New Slot Announcement Bonanza by Big Time Gaming

[Jackstar]

Maybe I missing it but on Dazzas videos I can’t see the profit/loss I thought uk sites have to show that? Or am I wrong?

 

[mack341]

I think on unibet you can hide it, leads me to think it must be optional whether you want to see it, just most places don't give you the choice

 

[PMKFRUITPRO]

He just crops it out on his bandicam.

 

[mack341]

I've noticed with bonanza that the master programmers, who are btg, couldn't even be bothered to link the sound effects to the stake win properly.

If you're playing on a higher stake, say £4 , and get a 1x win the yeehaa sound can be triggered, but if you're playing on 20p that sound is reserved for wins of 10+ times stake not 1x.

It's not exactly an exciting discovery, but does undermine the theory that bonanza is a really special bit of programming done by geniuses. I'm convinced it is a 'arrange the wheels after the result is drawn' game. The appearance and exact positioning of blockers, it's an insult to cascade games as well. I had 3 the other day and it didn't even add up to 1x, all that work for nothing.

I'm sure it pegs close to rtp simply by reversing any win with runs of dead spins, [by changing the odds] it would be too complex to rely on millions of combinations randomly dropping in. Occasionally it will do something freak, but that is no different to a jackpot game setting aside some of the accumulated rtp for big payouts.

Anyone had a good bonus and then a large win on the all the ways, within say 25 spins of each other?

 

[goatwack]

Exactly. In an ongoing, infinite simulation (barring the game being pulled one fine, sunny day) it ought to just be as mathematically feasible to supersede the game's RTP, and have sustained bouts of profit play.

If losing - "That's just the maths kicking in, doing it's thang"

If winning - "It's not possible, the maths will kick in and level it out eventually"

Yet winning streaks, in a supposedly random game, should be attainable, because in a void of 'infinity', such bubbles should coexist also, but of course won't, as it's been programmed to rein such anomalies in.

Try as one might, and however one sugar-coats it, this is called (wipes brow, clears throat) 'compensation', as evidenced by any meaningful wins being purged soon after in an extremely clunky fashion, and at complete odds at with what went before....

You can be sure that upon any sort of bountiful event in Bonanza, the game is undoubtedly kicked into 'Take Mode' as any regular would testify, let alone permit such absurdities as getting a large win followed by Max Ways, or even several other boons. Pretty suspect behaviour for a random game, wouldn't you say?

 

[interlog]

For me, the game doesn't play any different to when it was first launched. It will rip your balance most of the time but you can have the occasional run of good sessions that get you back closer to the games RTP.

Now, compare that to Diamond Mine, and that game in my opinion has changed. Almost impossible to get a bonus and the base game doesn't play as it used to. Way too many 3 of a kind wins with no cascade further wins to get the win value above the spin value.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

For me, the game doesn't play any different to when it was first launched. It will rip your balance most of the time but you can have the occasional run of good sessions that get you back closer to the games RTP.

There's never any proof that Bonanza has been changed or is compensated. Ever. Not one single shred of proof, or even compelling evidence.

When anyone ever does turn up any stats (as I did earlier in the year, and others have done from time to time), they always land somewhere comfortably within the range of expected results of a random game with a 4% house edge.

RTP - Same as it's ever been.
Feature frequency - Same as it's ever been.
Average feature pay - Same as it's ever been.
Base game pay - Same as it's ever been.

The only variables left are feature volatility (that might have been done, but evidence came there none), and base game volatility (again, that might have been done). Why BTG would bother to do either of those things though, I have no idea. I tracked stats earlier in the year (the posts are still there), ReelsOfFun crunched the numbers and guess what - they all came out about right.

Compensation is, IMO, a nonsense. Not only would it make the game non-compliant with its licensing, what's the bloody point of going to all that hassle (and risk!) to achieve EXACTLY THE SAME END RESULT that it will as a random game with a generous 4% house edge?

It's all tinfoil hattery of the highest order.

 

[snorky510238]

So at this point, we have 3 or 4 people saying it hasn’t changed and about 10 people who say it has.

Majority rules.

 

[kennygamerboy]

There's never any proof that Bonanza has been changed or is compensated. Ever. Not one single shred of proof, or even compelling evidence.

When anyone ever does turn up any stats (as I did earlier in the year, and others have done from time to time), they always land somewhere comfortably within the range of expected results of a random game with a 4% house edge.

RTP - Same as it's ever been.
Feature frequency - Same as it's ever been.
Average feature pay - Same as it's ever been.
Base game pay - Same as it's ever been.

The only variables left are feature volatility (that might have been done, but evidence came there none), and base game volatility (again, that might have been done). Why BTG would bother to do either of those things though, I have no idea. I tracked stats earlier in the year (the posts are still there), ReelsOfFun crunched the numbers and guess what - they all came out about right.

Compensation is, IMO, a nonsense. Not only would it make the game non-compliant with its licensing, what's the bloody point of going to all that hassle (and risk!) to achieve EXACTLY THE SAME END RESULT that it will as a random game with a generous 4% house edge?

It's all tinfoil hattery of the highest order.

Ridiculous how you refuse to believe the evidence. It makes me laugh when people are so naive to believe all is above board in the slots world. Haha wake up and smell the coffee. If they can rig the FOBT (which they did) what makes online Any different. Essentially playing against yourself they have all your cookies and data do you really think that they don't tailor it all to your personal habits?

 

[Jono777]

Always said from the start that the bare bones of online slots are no different to the old AWP's we love to hate

The main thing in common being "compensation"

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Ridiculous how you refuse to believe the evidence. It makes me laugh when people are so naive to believe all is above board in the slots world. Haha wake up and smell the coffee. If they can rig the FOBT (which they did) what makes online Any different. Essentially playing against yourself they have all your cookies and data do you really think that they don't tailor it all to your personal habits?

What evidence? And evidence that proves what? What is the claim against Bonanza?

EDIT - I can't claim to have read every word of every post in all 847 pages of this thread, but I've been following it from the start and reading it regularly, I've never seen anyone 'prove' anything untoward, and all the genuine stats that have been posted, show it as being a random game with an RTP of 96%, a 1/460 feature frequency, with loads of RTP in the base game, relatively little in the feature, and a rarity of hits in the 500x or more and certainly 1000x or more range. None of that has ever changed.

 

[snorky510238]

There’s no doubt that the wins between x100 and x500 are much rarer. There are definitely way more that pay less than x100 too.

 

[goatwack]

There’s no doubt that the wins between x100 and x500 are much rarer. There are definitely way more that pay less than x100 too.

How would you even know? You've barely touched this game!

 

[mack341]

What evidence? And evidence that proves what? What is the claim against Bonanza?

EDIT - I can't claim to have read every word of every post in all 847 pages of this thread, but I've been following it from the start and reading it regularly, I've never seen anyone 'prove' anything untoward, and all the genuine stats that have been posted, show it as being a random game with an RTP of 96%, a 1/460 feature frequency, with loads of RTP in the base game, relatively little in the feature, and a rarity of hits in the 500x or more and certainly 1000x or more range. None of that has ever changed.

If you get a decent win and then the reel sets/odds change afterwards, so that you immediately experience a higher rate of dead spins, then this is a form of compensation surely?

The only 'evidence' would be in the software code, everything else can be batted away as 'well, that's what a random 96% game will do'

 

[goatwack]

Clearly to some it's the destination that matters, not the journey. So if the game's 96% is achieved, which some may not even attain over days, months or years, if ever, then to hell with all the 'in-between bits'.

The crux of the matter is the way in which the game alters its behaviours during sessions to keep things aligned, i.e through corrective, patterned play.

No one is saying they can't win on Bonanza or get good hits, but the manner in which things play out has always exhibited compensatory mechanics, beyond anything that could be deemed truly random or even non-scripted. Because woe betide anyone that dare win big consecutively, let alone thousands of players in unison!

The sort of reasoning that companies can change the dynamics of their games and not even be criticized for it are a company's wet dream, and the sort of rhetoric that harms the scene as opposed to helping it

 

[snorky510238]

If you get a decent win and then the reel sets/odds change afterwards, so that you immediately experience a higher rate of dead spins, then this is a form of compensation surely?

And this absolutely happens, more times than it’s possible to believe, if the game was random.

The question, why would they bother to change the game, is indeed a question that shows how naive or one dimensional, some people’s thinking can be.

 

[snorky510238]

Just to add, the cascades are 100% not random. The outcome is known instantly and as @mack341 says, the rest is just eye candy.

The proof of this is most noticeable when you get about 4 cascades for a small win (x3 for example).

On the initial spin, you hit 3oak aces. From the result your win can only be increased by hitting a Jack on reel 3 (one space), in it drops. That result leaves only a King needed to keep the win alive (one space), in it pops and so on. I have even had 5 or 6 cascades when the only symbol I can win on manages to drop in.

Each one of those individual drops is an 11-1 shot so when there is only 1 space to win, 4 successive cascades has accumulative odds of 14,641 to 1. 3 successive is 1,331 to 1.

That tells you that you should see those occurrences, very rarely but it is indeed, the exact opposite. These happen way more often than the maths suggests.

It’s the same with the 4 symbols scrolling across the top. Again, the odds of seeing all 4 symbols the same is 14,641 to one. Yet 4 matching comes up way more often.

So, if “the blind faith” are going to use the maths as their reason the game has to be legit and everything stacks up, then there are some examples of how it cannot be random and the maths does not stand up.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I would imagine the entire round is generated server side first, and then replayed by the client, since they can go on for a while. From memory it's pretty well established (and agreed upon) that Bonanza uses dynamic reel sets that it switches between (which for the record, is not something I'm a fan of at all), so stuff that should feel like it has a reasonable chance of happening, is actually vanishingly unlikely. Also its reel strips are incredibly long (there's a thread somewhere here at CM where someone pulled the reel strips for Danger High Voltage, those things are LOOOONG, there are different ones for different bonus rounds, and they're very scummily designed).

However, all of the above can be true, whilst the game is still fair and random. How far along the route to Jammin' Jars we are with Bonanza is up for debate to some extent (Jammin' Jars being confirmed here at CM, by Push Gaming themselves, to basically be a 'scratchcard' style game where everything you see on screen is a pre-determined sound and light show following a single call to the RNG on the backend).

I think what people really need to do with Bonanza is disassociate what they're seeing onscreen in front of them, from whatever the backend might be doing, you can have stuff that looks all kinds of fishy onscreen, that still has a fair RNG call on the backend. I mean, it's not exactly uncommon as a practice, like the 'reveal' on pick me style bonus rounds that shows your 'choice' was wrong, rather than the server had already chosen the result and was just showing it to you.

However, none of this stuff even remotely proves, or provides evidence for the claim that Bonanza is compensated, or does pretty much anything else that it's routinely accused of in this thread.

Just stop playing it if you don't like it, and if you've already stopped playing it, then congratulations! Spend the money you save on something nice

 

[goatwack]

I thought the BTG rep had vouched for Bonanza's bonus being 'live' and unfurling before the player in 'real time'?

These deconstructed interpretive revelations are really quite something!

 

[interlog]

I thought the BTG rep had vouched for Bonanza's bonus being 'live' and unfurling before the player in 'real time'?

These deconstructed interpretive revelations are really quite something!

He did indeed say that, and I believe him to be right in doing so.

Unlike Red Tiger as an example where the bonus is already determined when it starts (the balance updates before the first spin of the bonus is played!), with BTG games it isn't. Different reel sets may be in place (Danger High Voltage being a prime example, and even with Bonanza that max megaways in the bonus is still to be seen over all of these years) but it certainly isn't pre-determined in my opinion.

As for the observation of made of "impossible" tumble wins as described by snorky, this was the case when the game was first released yet no complaints on his part when he was on a winning streak.

 

[snorky510238]

He did indeed say that, and I believe him to be right in doing so.

Unlike Red Tiger as an example where the bonus is already determined when it starts (the balance updates before the first spin of the bonus is played!), with BTG games it isn't. Different reel sets may be in place (Danger High Voltage being a prime example, and even with Bonanza that max megaways in the bonus is still to be seen over all of these years) but it certainly isn't pre-determined in my opinion.

As for the observation of made of "impossible" tumble wins as described by snorky, this was the case when the game was first released yet no complaints on his part when he was on a winning streak.

I have always stated that slots are not random from day 1 so not like I have suddenly changed my mind.

As for the bonus plays out “live”. We have a few examples that Imo, proves it does not.

More than once, (it actually happened to me), a 4 scatter trigger at Unibet displayed 17 spins. Bemused, I press start and the first spin, I get 3 carts on the top row to correct it.

That happened to at least one other player (@pinnit2014) from memory.

Then you have the scenario, where @pinnit2014 triggered the bonus only to be disconnected before he pressed start. On logging back in, his balance had updated and low and behold, he plays out the bonus that paid the exact extra his balance had increased by.

Let’s face it, we all know there is a lot going on in the programming that we will never know about but it stands to reason that if you were playing £20 spins and you hit a bonus, there’s not a chance you are hitting 8 ways of diamonds on a x20 multiplier so the stake must affect the outcomes possible.

We are led to believe it doesn’t though.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

There are several possible scenarios here (that can apply not just to Bonanza).

1) The entire free spins round is pre-determined insofar as the server makes an RNG call, the RNG returns a value (i.e. 72x) and the game then either 'engineers' a set of spins that delivers this, or plays out the pre-scripted sequence that matches the call (as Jammin' Jars does).

2) The RNG returns the fact a bonus has been triggered, the server then plays out the free spins on its backend, one after the other, each based on another RNG call (this can be done in milliseconds), and then delivers that sequence of spins to the client to replay to the player.

3) The RNG simply triggers the free spins round, and then delivers each spin of the bonus to the client after the player chooses to start it, one after the other, based on a fresh RNG call for each. The server doesn't 'know' what the result is until the final spin has been generated.

There could be some more variations in there, but they're the main ways it could be done. We can argue the toss about which is is preferable, although all of them, assuming the original RNG call is entirely random, are fair.

I covered this in a video on my old channel, 3Dice use Option 3 above, I yanked my network cable halfway through a free spins round and when I reconnected the server only replayed the round up to the last spin that had completed, it then had to generate the rest of the spins to finish the round, it didn't 'know' what the result was, only that it still owed me some free spins.

I tested this with another game at a different casino from a different provider (I honestly can't remember which one now), and when I went back into the game the free spins round had been completed and my balance simply updated with whatever it had paid, the server already knew where it had finished, even though I hadn't seen it.

 

[Jono777]

A server result is a server result, ALL of which are predetermined.

Press 'spin' server determines "Lose", display anything easily (mismatch reels 1+2 and job done)

Press 'spin' server determines 100x win, the coding can the decide whether to drop a base game hit in worth your 100x or to bonus but still will only pay the predetermined 100x

If I had a million quid in the bank right now, I'd confidently stake 99% of it that this is pretty much how all online slots work, or pretty darn close anyway.

 

[interlog]

A server result is a server result, ALL of which are predetermined.

Press 'spin' server determines "Lose", display anything easily (mismatch reels 1+2 and job done)

Press 'spin' server determines 100x win, the coding can the decide whether to drop a base game hit in worth your 100x or to bonus but still will only pay the predetermined 100x

If I had a million quid in the bank right now, I'd confidently stake 99% of it that this is pretty much how all online slots work, or pretty darn close anyway.

You're probably right.

That being the case, and the RTP hasn't changed, why the heck would you then recode the game, as has been assumed by some here.

 

[PMKFRUITPRO]

Each spin in the base is already known the second you hit start. The cascades in the base are the results of that request and NOT another random call for each subsequent cascade.

In the feature each spin is a single request, the bonus is not a pre determined amount like on some slots.

This was demonstrated when BTG had issues where the game round couldn’t play out to an end. Instead upon re-loading the game the initial trigger would appear and a completely different bonus round would play out over and over again all with different results entirely no matter how many times you tried to get the game to end.

 

[slot_zombie]

And yet there was that graphical bug a while ago, where a normal 4 scatter bonus round would say you have won 17 spins on the trigger... if a retrigger was coming during the bonus.

..which kind of kills the non-predetermined individual RNG call theory, does it not?

 

[snorky510238]

And yet there was that graphical bug a while ago, where a normal 4 scatter bonus round would say you have won 17 spins on the trigger... if a retrigger was coming during the bonus.

..which kind of kills the non-predetermined individual RNG call theory, does it not?

I mentioned exactly that on the previous page. I am pretty sure I posted the screenshot in this thread along with the appropriate bullshit.

 

[PMKFRUITPRO]

Yes one can only presume that it is indeed a graphical bug or a programming glitch.

There is no doubt each spin in the feature is a random call.

 

[goatwack]

No f***ing clue what's going on anymore, lost track when the score was 3-3. So which is it?

Half- live?

Semi- scripted??

Non-in-play in-play???

Screw it. Let's just go with partially pseudo- predetermined, for all our sakes ?

 

[mack341]

Each spin in the base is already known the second you hit start. The cascades in the base are the results of that request and NOT another random call for each subsequent cascade.

In the feature each spin is a single request, the bonus is not a pre determined amount like on some slots.

This was demonstrated when BTG had issues where the game round couldn’t play out to an end. Instead upon re-loading the game the initial trigger would appear and a completely different bonus round would play out over and over again all with different results entirely no matter how many times you tried to get the game to end.

I don't think I read the original posts on this, so just wonder if there are any alternative conclusions to draw.

Could it not be possible that there was a conflict between what the bonus win the game had asked to display [in monetary terms] and what the software was producing, so the game then crashes as a protective measure, and due to it never matching the correct total the bonus round would not complete?

Are there any other slots that do a 'live' individual spin bonus rather than a play out of a pre-determined win [at the trigger moment]?

edit: Also wasn't there something on Dazza's demo vids of new slots, where he is in a developer mode and selects the bonus result, say 5,000x and then the game shows it? However maybe these weren't btg games.

 

[PMKFRUITPRO]

I can’t remember what the exact error was, I was pretty certain it was when bonuses were being shut down and played later (like in a bonus hunt scenario) and for some reason (possibly a certain time elapsed) the bonus round would not end correctly and they’d be an error.

Upon reloading the game , the initial bonus trigger was resumed and the bonus would replay itself. However because BTG bonus rounds are separate random individual calls for each spin, then of course you would get a different out come each time before the error then happened again and the whole process would repeat itself again.

I remember this happening to rocknrollaaa on a stream once ( Extra Chilli was the game) and then a member here posted about it happening to them on Opal Fruits.

BTG subsequently resolved what ever the cause was.

Certainly in the early days the results of a bonus were not pre determined. I couldn’t comment now.

On say raging rhino or montezuma for example, if the game error’d out or your battery went or something, then (in the early days) the bonus upon reloading would just exactly replicate the previous bonus that fucked up spin for spin again. I think SG then just upgraded the game to continue from the last spin before something going wrong rather than play the entire bonus out again.

 

[PMKFRUITPRO]

On some providers you can achieve the max win on demo mode yes, but again because of the way BTG bonuses work with no ‘theoretical’ max win cap or stop trigger and because of the random call for each spin you can’t do this.

Of course other providers have win caps and stop limits.

 

[hhhelllo]

A slot with no max win won't even pay 5000x more than one time out of a trillion spin anyway.
Why are you guys still playing this stupid game? The feeling is nice, I get it. But nobody ever wins more than 4000x
How much money would you have saved if instead you would have played fruit party with 5000x max win?
Normally you compare RTP and thats it.
But with Bonanza, you can't. It's just a dumb game that will always end up with fck all.
Except one session per year with a couple 400x and an overall 2000x profit after couple hours.
Far from worth it

 

[pinnit2014]

I have always stated that slots are not random from day 1 so not like I have suddenly changed my mind.

As for the bonus plays out “live”. We have a few examples that Imo, proves it does not.

More than once, (it actually happened to me), a 4 scatter trigger at Unibet displayed 17 spins. Bemused, I press start and the first spin, I get 3 carts on the top row to correct it.

That happened to at least one other player (@pinnit2014) from memory.

Then you have the scenario, where @pinnit2014 triggered the bonus only to be disconnected before he pressed start. On logging back in, his balance had updated and low and behold, he plays out the bonus that paid the exact extra his balance had increased by.

Let’s face it, we all know there is a lot going on in the programming that we will never know about but it stands to reason that if you were playing £20 spins and you hit a bonus, there’s not a chance you are hitting 8 ways of diamonds on a x20 multiplier so the stake must affect the outcomes possible.

We are led to believe it doesn’t though.

That went on for ages and only at Unibet - made it very annoying as you thought when the re-trigger came it was 22, if you weren't paying attention when it rolled in etc.

Re the other one - DreamRJ had a different experience on DHV - every time he replayed the gubbed bonus round the total win was different (not sure what one the casino ran with, probably the lowest )

 

[snorky510238]

I had the same experience on a BTG game. ? Gods (only played it once) can’t remember the full name and get this for an outcome.

I think it was at 21 Casino (white hat one). They had a rep on here I think…..Mariflab or something like that iIrc.

I triggered the bonus but I couldn’t start it. Messaged her to look into it and she said there was an error but having looked into it, the bonus actually paid nothing…Zilch.

There’s a surprise, I thought. Can’t prove it did but seemed highly coincidental..hmm.

Put it down as one of those things and left it a while. Then thought, I wonder if it would work on a different device. Tried it on my laptop and it worked first time and paid £17.40 (some things stick in your memory).

The problem now was, the game wouldn’t exit the bonus and update my balance so I refreshed it and found that it went back to the start of the bonus and yes, I did get a different result. £4 odd.

Same problem, couldn’t exit so I played it over and over. I played about 25 bonuses and none of them paid over £17.40 but none of them paid 0.

The strange thing was 2 of them paid exactly £4.30 and 2 of them paid exactly £6.40, albeit with different wins to lead to the totals. It did seem a bit of a coincidence and I could probably go in and play it again as it never did get resolved.

On the Jammin’ jars theme, what you have to remember is that the only said it was pre-scripted after they were found out. They didn’t advertise it that way beforehand. Why?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

On the Jammin’ jars theme, what you have to remember is that the only said it was pre-scripted after they were found out. They didn’t advertise it that way beforehand. Why?

Because it doesn't really make any difference at a fundamental level, as long as the original call to the RNG is fair and random, and all possible outcomes have an equal chance of being picked. (I always argued, and still do, that the rule of Jammin' Jars are misleading because they say that the movement of the jars is random, suggesting that all outcomes are possible, when in actual fact this isn't the case.)

Game providers aren't under any obligation to reveal how the maths of their games work, they just need to pass certification and abide by the terms of their licensing.

I don't like the maths models of modern games (not even sure you can call them 'slots' in the traditional sense), and how opaque their operation is, which is partly why I haven't deposited anywhere for months now. (Add in insane variance, shrinking RTPs, lazy game design and lack of innovation, the general hassle of playing online these days and all the rest of it - and I just can't be arsed.)

 

[slot_zombie]

Because it doesn't really make any difference at a fundamental level, as long as the original call to the RNG is fair and random, and all possible outcomes have an equal chance of being picked. (I always argued, and still do, that the rule of Jammin' Jars are misleading because they say that the movement of the jars is random, suggesting that all outcomes are possible, when in actual fact this isn't the case.)

Game providers aren't under any obligation to reveal how the maths of their games work, they just need to pass certification and abide by the terms of their licensing.

I don't like the maths models of modern games (not even sure you can call them 'slots' in the traditional sense), and how opaque their operation is, which is partly why I haven't deposited anywhere for months now. (Add in insane variance, shrinking RTPs, lazy game design and lack of innovation, the general hassle of playing online these days and all the rest of it - and I just can't be arsed.)

Glorified high-volatility scratchcards with a light show tacked on.

Always "felt" like the Microgaming titles were doing random reel strips but who knows.

For modern stuff, can only shout out Push Gaming for Razor Shark which surprised the devs with a win over over 80,000x when testing couldn't produce over 50,000x. RS2 is probably also random in the same way, i.e. not a scratch card.

 

[Slotter]

Has the RTP on this been changed? I swear when I played it a few days ago it said 95.?? %. I always remembered it being 96.?? %. I have been out of the loop for a while though.

 

[snorky510238]

Here’s a genuine question. If it’s all random and each spin in the bonus is a separate call, then why, with a game that has the potential (if it is indeed random), have we never seen a x20,000 win? Thousands upon thousands of bonuses, collectively, but nobody got lucky. Find that hard to believe.

 

[goatwack]

Pretty easy one: everyone's just sort of unlucky. Plus not enough spins put through it.

The average user will need a few billion (to get that RTP) whilst the combined userbase will need a few trillion. Give or take

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Glorified high-volatility scratchcards with a light show tacked on.

Always "felt" like the Microgaming titles were doing random reel strips but who knows.

Certainly if you go back far enough MG slots used genuine reel strips, for example the original Thunderstruck you could work out the precise RTP by pulling the reel strips and doing the sums, based on each stop on each strip having the exact same probability of landing on each spin.

 

[pinnit2014]

Happy with the amount but 22 spins and a x32 couldn't even match Gemix X wise

 

[snorky510238]

Is that from 2018?

 

[cncas2123]

I have been back playing after a 6 month break thanks to Jumpman Gaming being turds with a withdrawal. Bonanza is still shite , a dozen bonuses so far and biggest was x20.
I never experienced the halcyon days of big bonuses one after the other , but did drop a x 5000 base game hit last year, and for me bonanza was shite , still is shite and will continue to be shite but that’s just the nature of slots most of the time.

 

[interlog]

Here’s a genuine question. If it’s all random and each spin in the bonus is a separate call, then why, with a game that has the potential (if it is indeed random), have we never seen a x20,000 win? Thousands upon thousands of bonuses, collectively, but nobody got lucky. Find that hard to believe.

How do you know nobody had a 20,000x win? The majority of players don't post Youtube videos and screenshots of their wins.

 

[snorky510238]

How do you know nobody had a 20,000x win? The majority of players don't post Youtube videos and screenshots of their wins.

What’s the biggest win we have seen posted on here? Thousands posted and yet, never one over 10,000 even. I am sure if someone had hit a monster it would have popped up somewhere. Not including BTG’s x14,000 when it first came out. Further proof, they’re a bunch of scamming chancers and that’s being polite.

 

[goatwack]

There's a chance that quite a few gamblers aren't on forums or have any visible online presence, and so go about their business quietly.

I'd imagine there's also many that flit in and out from Bonanza, to add to its vast userbase....

Yet given its uniquely addictive nature, there'll be a dedicated Bonanza base that'll cane this slot almost exclusively since its beginnings, numbering thousands. And still no peep from any of those regarding anything remotely close to the wins seen early in this game's cycle, by a streamer no less!

Statistically unlikely, all the more so given that it's in a gambler's nature to impress their big wins amongst others.

If those 14,000x and above winners do exist out there.......I salute you! ?

 

[Kroffe]

There's a chance that quite a few gamblers aren't on forums or have any visible online presence, and so go about their business quietly.

I'd imagine there's also many that flit in and out from Bonanza, to add to its vast userbase....

Yet given its uniquely addictive nature, there'll be a dedicated Bonanza base that'll cane this slot almost exclusively since its beginnings, numbering thousands. And still no peep from any of those regarding anything remotely close to the wins seen early in this game's cycle, by a streamer no less!

Statistically unlikely, all the more so given that it's in a gambler's nature to impress their big wins amongst others.

If those 14,000x and above winners do exist out there.......I salute you! ?

I dont think the actual hit was from a streamer, but it was that 'letsgiveitaspin' guy that posted it on youtube.
So this seemingly once in a lifetime win was re-created by BTG themselves, and going by their history with creating wins it would not exactly surprise me if this was the same deal.
Weird how they did not re-create all the other 10.000x+ wins that the game is surely spitting out each year.

Hit is around 3:50.

 

[slot_zombie]

Yes, it was revealed by a much thinner Kim "LetsGiveItASpin".

At the time it was such an incredible X win that it was "unveiled" after being "recreated".

14000x wouldn't touch the sides today. How times changed.

 

[goatwack]

Yet the game itself hasn't changed in all that time *cough* *splutter*