December Challenge news

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
Hi guys

Taking entries for December now. Tunzamunni, King Cashalot and Major Millions are the 3 to hit.

Cashalot is way past its pay-day - standing at $670k as i write :eek2:

Submit entries in the normal way & before you play (see www.slotjunkies.info/slotchallenge.php). Let's be 'aving ya :)

Simmo!
 

liquidsoap

Dormant account
i sent my entry in

i sent my entry i am a major millions type of guy, does it matter if its 3 reel or 5 reel, cuz ive done solid at both but hit a near jackpot at 3 reel
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
liquidsoap said:
i sent my entry i am a major millions type of guy, does it matter if its 3 reel or 5 reel, cuz ive done solid at both but hit a near jackpot at 3 reel
Either is good liquid :) Yeah its a good slot - my fave progressive for sure.
 

w2album

Senior Member
TunzaMunni

Done my 2000 first spins for this month, took me 1200 spins to get this one + one more later - total cost for the 2000 spins $ 85 Tunza was ice-cold for long periods:(
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Slot comp rules...

Another couple of questions for Slot-Meister Simmo!
(I can't see the answers anywhere in the rules... maybe my shades are too dark! :cool: )

1. In the 'Normal' slots comp I just entered the Challenge challenge (Cashville).
In the info panel (copy below) it says the first prize is 250, yet the total prize fund is 250 - so does that mean there is no 2nd & 3rd prize? Or is there a typo somewhere! ;)

2. Are you going to allow 1 player to claim all three prizes in any given comp?
Or limit it to one prize per player per slot?
I think it should only be one per player so that; a) A mega high-roller can't dominate all the comps & b) to encourage more people to have a crack - even if someone has already posted a mega-hit, it will still be worth having a shot at the 2nd & 3rd prizes! :thumbsup:
.
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
KasinoKing said:
Another couple of questions for Slot-Meister Simmo!
(I can't see the answers anywhere in the rules... maybe my shades are too dark! :cool: )

1. In the 'Normal' slots comp I just entered the Challenge challenge (Cashville).
In the info panel (copy below) it says the first prize is 250, yet the total prize fund is 250 - so does that mean there is no 2nd & 3rd prize? Or is there a typo somewhere! ;)

2. Are you going to allow 1 player to claim all three prizes in any given comp?
Or limit it to one prize per player per slot?
I think it should only be one per player so that; a) A mega high-roller can't dominate all the comps & b) to encourage more people to have a crack - even if someone has already posted a mega-hit, it will still be worth having a shot at the 2nd & 3rd prizes! :thumbsup:
.
OK...most of the comps have 1st, 2nd & 3rd prizes - this one only has a first prize this month. A player can claim all 3 prizes on a slot if they so wish but bear in mind whether its a high-roller or low roller, its equal chance.

Rules will probably change for next month - its suck-it-and-see for December :) At least no-ones tripped the low-roller flood-filter yet :D
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
KasinoKing said:
CrapVille has been... well... crap!

But at least some of my favorites have been coming to the rescue....! :D
.
Cool - funnily enough, that game will probably be a comp next month too KK :)
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
CAG
MM
Leaderboard prize?

Has consideration been given to allocating prizes to the positions on the leaderboard at the end of the month as well as for individual contests?
Perhaps the sponsors could contribute an amount to a central fund, and this can be distributed to the leaderboard winners. I realise distribution of the prizes will be more complicated as not all players are guaranteed to have an account at any one casino among the sponsors.

The incentive this month of course is fame!
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
vinylweatherman said:
Has consideration been given to allocating prizes to the positions on the leaderboard at the end of the month as well as for individual contests?
Perhaps the sponsors could contribute an amount to a central fund, and this can be distributed to the leaderboard winners. I realise distribution of the prizes will be more complicated as not all players are guaranteed to have an account at any one casino among the sponsors.

The incentive this month of course is fame!
Maybe in time VWM but as December is really evaluation month, I'd like to see how it goes first and fine-tune rules etc.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
CAG
MM
Sponsor Concerns

I have just logged on to Slotjunkies and noticed a message indicating sponsors to be looking at how players are playing, particularly play at very low stakes.
I have one suggestion for rule modification that might help.
Currently, the prizes are based on the ratio of payout to stake. If this was changed to the ratio of payout to coin, then players would at least have to play max coins on the competiton slots. This might hurt players who are low rollers, but it would stop play at the 9c level on, say, thunderstruck. Thunderstruck would need to be played at 1c coin, but 45c bet per spin.

Another suggestion is to increase the amount that has to be wagered from 1x to 2x or more (not too much though).
Lastly, sponsors could simply specify the minimum stake per spin they are prepared to pay the prize on. This would allow more flexibility, and allow players to distribute that stake as they wish. For example, they might allow less than max coins on Pollen Nation, but insist on a minimum of 45c per qualifying spin on Thunderstruck.
My own concern is that sponsors might be put off from running this again if a compromise is not reached that suits low rollers, but gives the casino the feeling they are attracting a reasonable quality of business through the promotion. They might even like to make the prize dependent on the actual stake of the winning entry, so a 9c stake winner would not get $400 but, say $40 - but would have got $400 had they staked 90c. There would need to be an upper limit though, as I doubt they would want to pay $4000 for a $9 stake winner!
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
vinylweatherman said:
They might even like to make the prize dependent on the actual stake of the winning entry, so a 9c stake winner would not get $400 but, say $40 - but would have got $400 had they staked 90c. There would need to be an upper limit though, as I doubt they would want to pay $4000 for a $9 stake winner!
Yes this is quite a neat idea actually VWM. We'll see how it goes - if we dont get that type of abuse, this may not be necessary or indeed maybe we can simplify it by perhaps having two "bands" of prizes.

There is actually a "flood filter" built into the system already so that if a player posts lots of claims at very low stakes, it prompts a message asking them to contact me. That way i can just check with the casinos that they are happy that the player is playing as they would normally and not deliberately "downsizing" to try and flush out the cash. Assuming its not an obvious case of a player being manipulative, the flood filter is lifted and they can continue.

Thanks for the feedback.

Simmo!
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
It may come as no surprise that I completely disagree with just about everything Vinyl said!

I think the sponsors are already getting enough out of the players.

One of their main interests (according to Simmo) is to get new sign-ups.
I myself joined Challenge casino as a result. I deposited $100 for a 100% bonus, but with a WR of B x 40 I have almost zero chance of completing WR. That's $100 they've had that they otherwise would not have.

Even if I had already been a member there, in wagering $400 on Crapville I lost $100 anyway!

If the WR increases I personally will not take part in the comps. I have already decided I will not attempt the Bejeweled one as I think $700 is a crazy WR for that slot. :eek:

Even if you are a member at the casino, you have to deposit $50 and the chances are you will lose this amount meeting the WR regardless of whether it's at 1c or 25c per line. I think a $50 'entrance fee' is more than enough for a competition with a $250 top prize.
$50 might not be much to you, Vinyl & Simmo, but to a lot of people (including me) it is a significant sum.

The real key to making this venture a success is getting lots of people to take part. So far I'm very surprised at the list of people who have NOT signed up. Where are the regular 'Winner Screenshot' posters; Slotchik, JonhSteed, RobWin, tim5ny, CasinoMeister!, caliban, schnozzy, polli123 (!), wayram, umberto... to name just 10?

I do see the list of entrants is now increasing, so maybe it's just going to take a little time to get going. ;)

Another factor, as mentioned in my previous post, is I strongly feel there should be a limit of one prize per player per slot. That would limit any high rollers to a maximum of 10 payouts. If you allow multiple prizes per game one person could potentially walk away with 30 prizes (totalling $4,000!) leaving the rest of us with just scraps. :(
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
Thanks for the feedback KK. Hear what you are saying and certainly nothing is cast in stone yet - still time to see how it goes. The key is obviously attaining a balance that keeps everyone happy and feedback like this is very valuable.

Hopefully as you say, some of the more established players will come in and we'll get a good balance that means everyone can enjoy it and make it successful enough to make it an ongoing thing. As you can hopefully see, i have put a lot of work into this so more than anyone, i want to see this cross bondaries and be judged a success :)

All that said, its also very important to make sure that the comps don't get compromised by the less scrupulous player.

Cheers

Simmo!
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Simmo! said:
Thanks for the feedback KK. Hear what you are saying and certainly nothing is cast in stone yet - still time to see how it goes. The key is obviously attaining a balance that keeps everyone happy and feedback like this is very valuable.

Hopefully as you say, some of the more established players will come in and we'll get a good balance that means everyone can enjoy it and make it successful enough to make it an ongoing thing. As you can hopefully see, i have put a lot of work into this so more than anyone, i want to see this cross bondaries and be judged a success :)
I think the amount of work you have put in is TOTALLY AWESOME! :notworthy :thumbsup: :notworthy

It's a brilliant idea that deserves to succeed!
I'm really looking forward to having a go at a few other comps.

Simmo! said:
All that said, its also very important to make sure that the comps don't get compromised by the less scrupulous player.
Cheers
Simmo!
My point exactly. A 'less scrupulous' high-roller could wade in with 10,000's of spins giving them a very good chance of cleaning up lots of prizes. :(
That's what worries me about allowing multiple claims on each competition.

You set out to try to make it fair for low-rollers - and apart from the above rule, I think you got it spot on :thumbsup:
Deposit $50 & wager $400 seems perfect. We all know that very few players are just going to wager the $400 and then stop. If say they have got $30 left and they haven't hit a big win they will carry on trying until either they do hit it, or they go broke!

Anyway - here's to the success of this super venture! :cheers:
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
KasinoKing said:
A 'less scrupulous' high-roller could wade in with 10,000's of spins giving them a very good chance of cleaning up lots of prizes. :(
That's what worries me about allowing multiple claims on each competition.
And indeed it could work the other way with said unscrupulous player spinning at 0.09. Either way, thats what i'm keen to prevent, although the "flood filter" is in place to provide an alert on that one. I'm sure we'll find a balance.

Thanks for the comments KK
 

slotchik

Dormant account
I agree with KK too. I know he is not abusing the system...and that casino has that player retention system in place for a reason. There are alot of people that invest little money but they shouldn't be penalized for that...

KK, the reason I'm not in it is because I haven't had time to read up on all the rules/regulations etc....but I will participate soon. I've already told Simmo that :)

thanks
 

dominique

Dormant account
slotchik said:
KK, the reason I'm not in it is because I haven't had time to read up on all the rules/regulations etc....but I will participate soon. I've already told Simmo that :)

thanks
Ditto. It sounds like great fun but I am too busy right now - will join later though.
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Simmo! said:
And indeed it could work the other way with said unscrupulous player spinning at 0.09. Either way, thats what i'm keen to prevent, although the "flood filter" is in place to provide an alert on that one. I'm sure we'll find a balance.

Thanks for the comments KK
I don't see what's 'unscrupulous' about spinning at 9c.
Everyone has to wager $400 (or whatever the level is for each comp), so the casino 'rake' is the same % of that $400 whether it's at 9c/spin or $9/spin!
That's why I think the way you set it up is so great! :notworthy
It gives all the low, middle and high rollers an equal chance. :)
I sincerely hope you are able to leave it just the way it is.

Slotchik, the rules are pretty simple - and I'm really looking forward to seeing some of your great screenshots up on the leaderboard! :thumbsup:
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
KasinoKing said:
I don't see what's 'unscrupulous' about spinning at 9c.
Everyone has to wager $400 (or whatever the level is for each comp), so the casino 'rake' is the same % of that $400 whether it's at 9c/spin or $9/spin!
That's why I think the way you set it up is so great! :notworthy
It gives all the low, middle and high rollers an equal chance. :)
I sincerely hope you are able to leave it just the way it is.
LOL. Well, we'll see how it pans out. :D
 
Top