I have split this off from another thread, as I thought it would be interesting to have a regulatory discussion and discussion on certain devices, versus the subject of the thread in which these points were raised.
In particular I thought I'd comment further on the notion of the UK as a bastion of player fairness, as I find this a little strange.
I find it strange because of the presence (the regulated presence, mind you), of AWP gambling devices. Devices which are illegal in many other mainstream jurisdictions around the world.
To the untrained eye, these appear to bear all the hallmarks of a spinning reel, random slot device.
To those that actually know what is going on, they are anything but.
If the AWP is not played "to optimal strategy", or is in a period where RTP has exceeded "set RTP" (due to successive jackpots occurring in a dynamic, non-random set of outcomes to pull RTP up from the dolldrums), then the player has effectively no real chance to win, unless they have a sufficient bankroll to put into the device to draw RTP down to appropriate trigger levels.
In times where the AWP is within a very limited expected range the RTP is poor to say the least, and given volatility is practically entirely on the downside, the player will lose.
The only time a player is really going to walk away ahead is to find or push the game into "winning mode".
In short, "knowledgeable" players will be able to prey on the casual or "unskilled" player on these devices, which by and large do not show game rules in any clear fashion, do not display optimal strategy, and do not show the indicated RTP is derived on a non-random basis.
A knowledgeable player can quickly determine whether the device is in a paying mode, or a non-paying mode, and leave or stay accordingly.
A knowledgeable player will play to optimal strategy to force RTP down to the point where arbitrary, non-random large prize triggers will occur, often in succession.
In short, a knowledgeable player will gain higher RTP at the expense of the unskilled player, which is why these devices are illegal in many regulated regimes.
On-line this seems to be reflective of the AWP's that exist, which from the look of the winning screenshots that show the same BIG winners on these devices over and over again, appear to use "pooled RTP".
To whit: all players are contributing to the same AWP pool, and only the knowledgeable players, or very lucky unskilled players, will win (unskilled if they access it at the right time, or knowledgeable players who access it, determine state of the device, and then stay or leave accordingly, and if staying know just how far to "push" the device)
These are designed to look like slot, but do not show any rules that can be accessed in-game in the same manner as the slots.
They are designed to trap the unwary.
So my questions are:
1) Looking at the UK B&M scene, how can a regulatory regime allow devices that look like slots, play like slots (to a great extent), but are nothing like slots, be considered a regime to emulate?
2) Is it fair to allow knowledgeable players to effectively prey off the unwary contributors to their eventual success?
3) Is a "pooled RTP" scenario something that exists in system providers that use AWP games on-line?
4) If the answer to (3) is yes, is a "pooled RTP" used in any other games on-line?
5) If the answer to (3) is no, and AWP's aren't random, how do these same big winners on AWP devices do it?
6) If the devices are meant to be playable by all players (on-line and B&M), where the heck are the rules? (in an easy-to-find, in-game way, as per slots)
Woooof
1) Until the recent updated gambling laws were passed, the ONLY thing that was regulated about AWP devices was the stake and jackpot amounts. The manufacturers and operators ran rings around the regulators, and the clever players ran rings around the OPERATORS
There was a TRADE BODY that "regulated" these "Fruities", and set "voluntary standards" that were expected from members. The "Fruitie in the chip shop" was often the most crooked of the lot!
It was only when the regulators accepted that these were GAMBLING devices, rather than "amusement" devices, that the first LAWS were passed to formally ban CHILDREN from playing them.
The more recent act redefined the categories, and there is still a "children's category" that you will see at the seaside, and at leisure centres, but the other categories are strictly 18+, and the entrance MUST be policed to prevent under age players from even ENTERING the area.
The industry didn't like the rules, and managed to get concessions. One is that "remote policing" via CCTV is permitted - seen at motorway services.
Another change introduced rules whereby it must be made clear what the nature of the game is, random, or compensated (AWP). The nominal RTP must also be displayed to the player. In the top category, £1 stake and £500 max payout, this is done by the software, and is visible below the reels.
Regulations once WORSE than many other jurisdictions became BETTER than at most jurisdictions overnight.
2) the very nature of AWP devices was unfair, the operators got their comeuppance once the devices became too clever, and bugs crept into the ever more complex code. Most novice players do not really understand the nature of the game, and this is one reason why operators were forced to make this clearer. Operators make most of their money from the more skilled players, so the product is designed to outwit these players, and now the programming has changed to give the casual player MORE of a chance than they had before, in the knowledge that the "skilled" player will STILL play just as much, and make the money for the operator.
3) The exact mechanism is a trade secret, but one thing is for sure, the games are NOT purely random, although there ARE some random elements in them.
With enough play, it is possible to spot the "tells" the machine is giving out, and make a reasonable prediction as to what will happen if play continues.
With many of my REALLY big wins, I can see it coming a mile off
Take my old favourite Treasure Ireland.
One of the "tells" is the reels giving the sequence "3OK Parrots" followed by "3OK Ships". This means that very shortly the feature game will go "mega", and spit out one of those MONSTER payouts.
It is also possible to spot when the game "dies" on you. This is when the feature game suddenly kills you off almost straight away, and several times on the trot.
There are some more subtle signs too, and like the land based AWP games, I believe the online versions are regularly "chipped" to change the "tells" that regular player have learned.
The "parrots then ships" tell seems to have gone from Treasure Ireland of late, it now does something different
The "Hippo" is even sneakier, as some "fake tells" have been added, and can make the game appear to be in a state it is not. This is similar to how land AWP games have been altered to give the casual player a better chance.
Although players seem to have their own individual instance of the AWP game, there also appears to be a further method whereby chunks of RTP are shifted between players. This means they CAN suddenly give a big payout from "nowhere" (as in no "tells" - you just don't see it coming). Conversely, they can SUCK a load of RTP from a player, who will NOT get the overall 95% in that particular cycle, because it has been shifted to another player.
4) This is one of the big "conspiracy theories". The existence of online AWP games has shown that online games are NOT necessarily random, and where patterns seem to appear in other games, players think it is just "an AWP in disguise".
It is just as "rogue" to NOT inform players that AWP games are not random as it is to have variable RTP settings. Microgaming themselves are NOT compliant with UK rules in this respect. NOWHERE does Microgaming reveal the nature of these games, and it is left to players to understand what "AWP" next to the game in the menu actually means.
5) .... because the games are NOT random, simples
6) In MGS, they are in the "help" pages. Additionally, click on a feature square, and the rules for that square are revealed.
Unfortunately, just as the fact that "space"= max bet, and "enter" = spin, these facts are not revealed all that clearly.
Knowing that these games are not random, and PROVING it, are completely different matters. The ONLY evidence is "the same winners always post the big payouts", but this SAME argument has been used to "prove" that the RTG random jackpots are NOT random, because of "the same players seem to keep winning them".
In the case of RTG, this is dismissed as NOT being anywhere NEAR proof that the jackpots are not completely random, so you CANNOT argue any differently when it comes to AWP games and "same players seem to always win"
I don't have a problem with this at all - long live online AWPs