Random is as fair as it can be as it's not biased by anything. LOL
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah but that means that those who have a couple of wins, might as well stop entering, as there's always lots and lots of people without wins, even though I only have 1 win, I think that's ridiculous, everyone should have an equal chance, as they do atm
Comment has been collapsed.
lol its random choice, probably the most fair system they could
using your system people could just not marked games as recieved for a week and collect as many wins as they could whilst staying at 0 wins.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, that's just stupid, soory for saying that but the thing about wins is that they are random (Or pseudorandom I don't really know) implementing that would only benefit new members thus more people would create alt accounts to exploit it.
Comment has been collapsed.
you mad you never win anything after 300++ entries?
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree. They have to change it and should go like this. When the giveaway ends , the script will search for midnightshooter. If im in, i win, if im not make re roll and send me an notification to enter the giveaway. Private and Group giveaways that im not in are excluded.
Comment has been collapsed.
No one steals anything, first of all.
But you may have a point, as for example users who give away on that 1:1 grousp (And thus are kinda exchanging instead of gifting) Have their CV values boosted too, so if CV was designed to reward contributors or gifters (Something I do not fully agree with) that can be considered as exploiting it. But well I thing that's something that can't be dealt with AFAIK. So there's no point on crying over spilt milk...
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't mean that Kaitlyn. That's why exchanging is written in italics. The point was that a person in a 1:1 ratio group is actually not giving away. If you know what I mean.
Anyways, I'm cool with it, I was only theorising.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with you and I also think that this problem isn't big. Those people mostly win giveaway that require $1000+ contributor value and there are not many people that reach that value with public giveaways, so they don't really steal the games from other people.
Comment has been collapsed.
Indeed it's neither big nor of high priority.
I just wanted to say that even daqr's statement migh seem pointless it's true up to a certain point.
But as I've already said that problem won't keep me awake at night. It's only a minor, side flaw of the sistem.
Comment has been collapsed.
You have a problem with randomness? Why?
Where's the fun in that? Random is fine.
Comment has been collapsed.
You should die among the most horrible suffering. I suggest flaying you and then cover your body in salt or something like that.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Regarding Steamgifts.com, i think they should implement some new system where after the giveaway ends the script scans all winners and picks up a random winner with 0 won gifts so far" - Joseph Kony, 2012
Comment has been collapsed.
So, let me get this straight - A user with 300 entries and 16 comments (probably some random thanks on a few giveaways) suggests an utterly stupid change related to the RANDOM system of winning?
Also, you are a member of the community from 2 weeks... Why don't you wait a bit and see what happens? People who have been here for almost a year do not complain, yet you do. Oh, that might be because the system is perfectly OK.
Do not think that I am trying to offend you, but there are people with 3000+ entries and 0 gifts won, so I do not see any reasonable arguments that corroborate your hypothesis, claim, complaint or whatever it is...
Comment has been collapsed.
Almost a year? Shit, I've been here the whole time. Random has worked since the beginning, June 5th, 2011 to now, it's the height of presumption for anyone to suggest that it's a bad plan at this point.
Comment has been collapsed.
48 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by Mdk25
26 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by OneManArmyStar
826 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by InSpec
15 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by UnknownEAK
178 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by alluringirl
14 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Axelflox
610 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Aradiel
813 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by Mdk25
1,642 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by Mdk25
25 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by Masafor
5 Comments - Last post 20 minutes ago by Lugum
64 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by Lugum
8,065 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by ngoclong19
1 Comments - Last post 37 minutes ago by ThatDave
In my opinion you should make something like this:
and so on, what do you think? This would limiti winnings of someone, who in 300 Entries won 5 gifts...
Comment has been collapsed.