I mean if the minimum time was higher the people visiting the site only a few times a day would get to ENTER more giveaways, but all the giveaways would have drastically worse odds due to all these extra people joining them.
It is objectively better odds to keep the short time giveaways as they are since it gives the people better odds at the giveaways they are around to entering - which was the entire point of the change in the pointsystem.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's see now.
Suppose there are 24 giveaways, each of them 24h long and each of them has 2400 entries.
Chance per member for each one is 0,04% and everyone who visits the site daily has a chance to join.
So everyone gets about 1% chance to win the game.
Now suppose there are 24 giveaways, each of them 1h long and each starting after another. Suppose SG has a fairly equal number of users from around the world and each of them visits the site 12 times a day, when they don't sleep.
Consequently each giveaway will have 1200 entries and the chance to win each one will be 0,08%.
But each user will only have the chance to enter half of the giveaways so the cumulative chance is also ~1%.
So statistically speaking it makes no difference how long the giveaway runs. Now let's throw in some reality to the equation and see what we get.
Realistically, lots of users visit the site once or twice a day, so they will miss most of the short-time giveaways. Whereas autojoiners "visit" the site at least 24 times a day, so they will have a chance to join all giveaways as long as they have points. In the example of 24 copies of the same game, they will be able to join all of them.
So "objectively", as you say, it makes no difference to the odds, but realistically short giveaways are better for autojoiners and people compulsively checking the site several times a day, but far worse for casual users. If that's the point of those GAs, then all is ok. Personally I think they are only good for contributors who mostly care about pushing the key out and getting CV quickly, without giving a second thought about who wins. Admittedly I do that sometimes for crap keys I have lying around. But for good games I set 24h or longer.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think it works out that way with the cumulative odds considering the new point limit. Right now there's a flood of giveaways for a game I want and my points run out quickly. I enter the shortest giveaways first because they give me the best odds. If every single giveaway for this game was available at once my odds would be far worse since more people would have had time to see and enter them. I'd be able to enter just as many giveaways as now, but with radically worse odds.
If that was the case the best way to maximize my use of points and my chances of winning would be to sit around and monitor each giveaway near the end time to only enter the ones with best odds. That's, again, directly contrary to the purpose of this change. It would also mean that automation would be better at it than humans, meaning we're once more back to a system that favors the autojoiners that can easily be reprogrammed to enter only the giveaways with the best odds right before the end-time.
So yeah, like I said in another comment, changing the minimum time would undo any good that came from the point-change.
Comment has been collapsed.
Having a longer duration doesn't give more points though.
If min was 12H sure you could enter all of game Y perhaps. Lowering odds.
But I wont have the points for game X, raising odds of people there.
Thus balancing it all out.
Currently auto-joiners can just join every single one-hour giveaway and massively profit over human users, who need sleep and work and stuff.
Comment has been collapsed.
Having a longer duration doesn't give more points though.
No, but points regenerate so in 150 minutes you get 50 points - enough to enter even the highest cost giveaways now. That means if the min was 12h then every single person who sees that giveaway in the first 9½ hours will be able to enter it if they want to. You have to remember that some games are just more popular than others, so while the odds might be great on game X that doesn't mean people will choose that over game Y if game Y is better/more popular.
Currently auto-joiners can just join every single one-hour giveaway and massively profit over human users, who need sleep and work and stuff.
Like you said above "Having a longer duration doesn't give more points though" - nor does it give any less. Autojoiners wouldn't be affected in the least since they'd be able to enter exactly as many giveaways whether the minimum is 1h or 12h or 24h. If anything they'd get a slight edge since they can check for good odds on giveaways just before they end and enter only ones with higher chance of winning, say for instance when less people visit the site at certain times of day.
Comment has been collapsed.
"That means if the min was 12h then every single person who sees that giveaway in the first 9½ hours will be able to enter it if they want to."
But not enter the other giveaways, raising chances there. Where chances falter, other places they rise, keeping it all nicely balanced. I can see how it would skift with popularity of a game though.
As for bots, just set one to join only 1-hour giveaways. Profit. Running out of points (if it happens) really isn't worth the massive benefits you now reap. Till CJ hopefully cuts them down.
Comment has been collapsed.
As for bots, just set one to join only 1-hour giveaways. Profit. Running out of points (if it happens) really isn't worth the massive benefits you now reap. Till CJ hopefully cuts them down.
There's only 480 points in a day now, there's over 4500 giveaways in a day. I certainly agree that the autojoiners and bots should be banned as soon as possible, but you seem to be drastically overestimating how effective they are with the radically reduced point distribution. If they just entered 1h giveaways for 1 or 2 popular games from the latest humble monthly (as I have been doing manually) they'd run out of points within a few hours at the very most. Not much profit in that.
But not enter the other giveaways, raising chances there. Where chances falter, other places they rise, keeping it all nicely balanced. I can see how it would skift with popularity of a game though.
Except if the time is longer then they have more time to get more points to enter the second giveaway as well, and the third, and the fourth. Sure they may miss a few but the fact that more people will have more time to enter more giveaways means it's an objective reduction of odds from 1h giveaways, where fewer people will be able to enter because they don't have the time to wait for their points to regenerate enough to enter more of them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Of those 4500 how many are 1-hour low level giveaways though, probably not a lot. Might cover the 480 points, I think it wont. Most low-interest games now go with about 100 entries, so you can also set one to enter all 150- for maximum chance. As long as you don't care for good stuff (they're cardfarmers, why should they?). Why should they enter the Humble Bundle stuff? This change by itself more than promotes the use of bots for maximum "profit" so I hope they go true on their word and actually do something about it. Cause this one definitely is contro.
As for the second point; spending them on one game still disables you from spending them on another. It's not like you can enter 10 of game 1, and then still have your entries of game 2.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm fine with them existing, can't be all that worried about every giveaway I miss, that would suck all the enjoyment out of this site (even tho most of it comes from the discussions).
But if it comes to personal preference I think that between 3 hours and 1 week is ideal.
Comment has been collapsed.
I did a lot of short GAs in the past, and I do like them. My reasoning behind them is: There will be fewer people entering than in longer GAs. So the chances for those who enter are higher. And people who miss them, don't spend points on them, so they don't need to be sad.
I think with the new points system, this is even more true. You can enter the short GAs of the time when you are online, and just ignore the ones that are run when you are not on the site.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not hate. It's a reaction to a fixed point system rather than a dynamic one that could have been improved by reducing the number of points generated per a giveaway created.
Comment has been collapsed.
Pretty much.
Humble's are generally marked by 1H giveaways after the fact.
Not a problem before; you had more points. Now, it requires careful planning or you're stuck with not a lot of options.
Basically the system of old (more points for more giveaways, less points for less) is not automated anymore but requires manual labour. Which isn't all that great when you hear the goal was to make you spend less time and effort on this site.
Comment has been collapsed.
If a creator wants to make a GA that runs an hour only, well, that's their perogative.
No-one is entitled to be able to join every GA for a game they want.
And if you feel annoyed because you missed some, there will be more GAs down the line anyway. And why get annoyed because you missed a small chance in a raffle?
Comment has been collapsed.
I pretty much always went for 24H minimum so everyone on the world got their shot.
Some exceptions where made for 1H, but really, all of that was utter trash. Where I wouldn't have minded a cardfarmer got it since I doubt any legit player would have played it either, just tried it, hated it like me, and left it running till cards, uninstall and hide (like I did).
Comment has been collapsed.
Almost every public giveaway I have ever made was 1 hour long(others usually a day or they don't get enough entries). I love being able to just send out a bunch of games out in a short time period when I do have the time for it. I don't get the hate behind them - to the people who say they are unfair boo fucking hoo, life isn't fair.
If the minimum time gets extended I would probably never make any public giveaways anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
The fact that this suggestion is discussed so actively only shows how far from perfection this new system of points distribution is. I think enough damage was done today, why add further limitations (especially to GA creators)?
And yes, I like entering them, and there are situations when making GAs short is much more handy.
Comment has been collapsed.
24 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by Mondongo98
124 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by SeaGoblin
17 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Kappaking
28 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Happyleaf
99 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by thephilosopher555
2,528 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by js93583
13 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by WastedYears
12 Comments - Last post 28 seconds ago by Daimao666
59 Comments - Last post 41 seconds ago by bananaramanapalm
19 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by Nickbread
1,636 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by Noodles91
1,787 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by Mdk25
17,519 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by cpj128
0 Comments - Created 10 minutes ago by coleypollockfilet
Comment has been collapsed.