Online gambling has become a disgrace for UK players

[jasonuk]

@jasonuk, how do you think the number of ways shown is chosen/calculated?

I haven't really looked into it myself, but I recall previous threads mused about weighted tables of possible combinations. Given the "max megaways" mechanic, that would make a lot of sense - otherwise you would have too many ways to deal with gracefully (lots of 5, 6 or 7 depth) or astronomically small odds (e.g. 1/10 x 1/8 x 1/8 x 1/8 x 1/8 x 1/10 = 1 in 409k)

The alternative would be the Red Tiger approach where it's all window dressing and there's little evidence of any reels at all - but BTG do use traditional reelsets (plural) so that wouldn't work for them.

 

[snorky510238]

That’s the strange thing. If it was based on all possible combos being a available, which I think they are, then the odds of seeing the max ways is about 22,500-1 (worked it out once, it’s around there). The fact that I have seen it 3 times in 4 spins would be next to impossible, if every combo had an equal chance of dropping.

 

[jasonuk]

That’s the strange thing. If it was based on all possible combos being a available, which I think they are, then the odds of seeing the max ways is about 22,500-1 (worked it out once, it’s around there). The fact that I have seen it 3 times in 4 spins would be next to impossible, if every combo had an equal chance of dropping.

It would make for a problematic slot design - because you would have hundreds of high ways (as in 20k+) balls in the bag. Similarly you wouldn't be able to market "max megaways" properly if it was a 1 in 22500 shot (6 x 5 x 5 x 5 x 5 x 6 combinations).

So you have three options - weighted megaways balls, lower the pays into oblivion, or introduce some kind of ante bet / pre-gamble to get rid of the paint-drying spins (of which there are many). I have no idea what that would need to cost though, but it wouldn't be cheap!

 

[ollygarch]

Counting numbers on the fingers of one hand?

 

[Jono777]

I haven't really looked into it myself, but I recall previous threads mused about weighted tables of possible combinations. Given the "max megaways" mechanic, that would make a lot of sense - otherwise you would have too many ways to deal with gracefully (lots of 5, 6 or 7 depth) or astronomically small odds (e.g. 1/10 x 1/8 x 1/8 x 1/8 x 1/8 x 1/10 = 1 in 409k)

The alternative would be the Red Tiger approach where it's all window dressing and there's little evidence of any reels at all - but BTG do use traditional reelsets (plural) so that wouldn't work for them.

No way on this planet mate.

DHV and similar maybe yes, sure it's been discussed in depth on here in the past.

Bonanza, Chilli, WWTBAM etc no way hozay. Just displays the necessary symbols together with the correctly random chosen MW to "look like" a reel.

With all the permutations possible, they would wrap around the planet several times.

 

[jasonuk]

Seems like you are pushing the same conspiracy that you did four years ago - I've a BTG/Bonanza Randomness Theory - Casinomeister Forum

BTG even responded to that thread saying they don't use a "tacky tombola" and that it is pure math. Amusingly the person who was trying to discredit Bonanza in that thread actually did the opposite, by demonstrating that the reels are real.

They even explained how the XML output works - so a suitably minded person would be able to build the reels and prove they are genuine.

The whole point of the "blocking reels" design (to use the language of the OP in that thread) is to naturally temper the variance - unless you get the tail-end of the block in view, the next ones are going to cascade down and probably block subsequent wins.

With all the permutations possible, they would wrap around the planet several times.

Correct, BTG have some of the largest probability models used in modern slotting.

As has been discussed in previous threads, players have uncovered wins that exceeded their in-house testing... that's why traditional slot design uses a liability limit (e.g. £250k), because that one-in-a-quadrillion shot can genuinely happen and businesses really don't want undefined liabilities.

Not to be confused with "max win" scratchcard slots (the "tacky tombola") - that's just straight up dishonesty.

 

[johnnymcc1966]

It's awful isn't it nowadays. Getting some play time on almost any game has become virtually impossible and I'm having to decrease stakes,often to minimum,to get some spins in. This means usually smaller bonuses and still no decent sessions.

 

[Reelsoffun]

No way on this planet mate.

DHV and similar maybe yes, sure it's been discussed in depth on here in the past.

Bonanza, Chilli, WWTBAM etc no way hozay. Just displays the necessary symbols together with the correctly random chosen MW to "look like" a reel.

With all the permutations possible, they would wrap around the planet several times.

So you saying my SIM i posted about on here don't use reel strips either?

Mine use similar sets to bonanza they are 177 long, more than 1 set is used, random position stops and the reel heights each spin are random too, although they are weighted eg a 7 high is not the same chance as a 3 high for example.

Just the 177 stops per reel gives 30.7 Trillion different outcomes, before you start on anything else eg drops lol

Mine also has a "forced" max ways spin which is also a random call, and uses its own set.

I strongly expect the real games do it the same way or very similar to it.

 

[Jono777]

So you saying my SIM i posted about on here don't use reel strips either?

Mine use similar sets to bonanza they are 177 long, more than 1 set is used, random position stops and the reel heights each spin are random too, although they are weighted eg a 7 high is not the same chance as a 3 high for example.

Just the 177 stops per reel gives 30.7 Trillion different outcomes, before you start on anything else eg drops lol

Mine also has a "forced" max ways spin which is also a random call, and uses its own set.

I strongly expect the real games do it the same way or very similar to it.

No mate, I'm saying I cannot get my head around it having reel strips in the sense we know them, such as the 16 symbols on an AWP or the approx 80 - 200 symbols on some of the older fixed line and 243 mechanic games. (Bonanza / BTG not your game)

I don't doubt your slotting knowledge or skills for a second but I do doubt what we're told by providers, sad but true on how I feel about the more modern games we see.

 

[Reelsoffun]

Well even the 16 stop reels on AWP's were almost always likely weighted to more on a virtual reel that mapped the the physical 16 stop one. Not everything is as it seems on slots since computer chips got involved LOL I would say the only slots you can trust are the pull handle ones but even they were easy to manipulate if you had the know how.
Anyway back to another comment, I believe they do use strips, and weight the 2-7 reel height on individual spin basis.

@snorky510238
Just because the true odds of a max ways "appears" to be 1 in 22,500 don't mean the real odds are that as they not, they appear way more than that so its logical that there is other extra chance in play but that will still be on a random chance. Wether that be down to a pure random "forced" 1 in 800 max ways or higher chance of a 7 high than the 1 in 6 and the 1 in 5 ( middle 4 ) we "see" as being logical

 

[snorky510238]

Well even the 16 stop reels on AWP's were almost always likely weighted to more on a virtual reel that mapped the the physical 16 stop one. Not everything is as it seems on slots since computer chips got involved LOL I would say the only slots you can trust are the pull handle ones but even they were easy to manipulate if you had the know how.
Anyway back to another comment, I believe they do use strips, and weight the 2-7 reel height on individual spin basis.

@snorky510238
Just because the true odds of a max ways "appears" to be 1 in 22,500 don't mean the real odds are that as they not, they appear way more than that so its logical that there is other extra chance in play but that will still be on a random chance. Wether that be down to a pure random "forced" 1 in 800 max ways or higher chance of a 7 high than the 1 in 6 and the 1 in 5 ( middle 4 ) we "see" as being logical

I kind of get that but in fairness, this has always been my rant, regarding randomness. The second you start messing with natural odds or “forcing” things, it isn’t random.

 

[Reelsoffun]

I kind of get that but in fairness, this has always been my rant, regarding randomness. The second you start messing with natural odds or “forcing” things, it isn’t random.

Even if the "Forced" element is decided at random?

 

[snorky510238]

Check the true definition of random and it’s obvious that slots cannot be classed as random.

made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.

 

[electronictonic]

Check the true definition of random and it’s obvious that slots cannot be classed as random.

made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.

Most of them are scripted, having done hundreds and thousands of spins across the Reactoonz series games I can provide commentary for the outcome as I see the scripted sequence happening and be correct with almost 100% accuracy, the most blatant is Elk games 99.9% of bonuses is 10 free spins 7 or 8 of them dead spins with 1 paying hit and thats it, the same goes for their 5 free spins it usually gives 3 or 4 dead spins off the bat in a row with 1 paying hit time and time again.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Most of them are scripted, having done hundreds and thousands of spins across the Reactoonz series games I can provide commentary for the outcome as I see the scripted sequence happening and be correct with almost 100% accuracy, the most blatant is Elk games 99.9% of bonuses is 10 free spins 7 or 8 of them dead spins with 1 paying hit and thats it, the same goes for their 5 free spins it usually gives 3 or 4 dead spins off the bat in a row with 1 paying hit time and time again.

Reactoonz is known to work on pre-scripted sequences, as do all games of that type. There was much controversy about this with reference to Jammin' Jars here at CM when Push Gaming had an active rep.

Turned out they'd only put 1.3m sequences into the 'bag of balls' so streamers were showcasing the game with entirely real funds on their streams and getting very excited about their entirely real wins, with sequences that were playing out identically.

Push Gaming confirmed that the game uses pre-scripted sequences, and confirmed that they only put 1.3m results into the pool.

 

[jasonuk]

Reactoonz is known to work on pre-scripted sequences, as do all games of that type. There was much controversy about this with reference to Jammin' Jars here at CM when Push Gaming had an active rep.

The game rules to this day still claim the jar movement is random - even though they have admitted there is zero randomness to it. The whole point of the game rules is that they are law... once that breaks down then we're into full wild west territory (which I guess we are now, so many dishonest slot providers).

Check the true definition of random and it’s obvious that slots cannot be classed as random.

made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.

That would apply to the input stream - and the RNG is heavily regulated for that reason. Those random numbers have to be mapped somehow, and that behaviour should be somewhat transparent to the player.

The problem was certain vocal parts of the industry (no prizes for guessing) talked about traditional slot design being "boring"... perhaps because they couldn't dopamine-trap people with an endless stream of just missed scenarios and impossibly big wins that will never be paid (literally - there's a reason they call it "max win" rather than a "win cap") regularly... remember Avalon 2 was 2.5 billion to one, where-as bonus buy parody is 1 in 150k... 17,000x more likely from previous discussions.

If you tried to design that as a true odds game, it would look as awful as it plays... hence why progressive jackpots became a thing (which is what it basically is - a 6% winner takes all fixed jackpot).

 

[snorky510238]

Reactoonz is known to work on pre-scripted sequences, as do all games of that type. There was much controversy about this with reference to Jammin' Jars here at CM when Push Gaming had an active rep.

Turned out they'd only put 1.3m sequences into the 'bag of balls' so streamers were showcasing the game with entirely real funds on their streams and getting very excited about their entirely real wins, with sequences that were playing out identically.

Push Gaming confirmed that the game uses pre-scripted sequences, and confirmed that they only put 1.3m results into the pool.

BUT, they only admitted it once they’d been caught out. Not upfront.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

BUT, they only admitted it once they’d been caught out. Not upfront.

According to the regulations they were operating under, they weren't doing anything wrong, the game is fair and random, it just chooses to show the results the RNG picks using pre-scripted sequences.

The rules were, and are, dodgy as hell though, as was well discussed at the time and jasonuk notes again above, the jars cannot move in 'any' direction like the rules say, so in essence the game constantly implies things that can never, ever happen, as being possible.

I've still got the videos I made about it for my old channel, and I called it out as dodgy behaviour back then, can do a reupload if anyone's interested.

This is why I'm a big fan of older style 'proper reels' type games.

 

[justdoit]

last time I got same offer from UK Casino was in 2010 now UK casinos they send offer 10p or 5p on 40x wager

 

[Guntis]

Isn’t that a new Pragmatic Play game? The 100 max bet with a bonus seems a pretty new thing too.

I saw a few online casinos without a $5 max bet rule as well, but there was a withdrawal cap after clearing the playthrough.

 

[Lemon]

According to the regulations they were operating under, they weren't doing anything wrong, the game is fair and random, it just chooses to show the results the RNG picks using pre-scripted sequences.

The rules were, and are, dodgy as hell though, as was well discussed at the time and jasonuk notes again above, the jars cannot move in 'any' direction like the rules say, so in essence the game constantly implies things that can never, ever happen, as being possible.

I've still got the videos I made about it for my old channel, and I called it out as dodgy behaviour back then, can do a reupload if anyone's interested.

This is why I'm a big fan of older style 'proper reels' type games.

What tends to happen here, and it's not limited to grid games (it could be any game with complicated mechanics or persistence in the bonus for example) is that they blast off millions of bonuses that play out entirely randomly, save the results and RNG sequence to a database, filter out the ones that don't look very nice to the player and then make a weighted look-up table that chooses a bonus to play when you trigger it - and then that same RNG sequence is played back to you, returning the same value. It will feel random because you shouldn't have seen that exact sequence before if there are enough entries in the database to pick from.

So technically it's not quite 'pre-scripted'; that bonus was conjured up randomly once upon a time, and they're just reusing it because it meets certain criteria. I suppose you could take the RNG sequence and modify it by hand to make it as attractive as possible, but that would take ages.

With Jammin' Jars I agree that the movement of the jars in the bonus is already known in advance, but to most players it will appear to be random. The only way you won't see it that way would be if you've seen that same bonus database entry before.

For those with a very literal interpretation of the word 'random' this method might seem shady in some way but it's very often the best way of ensuring complex mechanics in bonus rounds look as good as possible, and it also helps a lot when hammering the maths profile into the shape you want, something that is often very hard to achieve on certain games. You can make the rare events that might randomly occur 1 in 1000 bonuses happen much more often so the player at least achieves what they're aiming for before they give up.

I don't see it as being dodgy; more being creative within the set guidelines. 25 years ago people were using one set of reelstrips for the base game and then the same one for Free Spins. Nowadays we have base games that pick one of several reelsets per spin via a weighted table, and the same in Free Spins. We also have rejection chances in a lot of slots which again help shape the maths. I haven't got a problem with any of it quite frankly. The more complex slots become, the more you need to look in different places for solutions.

 

[jasonuk]

So technically it's not quite 'pre-scripted'; that bonus was conjured up randomly once upon a time, and they're just reusing it because it meets certain criteria.

Good post overall, although I would disagree with the above - the term "scripted" or "pre-scripted" is precisely for such a scenario. It is a game round were there is a suggestion of randomisation at the time of play but there is actually little or none - hence it's pulling a ball (or script) out of the bag.

For those with a very literal interpretation of the word 'random' this method might seem shady in some way but it's very often the best way of ensuring complex mechanics in bonus rounds look as good as possible, and it also helps a lot when hammering the maths profile into the shape you want, something that is often very hard to achieve on certain games. You can make the rare events that might randomly occur 1 in 1000 bonuses happen much more often so the player at least achieves what they're aiming for before they give up.

If they didn't say it was randomly moving - then it would be the same as the hundreds of other scripted grid slots that didn't cause an uproar. The line is crossed when the game rules are wrong...

And yes, it's exactly to implement absurd volatility - way beyond what natural mechanics will. So much dopamine to get people to believe these wins are genuine and achievable... until they see the rather large hole in their wallet.

 

[justdoit]

Isn’t that a new Pragmatic Play game? The 100 max bet with a bonus seems a pretty new thing too.

I saw a few online casinos without a $5 max bet rule as well, but there was a withdrawal cap after clearing the playthrough.

yes Pragmatic, this 500 casinos they send regular offers

 

[RedPhase]

I am not sure what the feeling is in other countries because for 1, I obviously don’t play there and 2, we don’t see a lot posted but as UK player, I am beyond disgusted at what is happening.

I happily played for 6 years. Admittedly having the odd whinge when I hit a bad patch but other than that, I took the rough with the smooth and NEVER once felt the need to go to “chat” to complain about the way a game played.

In the past two and a half years, that’s a completely different story and particularly the past 6 months. In all honesty, it gets worse by the day. I can’t imagine for a second that this industry is being regulated properly. If it was providers (and let’s not forget, they are the main culprits but Casinos are hosting them), wouldn’t not be getting away with the blatant, filthy cheating that is happening right now.

In the early days of gambling online, if I hadn’t hit a bonus after depositing £60, (40-60p spins) I would think that was the session from hell. That was consistent for years, it genuinely felt that you were getting a fair crack of the whip.

Fast forward 8 years and the experience feels nowhere near the same. People will say volatility has changed etc. Yes it has but I still had some amazing wins and regularly playing these games.

Not now though, no sir, you can easily deposit £300-£500 without even seeing a bonus. That is quite simply disgraceful. Yes, okay, once in a while that might happen but for it to become the norm, no way, not a chance, unless you are playing against a slot that is programmed so the odds are ridiculously against you.

I could write pages but there’s little point, as whatever goes against the grain on this forum is quickly brushed under the carpet. If you’re a UK player and you’ve been thinking hang on a minute, am I being screwed over here? The answer is yes you are. It’s FOBT GATE all over again.

Accredited UK Casinos:

• Kwiff Casino
• PlayOJO
• Lottomart
• Casumo
• Rizk Casino

Your concerns are valid, and the issues you're describing touch on important aspects of fairness and transparency in online gaming. Delving deeper into the subject:

True Randomness vs. Adaptive Algorithms​

True Randomness:

• True randomness means that each outcome is independent of previous outcomes, as with a fair dice roll.
• In an ideal RNG, each spin of an online slot machine should have the same probabilities, regardless of past results.

Adaptive Algorithms:

• Some games might include features that adjust based on player behavior, but this should be disclosed and regulated.
• Adjusting the game’s difficulty or outcomes based on player actions without clear disclosure can be considered unfair.

Legal and Regulatory Standards​

Regulation:

• Reputable online casinos are regulated by authorities such as the UK Gambling Commission, Malta Gaming Authority, and others.
• These regulatory bodies enforce standards to ensure games are fair and random.

Fairness and Transparency:

• Casinos are generally required to use certified RNGs to ensure randomness.
• Any adaptive features or non-random adjustments should be clearly disclosed to players.

Return to Player (RTP):

• RTP is a theoretical percentage that indicates how much of the wagered money a slot machine will pay back to players over time.
• While RTP can vary over short periods, it should be consistent in the long run and not manipulated in real-time based on individual player actions.

Addressing the Issue​

1. Understanding and Evidence:
   • Gather concrete evidence of the patterns you’re experiencing (e.g., recordings and logs of gameplay).
   • Research the specific game and casino for any known issues or similar player experiences.
2. Contact the Casino:
   • Raise your concerns with the casino again, providing the evidence you’ve gathered.
   • Request detailed information about the game’s mechanics and RNG usage.
3. Regulatory Complaints:
   • If the casino’s response is unsatisfactory, file a complaint with the relevant regulatory authority.
   • Provide all your evidence and documentation to support your claim.
4. Public Forums and Reviews:
   • Share your experiences on public forums and review sites. This can help other players and might attract attention to the issue.

Steps for Moving Forward​

1. Choose Reputable Casinos:
   • Ensure you play on well-regulated platforms with good reputations for fairness and transparency.
   • Check for certifications and third-party audits that verify the casino’s fairness.
2. Understand the Terms:
   • Read the terms and conditions of the games and the casino.
   • Look for any disclosures about adaptive algorithms or non-standard RNG practices.
3. Stay Informed:
   • Keep up to date with industry news and player experiences.
   • Join communities of online gamblers to share insights and stay informed about reputable and fair gaming practices.

Conclusion​

Your expectation for true randomness in online gaming is entirely justified. Reputable and regulated online casinos should adhere to strict standards to ensure fairness and transparency. If you suspect unfair practices, taking the steps outlined above can help address the issue and potentially improve the standards in the online gaming industry.

 

[jasonuk]

Got to love ChatGPT - garbage in, garbage out.

Since we're talking about online rather than AWPs, nobody has really touched on adaptive algorithms and there's no real reason to - in many (if not most) jurisdictions that would be illegal for a random slot to behave in such a way. We could fill a 100 page thread talking about AWP stuff - in fact a number of us have on DIF .

Additionally, that is a pretty awful definition of true random. There would be two definitions we might use here:

• In terms of RNG, "true" random would use natural phenomena as a hardware-RNG (hRNG) rather than an algorithmic RNG (psuedo-RNG, pRNG).
• In game design, a "true random" slot would use natural odds for all devices provided to the player (such as reels and dice). If the RNG is mapped to a different scale (e.g. balls in the bag) it would be considered weighted random, and otherwise it would be compensated.
  • So the probabilities should be the same given the same start condition - linked spins do not prevent a slot from being true random or weighted random, as long as the game rules are clearly defined and rigid in nature.