Baptism by Fire - success Bet-at.eu - giving it a try

[PaaskeDenmark]

Just hit 5 Michael then 5 x amber. Typical Winagram not counting same with archievements in reward one

 

[Igor82]

How come you don't get any cash balance again after getting above the original bonus amount?? Not really happy about that. Also looking at suddenly achievement does not count despite i had some nice hits on IM Immortal Romance

I made £25 got £50 bonus. Went very low. Then got up to almost £75. But everything is now Bonus only.

I have not seen this at any microgaming casinos. When going above bonus should always be cash balance again.

Hi Paaske - not sure if i followed everything but here goes:

bonus balance is bonus - all of it because we split real balance and bonus balance. thats what allows you to withdraw after any hand and your deposited funds and their derivative real money wins wont be locked in - simply bonus will be invalidate.

you need to complete the whole WR and the whole bonus balance will turn to real.

all achievements are updated every morning as i noted in one of the posts before and as it's written on the page. If you got some nice achievements now - you can expect them to show tomorrow after we receive global player update from MGS.

As for winagram - i don't follow what does that have to do with IR achievements? sorry

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

Hi Paaske - not sure if i followed everything but here goes:

bonus balance is bonus - all of it because we split real balance and bonus balance. thats what allows you to withdraw after any hand and your deposited funds and their derivative real money wins wont be locked in - simply bonus will be invalidate.

you need to complete the whole WR and the whole bonus balance will turn to real.

all achievements are updated every morning as i noted in one of the posts before and as it's written on the page. If you got some nice achievements now - you can expect them to show tomorrow after we receive global player update from MGS.

As for winagram - i don't follow what does that have to do with IR achievements? sorry

Hi Igor.

Sorry what I mean is sorry yes no IM but IR archievements. It is showing on paytable but nothing is showing in rewards table. IT says average bet is only £0.19 despite i have been betting 0,60 and 0,90...

So I though it does not count when only bonus balance. But fact is that i was over bonus amount again £50 when getting some nice hits...

And yes Winagram has not moved at all since i only have bonus balance?? It updated constant up to around £72 but not since....

Hope that makes sense?

 

[Igor82]

Hi Igor.

Sorry what I mean is sorry yes no IM but IR archievements. It is showing on paytable but nothing is showing in rewards table. IT says average bet is only £0.19 despite i have been betting 0,60 and 0,90...

So I though it does not count when only bonus balance. But fact is that i was over bonus amount again £50 when getting some nice hits...

Hope that makes sense?

yes - please read back a few pages - i explained average achievement bet and why it is like that. also there is a blue info icon that explains it on the page regarding the average achievement bet (AAB). Regarding the paytable - it updates every morning for now - soon will be on the fly.

Igor

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

Oh my gosh just hit this beauty to give me a smile at least

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

Hi Igor thanks. Sorry I added some more info in my post in regards to Winagram

Regarding my very nice hit now. Does this mean i can forfeit bonus now of £50.

And then have £121.45 Cash balance to play with?

 

[Igor82]

Hi Igor thanks. Sorry I added some more info in my post in regards to Winagram

Regarding my very nice hit now. Does this mean i can forfeit bonus now of £50.

And then have £121.45 Cash balance to play with?

Hi paaske, I'm on my mobile right now heading out to dinner so I can't check the system.

However from what I'm reading and seeing in the screenshot I imagine you are confusing our system with the old clear play.

If your whole balance is in the bonus column, then you have to complete the WR to unlock it. If I remember seeing your screenshot right (again, on the phone so ant refer to it) you were about 21% in. Watch that bar as you go along. When it hits 100% whatever is in your bonus balance will turn to real money.

Please read the t&c's by clicking on the title of the bonus on the side of the game to make sure you understand the conditions and how the bonus works.

Ill ensure I include an easy to read explanation on the bonus page tomorrow.

Thanks

Igor

 

[JuicyFruit]

Unfortunately, I am done with this casino.

One session today had a 37% RTP, and overall my sessions are at 77%.

As I have said before, I play for fun, but I also like to win a little as well, and just to experience dead spin after dead spin is heartbreaking.

So I have self-excluded for 6 months....now back to the casinos where I have fun AND I win.

Sorry Igor....

 

[dionysus]

I'm curious what you played. Mg games aren't any luckier anywhere else - they're set by MG. You may well have had a bad run, but that can happen at any MG casino.

 

[Igor82]

Unfortunately, I am done with this casino.

One session today had a 37% RTP, and overall my sessions are at 77%.

As I have said before, I play for fun, but I also like to win a little as well, and just to experience dead spin after dead spin is heartbreaking.

So I have self-excluded for 6 months....now back to the casinos where I have fun AND I win.

Sorry Igor....

Hi juicy, I can't influence the RTP

Have you asked for a free comp? With that rtp I wouldn't be surprised if you're given a pretty decent cashback.

Sorry to have you exclude let me know if I can help you with anything.

Games running smoother at least today?

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

Wow very nice big hit again this is starting to look good.

 

[Igor82]

Wow very nice big hit again this is starting to look good.

View attachment 40706

How are the games? Smooth?

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

Yeah very nice and smooth winnings Had bit lag on IR earlier but only short while. Seems smooth now

 

[dionysus]

Nice win ..love/hate that game. I've had to redeposiit to hit the Fs and sometimes pays utter poo. But I've gotten some good FS hits out of it

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

WOW 1 free spin in Phantom Cash

Only god or should u say lady luck can say how this is gonna turnout :notworthy

Betting size 0,05 - stake £2,50 - win £210

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

Very nice finish total. Got 5 red ghost again!!! with both wilds crazy. Sorry for posting all the winnings shots. Promise i will stop now. And post whatever if I make wagering. Understand you guys might find it annoying in that case I am sorry. But I enjoy myself sometimes following threads where people are winning and posting their progress

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

Managed to make playthrough on the free chip the other day.

Made a deposit today, games are still somewhat laggy after 15-20 mins (have to refresh the game every now and then) but hopefully that problem will be sorted soon.

Had a few problems depositing but the support was pretty helpful and sorted things out in no time

 

[vinylweatherman]

Just had a look at the bonus weightings, and this is very puzzling.

All slots: Excluding Jackpots; Fantastic 777’s & Double Magic. 100%

I understand the argument for not allowing play on "jackpot" games due to the contribution to the network being based on turnover, but Double Magic What is so uniquely "Magic" about this ONE member of a whole family of Microgaming "slot clones" that operators fear play on it so much that it is even disallowed for the regular loyalty bonuses, not just the sign up package. Fantastic 777 is a game I am less familiar with, but I believe it to be another 3 reeler from MGS under "classic slots".

Equally confusing is this:-

Collusion: The joint effort of two or more individuals to gain an unfair advantage over the software and other players via pooling of funds to achieve unnatural increase of available bankroll through multiple bonus awards (similarly to multi-accounting) to benefit/take advantage from game engine design. This is usually done at a casino in order to increase the total number of deposit bonuses awarded, thereby un-naturally maximising probability of achieving a large winning slot pay-out (for example: slot bonus round) while ensuring that the pay-out of such an event is awarded to one of the colluding members, effectively detracting from the winning potential of any other players using the casino.

This CANNOT be done, slots are random, and are all player vs house.

If player A gets a massive hit whilst playing with a bonus, it does NOT in any way alter the odds of players C through to Z getting any specific outcome, each bet is random and independent of past results. The colluding partner of A, B for the sake of argument, by losing does not "fill the slot up" and make it more "ready" for player A - this is not a UK pub with a fruit machine by the bogs where such collusion DOES work to the detriment of fellow boozers C to Z.

This example came from somewhere, so which online slot can be manipulated like this?

I thought the terms had been "cleaned up" to purge such things that dated back to the Chartwell era.

 

[Andy Walker]

Managed to make playthrough on the free chip the other day.

Made a deposit today, games are still somewhat laggy after 15-20 mins (have to refresh the game every now and then) but hopefully that problem will be sorted soon.

Had a few problems depositing but the support was pretty helpful and sorted things out in no time

As a side note with the recent server load issues that I heard of with the small casinos I can imagine a management meeting where someone comes up with the brilliant idea of added into the T&C’s whereby you’ll get under a clause “3.4 Under high server load on the site the casino reserves the right to suspend any FTP sessions and advise players not staking at £xx.xx or above that they should increase their bet size or risk the session ending”. Awaits a beating

 

[Andy Walker]

this is not a UK pub with a fruit machine by the bogs where such collusion DOES work to the detriment of fellow boozers C to Z.

This example came from somewhere, so which online slot can be manipulated like this?

I thought the terms had been "cleaned up" to purge such things that dated back to the Chartwell era.

I would only question the AWP in the UK thing of late where bad play by a casual would result in advantage for one in the "know" the machines are now set to block at every chance to consistently control the RTP and whilst your suggestion of "sharking" does have merit it's not that great for the advantage player, they have been programmed for the casual in mind and with feature rounds that have no real life basis mathematically e.g. climbing a bonus ladder increases win potential when clearly it doesn't we see a compensated routine.

The feature that's near the jackpot level can give only the same as a feature just above the feature entry when it chooses. Yes they are set to streak unlike random machines but the predictability of them is set over such a crazy amount of spins that they can seem random in themselves, not forgetting the dismal RTP

 

[Igor82]

Unfortunately, I am done with this casino.

One session today had a 37% RTP, and overall my sessions are at 77%.

Isn't it nice that you can tell us that though - without having to contact CS and have the run about or trail through pages of transactions?

I'm only kidding of course - please let me know if i can make you feel better about the sessions. I'm sorry you had a rough start, i'm sure we can compensate to ensure your RTP reaches normal levels.

Igor

 

[Andy Walker]

Isn't it nice that you can tell us that though - without having to contact CS and have the run about or trail through pages of transactions?

I'm only kidding of course - please let me know if i can make you feel batter about the sessions. I'm sorry you had a rough start, i'm sure we can compensate to ensure your RTP reaches normal levels.

Igor

Perhaps a freudian slip with the "batter" but we all do this at some point, hope this kindness extends beyond the BOF?

 

[vinylweatherman]

I would only question the AWP in the UK thing of late where bad play by a casual would result in advantage for one in the "know" the machines are now set to block at every chance to consistently control the RTP and whilst your suggestion of "sharking" does have merit it's not that great for the advantage player, they have been programmed for the casual in mind and with feature rounds that have no real life basis mathematically e.g. climbing a bonus ladder increases win potential when clearly it doesn't we see a compensated routine.

The feature that's near the jackpot level can give only the same as a feature just above the feature entry when it chooses. Yes they are set to streak unlike random machines but the predictability of them is set over such a crazy amount of spins that they can seem random in themselves, not forgetting the dismal RTP

Quite, but why such a term for online slots unless they are compensated, or the term is a leftover from an era when some games were not random, and could thus be "loaded up" by colluding player A, at which point colluding player B would come along, play the same slot, and achieve an "unnaturally enhanced chance of a big payout" because player A has "forced" the RTP below the target level through a specific playing strategy.

The pub equivalent is player A knows about "the force", but runs out of change before he can trigger the streak. Player (shark) B spots this faux pas over his pint, and jumps on the machine to carry on the strategy from an advantageous position. The motto was "always carry enough change to finish what you started".

The era beyond the £15/£25 jackpot seems less prone to "forcing" and "sharking". The games made by "Red" were the hardest to predict. They did have a streak, but it wasn't as obvious to spot as with other makes. Vivid and Mazooma were the easiest to spot, but the streaks seemed limited to under £75 in the £25 jackpot era.

If Players A and B were each granted a deposit bonus at the local arcade, I can understand that if Player A deliberately plays to lose then player B would have an enhanced chance to beat the bonus, and for the pair to have a positive expectation even at the derisory 70% RTP often on offer.

None of this should work online, thus no term should be necessary, and should never have been necessary in the past.

As for the other observation, they don't even HAVE "Double magic", so God only knows where that term came from. Couch Potato would have been a far better candidate for such a restriction, and the APs can still play Cash Crazy in order to do whatever they were doing with Double magic elsewhere to bring about this term. It is the EXACT same game, just different symbols. All I can see with Cash Crazy and presumably Double Magic if they had it is the max bet of £10 and jackpot of 1600 coins, which is £8000 on a £5 coin/£10 bet. If it's OK to play Cash Crazy, then it should be just as OK to play Double Magic if it appears in the future.

 

[Andy Walker]

Quite, but why such a term for online slots unless they are compensated, or the term is a leftover from an era when some games were not random, and could thus be "loaded up" by colluding player A, at which point colluding player B would come along, play the same slot, and achieve an "unnaturally enhanced chance of a big payout" because player A has "forced" the RTP below the target level through a specific playing strategy.

The pub equivalent is player A knows about "the force", but runs out of change before he can trigger the streak. Player (shark) B spots this faux pas over his pint, and jumps on the machine to carry on the strategy from an advantageous position. The motto was "always carry enough change to finish what you started".

The era beyond the £15/£25 jackpot seems less prone to "forcing" and "sharking". The games made by "Red" were the hardest to predict. They did have a streak, but it wasn't as obvious to spot as with other makes. Vivid and Mazooma were the easiest to spot, but the streaks seemed limited to under £75 in the £25 jackpot era.

If Players A and B were each granted a deposit bonus at the local arcade, I can understand that if Player A deliberately plays to lose then player B would have an enhanced chance to beat the bonus, and for the pair to have a positive expectation even at the derisory 70% RTP often on offer.

None of this should work online, thus no term should be necessary, and should never have been necessary in the past.

As for the other observation, they don't even HAVE "Double magic", so God only knows where that term came from. Couch Potato would have been a far better candidate for such a restriction, and the APs can still play Cash Crazy in order to do whatever they were doing with Double magic elsewhere to bring about this term. It is the EXACT same game, just different symbols. All I can see with Cash Crazy and presumably Double Magic if they had it is the max bet of £10 and jackpot of 1600 coins, which is £8000 on a £5 coin/£10 bet. If it's OK to play Cash Crazy, then it should be just as OK to play Double Magic if it appears in the future.

You used an offline AWP statement / to justify your point of view, I just cleared it up in a short summary, thought I was doing a service

We maybe arching back to an era where single programmers had the ability to build back-doors into the software, today the programming is split between teams and therefore the hack is much harder to build in for a play pattern. Yes faults still occur but are quickly chipped.

 

[vinylweatherman]

You used an offline AWP statement / to justify your point of view, I just cleared it up in a short summary, thought I was doing a service

The question remains unanswered, why such a term for an online slot, they are not compensated AWP games, so this is a term without purpose, and redundant terms should be purged in order to reduce the wordcount. This example could never occur online, yet these examples are supposedly derived from actual methods that have been used in the past.

Given how open Igor has been over other things, I was hoping to finally get an explanation of what is behind this odd term, plus the widespread fear of "Double magic" that is shared by many operators of the Quickfire platform.

 

[dionysus]

Well, honestly?...who cares? If it's in there, dont play it - why does it really matter? I'm sure he's bigger things to get sorted than about a game that impacts NO one or a term that we all see

 

[Igor82]

What is so uniquely "Magic" about this ONE member of a whole family of Microgaming "slot clones" that operators fear play on it so much that it is even disallowed for the regular loyalty bonuses, not just the sign up package. Fantastic 777 is a game I am less familiar with, but I believe it to be another 3 reeler from MGS under "classic slots".

This CANNOT be done, slots are random, and are all player vs house.

If player A gets a massive hit whilst playing with a bonus, it does NOT in any way alter the odds of players C through to Z getting any specific outcome, each bet is random and independent of past results. The colluding partner of A, B for the sake of argument, by losing does not "fill the slot up" and make it more "ready" for player A - this is not a UK pub with a fruit machine by the bogs where such collusion DOES work to the detriment of fellow boozers C to Z.

This example came from somewhere, so which online slot can be manipulated like this?

I thought the terms had been "cleaned up" to purge such things that dated back to the Chartwell era.

Hi Vynil,

With respect - i'm not going to dare enter into game weightings I've read enough of threads to know it's a lost argument as in your books you have a view on things which isn't easy to change. And that's fair enough.

All i can say is that we weight them the way we weight them based on research, past experience etc. and right or wrong - its how it is on this casino. If you would like to discover more about why certain games are weighted the certain way with certain operators, it links to volatility, operator volume, special in-game features (like 50/50 double up) and other factors that perhaps their bonus system cannot compensate for so it's easier to exclude them. That's as far as I'll go, with utmost respect for your opinion which I agree, you may even be right about. We have consulted tons of data and research when opting of our game standards and simply chose to go with what we felt safe going with for the time being - who knows, maybe we'll update in the future but for now I'm happy

I'm more keen to answer you claim of collusion however:

1. Collusion is illegal. Factually, regulatory, legally - it's fraud for many reasons; and admittedly so even noted in the casinomeister philosophy. If we can prove you are connected to another customer and playing the game with the aim or sharing profits we will bar you.

2. I will for your own benefit, mathematically prove collusion is profitable to players when offering bonuses.

Unlike industry standard I will not stop there & hide behind "the industry standard", I've been advocating transparency and have been thought to put my money where my mouth is, so here goes:

Player A (let's name him Weatherman ) receives ONE 200% match on his deposit at 40x bonus turnover up to €500. Pretty common offer I would say.

This player deposited €250 and opted for €500 bonus tripling his initial spin count even if each bet is lost.

this one player is NOT allowed to open additional accounts (multi account) and claim more bonuses - which I would take is an approach you agree with since you hadn't pointed it out.

My first question would be : How is multiple players sharing the same balance/profits and acting in unison any different to one player opening multiple accounts? Please explain to me your opinion on the foremost logical then core legal and regulatory differentiating factors that make these two cases different in their nature that isn't consisting of "they are different people" as that is a non argument. They act, behave and bet as one person, aggregate their winnings and pool their bankroll, while triggering multiple instances of a single bonus aimed to be issued once acting very much as one person with many identities would, no?

Keen to hear your thoughts...

Anyway, onwards:

Weatherman has deposited €250, receiving €500 and now has a €750 bankroll. Playing a high volatility game at 96.5% RTP (he is informed and chose the right game) at say 25 line of 1€ each - he has exactly 30 losing spins with their bankroll. not many at first glance.

In order for this player to turn this bonus over he will need to have wagered €20,000. Expected losses at the RTP% stipulated are €700 however. Let's call RTP 96% so we make the casino ensure deposit and bonuses are swallowed by the wagering. At 96% RTP expected losses are €800, a little over the awarded funds and deposit - most importantly on average and across many individual players though. Please do take the volatility into account.

So now, let's say the aim is to hit a €2,000 + round.

at 100% RTP - odds of say x2000 win happening on a single €1 pay line bet are exactly 2000/1, which played as 25 lines per spin make those odds exactly 2000/(1*25) = 40 odd spins.

At 96% game engine RTP which as you stated yourself is unique to each individual spin and winning on one spin bares no relevance to another - this gives the spin odd of 40/0.96=41.66 which are exactly 41.66 in 1 odds for a spin to engineer a win of that value. or to put it differently, it would take 42 spins to almost guarantee it.

So now we know that it will take 42 spins for this kind of payout to be expected to happen, right? on average of course...

I'm over simplifying of course as the game engines have become far more complex and multiple hits on the games like 300 shields within the bonus rounds can easily give a 2000x + multipliers more often than we like which is why you cant play that game (and games of that type) at max bet with many operators but I wouldn't want to over complicate even more.

So Weatherman investment is €250 - affording a spin count of 30. How many players do you think will it take to almost guarantee that win?

Weatherman meets Vynil - his awesomely best friend that shares his views and they hang out and do amazing things together

They say, hey - I'm getting a LOT of bang for my buck with this bonus and you remember how fast we hit that massive win on 300 shields (or loaded, or couch potato or [insert high variance game here]) - if we try push though together i'm sure we can maximise the bonus and move into positive EV on that game.

So now Weatherman and Vynil both invest 250 each, giving the 1000 free with individual turnover of 20,000 at expected loss of 800 each. They now have 60 spins to achieve a 2000+ win that takes 45 spins on average. they effectively have 133% odds of making this happen. If that's not PEV...

Who knows, they might have a bad run and bust out, but they might hit it - at this point odds are in their favour it would seem.

mathematically - investment is 500, winnings are 2000 (with leftover budget) and expected losses at 800 to complete the turnover whoever hits it, leaving 1200 cashable and if they both depleted their real balance they are 200 in profit.

Now i KNOW - 40 or 60 spins are absolutely no indicator - but take the overly simplified example above, multiply it with a syndication of 20 players working in sync and with organisation (many with superior mathematical skills) playing the same game, at the same time, pummelling those rounds though and you (well me) have a problem on your hands.

And that's why collusion is barred.

I'm sorry on the naming jab - it was all in good spirits of course

Igor

 

[Igor82]

oh my i missed a few posts here lol - sorry if i repeated what was said, it took a while to write above.

 

[Igor82]

Perhaps a freudian slip with the "batter" but we all do this at some point, hope this kindness extends beyond the BOF?

lol - slip indeed. Yes of course - the RTP% bar is there (as i said in some other threads) so if my guys don't catch it themselves a simple snip to CS is enough to claim a chip. I found it really works so well in the long run.

 

[Igor82]

As for the other observation, they don't even HAVE "Double magic", so God only knows where that term came from. Couch Potato would have been a far better candidate for such a restriction, and the APs can still play Cash Crazy in order to do whatever they were doing with Double magic elsewhere to bring about this term. It is the EXACT same game, just different symbols. All I can see with Cash Crazy and presumably Double Magic if they had it is the max bet of £10 and jackpot of 1600 coins, which is £8000 on a £5 coin/£10 bet. If it's OK to play Cash Crazy, then it should be just as OK to play Double Magic if it appears in the future.

Just caught this - actually i owe you apologies. Nice spot and very valid point. I need to see why that got in there. I was filled with prejudice after reading a very long post of yours on another thread about the same thing and admittedly expected the same approach, whcih (in the other thread) i disagreed with while reading. My apologies to you sir :notworthy

nice catch

 

[Igor82]

Managed to make playthrough on the free chip the other day.

Made a deposit today, games are still somewhat laggy after 15-20 mins (have to refresh the game every now and then) but hopefully that problem will be sorted soon.

Had a few problems depositing but the support was pretty helpful and sorted things out in no time

I'm not shouting off the top of my lungs yet but a promising clue was uncovered and this afternoon the fix was deployed in testing mode... we're keeping notes of bet durations and packets and if all fares well fingers crossed) we'd have found it and solved it.

tomorrow'll be "D day" when we close the test reports and announce the outcome. Been seeing the games and it seems it's gotten really smooth. - no complaints at all on chats or e-mails since the fix.

fingers crossed.. and toes...

 

[Jasminebed]

Well, the ability to withdraw and forfeit the bonus is great, I probably would have cashed out far less had I known, lol.

Some MG casinos with the clearplay system don't allow it on the SUB though, you might consider that as a possibility if you want to avoid the advantage player. I do take the time to read the rules, it wasn't all that clear to me when I was playing.

Last night when I was playing, it was only 10:30 GMT, and there was no live support available. While I realize I'm outside the target market, most of us who play for entertainment do it in the evening, and support up to at least midnight should be considered.

The Winagram meter shows for me, but even play after meeting my bonus requirements didn't move it one bit. Says I need to opt in, but it shows as an active promotion for me, so I am unsure what to do to meet the requirements to post a screenie.

Also, I noticed some AWPs (fruities) I'm familiar with from MG casinos, but they just show as "Slots". Even if the game files explain it, I think they need to be classified as such on the main listing.

Can't run it in IE at all.... games are positioned so I can't access bet and spin buttons at all (about 1/2 the game is below the bottom frame, and there's no scroll bar), but works fine in Chrome.

Still looking for an answer to my earlier question (buried with a bunch of happy winning me) about play after completing wagering. Is it free of all restrictions regarding jackpot games, bet sizes and table games? Some casinos consider you to still be playing under bonus terms until cashout, and I tend to err on the side of caution if I'm unsure, and especially when I can't get an answer from support.

 

[Igor82]

Last night when I was playing, it was only 10:30 GMT, and there was no live support available. While I realize I'm outside the target market, most of us who play for entertainment do it in the evening, and support up to at least midnight should be considered.

Very suprised Support should be until 1am on most days. I'll have to check why the chat was unavailable at 10.30

The Winagram meter shows for me, but even play after meeting my bonus requirements didn't move it one bit. Says I need to opt in, but it shows as an active promotion for me, so I am unsure what to do to meet the requirements to post a screenie.

Winagram is auto-opt in. As long as you wager enough and reach 100% post a screenie on the sites in the promo info and we double largest bet/win proportion.

It's important to note that there are MY BONUSES panel and MY Promotions panel .Since its so new to the standard we need to work on clarifying things better. I'll get my teams on it and make the user process easier.

Also, I noticed some AWPs (fruities) I'm familiar with from MG casinos, but they just show as "Slots". Even if the game files explain it, I think they need to be classified as such on the main listing.

On it - thank you

Can't run it in IE at all.... games are positioned so I can't access bet and spin buttons at all (about 1/2 the game is below the bottom frame, and there's no scroll bar), but works fine in Chrome.

very keen to find out more on this. Will PM you for more info.

Still looking for an answer to my earlier question (buried with a bunch of happy winning me) about play after completing wagering. Is it free of all restrictions regarding jackpot games, bet sizes and table games? Some casinos consider you to still be playing under bonus terms until cashout, and I tend to err on the side of caution if I'm unsure, and especially when I can't get an answer from support.

I did answer it but I think it got buried with all the posts

after your balance had cleared - you were free to do as you wish with it. It's as if you deposited those funds. no restrictions what so ever


"Some casinos consider you to still be playing under bonus terms" - no comment. I cant follow that logic

 

[homerbert]

test games on my google nexus 7!
Everything work nice, no any lags, so i like it! If you have any device to play, you should try it, because i have a bit fun while spinning

 

[threescatters]

I have played a bit here and it is a good casino imo. Igor's responses in this thread are awesome.

Thumbs up for bet at eu getting on the accredited list.

 

[JuicyFruit]

I'm curious what you played. Mg games aren't any luckier anywhere else - they're set by MG......

Actually, although true in theory, that is not true in practice (IMHO). As we all know, some casinos 'hate' us no matter what we do, and some games also 'hate' us no matter what we try.

To give some examples.....32Red and I parted company long ago as my RTP was repeatedly appalling, no matter what I played, and yet Dash and I have an ongoing love affair.

I have never had any luck on TSI, TSII or LOTR (original), and I used to look at the winners screenshot section in disbelief regarding these games, and yet, Bridezilla, IR and Battlestar Galactica and I are firmly joined at the hip.

After my bad session here yesterday, I popped over to one of my favourite MG casinos, and all was well and good....

So unfortunately I just think that I have to add Bet-at.eu to my list of casinos who 'hate' me.

 

[JuicyFruit]

Hi juicy, I can't influence the RTP

Have you asked for a free comp? With that rtp I wouldn't be surprised if you're given a pretty decent cashback.

Sorry to have you exclude let me know if I can help you with anything.

Games running smoother at least today?

I wouldn't dream of asking for a cashback. If I have a run of bad luck then that is ...well...my bad luck.

Isn't it nice that you can tell us that though - without having to contact CS and have the run about or trail through pages of transactions?

I'm only kidding of course - please let me know if i can make you feel better about the sessions. I'm sorry you had a rough start, i'm sure we can compensate to ensure your RTP reaches normal levels.

Igor

It is brilliant to be able to see what the RTP is, and then make a decision (To Play or not to Play, that is the question! ) based on that.

However, I have now excluded but in six months, I will be back to try again. Hopefully by then your casino will have forgotten its grudge against me, and will allow my RTP to be at normal levels.

And I second what Threescatters has said....your responses to all posts are truly awesome.

 

[Igor82]

I wouldn't dream of asking for a cashback. If I have a run of bad luck then that is ...well...my bad luck.

The thing is, anyone can have a particularly dry run - it happens! the reason players end up enjoying the casino IS because the casino understands that at those times of high frustrations, it's our job to weather you through as much as it is our benefit to profit from the service.

It's the kind of loyalty treatment you wouldn't shy away from in your favourite restaurant, so why expect anything less at your casino of choice? IMHO, you shouldn't "not dream of it" - I think it's healthy to expect a casino to ensure your treatment is an enjoyable one, within reason of course, especially at times when the games themselves don't.

I PM'd you with some info not to make it overly public Hope you agree with that

Igor

 

[dunover]

I actually posted about bet-at.eu on here months back, few people knew much about them but they seemed kosher. I opened an account back then in new year? as I remember and was relentlessly battered for several hundred, so I closed it as I remember or placed a low deposit limit so I could take a break, can't quite remember. Games seemed to run OK but just felt like I did at 32red, that whatever I deposited I'd never get in the position of making a withdrawal. but that's (bad) luck, no-one's fault. I should have waited until now to join them lol........

 

[vinylweatherman]

Just caught this - actually i owe you apologies. Nice spot and very valid point. I need to see why that got in there. I was filled with prejudice after reading a very long post of yours on another thread about the same thing and admittedly expected the same approach, whcih (in the other thread) i disagreed with while reading. My apologies to you sir :notworthy

nice catch

I understand the maths of collusion, it was the way the example was written in the terms, implying that if one player loses and gets way below expected RTP, another player can come along and play the same machine and it may compensate for the earlier loss by giving enhanced payouts to the second player. This has always been the case in the UK as we have until recently ONLY had non random "fruit machines". The standard Vegas random slot has only recently been introduced, and even some of these are "compensated", rather than being true random 5 reelers. This is why such an example term can look very different to someone from the UK who has played fruit machines in arcades since childhood. Players unfamiliar with compensated terms would probably not see this meaning in the term, and would probably not understand it.

I don't get involved with collusion, I don't like being "run" by someone else. I was once approached in a fruit machine arcade by someone who wanted to "run" me because I was so good at playing. he would give me the bankroll, tell me what to play, where, when, and how, and I would keep a cut of the profits. I more or less told him to "eff off" as I preferred to play with MY bankroll, decide for myself when, where, and how, and keep ALL of the profits.

Collusion is not "illegal", it is merely a breach of contract where the terms prohibit it. It only becomes illegal once fraud is used, such as using false details to register an account, or using someone else's ID to play

I presume that games such as Double Magic are banned not for any logical mathematical reason, but because advantage players have selected it as their game of choice for a particular strategy, perhaps whilst engaged in collusion. The oddity is that this gives inconsistent terms that only shift the problem to another game for those in the know, but are likely to catch out or puzzle recreational players.

On this argument, Couch Potato should be banned, as APs tend to use this a great deal, even if this is not the experience yet of bet-at-eu

In fact, most slots can be set up to be of similar mathematical properties to Double Magic in terms of AP, and this will result in more and more slots getting banned, or the use of "spirit of the bonus" terms to confiscate winnings.

The only way to REALLY tackle the problem of APs is to think like them and try to be one step ahead. One good weapon would be software based enforcement designed to decline bets that fall outside of acceptable parameters. This will stop APs in their tracks, but it will not involve having to confiscate winnings, and sometimes catching recreational players out by mistake.

One simple measure would be to enforce max lines play on most slots, coupled with a max bet limit. APs currently work around max bet limits by playing fewer lines on a slot. Most recreational players probably just play max lines for fear of selecting fewer and seeing the jackpot appear on a valid winline they have not played.


Yesterday, the site was up so I had a look around at the games. I found them to be rather jerky and sticky, and not a particularly pleasant experience, even though there was no obvious lag. However I was using IE, and I note that Chrome or Firefox are recommended for the best experience.

I have always found browser based casinos poorer in performance than download ones, which is why I tend to avoid them. It would be nice to find a browser based casino that runs as smoothly as a download client. I have assumed the problem to be that browser based casinos have to download far more data during a session than download clients which already have the game files stored locally, and only need to send the betting transactions.

Having more of the Microgaming AWP games, particularly the ones not available in the download client, is likely to attract me to a Quickfire browser based casino, but poor in game performance would then deter me from becoming a loyal player.

The REAL problem is large sign up bonuses, it is where APs and colluders make their money. It would be far better to find an alternative draw for new players to try things out, and to promote loyalty the big bonuses should appear for these players, maybe an anniversary bonus, or monthly bonus for active depositing players. The existence of these perks to be made clear at the point of joining.

I often visit the site for a casino and find loads of information about welcome offers, but when I search for what loyal players can expect, there is often no information other than the "loyalty points club".

 

[Igor82]

I just want to say - amazing post. I love the feedback we get on this forum, it really helps us grow and improve rapidly.

There are a few things I'd like to explain without hijacking the BoF thread on the topic. Informative posts are the most fun though

I understand the maths of collusion, it was the way the example was written in the terms, implying that if one player loses and gets way below expected RTP, another player can come along and play the same machine and it may compensate for the earlier loss by giving enhanced payouts to the second player. This has always been the case in the UK as we have until recently ONLY had non random "fruit machines". The standard Vegas random slot has only recently been introduced, and even some of these are "compensated", rather than being true random 5 reelers. This is why such an example term can look very different to someone from the UK who has played fruit machines in arcades since childhood. Players unfamiliar with compensated terms would probably not see this meaning in the term, and would probably not understand it.

You are right and you are not right there. Players, especially informed ones, get blinded by the probability of outcome against infinity of chances. They use that "every spin is absolutely individual" at absolute face value, in error. Dare I say I never agreed the with the king of odds himself eek2 - Michael Shackleford - when I was reading his book.

Yes, the probability of each outcome is unique and equal across each spin, across infinite number of spins however. This is what players seem to forget. We do not live in infinity, we live in time restricted experience.

So if odds of an outcome to happen are for example 1 in 1000 every time, that means TWO (not one) important things:

1. Within those 1000 spins (and further), each spin has 1 in 1000 odds of producing desired outcome, and extremely importantly:
2. The outcome will most probably be produced ONE TIME.

that second line is of incredible importance.

So if in your playing experience on a game, you push though say 1000 spins, while that game completes 10,000 spins in total during your game play - are your odds the same as everyone else's? YES, but only on the condition that spin count is exactly the same for everyone for that duration of time!! Each spin is an increased chance of producing the desired outcome over the number of spins given.

So if for example in 1 hour, you produce 1000 spins with a probability of receiving 5000 in 1 outcome, chances are that you will have pushed 1000*1/5000= 20% odds (to over simplify). Now if the game during that time produced additional 9,000 spins across 9 additional players - then to each his own - each has the 20% chance of hitting. However if the other 9 players worked together acting as one, they effectively hoard that limited amount of spins to their own pocket having the collective odds of 9000x1/5000=9/5=180% chance of getting that outcome.

You are now faced with your 20% odds against a group of people having 180% odds to "get that win". It all times to number of players of course which do dilute the ability of syndicates to increase their own odds - however that doesn't change the mathematics of probability itself.

To put it simply: imagine you are spinning on one of the AWP machines by yourself at 15 spins per minute. Instead of having its own motherboard, the machine is connected to the central RNG. There are 10 players sititng right next to you spinning another 10 machines connected the same RNG. They have 10 times the odds that you have because they can spin at 10 times the frequency.

So the collusion DOES effect you as a player - less so on large operators but the mathematics of it are infallible.

EDIT: I realised I made it sound as if their (colluders) winning odds change your (player) winning odds. They absolutely do not, whether other players are working together or not doesn't influence the at the mathematical essence of things, however the mentality of colludes is such by which aggregation of spins and its rapid succession may have changed the "busyness" of the game within the small operator - which is why its influence is tied to operator volume capacity. It is fair to say that the colluding ring would need to be proportionately sized to the size of the operator for players to "feel" or be "affected by" any real difference but these are semantics. It's a very arguable topic as it is influenced by many variables - however influence in a pragmatic real-life view on things does exist.

I presume that games such as Double Magic are banned not for any logical mathematical reason, but because advantage players have selected it as their game of choice for a particular strategy, perhaps whilst engaged in collusion. The oddity is that this gives inconsistent terms that only shift the problem to another game for those in the know, but are likely to catch out or puzzle recreational players.

On this argument, Couch Potato should be banned, as APs tend to use this a great deal, even if this is not the experience yet of bet-at-eu

100% right and in fact i've already had the meting with my team to re-research, clean up and change. Thank you for that.

The only way to REALLY tackle the problem of APs is to think like them and try to be one step ahead. One good weapon would be software based enforcement designed to decline bets that fall outside of acceptable parameters. This will stop APs in their tracks, but it will not involve having to confiscate winnings, and sometimes catching recreational players out by mistake.

One simple measure would be to enforce max lines play on most slots, coupled with a max bet limit. APs currently work around max bet limits by playing fewer lines on a slot. Most recreational players probably just play max lines for fear of selecting fewer and seeing the jackpot appear on a valid winline they have not played.

Done that differently, while I cant engineer the software, I got the closest I could with my own technology, which attributes additional WR to the proportional winnings derived from "over max bet" spin.

So if you spin 80, and you are allowed 8 and you win 1000 form it. my system will do the following: 8/80=0.9 > 0.9=1000 = 900 > 900x additional predefined WR turnover.

so while AP's may increase their balance, they will also increase the turnover. best i could do without being able to re-engineer the game.

Yesterday, the site was up so I had a look around at the games. I found them to be rather jerky and sticky, and not a particularly pleasant experience, even though there was no obvious lag. However I was using IE, and I note that Chrome or Firefox are recommended for the best experience.


I have always found browser based casinos poorer in performance than download ones, which is why I tend to avoid them. It would be nice to find a browser based casino that runs as smoothly as a download client. I have assumed the problem to be that browser based casinos have to download far more data during a session than download clients which already have the game files stored locally, and only need to send the betting transactions.

While MGS do have a fix in place and tested to mitigate the lag on our Casino, I cant compete with the Viper experience unless i want to give up on option of integrating multiple providers, which IMHO is more important to the general player audience. Being given that the lag isn't debilitating the game play of course.

Until the technology allows bandwidth, animation performance etc to operate at locally installed speeds - this will never be able to happen (broser absed experience being equal to download experience of course).

The REAL problem is large sign up bonuses, it is where APs and colluders make their money. It would be far better to find an alternative draw for new players to try things out, and to promote loyalty the big bonuses should appear for these players, maybe an anniversary bonus, or monthly bonus for active depositing players. The existence of these perks to be made clear at the point of joining.

I often visit the site for a casino and find loads of information about welcome offers, but when I search for what loyal players can expect, there is often no information other than the "loyalty points club".

Love that comment - our perks are really second to none (i know every operator says that) but they are not advertised nearly enough or clearly depicted anywhere. Doing that will allow me to tap into a more informed, loyal audience from the get-go which is something I have taken seriously into consideration following your comment.

Thank you for that also.

Igor

 

[Igor82]

I actually posted about bet-at.eu on here months back, few people knew much about them but they seemed kosher. I opened an account back then in new year? as I remember and was relentlessly battered for several hundred, so I closed it as I remember or placed a low deposit limit so I could take a break, can't quite remember. Games seemed to run OK but just felt like I did at 32red, that whatever I deposited I'd never get in the position of making a withdrawal. but that's (bad) luck, no-one's fault. I should have waited until now to join them lol........

I'd love to be able to dig that thread up and check it out can you find it?

 

[incrediblestuff]

I'd love to be able to dig that thread up and check it out can you find it?

Here:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/anyone-heard-of-this-lot-got-an-e-mail.55442/

So, i did try out the games, and checked the site, no lag or anything, no disconnects, but the one game i tried from another provider, Nextgen, called "Dynasty" was exceptionally slow.

I used the 25NDB, as i already had an account, and must say i did like the layout, and the set up of the site was pleasing too.

I especially like the RTP counter, and the whole site just screams transparency

I also like how Igor has been active, and especially what he has been saying falls in good ears so far.
Definitely see this one passing Baptism, my thumbs are up in any case!
(provided this is a continuous state of affairs, but it would seem logical it is)

 

[dunover]

I'd love to be able to dig that thread up and check it out can you find it?

Yes, I forgot it was actually me who started it lol......
Incrediblestuff has the link for you above. I was the first here to take the plunge by the sound of it....
Hope things are a little better now, but it wasn't bad. I joined after receiving a spam e-mail, which is why I checked it out first.

 

[Igor82]

Here:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/anyone-heard-of-this-lot-got-an-e-mail.55442/

So, i did try out the games, and checked the site, no lag or anything, no disconnects, but the one game i tried from another provider, Nextgen, called "Dynasty" was exceptionally slow.

I used the 25NDB, as i already had an account, and must say i did like the layout, and the set up of the site was pleasing too.

I especially like the RTP counter, and the whole site just screams transparency

I also like how Igor has been active, and especially what he has been saying falls in good ears so far.
Definitely see this one passing Baptism, my thumbs are up in any case!
(provided this is a continuous state of affairs, but it would seem logical it is)

Thank you! - our approach has not wavered since before the BoF and will not change after it. This is who we are and the business model we stand for.

Thanks for the game feedback - 3rd party providers being fed through QF seem to be slow overall but it would appear the massive issues from the last weekend are now behind us. I'm glad to hear that. Technology is always hard at first, but we are working on it around the clock so as long as the kinks and issues are ironed out i see great things ahead personally. Well, I can only hope at least

I'll answer a few things on that thread as they aren't correct assumptions - just for clarity sake

 

[Igor82]

COLLUDING for DUMMIES

i just realised i wrote the synopsis of that book up there. Not sure how smart that was... :/

 

[Igor82]

I joined after receiving a spam e-mail, which is why I checked it out first.

Seriously?? you remember the affiliate it came from?

 

[dunover]

Seriously?? you remember the affiliate it came from?

I have PM'd you.

 

[vinylweatherman]

i just realised i wrote the synopsis of that book up there. Not sure how smart that was... :/

It's the "Advanced Techniques in collusion" book you should worry about

I suspect most players are dead against collusion because of the impression, right or wrong, that it isn't the casino, but other players, that are getting ripped off.

The problem is that for "dummies", they can't see why it is any different to the affiliate site that advertises a casino, and then offers a step by step guide to beating it's SUB. The result for the casino is the same, a body of players who play "perfect strategy" on the bonus, yet the casinos are happy for affiliates to provide such content, and pay them for bringing in the "bad traffic" that can result. With collusion, it is the same effect, a body of players using "perfect strategy".

The book on "advanced collusion" would show how having an affiliate on board the syndicate can make things even more profitable

The only way collusion can affect other players is where it gets so bad that it causes the casino financial problems, and perhaps the loss of decent perks for ordinary players.

Casinos could do more to police their affiliates, and crack down hard on any affiliates that market in a manner that is detrimental to the casino and the experience of the majority of players. Spam is another big issue for players, yet it seems affiliates that spam tend to get away with it by arguing that they adhere to some pretty weak anti-spam rules, such as having an opt-out link, which as everybody knows is the LAST thing one should use to opt out of something you didn't opt in to.

Policing the websites of affiliates will have an additional benefit in that some AP methods can be nipped in the bud before they become a big problem.

Players with a decent bankroll don't need to collude, they just need to know how to use Google. This will reveal suggested tactics for making the most profit from a series of welcome boni.

The slots "depth charge" tactic has been around long before operators started to worry about it, and whilst most focussed their attentions to the Blackjack grind, or the Roulette "full coverage of outcomes" methods, along with the newer tactic of dumping the entire balance on a single outcome at the very start of a session.

In terms of the "depth charge", there are many slots that are vulnerable, not just Double Magic.

The problem with a reactive response is that it results in frequent but minor changes in the terms, many of which defy the common sense of the average player. The only way to kill AP is to make it impossible to win with a bonus, and this will drive away ALL players, as winning is the desired outcome of however many hours of "entertainment" one gets.

It is the game designers who are not taking the problem seriously enough, as if they designed their games with bonuses and the approach by APs in mind, there should be no games to ban for bonus play.

For multi platform providers, it would be better to not have a game that is vulnerable to AP, than to have it and then ban most players from playing it because they are working towards achieving a promotional goal.

 

[Wild Reels]

signed up late last night and had some amazing wins, and a total rollercoaster to meet the wagering requirements, think i got to bed at 5am thank god im working nights bank roll up from 400 to 1.1k back down to £120, back up to 600, then a huge win on leagues of fortune sent it over 2k, finished wagering and won more on the way - have withdrawn 2.9k so i couldnt be happier, kyc checks done and completed in 1 day with no hassle, the only issue i had with the mg games was that after extended periods of play they became a little laggy, restarting them or swapping games seemed to fix it, no idea whether thats a pc issue my end or some sort of server issue.