Forums

Re: I don't get it re. ready gos

• webrep315 53 Posts

  Wed, Jun 20 2012 10:09 AM

  WGTicon:

  Hi

  thanks for the feedback. very interesting:)

  -wgticon

  Do I get a commission on this if its implemented and WGT starts raking in the dough? ;)

  Seriously, I mentioned this last week. Here's what I suggested

   

  Many players complain about not being able to win credits in RGs. Why are the number of RGs so limited? Create RGs for each tier with multiple levels of cost i.e. - Tour Master St Andrews Front 9 RGs of 1000, 500, 100, 50. Do the Same for back 9 and double for Full 18. That would be a total of 12 RGs for Tour Masters at St Andrews alone. If you do this for each course (SA, RSG, Oak, Kia, BPB, etc...), you would have 7 courses x 12 RGs each = 84 RGs for TMs alone.

  And allow us to search RGs by tier because of this larger number.

  Ok maybe that's a bit excessive but see the point here. Increasing the number of RGs that are tier specific = building immense good will with the entire community.

  Not to mention forcing a large number of players to compete in far more ranked rounds, thereby helping solve yet another issue (sandbagging) if they shoot well enough to win or place high.

  On top of all this good will, WGT will make more money because more people will purchase credits. Simply put, its a win-win for everyone.

  I find myself constantly waiting to play RGs specific to my tier. I have far less issues playing these tour specific RGs than any other aspect of WGT. While I still do have some issues that many have listed and gone over hundreds of times on these forums (balls through walls, weeds, bushes, etc...) Adding the additional tier I've seen mentioned and I can't think of another way that WGT could fix more of the problems than what I've mentioned above.

  I'm only able to break about even or worse on RGs that are not tier specific if they are the 100 credit variety. Larger fees result in more winnings which bring the big guns.

   

• ColumbusStorm 3,418 Posts

  Wed, Jun 20 2012 11:52 AM

  The more Ready Go's the better. Yeah...it's me with the same old request. More RGs with varying wind conditions, green speeds, pin positions, 18 holes, front 9, back 9, tiers and various entry fees. I prefer 100 credit entry fees, but sometimes will play for 200 credits. Even like the new 50cr fee, even though I haven't played one.

  I do like the fact that you can not enter the same RG until your previously entered RG has completed. Presumably this to prevent an RG from being dominated by just a few players and therefore can possibly allow 100 or more different players to compete in the same RG tournament using multiple RGs on same course/conditions/fee.

  What would happen if say more than 100 RG's were set up to be played over a month period, with the same setup/sign-up rules as now. Would fewer different players win credits or would more different players win credits?  Wonder if WGT has stats they use to project that outcome.

   

• webrep315 53 Posts

  Wed, Jun 20 2012 12:55 PM

  ColumbusStorm:

  The more Ready Go's the better. Yeah...it's me with the same old request. More RGs with varying wind conditions, green speeds, pin positions, 18 holes, front 9, back 9, tiers and various entry fees. I prefer 100 credit entry fees, but sometimes will play for 200 credits. Even like the new 50cr fee, even though I haven't played one.

  I do like the fact that you can not enter the same RG until your previously entered RG has completed. Presumably this to prevent an RG from being dominated by just a few players and therefore can possibly allow 100 or more different players to compete in the same RG tournament using multiple RGs on same course/conditions/fee.

  What would happen if say more than 100 RG's were set up to be played over a month period, with the same setup/sign-up rules as now. Would fewer different players win credits or would more different players win credits?  Wonder if WGT has stats they use to project that outcome.

   

  ding! ding! ding! we have a winner!

• webrep315 53 Posts

  Wed, Jun 20 2012 6:22 PM

  I haven't played since very early today (now after 9PM) because of the lack of available RGs, especially in my tier (TM)

  Currently there are 3 RGs that are TM specific. - Whistler, Oakmont and Olympic.

  I will not pay to play either of those courses.

  I'm effectively shut down in regards to RGs therefore my spending of credits is next to nil. I will pop in to play a quick blitz to keep my consecutive days xp going but I don't have any reason to do anything further.

  I'm very puzzled by this business model.

• gedi83 277 Posts

  Thu, Jun 21 2012 9:36 AM

  I think it would be nice to have some stability regarding the system of ready-goes, as in the recent months it's being changing quite a lot. Sometimes there were 4 ready-goes including 200 or 300 credit ones, sometimes only 2 100ers, sometimes most of them were hard courses under hard conditions (wind, greens), sometimes mostly easy courses under easy conditions.

  What we could have is that during each period there is always a hard course/conditions, a moderate one and easy one, so that people who prefer different levels of difficulty wouldn't have to sometimes play all 3-4 courses and at other times take an unwanted break...

  Also the credit amounts should become more stable, e.g. 50, 100, 200 for lower tiers and (50), 100, 200, 300 for higher ones...

• WGTadmin2 1,152 Posts

  Thu, Jun 21 2012 10:56 AM

  These are all good ideas and most of the reasons have been covered really well by you all above. 

   

  The balancing task is to give variety without creating too many so that they take too long to fill.  We will continue to try and optimize this.  The reason we have the time periods is so that the same players cannot enter all the RG's and win all of them.

   

  We hear that you would like to see more pricing options and stability and we will try to accommodate this in the future.  Thanks for the constructive discussion

• Lmorgan007 408 Posts

  Thu, Jun 21 2012 11:08 AM

  WGTadmin2:

  The reason we have the time periods is so that the same players cannot enter all the RG's and win all of them.

   

  I think having 12 hour waits could have the opposite effect.  I have a hunch that the people who wait 10 hours or so are operating in a different time zone.  

   

  Lets say someone in the USA (for the sake of argument) likes a RG at StA, but it fills up quick.  He logs on at 11pm sees a new one has started, thinks I enter that and play it tomorrow, safe in the knowledge that unless it fills up in 1 hour (unlikely), he'll be able to play it at lunchtime the following day.  

   

• DarSum 1,440 Posts

  Thu, Jun 21 2012 11:44 AM

  ColumbusStorm:

  The more Ready Go's the better. Yeah...it's me with the same old request. More RGs with varying wind conditions, green speeds, pin positions, 18 holes, front 9, back 9, tiers and various entry fees. I prefer 100 credit entry fees, but sometimes will play for 200 credits. Even like the new 50cr fee, even though I haven't played one.

  I do like the fact that you can not enter the same RG until your previously entered RG has completed. Presumably this to prevent an RG from being dominated by just a few players and therefore can possibly allow 100 or more different players to compete in the same RG tournament using multiple RGs on same course/conditions/fee.

  What would happen if say more than 100 RG's were set up to be played over a month period, with the same setup/sign-up rules as now. Would fewer different players win credits or would more different players win credits?  Wonder if WGT has stats they use to project that outcome.

  100 RGs a month, that run all month? Or start over during the month if they fill up?

  Either way, IMO, it's too many. You'd be waiting for ever for the one you played to either fill up or end.

  There's many RG regulars that could play all 100 RGs in an average of around 10 days or less. Then what?

  I think if they just kept the same number of non-tier specific RGs they have available per month the same and added more tier specific it would create more interest.

  I actually like how they swapped them up in the middle of the month. You may not like the 2nd half of the months option as well as the 1st halves. But it's sure better than being stuck with a whole month of RGs you don't like. 

• GlassMan27 573 Posts

  Thu, Jun 21 2012 11:50 AM

  Lmorgan007:

  WGTadmin2:

  The reason we have the time periods is so that the same players cannot enter all the RG's and win all of them.

   

  I think having 12 hour waits could have the opposite effect.  I have a hunch that the people who wait 10 hours or so are operating in a different time zone.

  Exactly, the current system is tailor-made for the same players to enter and win everything. I've been watching the 'late-posters' in the RG's I play for a while, and its almost always the same handful of players who are ones posting the late scores. And, more often than not, those players end up dominating the top of the leaderboards. It's frustrating to post an early score near or at the top, only to watch the last five players posting scores all end up in front of me. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem getting beat by better players, they are better players, and it motivates me to improve my own game so I don't keep finding myself in that situation. But, this argument in favor of the current system is terribly flawed. Forcing players to play when they sign up, in lieu of letting them sign up for everything and then play at their leisure (ten hours later), is the only way to keep the same players from winning everything.... if that truly is the goal.

• CanuckOntheScene 26 Posts

  Thu, Jun 21 2012 12:23 PM

  What's the problem with setting up a list of tournaments in poker SNG fashion? im sure most folks know how SNG lists work.

  try lowering the amount of entries for the courses that don't get alot of action.   down to 20-25 entries from the now 50.

  Personally I think making money is the  secondary  agenda for this site.