Dead or Alive statistics

[gagamel]

What you call random is a math algorithm, it's not the same of a real life test (where thousands variables can influence the results).
A casino software is designed to produce incomes. The software is designed with an alghoritm that produce what you call "random" but it's under parameters that are surely linked to the amount deposited from players, not from a single player (if not the casino risks to bankrupt).
The software manages the payout results checking all player deposits, not checking the single one player to make him loose. It gives the illusion of casuality.
Of course player winnings are under the algorithm that gives the idea to be fortuitous, but at the end it's not like a real life random test.
Roulette softwares are different because the game generates incomes by itself (with the zero house hedge) and the software alghoritm (with its middle-long term cyclic nature) is beatable even if 0.0001 players (or less) can do it, the rest of players loose and it's enough for the casino accountig dep. In fact bonuses are very rare on roulette softwares.
Try to win 1000€ at Casino Floor if you can

Do you have any proof for your statement? AFAIK the TRTP is calculated over millions of spins with a lot of different players. And AFAIK the casino has no influence to the gameplay.

What you say is, that the game provider is able to see how many players are playing in a casino. They know the bet size of every player for every game in every minute. And then they are able to calculate how much I have to win or lose? And all that for more than 100 casinos with 1000s of players. Wow. If I believe in that I need dunover to buy a tin foil hat.

I believe, that when I`m lucky, I can play 10 spins and have a RTP of 5000%.
If I play the same game for 2.5 million spins my RTP would be the same as the TRTP, mostly 96%.
Casinos have a lot of options to pay out big wins without going bankrupt. Like maximum bet sizes and of course withdrawal limits, 2000 a week or something.
I play now Jack Hammer at a casino, my RTP is 66% at the moment (after 400 spins). It`s sunday evening and a lot of players are around.
If you are right then someone made a really big hit with this game.
But for sure, I don`t believe your theory.

 

[zreb]

What you call random is a math algorithm, it's not the same of a real life test (where thousands variables can influence the results).
A casino software is designed to produce incomes. The software is designed with an alghoritm that produce what you call "random" but it's under parameters that are surely linked to the amount deposited from players, not from a single player (if not the casino risks to bankrupt).
The software manages the payout results checking all player deposits, not checking the single one player to make him loose. It gives the illusion of casuality.
Of course player winnings are under the algorithm that gives the idea to be fortuitous, but at the end it's not like a real life random test.
Roulette softwares are different because the game generates incomes by itself (with the zero house hedge) and the software alghoritm (with its middle-long term cyclic nature) is beatable even if 0.0001 players (or less) can do it, the rest of players loose and it's enough for the casino accountig dep. In fact bonuses are very rare on roulette softwares.
Try to win 1000€ at Casino Floor if you can

Random slots work with the exact same principle as a roulette game, they don't need to do anything extra to generate an income. They just have a far more complicated paytable. Each result has a certain probability of occurring, and if you add up all those probabilities, times the payout %, you end up with the game's expected RTP. It has absolutely nothing to do with other players, amounts deposited, or any of that. The slot does not need to collect money before it pays out.

The only slots that work like what you are saying are usually called "compensated" or "fruit machine" slots, and are an entirely different entity. Normal slots have no need to do this. There is no need for any sort of cycle, for money to be stored in the slot, or any dependence on past events. In roulette, the house edge comes from the fact that the house only pays you 35:1 instead of the fair 36:1. Slots are the same - the house edge is built into the paytable. The slot and it's paytable are designed so that nothing more needs to be done. The house gains its income because the slot is designed to pay out slightly less than it puts in, on average, for any spin of the reels. Past events, other players, and all such things are irrelevent. There are no pre-designed "cycles" of outcomes.

Random numbers are another issue. They don't need to be "truly random," they just need to be unpredictable, sufficiently non-correlated with prior numbers, and evenly distributed (in the long-term). Many softwares have their RNGs evaluated by an independent auditor to ensure fairness. If you think a software provider's RNG fails in any of these ways, that would be a serious accusation. If it is successful in all these regards, for our purposes, it's just as good as if it were truly random. If it is not, it could potentially be exploited for large amounts of money or be providing players with an unfair game.

 

[biemme]

Random slots work with the exact same principle as a roulette game, they don't need to do anything extra to generate an income. They just have a far more complicated paytable. Each result has a certain probability of occurring, and if you add up all those probabilities, times the payout %, you end up with the game's expected RTP. It has absolutely nothing to do with other players, amounts deposited, or any of that. The slot does not need to collect money before it pays out.

The only slots that work like what you are saying are usually called "compensated" or "fruit machine" slots, and are an entirely different entity. Normal slots have no need to do this. There is no need for any sort of cycle, for money to be stored in the slot, or any dependence on past events. In roulette, the house edge comes from the fact that the house only pays you 35:1 instead of the fair 36:1. Slots are the same - the house edge is built into the paytable. The slot and it's paytable are designed so that nothing more needs to be done. The house gains its income because the slot is designed to pay out slightly less than it puts in, on average, for any spin of the reels. Past events, other players, and all such things are irrelevent. There are no pre-designed "cycles" of outcomes.

Random numbers are another issue. They don't need to be "truly random," they just need to be unpredictable, sufficiently non-correlated with prior numbers, and evenly distributed (in the long-term). Many softwares have their RNGs evaluated by an independent auditor to ensure fairness. If you think a software provider's RNG fails in any of these ways, that would be a serious accusation. If it is successful in all these regards, for our purposes, it's just as good as if it were truly random. If it is not, it could potentially be exploited for large amounts of money or be providing players with an unfair game.

Nice post, i hope you are right. I'm testing a simple rtg slot to find cycles in the "random" (like i've succesfully found in roulette softwares). If you are right slots are beatable too with the right progression. I really hope that you are right even if i'm a bit skeptical.

 

[gagamel]

Nice post, i hope you are right. I'm testing a simple rtg slot to find cycles in the "random" (like i've succesfully found in roulette softwares). If you are right slots are beatable too with the right progression. I really hope that you are right even if i'm a bit skeptical.

Buy a tin foil hat

 

[Balthazar]

After experiencing many redflags, I've been expressing some doubts about NetEnt's randomness here lately and these free spins sessions might confirm them. Remember Chop what happened with Starburst in free play? I start to see a pattern here.

If NetEnt's slots are somehow compensated as a whole, that could explain the shitty paytables on recent slots. They wouldn't want to have too many slots capable of emptying the "reserve" because it would ruin the experience of other players.

Pass me the tinfoil hat, but I'll keep an eye on this thread.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

After experiencing many redflags, I've been expressing some doubts about NetEnt's randomness here lately and these free spins sessions might confirm them. Remember Chop what happened with Starburst in free play? I start to see a pattern here.

If NetEnt's slots are somehow compensated as a whole, that could explain the shitty paytables on recent slots. They wouldn't want to have too many slots capable of emptying the "reserve" because it would ruin the experience of other players.

Pass me the tinfoil hat, but I'll keep an eye on this thread.

I'll have to dig out the paperwork but IIRC my final spin count on Starburst was 320,000 and it didn't hit over 300x stake, and this is on a low variance slot that advertises a 500x stake jackpot.

Now that I have the means to generate free spins results massively quicker than I did back then (I can currently sustain 15x normal speed without any trouble), I might have another go at it.

Gonna finish off with DoA first though.

I have to say that the way Netent's slots roll has struck me as slightly odd on more than one occasion, you can explain away the high RTP yet appalling gameplay to an extent with the awful way they construct their paytables, but maybe there is something else going on.

 

[mrmark21]

I'll have to dig out the paperwork but IIRC my final spin count on Starburst was 320,000 and it didn't hit over 300x stake, and this is on a low variance slot that advertises a 500x stake jackpot.

Now that I have the means to generate free spins results massively quicker than I did back then (I can currently sustain 15x normal speed without any trouble), I might have another go at it.

Gonna finish off with DoA first though.

I have to say that the way Netent's slots roll has struck me as slightly odd on more than one occasion, you can explain away the high RTP yet appalling gameplay to an extent with the awful way they construct their paytables, but maybe there is something else going on.

Yes I've noticed that as well. I think this could have something to do with the PRNG as I'm pretty sure they go in accordance to certain algorithms.

 

[dunover]

Sorry, I won't be sending Balt/Chopley or Mark any tinfoil hats at the moment, as there seems to be some valid questions regarding Netent's gimping of certain games. If you compare the free games data/evidence from netent and stand it next to MG's equivalent-variance slots, well.....

 

[biemme]

Now that I have the means to generate free spins results massively quicker than I did back then (I can currently sustain 15x normal speed without any trouble), I might have another go at it.

How do you do 15x? does it depend from processor (i7?) or from something else?

 

[Wild Reels]

you can use cheatengine to modify the spin speed, by running their "speedhack" on the flash component, thats the only method i know im sure there is others.

 

[biemme]

you can use cheatengine to modify the spin speed, by running their "speedhack" on the flash component, thats the only method i know im sure there is others.

Is it possible that the casino notices it? could it go against their terms and conditions and compromise winnings?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Is it possible that the casino notices it? could it go against their terms and conditions and compromise winnings?

As long as you never try to interfere with a real play session, you should be fine. Not that you could anyway since the server always knows what's going on and will overrule anything your client tries to tell it.

The Netent servers don't seem to mind how fast they deliver free play results, (to a point, over 15x and it starts to get flaky), similar situation with MG which is how kktmd managed to get his one million spin sample.

 

[Balthazar]

Is it possible that the casino notices it? could it go against their terms and conditions and compromise winnings?

I'd not try it in real money mode.

 

[dunover]

Right - I've just finished my 50k spins running last night and up to this morning.
I have now had 257 bonus rounds. I have had 3x 5 extra spins, but still NO line of 5, but one of the 3 did pay 889x stake.
I did however hit the 5 scatters for 2500x stake on the 43-44000 spins session. And IIRC the bonus round actually paid 343x stake too!
I am playing 90p spins and would be down now £2,456.40p!! The 5 scatter win saved this from being 5k in the hole.
I seem to have had less bonus rounds than Blathons figures suggest is the average at 150-ish spins. My bonus rounds average 1/195 spins. Therefore I would expect them to become more frequent as I carry on, though obviously this isn't guaranteed.

The people who play this and regularly post the big wins must have deep pockets and be playing the bloody thing 24/7.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Interesting stats there dunover, especially as you're tracking more data than I am. At least you've managed to hit five scatters which is better than I achieved!

I haven't done any more spins so am still at 137K (been ragging the arse out of Battlefield 4 and can't be bothered starting the next block of 1000 spins on the media centre PC every 15 minutes), but I will resume in due course.

However, between us we have now done nearly TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND SPINS and neither of us have seen the five wilds on a winline in free spins, and have lost what would be many thousands of pounds in real money play. (If it weren't for your five scatters we'd be looking at a combined loss of pushing up towards £10,0000 with me on 36p play and you on 90p play.)

Scary statistics TBH, I can only repeat what I said early in the thread, this slot is a monstrosity, and I absolutely cannot understand where rolastan's screenshots are coming from on such a regular basis.

 

[Blathaon]

Right - I've just finished my 50k spins running last night and up to this morning.
I have now had 257 bonus rounds. I have had 3x 5 extra spins, but still NO line of 5, but one of the 3 did pay 889x stake.
I did however hit the 5 scatters for 2500x stake on the 43-44000 spins session. And IIRC the bonus round actually paid 343x stake too!
I am playing 90p spins and would be down now £2,456.40p!! The 5 scatter win saved this from being 5k in the hole.
I seem to have had less bonus rounds than Blathons figures suggest is the average at 150-ish spins. My bonus rounds average 1/195 spins. Therefore I would expect them to become more frequent as I carry on, though obviously this isn't guaranteed.

The people who play this and regularly post the big wins must have deep pockets and be playing the bloody thing 24/7.

With regards to the average being 1 in 150 spins. I don't know this for sure, i haven't logged the actual spin amount, only the features. So it might not be 1 in 150, but it's probably not far off. The 1 in 150 is just the number that have been floating around here at CM.

May i ask how you know how many features you have had?
Do you log them somehow, or is it just manual recording like i have done?

 

[biemme]

Scary statistics TBH, I can only repeat what I said early in the thread, this slot is a monstrosity, and I absolutely cannot understand where rolastan's screenshots are coming from on such a regular basis.

As Rolastan said he changes often casino to keep the highest bonuses, and i think he selects the most populars where the number of deposits is high (big money pot). Making a statistic on a single casino in fun mode is not the same because the algorithm is not influenced from the deposits pot and from the other players spins/winnings.
I'm starting to be a bit proud of my tin foil hat

 

[dunover]

Just log them on a piece of paper in column, 0-10 x stake, 10-50 x stake, 100-500x stake, 500-999x stake and 1000+ x stake. So far none of 1000+, 1 in the 500-999x column. The 5 scatters is logged at 2843 x stake in the 100-500x column separately as technically the freespins yielded 343x stake.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

As Rolastan said he changes often casino, and i think he selects the most populars where the number of deposits is high (big money pot). Making a statistic on a single casino in fun mode is not the same because the algorithm is not influenced from the deposits pot.

It should be exactly the same because every request to the server for a spin result should be treated exactly the same irrespective of free play, real play, which casino it's coming from, and so on.

The algorithm should not and must not be influenced by ANYTHING, it's a call to a server for a random result and every call must be handled in an identical fashion.

If Netent's slots worked the way you are describing they would be fundamentally cheating and unfair.

 

[biemme]

If Netent's slots worked the way you are describing they would be fundamentally cheating and unfair.

Welcome in the Netent world

There is another little red flag that suggests me to say that. I'm a roulette player, and ONLY Netent roulettes permit to bet ONLY 0,1-1€ on a single number (1:35). Usually the range of this bet is from 0.1-5€ to 0,1-100/1000 depending from the casino size.
I think i don't need to add anything more, right?

 

[Blathaon]

Just log them on a piece of paper in column, 0-10 x stake, 10-50 x stake, 100-500x stake, 500-999x stake and 1000+ x stake. So far none of 1000+, 1 in the 500-999x column. The 5 scatters is logged at 2843 x stake in the 100-500x column separately as technically the freespins yielded 343x stake.

ok, what threw me off was that you said that you knew the spin count AND the feature count. so that made me think that maybe you had some software to keep track. Because it's kinda hard to keep track of spins if you have a stop trigger for free spins.

when i play for real i always have it on auto spin with a stop trigger for free spins, so i have no idea of how many spins i have done. other than to assume that the 150 spin average is correct and multiply that with the number of features that i have logged.

 

[Finn]

Is it possible that the casino notices it? could it go against their terms and conditions and compromise winnings?

Paf has disabled Quick Spin and early stopping of the spin animation by second click in NetEnt games, so casinos could definitely argue that spin settings are something to be decided by the casino, and not to be tampered with.

Anyway "speed hack" most likely wouldn't help in "play for real money" mode, because on every NetEnt casino the real money mode runs more slowly than the demo mode, on some casinos the real money mode is only slightly slower most of time, barely noticeable, on some casinos a lot slower. Because free play mode is so smooth on all casinos, my gut feeling is that free play servers are common to all netent casinos and located where ever the best location for servers in Europe is, maybe in Germany connected to some internet uber bahn or something, and NetEnt has used lots of hardware on them relative to rate of use. The "online gambling tax heaven" islands where the real servers are located for tax reasons don't have same level of internet connection as the best server locations in Europe, and some casinos may have not good enough hardware compared to how many players they have playing the games.

 

[biemme]

Fun mode can be faster becasue the algorithm is calculated on your pc processor, so you can hack it. When you play in real mode it is calculated from the casino server. There is a very big difference in results. I've read many threads on this topic. There were similar comparisons for roulette software in fun/real play mode. I'm sure of that.

 

[dunover]

Fun mode can be faster becasue the algorithm is calculated on your pc processor, so you can hack it. When you play in real mode it is calculated from the casino server. There is a very big difference in results. I've read many threads on this topic. There were similar comparisons for roulette software in fun/real play mode. I'm sure of that.

There is some sense in what your are saying, it's entirely possible BUT it's thus far only your theory - can you prove any of this?

 

[biemme]

There is some sense in what your are saying, it's entirely possible BUT it's thus far only your theory - can you prove any of this?

I could prove it only with roulette but it's a very long and boring demonstration. It means observing roulette results in a special way. And if i do i will reveal the secret behind my strategy and i prefer to keep my discoverings private.