this could happen but it's a complicated fix so I punted it for later. ;)
Ha! I'm an excellent punter myself. Kicked quite a few long ones in my day! :D
Kent Briggs
Site Admin
Posts: 5878
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by Kent Briggs »

cchervit wrote:So, if I set Rathole to 120, it will remember the chip stack for every person who sat at the table for 2 hours. If they sit back down, it will have them sit back down at the table with however many chips they left the table with...even if that's more than the max buy-in, correct?
Correct, if they left with a stack higher than the min buy-in they will return with that same amount. If they were under the max they can of course buy in for the max.
What happens if they suddenly have less than what they left with in their balance b/c they lost it on another table? Is that corner case covered?
Then they can't come back until the rathole period expires. Otherwise players would park their chips at another table to get around the restriction.
but it'd just be really nice to just have something like "break, 5" and "break, 3" be permissible rows in the round structure.
Ok, I understand now.
cchervit
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:18 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by cchervit »

Kent Briggs wrote:Correct, if they left with a stack higher than the min buy-in they will return with that same amount. If they were under the max they can of course buy in for the max.
Was curious if they left with a stack higher than the max buy-in. They come back to the table with their higher-than-max buy-in, correct?

Thanks for being attentive to your fans, customers and for all your answers!
Kent Briggs
Site Admin
Posts: 5878
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by Kent Briggs »

cchervit wrote:
Kent Briggs wrote:Correct, if they left with a stack higher than the min buy-in they will return with that same amount. If they were under the max they can of course buy in for the max.
Was curious if they left with a stack higher than the max buy-in. They come back to the table with their higher-than-max buy-in, correct?
Yes, max buy-in is greater than min buy-in so it automatically applies there too.
cchervit
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:18 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by cchervit »

Kent Briggs wrote:Yes, max buy-in is greater than min buy-in so it automatically applies there too.
Haha! Yes, of course it is! Was just double-checking your statement wasn't bounded by the max buy-in! Thanks for being pedantic for me! :)

BTW, one more feature I would like and that would be for an option to be added to a given ring table config where the system would dynamically instantiate additional tables as more than 8 (if Stud/Razz) or 10 people register for it.
cchervit
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:18 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by cchervit »

Oh, and one other feature request...improved structured Hand Results logging.
  • Just a more standardized format so it'd be easier to parse using some reporting/analytic tools out there like ELK. Granted, this is a minor feature request.
    • So each line would be in the format of: tablename, systemtime, user, event, event content
    • Where user is one of the logged in usernames, "system" or "admin:console/admin:web"
    • Where event for hold 'em might be things like "seated", "left", "chat", "flop/turn/river", "hand", "rake", "[action:folds|bets|raises|calls]", "result", etc.
  • Slightly more than a minor feature request, the ability for the option to produce Hand Result logs run through something like this regexp so that admins have the option to turn off hand logging for folded hands would be nice to have --
    • Find: "\[\w[cdhs]\s\w[cdhs]\] Folded" & Replace with : "[xx xx] Folded"
      (or in vi/Unix format: "s/\[\w[cdhs]\s\w[cdhs]\]\sFolded/'[xx xx] Folded'/g")
Kent Briggs
Site Admin
Posts: 5878
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Yet another^2 wish list!

Post by Kent Briggs »

cchervit wrote:BTW, one more feature I would like and that would be for an option to be added to a given ring table config where the system would dynamically instantiate additional tables as more than 8 (if Stud/Razz) or 10 people register for it.
Currently that can be done with the API but of course requires coding on your end.
Post Reply