Gaming Analysis Group

[Harry_BKK]

I think that was from Lockinlove when she used to play it.

The numbers are from JFTW's Rainbrew slot. Quite an interesting reel layout and the first from JFTW I will try for real money. Was rather entertaining when i played in demo mode.

 

[dunover]

Well, you decide

View attachment 94080

Sorry but that's complete BS. 1360 max win in 224bn spins? If that were really the case and it was tested after SG platform intro then it would have really been bacofoil all round....


EDIT - Sorry, for some reason I got it into my head this was about Bonanza, ignore the above!

 

[bebo67]

Well, you decide

View attachment 94080

Wowzers!

 

[Harry_BKK]

Sorry but that's complete BS. 1360 max win in 224bn spins? If that were really the case and it was tested after SG platform intro then it would have really been bacofoil all round....


EDIT - Sorry, for some reason I got it into my head this was about Bonanza, ignore the above!

I though it is running on the Quickfire platform.

Here's is the complete part from their game sheet:

 

[bebo67]

I though it is running on the Quickfire platform.

Here's is the complete part from their game sheet:

View attachment 94082

I don't know if I missed it, but where did you get that info,and can you get it on all games?

 

[Harry_BKK]

I don't know if I missed it, but where did you get that info,and can you get it on all games?

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Others are not that forthcoming with details. Mostly, you need to register as an affiliate site to get access.

 

[dunover]

I am playing this right now and it's dreadful. You get a 'top' or 'bottom' wild on reels 2 and 4 respectively which then triggers a horizontal reel above or below which may or may not add wilds and therefore increase ways. I think the programme that fired 224bn results into this was lucky to get one of over 1000x. You get 1125 ways in FS so it must've been in those.

 

[Supababe]

For those not selected (especially those super talented and smart members) I went job hunting for lol.
What a range of positions I found.

How about this one?

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[bebo67]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Others are not that forthcoming with details. Mostly, you need to register as an affiliate site to get access.

Thanks!

 

[Reelsoffun]

I have played this for real and actually I like it, can think of hundreds that are worse, its probably a low/med to med variance slot. so far I would say its one of their best games, but im probably bias as im running at way over 100% payout.

I Also had a long run of wins giving 50x some only several spins apart, but max was only 60x on a feature.

Im sure i will match your view soon enough lol but for now its a gentle slot for just having some plays on. I think low rollers will like it TBH.

 

[mack341]

I though it is running on the Quickfire platform.

Here's is the complete part from their game sheet:

View attachment 94082

I think this sort of useful information about odds should be made available in the help pages of all games alongside the rtp to encourage responsible gambling and realistic expectations.

 

[Reelsoffun]

I think this sort of useful information about odds should be made available in the help pages of all games alongside the rtp to encourage responsible gambling and realistic expectations.

Totally agree its what i emailled to the UKGC about 5 years ago!

 

[Jono777]

Totally agree its what i emailled to the UKGC about 5 years ago!

Only 5 more to go then before you get your reply, fingers crossed

 

[mack341]

Totally agree its what i emailled to the UKGC about 5 years ago!

yeah its only fair, the slot maker, casino and regulator know the odds but don't think the player who is funding the whole thing should.

And then the powerful UKGC periodically bleats about responsible gambling, issuing fines hither and thither, when even if some odds information was only introduced on a sample of games to begin with, perhaps one from each developer SG netent etc... regulation that benefits the player and assists responsible gambling will have been improved overnight.

 

[Lemon]

For me, playing a new slot is like unwrapping a present; most of the fun is finding out about the game and trying to learn what the profile is like, how often certain things occur and what the percentage contribution is towards parts of the game. No game producer is ever going to willingly hand over info like that because the maths is usually fundamental to whether the game is successful or not. You can easily copy a theme, or style of music, or a particular feature on a successful game but it all counts for nothing if you don't get the maths right. Game producers should never be made to turn over info like that; 1-5 stars for volatility is enough and the player can pay to find out the rest for themselves - that's what gambling is about after all. If Cadbury were ordered to publish their chocolate recipe, every bar of chocolate from every confectioner from then on would taste like fucking Dairy Milk and there would be no variety at all. The industry is bad enough for copying each other as it is. The maths should always be sacred.

 

[mack341]

I bet the slot makers will know the odds approximately of other makers games, they can run simulator software and analyse the results and will be able to determine how the rtp is distributed and the mathematics and stats at the end of the day. Its only the player who is kept in the dark, you could still do as you do and ignore odds info in the help pages if that is the way you like to play.

 

[lotusch]

For me, playing a new slot is like unwrapping a present; most of the fun is finding out about the game and trying to learn what the profile is like, how often certain things occur and what the percentage contribution is towards parts of the game. No game producer is ever going to willingly hand over info like that because the maths is usually fundamental to whether the game is successful or not. You can easily copy a theme, or style of music, or a particular feature on a successful game but it all counts for nothing if you don't get the maths right. Game producers should never be made to turn over info like that; 1-5 stars for volatility is enough and the player can pay to find out the rest for themselves - that's what gambling is about after all. If Cadbury were ordered to publish their chocolate recipe, every bar of chocolate from every confectioner from then on would taste like fucking Dairy Milk and there would be no variety at all. The industry is bad enough for copying each other as it is. The maths should always be sacred.

Very well said.
And I am all for 1-5 stars ranking when it comes to volatility.
Some slots providers already use a system like that.
Correct me if I am wrong but I think it was Pragmatic that has these lightning symbols from 1-5 to show the volatility of the slot.

 

[bebo67]

I think this sort of useful information about odds should be made available in the help pages of all games alongside the rtp to encourage responsible gambling and realistic expectations.

Agreed!

 

[nikantw]

I though it is running on the Quickfire platform.

Here's is the complete part from their game sheet:

View attachment 94082

Can we please have that kind of info for every slot?
Dare I ask it for Bonanza?

 

[Reelsoffun]

For me, playing a new slot is like unwrapping a present; most of the fun is finding out about the game and trying to learn what the profile is like, how often certain things occur and what the percentage contribution is towards parts of the game. No game producer is ever going to willingly hand over info like that because the maths is usually fundamental to whether the game is successful or not. You can easily copy a theme, or style of music, or a particular feature on a successful game but it all counts for nothing if you don't get the maths right. Game producers should never be made to turn over info like that; 1-5 stars for volatility is enough and the player can pay to find out the rest for themselves - that's what gambling is about after all. If Cadbury were ordered to publish their chocolate recipe, every bar of chocolate from every confectioner from then on would taste like fucking Dairy Milk and there would be no variety at all. The industry is bad enough for copying each other as it is. The maths should always be sacred.

While i agree with that in some ways, I dont in others. Yes they shouldnt be forced to hand over all the math etc but key things like max win should be.

No way should slot providers be able to brag about win up to 8000x bet etc if its a 1 in a 20 billion chance thats just BS.

So I think as a bare minimum max win or say 1000x bet wins should have a frequency provided to the player to allow them to make a better choice of the games to play.

Other wise you get 3 slot games with all the same 2000x max win on a bet yet can be wildly different to the frequency how is that responsible gaming, the player would assume the chances are similar to hit on each but could be wildly different?

It would be like betting on a number on roulette where they all pay 35x bet but you dont know how many numbers are on each of the wheels.


Also if RNG's are indeed random and fair, then over time someone could just get to some of the math anyway eg ave feature hit frequency and base win % compared to jackpot / mega win frequency.

I have a speadsheet i did that gives me a full breakdown of what i won via base, feature, free spins etc it not hard, there is many of us here that will have put several hundred thousand or even 1million+ games through some slots and you would have a pretty accurate ave hit rate after that, so what have they got to fear really?

It would of course force providers to make better games that dont just give the illusion of a big win that is only millions to one chance of.

1-5 scale wouldnt be enough either these days due to games like BTG so a 1-10 scale would be more fitting i would expect, we certainly need more than low, med, high, which some providers just use.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I bet the slot makers will know the odds approximately of other makers games, they can run simulator software and analyse the results and will be able to determine how the rtp is distributed and the mathematics and stats at the end of the day. Its only the player who is kept in the dark, you could still do as you do and ignore odds info in the help pages if that is the way you like to play.

Developers move around a lot. e.g. most of the Quickspin top guys are ex-Netent people....etc.

I don't think that, except BTG's Megaways, there are a lot of secrets left. I got a ton more details from most providers but what good is it going to do to us degenerates....i mean look at Rainbrew's chance to hit a 90+ x bet win, yet people still spin the reels in the hope it will happen on the first 5 spins.

 

[mack341]

For me, playing a new slot is like unwrapping a present; most of the fun is finding out about the game and trying to learn what the profile is like, how often certain things occur and what the percentage contribution is towards parts of the game. No game producer is ever going to willingly hand over info like that because the maths is usually fundamental to whether the game is successful or not. You can easily copy a theme, or style of music, or a particular feature on a successful game but it all counts for nothing if you don't get the maths right. Game producers should never be made to turn over info like that; 1-5 stars for volatility is enough and the player can pay to find out the rest for themselves - that's what gambling is about after all. If Cadbury were ordered to publish their chocolate recipe, every bar of chocolate from every confectioner from then on would taste like fucking Dairy Milk and there would be no variety at all. The industry is bad enough for copying each other as it is. The maths should always be sacred.

what if like the game harry showed us the info on 'rainbrew', under the shiny attractive wrapping paper its clear nestles a turd, you just want to spend lots of money to find out for yourself?

 

[Lemon]

what if like the game harry showed us the info on 'rainbrew', under the shiny attractive wrapping paper its clear nestles a turd, you just want to spend lots of money to find out for yourself?

What's a turd to someone might be an enjoyable game to someone else. Imagine spending 6 months working on a game and then having to state exactly what the profile is and alienating a slice of the whole player base before they've even committed any money? For a lot of new games the first week or two when it goes live can be very lucrative because of all the players giving it a try and seeing whether they like it or not. If you deny a new game this then game producers will never bother trying anything new or that has a learning curve, and we'll all end up playing clones of Book of Ra from each provider. Every new game deserves that period where players are required to find out for themselves if they like the game. There has to be a line between player protection and nanny-state in my opinion.

 

[Reelsoffun]

What's a turd to someone might be an enjoyable game to someone else. Imagine spending 6 months working on a game and then having to state exactly what the profile is and alienating a slice of the whole player base before they've even committed any money? For a lot of new games the first week or two when it goes live can be very lucrative because of all the players giving it a try and seeing whether they like it or not. If you deny a new game this then game producers will never bother trying anything new or that has a learning curve, and we'll all end up playing clones of Book of Ra from each provider. Every new game deserves that period where players are required to find out for themselves if they like the game. There has to be a line between player protection and nanny-state in my opinion.

Then you get players trying all these new games, finding out they are all "Dreadful" < (word on loan from dunover) as he puts it and after a dozen games in a row decide to give up all new slots for good, yay! Great plan

 

[Lemon]

No way should slot providers be able to brag about win up to 8000x bet etc if its a 1 in a 20 billion chance thats just BS.

<snip>

1-5 scale wouldnt be enough either these days due to games like BTG so a 1-10 scale would be more fitting i would expect, we certainly need more than low, med, high, which some providers just use.

Some good points there and as far as max win statements go - I would agree with you there 100%. Secrets of the Stones, win up to 3475000 coins or whatever it is? You've more chance of going down the beach and picking the right grain of sand. The player is better off looking at the paytable and the game rules and after a few sessions they should be able to infer what is realistically possible. Statements like the above feel like desperate attempts at selling hopes and dreams that will never materialise.

A 1-5 scale could also be expanded slightly, I would certainly agree with those sentiments, but one game company's rating scale might differ from another. What are the units of measurement? Standard deviation? It's unlikely each producer's idea of a 5-out-of-5 game will be the same, unless there's an industry standard they all use.

Asking for hit rates of certain prize ranges would almost certainly be met by resistance from most game developers. A lot of the fun and excitement is in trying new games for yourself with no preconceptions.

 

[mack341]

maybe then as a compromise, a year or two after a game releases some of the odds could then be published in the help page.
At the moment I believe people are playing less, at least in the uk anyway, from when I started 3 years ago maybe they would play more if they knew the odds involved to get a big win.

 

[Jasminebed]

While this is interesting, I think it is important to remember that for TRTP trials to be useful, they must be many many times the possible slot combinations, so those billions may actually be dozens of millions combinations. The more simulations you run, the closer you come to true RTP. A simple slot like Thunderstruck with reel strips has 5 million combinations, and I think that is just base game. You should run 5 billion spins to get an accurate RTP iirc, from reading I've did on pseudo RTPs. In fact, I think they recommended 10,000 x possible outcomes for greater accuracy.

Some of my favourite games rarely produce 100x wins, but frequent 25 to 40x bonus rounds, and some 2-10x base game hits can produce really enjoyable games.

Take Thunderstruck, a simple game by today's standards. While in theory, it might be possible to hit 5 scatters on every spin and keep retriggering, it's never gonna happen.

I've never seen 15 bars on Starburst posted online, and AFAIK no one has ever reported one here, not even seeing it on other sites, and that's not even that big a win. That game enjoys huge success.

Ten years ago, you didn't even know the RTP of individual slots.

 

[Reelsoffun]

. A simple slot like Thunderstruck with reel strips has 5 million combinations, and I think that is just base game.

I highly doubt it has so few combinations, even my very basic 5 reel slots have 33 million minimum and a lot have just shy of 2 billion reel stops.

 

[brianmon]

What's a turd to someone might be an enjoyable game to someone else. Imagine spending 6 months working on a game and then having to state exactly what the profile is and alienating a slice of the whole player base before they've even committed any money? For a lot of new games the first week or two when it goes live can be very lucrative because of all the players giving it a try and seeing whether they like it or not. If you deny a new game this then game producers will never bother trying anything new or that has a learning curve, and we'll all end up playing clones of Book of Ra from each provider. Every new game deserves that period where players are required to find out for themselves if they like the game. There has to be a line between player protection and nanny-state in my opinion.

But that's like saying that bookmakers should be allowed to have anonymous horses for punters to bet on - no odds or form stated. You just bet on it for 20 or 30 races, and make up your own mind.

All anyone is asking for is enough information to make an informed decision from. No one's asking for details of the reelstrips and the full maths.

The company in question here, JFTW, have most of the information available for anyone, to download, from their website

eg.

I can't see a problem for them to add that to the helpfile.

Maybe it would make games producers work harder and be more competitive.

The way your post tells it.... is that game producers can turn out any old shit, because they can rely on making some money in the first few weeks, from players trying it 'blind'

 

[Jasminebed]

@KasinoKing , I know you were part of the reel mapping back in the day, before I joined the forum. I think it was Zooie (?) that did a Thunderstruck emulator?

 

[bebo67]

I'm going to use Gemix for an example. Lord only knows why. lol. Anyways Im at world 2627. I have no idea how many world there are, but lately I have seen 22-25 stars show up, in the wrong order, but its showing me its there.

132892
Total Spins

96.75%
Theoretical RTP

Spins per session
47:18Time39Spins

Biggest win
3382.50 CADWin5.00 CAD ( last summer win)
With that many spins. I'm thinking another year before I hit it really big! Or the worlds run out first. They should show how much you have spent on a game too. A game that you always play with a few others mixed in.

 

[nikantw]

Trance said nobody reads the info files or needs wins > 500x so I don't see any problem with some true odds in the info file.
It is not true that they will lose money if they don't promise wins that will never come.

 

[Lemon]

But that's like saying that bookmakers should be allowed to have anonymous horses for punters to bet on - no odds or form stated. You just bet on it for 20 or 30 races, and make up your own mind.

All anyone is asking for is enough information to make an informed decision from. No one's asking for details of the reelstrips and the full maths.

The company in question here, JFTW, have most of the information available for anyone, to download, from their website

eg.

View attachment 94096


I can't see a problem for them to add that to the helpfile.

Maybe it would make games producers work harder and be more competitive.

The way your post tells it.... is that game producers can turn out any old shit, because they can rely on making some money in the first few weeks, from players trying it 'blind'

Horses and slots are two completely different forms of gambling though aren't they Brian? You don't get an RTP% on a horse race but you get odds on various outcomes instead, and the punter puts their money on one of them, using 'form' to help them arrive at their decision and feel in control. You're not going to place a bet without knowing how much you'll win if it comes in - that would be stupid.

On slots you're betting on millions of different outcomes simultaneously, many of them losing ones, and the player hopes that a winning one will come in. Knowing the odds and hit rates of certain things isn't going to help them win or lose on a slot, as they're betting on all of them at the same time, every few seconds. Declaring the RTP% and volatility helps the player form an opinion of how long their money might last, and how bumpy the ride might be along the way to hitting a bonus or big win. The rest they can find out for themselves; that's part of the essence of slots, and gambling in general - there has to be an element of risk and unknown. If you remove this, then a large part of the thrill and excitement of gambling on slots is also taken away.

The profile and maths of a game might not have been to the player's liking in the end, but they've still played the game at 96% RTP or whatever during that time, and will have had just as much chance of winning or losing overall on another 96% game with a maths profile they like, so it's not like their being ripped off in any way. You can play a game, not like it for whatever reason, and still win on it.

As much as I admire JFTW for putting that game info on their website, it doesn't mean everyone should have to, and it certainly doesn't mean they should be required to state it in their help pages. If BTG had to state the sort of info on Bonanza that JFTW are giving away, competitors would have a field day and you'd have games with Bonanza profiles popping up left, right and centre. I'm all for transparency, but asking for details beyond the RTP% and volatility to be supplied to players, however well-meaning, will damage the industry and put successful established game developers in a massively vuinerable position.

 

[nikantw]

Horses and slots are two completely different forms of gambling though aren't they Brian? You don't get an RTP% on a horse race but you get odds on various outcomes instead, and the punter puts their money on one of them, using 'form' to help them arrive at their decision and feel in control. You're not going to place a bet without knowing how much you'll win if it comes in - that would be stupid.

On slots you're betting on millions of different outcomes simultaneously, many of them losing ones, and the player hopes that a winning one will come in. Knowing the odds and hit rates of certain things isn't going to help them win or lose on a slot, as they're betting on all of them at the same time, every few seconds. Declaring the RTP% and volatility helps the player form an opinion of how long their money might last, and how bumpy the ride might be along the way to hitting a bonus or big win. The rest they can find out for themselves; that's part of the essence of slots, and gambling in general - there has to be an element of risk and unknown. If you remove this, then a large part of the thrill and excitement of gambling on slots is also taken away.

The profile and maths of a game might not have been to the player's liking in the end, but they've still played the game at 96% RTP or whatever during that time, and will have had just as much chance of winning or losing overall on another 96% game with a maths profile they like, so it's not like their being ripped off in any way. You can play a game, not like it for whatever reason, and still win on it.

As much as I admire JFTW for putting that game info on their website, it doesn't mean everyone should have to, and it certainly doesn't mean they should be required to state it in their help pages. If BTG had to state the sort of info on Bonanza that JFTW are giving away, competitors would have a field day and you'd have games with Bonanza profiles popping up left, right and centre. I'm all for transparency, but asking for details beyond the RTP% and volatility to be supplied to players, however well-meaning, will damage the industry and put successful established game developers in a massively vuinerable position.

You said thiis again.
Sorry, like many others I am not convinced by any of it.
A few odds is not "the math" and if you don't want to know don't look for it.

 

[brianmon]

As much as I admire JFTW for putting that game info on their website, it doesn't mean everyone should have to, and it certainly doesn't mean they should be required to state it in their help pages. If BTG had to state the sort of info on Bonanza that JFTW are giving away, competitors would have a field day and you'd have games with Bonanza profiles popping up left, right and centre. I'm all for transparency, but asking for details beyond the RTP% and volatility to be supplied to players, however well-meaning, will damage the industry and put successful established game developers in a massively vuinerable position.

So you're seriously saying that if BTG made, just this information available, their competitors would be able to copy their games?

It seems to be more a case of games producers NOT wanting this information available to players, than worrying about what their competitors could do with it.

Too frightened of players seeing just how bad some games actually are

 

[Tirilej]

Most gamblers wouldn't understand it and I doubt that many are reading the help files anyway. Even if they did they would just claim that the provider is lying about those numbers anyway if they lose so I don't get the point.
The ones who want it are you guys who already knows a lot. You maybe can use the information for something , but the normal player won't.

 

[nikantw]

Most gamblers wouldn't understand it and I doubt that many are reading the help files anyway. Even if they did they would just claim that the provider is lying about those numbers anyway if they lose so I don't get the point.
The ones who want it are you guys who already knows a lot. You maybe can use the information for something , but the normal player won't.

I could say many good points and just a few venting doesn't mean 99% doesn't trust the info files.
Shall we have a pool how many want to know their chance for a 1000x on Bonanza , or any other slot?

 

[pinnit2014]

Half way house for me - I’d be interested to know but it probably wouldn’t be a primary decision maker.

If you told me I’d a 1 in 4m chance of a Bonanza 1000x I’d stay play it. Which is probably quite close to the odds.

The only thing that really influences my deposit amount, bet size etc is volatility. Not RTP, not the above.

Nice to have, not necessary pour moi

 

[dunover]

So you're seriously saying that if BTG made, just this information available, their competitors would be able to copy their games?

View attachment 94124


It seems to be more a case of games producers NOT wanting this information available to players, than worrying about what their competitors could do with it.

Too frightened of players seeing just how bad some games actually are

Actually it would be quite straightforward to reverse engineer a math model if the full or partial test results were public. Think about it - you'd have the game's pay-tables and RTP published by right and then you could pretty accurately work out the parse sheets and reel mapping from the pay frequencies listed above. It looks to us maybe like the partial pieces of a puzzle, but to the maths people in a development team pretty easy pickings.

You even have examples like 2Winpower reverse-engineering numerous Novo and Playtechs based just on pulling a few million results from the RNG and unravelling the code to produce some pretty accurate copies. Obviously that's a criminal enterprise and legitimate developers will have a code of conduct and trademarks/patents to protect them so wouldn't attempt it anyway. But yes, it's perfectly feasible.

Even on here you've got enough info just gleaned from RNG-tapping to reproduce the MG IR/TS2 games quite easily! (Search kktmd posts)

Think of that pay spread info from JFTW as a 'slot Sudoku puzzle'.

 

[bebo67]

Myself. As much as I would love a big win, its not my first choice when playing a game. I remember when I was going to a land casino, and if I won as soon as I got there, I would moan, because you " just knew". It would ruin my whole night. I like to play.

 

[nikantw]

Actually it would be quite straightforward to reverse engineer a math model if the full or partial test results were public. Think about it - you'd have the game's pay-tables and RTP published by right and then you could pretty accurately work out the parse sheets and reel mapping from the pay frequencies listed above. It looks to us maybe like the partial pieces of a puzzle, but to the maths people in a development team pretty easy pickings.

You even have examples like 2Winpower reverse-engineering numerous Novo and Playtechs based just on pulling a few million results from the RNG and unravelling the code to produce some pretty accurate copies. Obviously that's a criminal enterprise and legitimate developers will have a code of conduct and trademarks/patents to protect them so wouldn't attempt it anyway. But yes, it's perfectly feasible.

Even on here you've got enough info just gleaned from RNG-tapping to reproduce the MG IR/TS2 games quite easily! (Search kktmd posts)

Think of that pay spread info from JFTW as a 'slot Sudoku puzzle'.

Yes, I agree, it is easy for them to copy most games. Even easyer to get the frequency of a 1000x win. It may save them like 3 min of work to see it posted.
But most players need it and cant get it.

 

[Lemon]

You said thiis again.
Sorry, like many others I am not convinced by any of it.
A few odds is not "the math" and if you don't want to know don't look for it.

You might not think so, but things like feature hit rates and percentage contributions would be very useful to certain people. But fuck the game companies eh? Let's make them give all their secrets away just so you can turn round and applaud them for being 'fair'.

 

[brianmon]

Actually it would be quite straightforward to reverse engineer a math model if the full or partial test results were public. Think about it - you'd have the game's pay-tables and RTP published by right and then you could pretty accurately work out the parse sheets and reel mapping from the pay frequencies listed above. It looks to us maybe like the partial pieces of a puzzle, but to the maths people in a development team pretty easy pickings.

Except they aren't giving the hit frequency of specific wins or symbols/
If they'd listed the hit frequency of each of the paytable entries, then fair enough

But they're stating the frequency of wins within a certain multiplier ranges... 15x-30x, 30x-60x and 60x-90x
Those wins could be made up of many different symbol combinations, they could be base-game or the base-game sidewinder feature or the free spins.
especially as it's a 243-1125 ways game

 

[brianmon]

You might not think so, but things like feature hit rates and percentage contributions would be very useful to certain people. But fuck the game companies eh? Let's make them give all their secrets away just so you can turn round and applaud them for being 'fair'.

Those kind of figures are usually includes in the games' commercial data sheets, which all casinos have access to. So it wouldn't be too difficult for a competitor to get hold of it

 

[Lemon]

Those kind of figures are usually includes in the games' commercial data sheets, which all casinos have access to. So it wouldn't be too difficult for a competitor to get hold of it

I understand that certain info is distributed for marketing purposes and so on and that's fine, but the idea of a developer being required to publish what they may regard as sensitive info for all to see is a touch fanciful in my opinion. You could understand them not wanting to, and it wouldn't be for nefarious reasons.

 

[nikantw]

You might not think so, but things like feature hit rates and percentage contributions would be very useful to certain people. But fuck the game companies eh? Let's make them give all their secrets away just so you can turn round and applaud them for being 'fair'.

No need for that. Nothing like it. Actually the point is they have nothing to fear. The other companies already have the hit frequency, or can easily get it.
Only the players don't.

 

[dunover]

Except they aren't giving the hit frequency of specific wins or symbols/
If they'd listed the hit frequency of each of the paytable entries, then fair enough

But they're stating the frequency of wins within a certain multiplier ranges... 15x-30x, 30x-60x and 60x-90x
Those wins could be made up of many different symbol combinations, they could be base-game or the base-game sidewinder feature or the free spins.
especially as it's a 243-1125 ways game

And that is enough information as those wins can be only obtained with certain symbols and combinations. All you need to do is totalize their averages as listed to a level stake, note the RTP and work out the overall win frequency with a few hundred spins. Then you'll work out the smaller wins and their RTP contributions, then work backwards from there. As I said, it's a form of slot maths Sudoku. You can already see by the base game that only just over 18.1% of the total pays are composed of base game wins (17.43% of the RTP) and from that you can partly deduce the constituent wins from the pay tables which would make the majority of those small wins. Put it this way, try getting a developer to impart this info when the game is under construction! Maybe Trancemonkey will tell you if he sees this thread.

 

[lockinlove]

I know if I show the average person that chart, they would never play slots. No way slot providers want people seeing that. Sure you get your players playing for entertainment only but lets be realistic. Most players deposit in hopes to win big. They see those returns and they are like...ohhhh hell nahhh

 

[Reelsoffun]

Base 17.43%
side feature 50.66%
main feature / free spins 27.93%
TOTAL 96.02%

From recent games I know about and have seen par sheets for I would say thats a typical set of figures of a lot of games of this type or ones that have random features like the blueprints etc

Which is why they play so awful if you don't hit a feature and the random features are not triggering.

These games all boil down to if your hitting the feature above the designed average and or the extra random features then your most likely gonna be in profit for the session, if you dont your gonna have a rough session very quickly.


With a game like bonanza it could just as easily be

Base 68.09%
Free spins 27.91%
TOTAL 96.0%

and although I have not played it enough to even come close to an accurate guess, I doubt its gonna be that far from that, I would be very surprised if they were more than +/- 5% from those figures esp with what people have been saying about wagering, its ability to keep your balance etc Any hard core bonanza players out there that would like to know how easy it is to track those two figures feel free to PM me.

 

[nikantw]

People play lottery like crazy, don't they know the odds?
People play scratch cards like crazy and those have all odds on the back side or on the internet.
We gamble, we take risks. It is only fair we can find the chance of success if we want to. Most people know nothing or very little about gambling anyway, even if they do gamble.
The truth is almost nobody will read them but everybody will trust the industry a bit more.
Companies have nothing to fear (but something to gain) and I hope JFTW will prove that.