Question for the industry guys (RTP)

[andym]

Hi guys,
i have one question for you and would be happy if someone can answer that.
Lets assume there is only one online casino out there. This online casino licensed only one slot. This one slot has a theoretical RTP of 96%.
In that online casino only two players are playing the whole time.

Player1 made a really good win on the slot and get an RTP of 104%. Then Player1 stopped immeadiately playing.
Now whats the most likely real-RTP-outcome for Player2 who still continues playing with a very lot or unlimited spins:

1. Player2 will end up at 96% RTP
2. Player2 will end up at 88% RTP

Thanks
Andy

 

[ChopleyIOM]

You are talking about the concept of compensation if you're thinking Scenario 2 is the answer, online slots are random and are not compensated. therefore Player 1's results and Player 2's results are entirely independent of each other.

Eventually Player 1 and Player 2 will, given a sufficient number of spins, reach the T-RTP of the slot, but their results along the way do not influence the other at all.

 

[andym]

Thanks for your answer.
So you THINK that Answer 1 is correct? Because thats what all casinos/slots telling us the whole time?
Or you KNOW that Answer1 is the correct one?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

If you are even remotely thinking that Answer 2 is correct then stop playing online slots

 

[Kroffe]

If you are even remotely thinking that Answer 2 is correct then stop playing online slots

Or, be player 1.

 

[pinnit2014]

Or, be player 1.

Unfortunately, being Player 1 at places like Videoslots is impossible

So, don't be Player 3; 50% RTP, there.

 

[andym]

If you are even remotely thinking that Answer 2 is correct then stop playing online slots

Well said. But thats the "opinion" of a VIP manager of one of the TOP5-certified casinos you see in the casinomeister list.
Let me explain you why i asked you and stressed that topic:
Several months ago i asked my VIP manager about my (at that time very bad) RTP in that casino.Throughtout "unlimited" spins.
His answer was: "A bad RTP one player has is sometimes normal. Because at the same time other players win. And other players only can win if others loose".
Thats was a quote...

So in my understanding refering to my forum-question that is more or less answer2.
And now tell me:
Do we/you do not understand the concept? Do they not understand the concept?
Or is it just a complete mess industry in the meantime...

 

[CasinoNinja]

I'm sorry, but your VIP manager probably was not explaining it to you properly.

To get the stated RTP it's based on billions and billions of spins, I think in DoA 2 they did it over 11 Trillions on spins to get it to the stated RTP.

Over the very long run, your play should reflect closer and close to the through RTP. But in reality, you are never going to reach it in your lifetime, so it could be below, above and so on.

It's just maths and the likelyhood of outcomes. Your bound to lose slightly more than winning over the very long run.

 

[andym]

I'm sorry, but your VIP manager probably was not explaining it to you properly.

To get the stated RTP it's based on billions and billions of spins, I think in DoA 2 they did it over 11 Trillions on spins to get it to the stated RTP.

Over the very long run, your play should reflect closer and close to the through RTP. But in reality, you are never going to reach it in your lifetime, so it could be below, above and so on.

It's just maths and the likelyhood of outcomes. Your bound to lose slightly more than winning over the very long run.

i totally agree.
But thats not the point.
The main question is: Does a single player RTP on a slot affects another player RTP?
In my understanding the answer on that question is: No
But the VIP manager clearly told another story!

 

[CasinoNinja]

i totally agree.
But thats not the point.
The main question is: Does a single player RTP on a slot affects another player RTP?
In my understanding the answer on that question is: No
But the VIP manager clearly told another story!

Well, no it does not. So your VIP manager is clueless and wrong

 

[ChopleyIOM]

i totally agree.
But thats not the point.
The main question is: Does a single player RTP on a slot affects another player RTP?
In my understanding the answer on that question is: No
But the VIP manager clearly told another story!

I think he was trying to explain what CasinoNinja said above but maybe English isn't his first language or he phrased it in a way that made it come across wrong, or it is possible he completely understands how online slots work.

The answer to the question is indeed 'no', at least as far as random online slots work. Compensated games do exist (UK AWPs/fruit machines for example), but they're a completely different beast to random online slots.

It's not even like there's any benefit to coding online slots to be compensated, quite apart from the fact it'd be completely busting the licensing terms for the games, it's a massive ballache for no benefit. Just design the maths of the game correctly, chuck a few billion simulated spins at it, certify the T-RTP, and let random numbers do the rest.

 

[colinsunderland]

So, in the testing stage, who decides how many spins should be done? Surely to get a true RTP there should be a set number otherwise it can be manipulated?
For example, Netent say it took 11 trillion spins.
What if they started thinking, ok, we will do 5 trillion, at the end the game shows 70% RTP, they think, shit, do another trillion see if we can get it up a bit, then another, then another, then another until they hit the 96% they need.

They could even have a stop limit, something like if number spins>1 Trillion and RTP = 96.2% then stop. If number of spins >1 Trillion and RTP <96.2% continue. Then eventually they will hit the RTP they require and stop, even though another trillion could see it drop to say 80%

Surely all slots should be tested over the same amount of test spins, otherwise the RTP means nothing?

 

[Kroffe]

So, in the testing stage, who decides how many spins should be done? Surely to get a true RTP there should be a set number otherwise it can be manipulated?
For example, Netent say it took 11 trillion spins.
What if they started thinking, ok, we will do 5 trillion, at the end the game shows 70% RTP, they think, shit, do another trillion see if we can get it up a bit, then another, then another, then another until they hit the 96% they need.

They could even have a stop limit, something like if number spins>1 Trillion and RTP = 96.2% then stop. If number of spins >1 Trillion and RTP <96.2% continue. Then eventually they will hit the RTP they require and stop, even though another trillion could see it drop to say 80%

Surely all slots should be tested over the same amount of test spins, otherwise the RTP means nothing.

Wouldnt the slot be stopped at the testing facility if the rtp cant be replicated with the same amount of spins?
If Netent says 100 billion spins and 96% rtp, but the testing facility gets 90% aftet 100 billion spins, the slot would fail/not pass the testing.

 

[colinsunderland]

Wouldnt the slot be stopped at the testing facility if the rtp cant be replicated with the same amount of spins?
If Netent says 100 billion spins and 96% rtp, but the testing facility gets 90% aftet 100 billion spins, the slot would fail/not pass the testing.

I don't know as I don't know how that type of things work, I would have thought NetEnt did the spins then sent the results over to be reviewed rather than the testing house doing the same, otherwise surely that would indicate they aren't random at all. The chances of the exact same RTP being recorded by 2 people, over 11 trillion spins must be quite small surely?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I guess the idea is that the sample size is sufficiently large to get the margin of error to within 0.001% or suchlike, also it will very much depend on the game.

As such I'd expect two samples of 11 trillion spins, to be very, very, VERY close to each other in terms of the RTP they finish up at.

Beyond that for example we know that Jammin' Jars only has (IIRC) about 1.2 million results in the pool, all of which are pre-determined animations that play out after the RNG call.

For a HV monster such as NLC's new output they seem to work to sample sizes of around 10 billion spins, it's really hard to get across just what a huge number that is.



For a super low volatility game like Starburst with a capped prize of 500x stake, your spin sample could be a lot smaller and still be accurate.

Pragmatic seem to cap their output, so I guess they'll do however many spins for their sims, cap off anything above 5000x stake (or whatever), and what's left as 'valid wins' is the RTP.

Lots of different ways to do it I suppose.

 

[Kroffe]

I don't know as I don't know how that type of things work, I would have thought NetEnt did the spins then sent the results over to be reviewed rather than the testing house doing the same, otherwise surely that would indicate they aren't random at all. The chances of the exact same RTP being recorded by 2 people, over 11 trillion spins must be quite small surely?

I dont know how it works either, just guessing.
I assumed the testing houses replicated the results (within a margin of error whatever that may be) and if they cant, fail the slot.
Even if the outcomes are random, the outcomes are limited, so given enough spins you would get not identical, but very similar results.

 

[colinsunderland]

I dont know how it works either, just guessing.
I assumed the testing houses replicated the results (within a margin of error whatever that may be) and if they cant, fail the slot.
Even if the outcomes are random, the outcomes are limited, so given enough spins you would get not identical, but very similar results.

well yes I get that, but the main point was the number of spins. 10 billion is a massive amount, but nowhere near 11 trillion, and if you do enough spins then there will be a point at which you are likely to reach the outcome you want.
It's more, why pick 11 trillion spins as the test amount, when other providers are doing far less. Surely the testing should be uniform, and be over a set number of spins? And a set number of goes, then possibly take the average. For example, do 10 billion spins 5 times. Get the RTP from each set, add together and divide by 5. Rather than do as many spins as it takes to get the result you want, then stop.

Imagine if that type of 'testing' was done in other areas, it would be viewed as completely unreliable.

 

[Lemon]

Player 2 can expect to end up at 96% if they play an unlimited number of spins - and maybe they will get there sooner than that, or maybe not.

Meanwhile there will be a Player 3 somewhere who will be on 88% after roughly the same number of spins as Player 1, and thousands of other players who will be in and around those figures, or maybe not.

You can't really compare Player 1 with Player 2 because Player 1 might have only played 100 spins to get 104%, whereas you're expecting Player 2 to play anything up to infinity, at which point Player 1's sample of games and resultant RTP% pales into insignificance.

 

[slotmaster]

Unfortunately, being Player 1 at places like Videoslots is impossible

So, don't be Player 3; 50% RTP, there.

View attachment 154297

Do not know what is going on at vs but I am tired of blowing threw deposits in like a hour. 100 x win is a miracle and a jackpot on there now. lol

 

[andym]

Player 2 can expect to end up at 96% if they play an unlimited number of spins - and maybe they will get there sooner than that, or maybe not.

Meanwhile there will be a Player 3 somewhere who will be on 88% after roughly the same number of spins as Player 1, and thousands of other players who will be in and around those figures, or maybe not.

You can't really compare Player 1 with Player 2 because Player 1 might have only played 100 spins to get 104%, whereas you're expecting Player 2 to play anything up to infinity, at which point Player 1's sample of games and resultant RTP% pales into insignificance.

yes, but thats why the model based only on two players in that topic.
The only question i wanted to point out is: if a rtp of one player effects the rtp for another player in the same casino on the same slot.
In my opinion it shouldnt, but referring to a comment of a vip manager it does (see my posts above).

And thats just an additional point why i in the meantime have huge doubts about that whole industry...

 

[Twin]

No. the Game does not care if one person wins. same reason why the chance is there to hit the Mega Moolah jackpot twice with 2 spins in a row.

It's all chance-based.

 

[Kroffe]

well yes I get that, but the main point was the number of spins. 10 billion is a massive amount, but nowhere near 11 trillion, and if you do enough spins then there will be a point at which you are likely to reach the outcome you want.
It's more, why pick 11 trillion spins as the test amount, when other providers are doing far less. Surely the testing should be uniform, and be over a set number of spins? And a set number of goes, then possibly take the average. For example, do 10 billion spins 5 times. Get the RTP from each set, add together and divide by 5. Rather than do as many spins as it takes to get the result you want, then stop.

Imagine if that type of 'testing' was done in other areas, it would be viewed as completely unreliable.

The best i can give you is a 'i have no idea'


Maybe one of the providers on the forum could provide some insight to how they choose how many spins to do during testing etc.

 

[Kroffe]

No. the Game does not care if one person wins. same reason why the chance is there to hit the Mega Moolah jackpot twice with 2 spins in a row.

It's all chance-based.

I just did two spins on Moolah, didnt win the jackpot even once.
Just my luck.

 

[mack341]

who decides the 'solution' and is this a new forum feature as I haven't see it before?

edit: not disagreeing with Chop's post, other than I believe the rng is 'pseudorandom'

 

[Kroffe]

who decides the 'solution' and is this a new forum feature as I haven't see it before?

edit: not disagreeing with Chop's post, other than I believe the rng is 'pseudorandom'

Yeah, true random cant be created by a machine, or so ive been told.