It's not the $ but the principle

everyday

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Location
British Columbia, Canada
Played MG $2 & $5 tournies all afternoon, winning some, losing some. Finally got to where I was on the low side and needed another win. Played a $2 Tomb Raider and managed to stay in 2nd. place for the whole 5 minutes. I thought "yay I won $3" and got to the winners screen to see another player sitting in 2nd. place:what: Had to look again to see that we had tied (the same total winning amount). But I had reached that total afew spins before her and the software decided to give her the win instead:confused: Have to admit that I felt cheated but also realized that this is a glich that they have to correct before the same problem turns up during a $20,000 weekender tournie. So I have sent off an email to the casino I was playing at and asked that they forward to the MG programming people. Don't know if they've had players tied before but I really think the win should go to the person who got there first.
 

kimss

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Location
Norway
Well to be honest, the prize should be devided to the ones sharing the 2nd place. That would be the most fair.
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
Well to be honest, the prize should be devided to the ones sharing the 2nd place. That would be the most fair.
I was about to say the same.
Unless it's in the terms that first or last 'past the post' take precedence, then combining the 2nd & 3rd prizes (if there is a 3rd..?) & splitting 50/50 is the only fair option.

KK
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
I have seen this take place in situ MANY times. In ALL cases, it is the player who reaches the tied position LAST that takes the lead, and NOT the one already there.

Even without the prizes being divided, it is clearly WRONG, as the player who reaches the score with fewest spins should take the lead.

It would be worth double checking to see whethe this is determined by chips remaining, with the player in a tie, but with most chips remaining, taking the lead.

In some tournaments, this could have a serious affect on the outcome, and would be of the form "last come, first served", and would cause considerable anger were the difference as great as between 1st and 2nd in the weekender.

This is the SECOND problem to appear in these tournaments this week. I experienced some strange goings on related to "connectivity", which I now suspect is due to an update to the tournament software intended to "handicap" players on Broadband & fast PC's, so that those on slow machines and/or dial-up are at no serious disadvantage.
It also implies that right from the outset, it was INTENTIONAL that players would have no chance in hell of playing all their allocated chips, rather than a flaw in calculations for individual allocations of chips and playing time.
Until now, I had believed that the intention was that, under optimum conditions, the tournaments were designed to allow all chips to be played, and that failure to get through them indicated substandard PC or internet performance.

All chips ARE generally played in the weekender, but in some tournaments the waste just goes up and up with each rebuy, sometimes with the remaining chips at the end greater than the winbox:mad: This is highly demoralising, and has put me off many tournaments, and now the novelty has worn off I play the weekender and perhaps a couple of others, whereas I used to play daily from the $200 pot 30 minute events upwards.
 

footdr

Banned User: PITA violations of the Forum Rules
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Location
cyberspace
JUST ENTERED TWO TOURNEYS FOR FIRST TIME

Just played two tourneys. One free and one cost $20.00.

I am on Dial-up(I know, I'm living in the DarkAges of internet connections)

What I learned:

I will not ever pay to enter a tournament that is timed again, in fact I asked to be refunded and they gave me the money back. There are way too many variables regarding internet connections, processor speed, graphic memory, and so on. I watched the wheels spin and spin and spin and then when I got the bonus round it was moving really slow, and every time I changed the number of lines or coins, the response slowed down.

The tournaments with a set amount of play money are definately better, at least for me and my computer and my dial-up connection.
 

everyday

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Location
British Columbia, Canada
Explaination received

I should have thought of this if I had looked at our user names alittle closer. Here is the response:

Hello JoAnne,

Thanks so much for your email and your feedback regarding the slots tournament. I have spoken with Microgaming regarding this issue and they have advised that in the unlikely event that two players end the tournament with the same amount in their Win Box, the player with the alias that is listed first alphabetically will be awarded the prize. Our tourney manager has offered to take this up with Microgaming, and as a thank you I have put a $20 bonus into your account, and refunded the $2 entry fee.

Hope your luck is a bit better next time! If there is anything else I can do for you, please dont hesitate to contact me.

Kind Regards,

Simon

Manager, CR Helpdesk

Interesting way to set that up but I guess it's the best the software can do for now. Nice that the have returned my entry fee but you won't see me playing in the $50 tournies any time soon:). VWM - I have noticed the same slow spins especially when free spins are awarded. Thunderstruck is the worst for that - takes over 2 minutes sometimes to get through them. All in all I still enjoy the inexpensive entertainment the tournies offer but some improvements are needed. So, off to see what damage I can do with the $20 bonus they have kindly given me:D
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Just played two tourneys. One free and one cost $20.00.

I am on Dial-up(I know, I'm living in the DarkAges of internet connections)

What I learned:

I will not ever pay to enter a tournament that is timed again, in fact I asked to be refunded and they gave me the money back. There are way too many variables regarding internet connections, processor speed, graphic memory, and so on. I watched the wheels spin and spin and spin and then when I got the bonus round it was moving really slow, and every time I changed the number of lines or coins, the response slowed down.

The tournaments with a set amount of play money are definately better, at least for me and my computer and my dial-up connection.
MG's botched attempt to level the playing field last weekend (which they have claimed were "connection issues"*) meant we ALL got to experience what you went through, with spins taking around 7 seconds EACH to complete & resolve payouts. Free spins are even worse, as not only do they run just as slowly, but every time you hit a win it cycles through each winning line in turn before moving on to the next. This can mean free spins taking nearly 10 seconds each to fully execute, and with only 3 to 5 minures on the clock for tournaments leaves the experience unfulfiling.

WHY are the games not as fast as in "normal" play, even with dial-up, a better experience would be had.


* Connection issues my a$$!!!!!

I am well versed in constant issues with bad connection to the Kawanake compound with MG, and last weekend was NOTHING LIKE IT!

In short, connection issues are chaotic, the connection delays during the tournaments were 100% of spins, and predictable like clockwork.

The formula I derived was sneaky, but sinister in it's simplicity.

Taking the time of execution of the PREVIOUS spin (not the one just requested), the "connection lag" was exactly 5 SECONDS each and every time.

I deliberately waited 10 seconds between requesting spins as an experiment, and, guess what, absolutely ZERO "connection delay" EVERY TIME. I span quicker, and as soon as the interval hit between 4 and 5 seconds I noticed the delay back again. It is particularly noticeable on Tomb Raider, as it runs a little faster than Thunderstruck. Thunderstruck has an error in the Viper display module that causes the reels to "stick" occasionally, but also causes the last reel to hang for a short while before settling, and CAN on occasion cause the game to crash altogether with the first two reels stopped and the last three forever spinning, and sometimes with "garbage" in the free spins left field (usually indicating "0" or "-1" spins left).

Casinos are now apologising for these errors, and I have retested in Riverbelle (all clear). Interestingly, the lobby did an "update" and appears to have completely flushed and reinstalled the two multiplayer slots. Interestingly, it was a "super re-install". I know this as I had turned off background sounds and game sounds, leaving only win sounds on, but found these settings were restored and needed to be set all over again. MG updates do NOT usually overwrite user settings like this.
Now what "connection issues" are fixed by updating the local copy of the game graphical display module? I would have thought something on the lines of tweaking or rebooting the server would help, as well as tracing the routing through the individual casino lobbies.
Given that these delays occured while fewer than 50 players were actually playing a tournament, the capacity of these servers must be pretty abysmal compared to the capacity of the general casino server.

The individual casinos may not know the full story, but MG do, and it didn't work. Far from attracting players with "slow" kit, many players were put off ever playing again. Including some who tried for the first time this weekend.
Fewer players than usual took part in the weekender, over 500, instead of the usual 800 to 900.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top