Need your input: Casino Slot RTP - Categorizations, Would You Agree?

[dunover]

Okay, I am not saying this is going to happen, but hypothetically speaking how would we rate a casino's RTP offerings should it be decided one day to offer this information at CM? Or if it was available anywhere else for that matter?

As you may or may not know, a game reduced by 2% from 96.xx to 94.xx on average reduces your playtime by around 25%. From 96.xx% down to 92.xx% (4% less) it will halve average playtime so a 50% reduction in spins if you start with 100x bet and play until bust, recycling wins.

FYI this is worked out by starting with 100x stake, staying at that stake and assuming NO variance i.e. you get back 96p for every £1 spin until you cannot cover a last £1 play.

So my suggestion is RTP RATING:

A = EXCELLENT! All the casino's slots are offered at developer's highest setting or settings averaging 96%

B = GOOD Most games are supplied at 96% but some are offered at 94% where the developer/provider offers this.

C = MEDIOCRE Generally the majority of games are 94% but can have a few at 96% whereby the provider only offers them at 96% but may also have an approximately equal number at 92%, thus averaging 94%. This category seems quite common nowadays.

D = POOR The majority of games are set at an abysmal 92%, a few exceptions up and down but 92% the approximate norm.

E = EXECRABLE The casino not only employs most games at 92% but is known to lower some to the obscenely terrible 90% or even less where those providers offer 84-86% options. May as well play land-based.

Would you broadly agree this is a fair and relevant list? Any ideas? Thanks!

 

[satchnz]

I suggested something vaguely similar but more complex a couple of years ago and the general consensus was the question around how this info would be kept up to date.

Having a couple more years of CM experience under my belt, I now realise there are enough of us on here that wouldn’t mind being vocal when they spot general RTP changes at their usual hangouts. I’d certainly get involved.

Would you also include crypto casinos?

 

[dunover]

I suggested something vaguely similar but more complex a couple of years ago and the general consensus was the question around how this info would be kept up to date.

Having a couple more years of CM experience under my belt, I now realise there are enough of us on here that wouldn’t mind being vocal when they spot general RTP changes at their usual hangouts. I’d certainly get involved.

Would you also include crypto casinos?

Yes, but this is not an OFFICIAL CM objective (although if the other admin latched on and though it a decent idea then it could be one day) more of an informal categorization the forum members could get used to and remember easily for when we discuss casinos in future. Instead of typing a lot about RTP we could simply use the number 1-5 which the player at any given casino thinks is appropriate.

 

[lockinlove]

I have nothing to suggest aside from this should absolutely be included. Having casinos putting their rtp to 89% on some slots is outrageous. Especially since a lot of people have no idea there is different rtp. Casinos should not be allowed to advertise here or the players should know before signing up.

RTP models were never changed before really. Times have changed and its time for casinomeister to step in and change with it.

89% rtp is pretty criminal and casinos shouldnt be allowed to use casinomeister as their platform to commit invasive non lubricated crimes.

 

[Reelsoffun]

89% rtp is pretty criminal and casinos shouldnt be allowed to use casinomeister as their platform to commit invasive non lubricated crimes.

Yet land based UK casinos have been running at 90% for over a decade with the odd couple of games at as low as 88% So what does that tell ya.

 

[Guntis]

1-5 seems too granular. I think 1-3 could be alright. Something like this i guess:

- Excellent: Top RTPs like 96% across all slots by popular providers
- Good: Some providers' slots run at lowered RTPs (e.g dropped from 96% to 94%)
- Low: Most slots by popular providers run at very low RTPs (e.g dropped from 96% to 92% or lower)

 

[dunover]

1-5 seems too granular. I think 1-3 could be alright. Something like this i guess:

- Excellent: Top RTPs like 96% across all slots by popular providers
- Good: Some providers' slots run at lowered RTPs (e.g dropped from 96% to 94%)
- Low: Most slots by popular providers run at very low RTPs (e.g dropped from 96% to 92% or lower)

That's what I was originally going to go for, A-B-C but thought each category would be too broad so expanded them to 5. You make a good point though, could just use A,B,C.

 

[lockinlove]

Yet land based UK casinos have been running at 90% for over a decade with the odd couple of games at as low as 88% So what does that tell ya.

Which is why I dont really go to landbased. I can somewhat understand them going that low as the overhead in those landbased casinos are insane. But it goes to show me one thing. 90% rtp is really really really bad because landbased casinos still rake in hundreds of millions-billions even after all the overhead they pay.

 

[Flyingslotsman]

I agree with guntis , 1,2,3. Everything else in the bin.Great idea which would love to see implemented.

Crypto =1
Uk = 2/3

I think only 2 or 3 offer filler RTP. Mr Q and Ive heard bet365. Mr Q just doesn't offer full games, otherwise decent casino. They have still never implemented a search or sort option, which is mildly infuriating.

 

[jasonuk]

Sounds like a glorified traffic lights system - which I would agree with.

The one expansion I would consider, is to have the underlying data with it - doesn't have to be detailed (existing releases vs new releases, with a indicative range), but it would be very easy for stuff to slip through the net if it is too simple.

For example, I can think of sites that offer

• Existing releases at 96%, new releases at 94%
• Existing releases at 96%, new releases at 92% (!)
• Existing releases at 92-94%, new releases at 88-92% (yes, that's WH)
• Existing releases at 96%, new releases at 94-96% (yes, the rare breed toying with increased RTPs)

So someone like me that tends to skew towards older slots will have more options than someone that wants to play the latest streamer scratchcards (because almost nobody deploys those at 96% in the UK).

It also flags sites like WH that are actively targeting 96% and deleting them from their site... and WH being red-red would be a *ahem* red flag for people to avoid their offerings.

(Aside: while this is being mentioned as a community initiative, it's something I've suggested should be included in the ratings rework - e.g. a 94% site would never be 9.5).

 

[Avernite]

Excellent suggestion. I think the 5 rating steps is better than 3 as well as casinos have a more varied approach with RTP at the moment. It should definitely factor into overall rating as well.

 

[mcgameboy]

Personally, I like the 5 rating tiers in Mr. D's OP the most.

Although some of the reps here on CM might not be too chuffed with such a ratings system

LIL made an excellent point re: RTP models changing and CM needing to move with the times.
Especially in today's slotting world, where slots with nosebleed variance are becoming the norm, rather than the exception.

In terms of getting more bang for your buck/pound/euro, players NEED to be fully clued up on where the best places to play are.

That said, we need to make sure we paint the full picture.
For example, a site like Playojo....personally, I'd have its overall RTP rating as a D, due to a lot of their slots being at 92%.

BUT....if you were a fan of Merkur slots and nothing else, then Playojo would be an A, given that most of them are 95%+ RTP.

So maybe some caveats or notae bene need to be included in order for it to be done right.
We can't go highlighting the bad while neglecting to omit the good. And vice versa.

If this RTP rating were to become a thing here at CM, then perhaps there could be a useful role for the Meister Minions to play here?

 

[justdoit]

last week you guys add a casino with RTP 88%, no one is going to join if RTP is low, also check casino if they keep the same RTP, like Winz year ago they had max RTP now they drop RTP to 94%, and they still on top 9.6,
also will be nice to rate casino how active rep`s are, Winz rep was very active with new offers, when they got casinomeister reward never see again
Bonus if casino offers whats the wager ist wager on bonus or both bonus and deposit, max bonus payout etc
payment offers by casino, if they charge fee what is the % fee on deposit or withdraw, do they accept visa card on deposit or withdraw, special on crypto casino fees are very high on Fiat deposit

verifey time VS use to verifey doc in 5-10mins now 3-4 days need to waiti to verifey my bank card, and need to send email again with my bankcard pic
also will be good to rate casino what providers they use, many Crypto casino you see some providers I never play or heard before,
like


but good providers like Relax, push gaming etc are not in list
P.s.
I also think Casinomeister Award need to have some rules to get it,at list show RTP like Bet365 they show, and 1 bonus, free spins offer per month to Casinomeister gamblers on avrage wagering %, if Casino get Casinomeister reward there value will go up

 

[justdoit]

Personally, I like the 5 rating tiers in Mr. D's OP the most.

Although some of the reps here on CM might not be too chuffed with such a ratings system

LIL made an excellent point re: RTP models changing and CM needing to move with the times.
Especially in today's slotting world, where slots with nosebleed variance are becoming the norm, rather than the exception.

In terms of getting more bang for your buck/pound/euro, players NEED to be fully clued up on where the best places to play are.

That said, we need to make sure we paint the full picture.
For example, a site like Playojo....personally, I'd have its overall RTP rating as a D, due to a lot of their slots being at 92%.

BUT....if you were a fan of Merkur slots and nothing else, then Playojo would be an A, given that most of them are 95%+ RTP.

So maybe some caveats or notae bene need to be included in order for it to be done right.
We can't go highlighting the bad while neglecting to omit the good. And vice versa.

If this RTP rating were to become a thing here at CM, then perhaps there could be a useful role for the Meister Minions to play here?

thats true I use to deposit on playojo only for merkur games and Gamomat games, The only UK casino they have Gamomat games