what do you think about the amount of points we get?
I constantly have 400 just sitting there. But, that's because I own a lot of games (I have a humble sub), and there are a lot of games that I am not interested in. But, someone with fewer games might use those up just entering for 1 or 2 games they would like from a HB bundle, or something.
It should stay the way it is. I know there are +1 nutters out there that have some weird obsession with owning every game, no matter what it is, but I think less points would just benefit them more. Some of them use autojoin bots, so they'd be on top of using the points before they max out. Normal people just log in once or twice a day.
Comment has been collapsed.
"I don't need so many points and because of that everyone else also should have fewer of them. That's just fair!"
That's not how "fair" works.
Comment has been collapsed.
maybe my wording wasn't perfect on that, but don't twist my words either. i said i'd be okay with having less points, as in it would not affect me if we had less.
Comment has been collapsed.
Where is the twisting?
i'd be okay with having less points, as in it would not affect me if we had less. + "fair"
That is pretty much what I summed up. If you worded it poorly again and don't mean it like that, that's okay. But don't accuse me of twisting it, I'm not responsible for your formulations. Maybe change the title?
Comment has been collapsed.
I only enter for games I would play. I am both constantly out of points and constantly at 400. It all depends on whether or not a game I want was just bundled.
Comment has been collapsed.
At 99% time am stucked at 400P ... then some wave of GA's appear (new HB choice or so) and magically i do not have enough points to enter cuz each GA is 40/50P... 20 GA appear with 50P games ending in 4 hours and i simply cant access.
idk if its fair or not... in last 1y i didnt won single game and yes i entering all that 1 year :D cant say i care about point fariness
Comment has been collapsed.
Still miss the days where we got points anytime someone made a giveaway. :/
Comment has been collapsed.
Most of the time when I leave SG for the day I either have large amount of points left or full points. When I was using a LOT more points I thought having 400P was fine so I don't see any issue with the way it is currently.
Comment has been collapsed.
for me it's more about the rate at which they regen.
Everytime some important bundle comes out I'll be short on points, and will have to make choices even if I come back several times a day. Then when everyone has given away that game I'm interested in, for weeks I will constantly be at 400 points.
Not sure what can be done about it. To be fair the system seems like a good compromise anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not so many points that you can enter everything but enough that you should be able to enter for the games you want to. Seems like its working as intended so its fair to me.
Comment has been collapsed.
Today on "Let's talk about fixing something that isn't broken".
Comment has been collapsed.
i never said it's broken or that it needs to be fixed. i just think it is an interesting subject to talk about on this site as points do play a major role, atleast for most of the people on here, that's why i am asking for opinions.
Comment has been collapsed.
I actually liked how system worked before, when we got points only when somebody created giveaway. When it was still a thing I always had the right number of points to enter all I wanted. With current system I either have too much points and nothing too enter, or too much giveaways I want to enter and no points. Balance is lost.
Also, you are wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
personally I would prefer a lower "point per hour" and an higher point stack (600 at least)
Comment has been collapsed.
System isn't perfect, I don't particularly like it as it is, but it's quite fair.
What I really can't stand honestly is people always trying to screw others (e.g. "since I enter few giveaways, everyone needs to get points at a slower rate / a lower point cap!" or whatever) not thinking other people may have different necessities. It happens all the time in every situation, not just here.
Comment has been collapsed.
i can see how that might be seen as a very selfish move, but less points might end up meaning less entries per giveaway, giving you greater chances of winning. so it's not only to screw someone over.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thousands of people pouring their points in giveaways having a win chance approximating zero shows the current system isn't very effective.
Like in every functioning economy there has to be a correlation between supply(giveaways) and demand(points) to function. In a situation of low supply members tend to spend their points on everything they can enter without making a deliberate choice thus diminishing the chances of winning for everyone. Or they haven't enough points if supply is high(e.g. a good bundle is released thus resulting in more giveaways).
I would like a more flexible system with variable amounts of points given in accordance to the changing supply(giveaway) situation.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would like a more flexible system with variable amounts of points given in accordance to the changing supply(giveaway) situation.
That... actually doesn't sound like a bad idea and I don't think it would be even that hard to implement either.
Comment has been collapsed.
That was the old system. Every 15 minutes, every user was given a certain % (something like 5%, IIRC) of points based on the total of the points needed to enter all giveaways created in those 15 minutes. They changed it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with you, but the old system's main problem was that it mostly awarded bots and people who were very active, and punished the users who logged in once a day or such.
The new system, though, has about the same problem. Bots and very active users can exploit the system and "store" their points in long-lasting giveaways, gaining ad advantage over regular users. But hey, I'm not complaining, it's legit. I'd like to see the point cap set to a much higher value, so normal people aren't that much penalized when there's a big event or a nice bundle.
For the 0% chance, well, more users = fewer chances for everyone. It's normal, I don't even care anymore. I enter giveaways for fun.
Comment has been collapsed.
but this is not entirely an economy, it's a free lottery of prizes someone decided to put available for free here from the outside.
It's made for mass joining already. The only effort is to click a couple of buttons, and to some extent, it's even funny that bit of excitement it gives winning among 4000 entries.
Reducing the amount of points circulating will probably enhance the effectiveness of the running bots where humans decide to clutter only specific titles or come back after long periods while bots keep charging left and right. If I was a high volume giver, with less entries in my GAs I'd be annoyed by seeing same persons with fancy thanks messages winning too often than with lots of entries. An increasing rate would probably aggravate the clutter on big titles killing even more the winning chance on more games than usual.
Probably a captcha or a minimal reward for null points titles as incentive for givers would be more useful than any flexible sharing.
In a way or another, just good luck everyone :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe people spend their points in things they don't really want because with the 400p limit those points would go wasted?
I would set that limit much higher. Maybe 500p base and with every level you gain you also get +50 maximum points?
Comment has been collapsed.
If people don't have enough points, let them play games.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, much lesser points and extra points if you make GA's, would lower different things.
Like the advantage of autojoiners because such accounts don't/not often make GA's.
And because more and more users have more and more games, collected over the years from purchases, freebie sites, wins etc., it should be influence the point system too. In the way that it give lesser points for the users to avoid/lower the situations where people enter each and every GA because they have "points laying around", only to have won something (not a good game, no cards, no +1 for the library) and maybe for statistic sites to brag about how many games they own.
Comment has been collapsed.
i personally hit the 400 point limit a lot since i've started to only join giveaways for games i think i would really enjoy/play.
i would be okay with having less points, so people are forced to pick their entries more carefully.
but that's just my opinion and you might think it's wrong, so what's yours?
what would a discussion without a giveaway be
Comment has been collapsed.