- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
Yeah that would of been 3 wins of 729 ways of 7 of a kind. But this seems to work like DHV where a full reel wild doesn't act like three symbols. It is just one.
Last edited:
Think slots are rigged? Read this first...
- Thread starter trancemonkey
- Start date
Yeah that would of been 3 wins of 729 ways of 7 of a kind. But this seems to work like DHV where a full reel wild doesn't act like three symbols. It is just one.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
Your wish is my command.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
Or search Google for RGS UK Testing. First link would be the pdf. It's all freely available.
With regards to how many games - A Monte Carlo test can sometimes be done which basically runs through every single possible reel stop position and gets the outcome.
For complex games that can be calculated in excel, then the calculations can be verified in numerous ways. Simulations being one.
For games that can't be precisely calculated, then I would guess around 5 billion games to get the precise RTP to quite a few decimal places.
And yes, jackpots should always be taken I to account UNLESS the jackpot is not part of the game. Which the one you mentioned wasn't. It was over many games and therefore should have been tested independently.
That info help?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
That we should all complain and get more money!
But yeah, either the rules are wrong(ly worded) or the payouts are wrong OR PP interpreted their own screenshot wrong. A wild reel isn't 3 wilds, but has always counted as 1 wild for that reel. I've played with real money, had a bash on fun money and saw it played by others and it all paid like I just said.
I'd like to hear from @trancemonkey on this one
My theory on this was......
How many times have we all been caught out by T and Cs that mean we “ broke rules of bonus by wagering too much or not enough or on the wrong games or covered too much of a roulette wheel etc etc..
Well In this instance the rules were not clear and the screenshot they sent “ incorrectly” in my opinion supported the fact that more than 3 winlines were in play.... couple that with the fact that this game forever highlights in massive font 2187 ways to pay... at the very least it could be interpreted as “ intentionally misleading “ and as the GC and fair play etc is currently a very hot topic, I surmised that with PP having been in the news recently on various negative issues, did they really want another court case on there hands.
I was very reticent in taking the £5k as I was fairly sure I could have pushed for the full payout ( which without going into boring detail could have been Interpreted 2 ways
2187 wins which would have exceeded the max payout which on my stake (£6) was 60k or following the email threads from the tech team 30 ways ( so 10 times what I actually received, as they said my £6 stake was divided into 30 winlines so 20p per winline ( this is where they say that it’s 2187 ways to win not that you can win 2187 times, which in itself is misleading but I followed the train of thought, however what they couldn’t answer was ( and never did)
Ok so if I am paying for 30 winlines from my £6 stake and I have 3 winning ones as per payout... what’s happened to my other 27 winlines.... and that I think coupled with there version of the simplified screen shot put them in a corner.
What I had to balance out was it was going to cost me £2k to take them to court and then the court would want to attempt mediation first and then probably a day before the court case PP would offer to settle for the 21k minus what had been paid from the spin but that would be a year down the line in all reality.
I would be the 2k down and a lot of time and effort and nett an extra 15k assuming all went that way...
Or I could take the £5k instantly with no drama and no potential to lose!!
It was principle more than anything that made me want to reject the offer, but as the saying goes sometimes you have to be rich to be principled !!
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2017
- Location
- England
Yes this has been highlighted before.
The reels open up when that feature starts, suggesting there is X amount of ways to win.
Then when it plants the wilds on the reels the ways are reduced!!
The reels open up when that feature starts, suggesting there is X amount of ways to win.
Then when it plants the wilds on the reels the ways are reduced!!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
Exactly but the game doesn’t say that..:
Therefore misleading
Therefore subject to questioning
Casinos are very much sticklers for the rules when it suits.....
nice to give them a bit of their own back from time to time..
!!
Therefore misleading
Therefore subject to questioning
Casinos are very much sticklers for the rules when it suits.....
nice to give them a bit of their own back from time to time..
!!
BabylonBear
Dormant Account
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2019
- Location
- London
Can I just add something to this: If a set of numbers or events "looks" random, it probably is not.
A real series of random numbers doesn't look like what a person would expect it to look like. People expect a sort of periodicity and predictability, based on consistency with past events, which simply doesn't exist in a set of independent outcomes.
For example, if you put someone in a room and ask him to write 100 random numbers down between 1-6, and put another person in a room and ask him to roll a die 100 times and write down the results, the set of numbers will be very different. I could look at the two number series and tell you which one was made up and which one was from the die. People have cognitive biases and assumptions about what they think random numbers will look like. For example, the guy making up numbers will probably not write the same number 3 times in a row, although in reality it will happen 2-3 times per 100 rolls. (Incidentally, these biases can be used to determine when people have made numbers up; e.g. fake phone numbers or voting fraud.)
So as a consequence, if you have a slot that chooses a bonus randomly, some days you might have 1000 spins without a bonus, and then the next day you might have two bonuses in a row. This is normal. If you had a slot which never did this, and always gave a bonus every 100-200 spins, then it would have to be rigged in order to achieve this....
A real series of random numbers doesn't look like what a person would expect it to look like. People expect a sort of periodicity and predictability, based on consistency with past events, which simply doesn't exist in a set of independent outcomes.
For example, if you put someone in a room and ask him to write 100 random numbers down between 1-6, and put another person in a room and ask him to roll a die 100 times and write down the results, the set of numbers will be very different. I could look at the two number series and tell you which one was made up and which one was from the die. People have cognitive biases and assumptions about what they think random numbers will look like. For example, the guy making up numbers will probably not write the same number 3 times in a row, although in reality it will happen 2-3 times per 100 rolls. (Incidentally, these biases can be used to determine when people have made numbers up; e.g. fake phone numbers or voting fraud.)
So as a consequence, if you have a slot that chooses a bonus randomly, some days you might have 1000 spins without a bonus, and then the next day you might have two bonuses in a row. This is normal. If you had a slot which never did this, and always gave a bonus every 100-200 spins, then it would have to be rigged in order to achieve this....
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Location
- Ontario
As the "whistle blower", I never said it was rigged, I said it was not the same as real mode. It must have had a RTP in the high hundreds. Which is deceptive and against the rules for a CM accredited casino. That's fine to have on GameArts site to show off their portfolio, but deceptive on a casino site. I am sorry they never provided a correct version. I never doubted the game itself, mind you, I don't have a statistically large enough sample of real play. If I could turn a couple of hundred into 40 or 50 K every few hours in real, I might not have been as keen to rumble it, lol. I do want to thank CMers for taking their time to help provide a larger sample size so VS could press the provider a little harder after they initially denied it was different.
Running at a very high RTP doesn't mean it's not random. I don't watch streamers. Maybe I should have streamed my Thunderkick play. Do you think I should approach casinos that still run it about that, lol.
Oh, I know the answer to that one. It's been discussed quite a number of times. The dollar (or xbet) amount is determined the minute you spun. The way that win is displayed is just "eye candy". I have a screenshot of a 27x trigger, I was pretty excited. I have no screenshot of the result, so it means it was less than 100x my bet. I was betting $2.
If paddy offered sasukdcf an extra £3,400 on top of the official game payout of £1,600, why would they feel the need to do this?
Is this common practice if everything is hunky dory with a game...
He has mentioned losing more money than trancemonkey, so perhaps retaining him as a customer was worth 5K?
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Location
- Ontario
I'm just a player, but I have been here a decade, and slotting longer than that. I have around half a million spins on Bonanza, have never hit a 600x win, and am still ahead on it. I have did a lot of $20 spins on it too, but also many many at just 20 cents. Come to think of it, it might be rigged 
This tells me just how large that pool of possible results is.
This tells me just how large that pool of possible results is.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Location
- Kent
"Oh, I know the answer to that one. It's been discussed quite a number of times. The dollar (or xbet) amount is determined the minute you spun. The way that win is displayed is just "eye candy". I have a screenshot of a 27x trigger, I was pretty excited. I have no screenshot of the result, so it means it was less than 100x my bet. I was betting $2. "
assuming I've read that right, then this is true of course, many slots do this, that the result on many games are determined at the point of pressing spin before the bonus has landed (in some cases the result even reflected in the updated balance before starting the bonus round lol), and the rest is just (often a bloody wind up version of it as well ) eye candy that displays the previously triggered win graphically.
i used to , stupidly, play at 888, where the lobby balance would update the miment yiu click spin - before a win had landed on the reels. id often let a friend play back then, and he'd set auto play and minimize the screen and have the lobby in view instead, watching the numbers of the balance fluctuating, before i kicked his ass and told him to stop doing that with my money lol... he was doing it to wind me up ;D
But the example you replied to, and the one you gave, are on bonanza.
Hasn't BTG claimed each spin is independent during the bonus round for their games though?
With increasing multipliers on high stakes and starting with 27 spins, I'd be smashing up my house at a 44x bet resulton a £20 stake, with having 27 spins from the off. and i wouldn't stop there, I'd be smashing through the walls and onwards into my neighbours house, and into their neighbours house and so on, until the entire road was nothing but rubble.
like a few people mentioned about the 50 spins video posted here for BTG's Who wants to file for bankruptcy game, with increasing multipliers, it did seem to be repetatively dissapointing that once it progressed into the higher multipliers during the 2nd half of the 50 spins, the wins became absolutely tiny, where anything over 3oak of low paying symbols would yield good returns due to the higher multiplier, and quite obviously savage returns if also on a £20 bet, if the wins were more than just 3oak symbols that IIRC kept appearing at that stage.
please ignore my post if ive got the wrong end of the stick, i just read what you wrote as that the bonus on games are predetermined, and afaik, BTG have claimed that on bonanaza and WWTBAM, they are not.
also, not trying to turn thread into a 'BTG is limiting the damage on high stakes' type thread, nor do i believe that it is done on any slots, but it would be nice to see (someone got a few trillion bucks lying around, and wanna try?) would be nice to see a fair few examples to compare, of perhaps say, WWTBAM at £20 playing out a 50 spin bonus trigger, to see if that video posted here was just unlucky once the 2nd half of the spins producing dismal 3OAK pays as the multiplier got so dangerously high, or if it was limiting exposure due to insane multipliers.
also. fwiw, i dont play BTG. So am only going by what I've read or seen, which is obviously next to FA, especially with such high stakes as £20 per bet. and so while im not making accusations, my opinion on that matter would probably be worth next to FA as well
assuming I've read that right, then this is true of course, many slots do this, that the result on many games are determined at the point of pressing spin before the bonus has landed (in some cases the result even reflected in the updated balance before starting the bonus round lol), and the rest is just (often a bloody wind up version of it as well ) eye candy that displays the previously triggered win graphically.
i used to , stupidly, play at 888, where the lobby balance would update the miment yiu click spin - before a win had landed on the reels. id often let a friend play back then, and he'd set auto play and minimize the screen and have the lobby in view instead, watching the numbers of the balance fluctuating, before i kicked his ass and told him to stop doing that with my money lol... he was doing it to wind me up ;D
But the example you replied to, and the one you gave, are on bonanza.
Hasn't BTG claimed each spin is independent during the bonus round for their games though?
With increasing multipliers on high stakes and starting with 27 spins, I'd be smashing up my house at a 44x bet resulton a £20 stake, with having 27 spins from the off. and i wouldn't stop there, I'd be smashing through the walls and onwards into my neighbours house, and into their neighbours house and so on, until the entire road was nothing but rubble.
like a few people mentioned about the 50 spins video posted here for BTG's Who wants to file for bankruptcy game, with increasing multipliers, it did seem to be repetatively dissapointing that once it progressed into the higher multipliers during the 2nd half of the 50 spins, the wins became absolutely tiny, where anything over 3oak of low paying symbols would yield good returns due to the higher multiplier, and quite obviously savage returns if also on a £20 bet, if the wins were more than just 3oak symbols that IIRC kept appearing at that stage.
please ignore my post if ive got the wrong end of the stick, i just read what you wrote as that the bonus on games are predetermined, and afaik, BTG have claimed that on bonanaza and WWTBAM, they are not.
also, not trying to turn thread into a 'BTG is limiting the damage on high stakes' type thread, nor do i believe that it is done on any slots, but it would be nice to see (someone got a few trillion bucks lying around, and wanna try?) would be nice to see a fair few examples to compare, of perhaps say, WWTBAM at £20 playing out a 50 spin bonus trigger, to see if that video posted here was just unlucky once the 2nd half of the spins producing dismal 3OAK pays as the multiplier got so dangerously high, or if it was limiting exposure due to insane multipliers.
also. fwiw, i dont play BTG. So am only going by what I've read or seen, which is obviously next to FA, especially with such high stakes as £20 per bet. and so while im not making accusations, my opinion on that matter would probably be worth next to FA as well
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
As I understand, all results are determined from the point of hitting spin.
Not that it isn't still random - just the possible results are grabbed from the pool (bundled) or individually.
It isnt that results are pre-determined per se, just the outcome is determined from the point of hitting spin.
It's 3am so my brain is half awake so @trancemonkey can explain is better if willing (though I know he has many times)
Not that it isn't still random - just the possible results are grabbed from the pool (bundled) or individually.
It isnt that results are pre-determined per se, just the outcome is determined from the point of hitting spin.
It's 3am so my brain is half awake so @trancemonkey can explain is better if willing (though I know he has many times)
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
Cheers for the links..: I have read them before actually although I think the layout has been altered.... problem with all that from the GC is that it’s all very generic and moreover unfortunately the GC is way behind the times and forever playing catch up with the casinos that use any flaw or loophole they can and wait for the GC to cotton on....
I spent 2 years in dialogue with them over this progressive JP
They did finally cotton on to my point ( bear in mind they take 6 weeks at a time to respond ) they then contacted coral and requested the data that I had been asking for from them for ages and in short coral refused to give it to them!
And to my astonishment the GC basically just rolled over!
The game was pulled 3 days after the GC emailed them! And where did 3 years of progressive money go? Who knows!!!
As for the data...
So for any given game it should be available exactly how it’s tested and what the results were... not just a generic it’s been tested to required standards... and as for changes... ok here is a “ for instance “
6 appeal ( one of my go to games )
Coral had a offer on for VIPs where you got 25% bonus on any winnings on certain days...
This soon got changed to exclude jackpots.
The same day the amount required to activate the “ jackpot “ tune and the car driving off on 6 appeal was significantly lowered.
However looking at the certificate on the game it hasn’t been retested and yet the dynamics of the game have been altered....
6 appeal is one of the games I refer to when I say it blatently plays differently at higher stakes... I have contacted realistic gaming and asked for a copy of the RTP results I have also contacted the casinos and the testing house... denied by all...: yet if I wanted a copy of a test certificate for an electrical appliance or any other item basically it wouldn’t be so hard to achieve.
I could literally send you hundreds of photos of massive wins on lower stakes...
And as ever none or equal size pro rata wins at higher...
Yet on the flip side I regularly hit 5 roulette wheels or ladies at £10 stake but very rarely at lower stakes... but it appears at £10 stakes and upwards it gives you regular larger wins on base game and very very few worthwhile features!! And I have mentioned this many moons ago.... I did once hit the biggest feature ever ( or so I thought on £20 stake )
256 spins on a 27 times multiplier...
Never hit anything close to that before or since on any stake.... although had some big wins pro rata on smaller stakes but with less spins and smaller multiplier...:
So in essence my 200+ spins were at £540 each spin!
I stopped the game to see what the max payout was and it equated to £40k which I was pretty sure at that level of spins I was gonna smash outta the park with spins to spare... as even a 30 spins x 6 multiplier normally gives you a pretty awesome return...
Nett result under 8k
A good win on the day but again as I have hit countless £1000 plus wins on far far less spins on £2 to this day I can’t reason that result...
I was actually playing off the spins in front of the area manager for corals who I happened to be meeting that day! And he agreed that was a joke of a return considering the starting point....
And this is where I feel there is something in place to limit exposure somewhere as it’s way to frequent and rarely disproved....
Why would I hit far more 5 of a kind roulette wheels on £10 spin than £1 spin but I do...
The logic would be the casino would prefer RTP is maintained at higher stakes through greater base game wins than through a more volatile feast or famine type scenario as they don’t want players losing on large stakes very quickly and not wanting to play them again or they don’t want the lucky punter to withdraw the money as a huge lump and never get it back.... all of which makes sense, however would not be fair to the player....
But according to GC regs as long as the RTP is tested and in accordance with published figures... it doesn’t say how the RTP is maintained has to be equal among st
That probably was the case to an extent however casinos don’t give away money lightly.... and bare in mind I was fully aware it wasn’t PP fault and I stated this but unfortunately they were the only point of contact I had, as they were the ones hosting the game so therefore my recourse was with them as you cannot directly interact with the game provider.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
"Oh, I know the answer to that one. It's been discussed quite a number of times. The dollar (or xbet) amount is determined the minute you spun. The way that win is displayed is just "eye candy". I have a screenshot of a 27x trigger, I was pretty excited. I have no screenshot of the result, so it means it was less than 100x my bet. I was betting $2. "
assuming I've read that right, then this is true of course, many slots do this, that the result on many games are determined at the point of pressing spin before the bonus has landed (in some cases the result even reflected in the updated balance before starting the bonus round lol), and the rest is just (often a bloody wind up version of it as well ) eye candy that displays the previously triggered win graphically.
i used to , stupidly, play at 888, where the lobby balance would update the miment yiu click spin - before a win had landed on the reels. id often let a friend play back then, and he'd set auto play and minimize the screen and have the lobby in view instead, watching the numbers of the balance fluctuating, before i kicked his ass and told him to stop doing that with my money lol... he was doing it to wind me up ;D
But the example you replied to, and the one you gave, are on bonanza.
Hasn't BTG claimed each spin is independent during the bonus round for their games though?
With increasing multipliers on high stakes and starting with 27 spins, I'd be smashing up my house at a 44x bet resulton a £20 stake, with having 27 spins from the off. and i wouldn't stop there, I'd be smashing through the walls and onwards into my neighbours house, and into their neighbours house and so on, until the entire road was nothing but rubble.
like a few people mentioned about the 50 spins video posted here for BTG's Who wants to file for bankruptcy game, with increasing multipliers, it did seem to be repetatively dissapointing that once it progressed into the higher multipliers during the 2nd half of the 50 spins, the wins became absolutely tiny, where anything over 3oak of low paying symbols would yield good returns due to the higher multiplier, and quite obviously savage returns if also on a £20 bet, if the wins were more than just 3oak symbols that IIRC kept appearing at that stage.
please ignore my post if ive got the wrong end of the stick, i just read what you wrote as that the bonus on games are predetermined, and afaik, BTG have claimed that on bonanaza and WWTBAM, they are not.
also, not trying to turn thread into a 'BTG is limiting the damage on high stakes' type thread, nor do i believe that it is done on any slots, but it would be nice to see (someone got a few trillion bucks lying around, and wanna try?) would be nice to see a fair few examples to compare, of perhaps say, WWTBAM at £20 playing out a 50 spin bonus trigger, to see if that video posted here was just unlucky once the 2nd half of the spins producing dismal 3OAK pays as the multiplier got so dangerously high, or if it was limiting exposure due to insane multipliers.
also. fwiw, i dont play BTG. So am only going by what I've read or seen, which is obviously next to FA, especially with such high stakes as £20 per bet. and so while im not making accusations, my opinion on that matter would probably be worth next to FA as well
Who wants to file for bankruptcy !!!! Classic!!
My way of looking at it is this....
Can I recall ever hitting £80 win playing £2 stake with such a good start...:
Er no!
Which pro rata is same outcome
And here is an interesting “ aside”
I was playing that newish BGT type game “ temple “ something or other..:
standard game with normal increased multiplier etc...
Was only playing small stakes and hit a good feature ( I went random and hit 15 spins with minimum of 10,000 ways )
I got to 15 x multiplier and suddenly the game became very slow with all reels slowing down and massive waiting time between spins...
Why would this be?
Soon as feature finished it returned to normal ???
Very strange needless to say as the multiplier increased the wins dried up or were minimal 3 of a kind low symbols ..:
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2017
- Location
- United kingdom
Slow playing slot game, and slow not due to the internet connection, and you see only 1 scatter appearing time after time? Take the money that you have left and run!!!
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
Why what does it signify to you?
Was very weird and set the brain whirring !!
Was very weird and set the brain whirring !!
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
It's blueprint, and given the speed the servers run at (they can handle many many requests per second) even if they wanted to do something dodgy, you certainly wouldn't notice it via speed of play.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2017
- Location
- United kingdom
From my gaming experience, I have noticed that if such "anomalies" start to appear its time to (immediately) leave! I can give a prime example - Montezuma slot!
If you notice: slow gameplay and only one scatter showing up - forget about the game for that evening!
This game normally throws out the bonus game within 70 spins but in case it happens as the above, it may take easily over 400 - 700 spins.
I was testing it myself several times!
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
Ok fair enough... and I wasn’t necessarily alluding to anything dodgy ( for a change !!)
But wondered why it “ suddenly need to think very hard “ between and during the free spins
6 appeal does it too from time to time during the feature ... to mix it up a bit the reels land in random orders and I have had reels 1245 land with Big symbols on and the middle reels freezes and then spins for ages before “ missing!!”
Although I have had it hit on one occasion just to be fair!
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
@Guntis
Montezuma... wow yes that was one of my weaknesses for a while on coral
Had a good run on it al lower stakes
Higher stakes couldn’t hit a thing
Lost an 8k pot at £10 a spin without a feature...
Also it used to “ I think this has changed “ allow fast play and it definitely played differently doing that... ( for the worse)
You could spunk £200 without a win
Play it slow play and suddenly the wins came back .. time and time again...
On small stakes I hit some huge wins on that tho
I remember having about 70 spins stacked up on 10x multiplier a couple of times..:
Never really hit much playing big stakes tho “ shock horror!!”
Montezuma... wow yes that was one of my weaknesses for a while on coral
Had a good run on it al lower stakes
Higher stakes couldn’t hit a thing
Lost an 8k pot at £10 a spin without a feature...
Also it used to “ I think this has changed “ allow fast play and it definitely played differently doing that... ( for the worse)
You could spunk £200 without a win
Play it slow play and suddenly the wins came back .. time and time again...
On small stakes I hit some huge wins on that tho
I remember having about 70 spins stacked up on 10x multiplier a couple of times..:
Never really hit much playing big stakes tho “ shock horror!!”
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Location
- Uk
Interesting points from both sides of the fence and imo as far as I can see the only element that fuels this long running debate is the interpretation of the word “random” which again imo is used a little loosely depending on which side of the fence you are on given it’s true definition. Therefore it is misleading and should be changed. Results of each spin are mathematically formulated to produce as near to an unpredictable outcome as possible would suffice.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2018
- Location
- Sweden
I mean, true randomness literally does not exist. Random today is really just short for pseudo-random.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
Which is what we use... a PNRG. Normally the Mersenne Twister.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
Whatever you want to call it... I use the term randomly determined.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Location
- Uk
I think the megaways idea opens up a lot of questions. One that crosses my mind is how do you set a trtp on a game that doesn’t have a set maximum win. As in theory it’s infinite and unless it is capped somehow you couldn’t say just that because it didn’t happen in testing that it never will (I know it’s hypothetical) but that’s how it’s advertised.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Location
- Norwich
So bonanza doesn’t have a “ cap”
Didn’t know that!!
Makes me wonder more now!
I was playing £10 stake once and was mid feature..:
It was playing ok but all small wins but a few of them and was on x17 multiplier
Top line of symbols that shunt across was
9 diamond diamond diamond
First line of reels were all 9s and a couple of nines on reels 2 and 3 gave a win...
Reels were littered with diamonds and last row was all diamonds bar about 1 I think... and it was the smallest reels so about 8 diamonds
There was 2 on reel 2 and 3 one I think on four a couple on 5 plus all symbols up top were now diamonds...
And the whole of reel one was about to be replaced with symbols
Just a single diamond needed for what must have been 100k min..( I have hit a full line of diamonds at £10 but I couldn’t recall if it paid £500 or £1000 but either way it would have been legendary
You know the rest
Didn’t know that!!
Makes me wonder more now!
I was playing £10 stake once and was mid feature..:
It was playing ok but all small wins but a few of them and was on x17 multiplier
Top line of symbols that shunt across was
9 diamond diamond diamond
First line of reels were all 9s and a couple of nines on reels 2 and 3 gave a win...
Reels were littered with diamonds and last row was all diamonds bar about 1 I think... and it was the smallest reels so about 8 diamonds
There was 2 on reel 2 and 3 one I think on four a couple on 5 plus all symbols up top were now diamonds...
And the whole of reel one was about to be replaced with symbols
Just a single diamond needed for what must have been 100k min..( I have hit a full line of diamonds at £10 but I couldn’t recall if it paid £500 or £1000 but either way it would have been legendary
You know the rest
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Location
- Uk
I am not saying it’s not capped. Imo it almost certainly is because otherwise no casino would take it on board knowing one mammoth hit could put them out of business. What I am saying is that we as players wouldn’t be told that information ( and are led to believe mega high wins and multipliers are achievable) and surely that shouldn’t be allowed. Clearly there is some trickery implemented into the software that prevents certain things happening that obviously passes testing (ahem). Just take the sample of every bonus hit on a megaways game on this forum. Where is just one x50 multiplier? If there is one I haven’t seen it. Which tells me bonus rounds are controlled.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
- Location
- UK
Theres a page over on random.org that explains the difference between PNRG and TRNG (True Random Number Generator)
Perhaps you have wondered how predictable machines like computers can generate randomness. In reality, most random numbers used in computer programs are pseudo-random, which means they are generated in a predictable fashion using a mathematical formula. This is fine for many purposes, but it may not be random in the way you expect if you're used to dice rolls and lottery drawings.
RANDOM.ORG offers true random numbers to anyone on the Internet. The randomness comes from atmospheric noise, which for many purposes is better than the pseudo-random number algorithms typically used in computer programs
Pseudo-Random Number Generators (PRNGs)
As the word ‘pseudo’ suggests, pseudo-random numbers are not random in the way you might expect, at least not if you're used to dice rolls or lottery tickets. Essentially, PRNGs are algorithms that use mathematical formulae or simply precalculated tables to produce sequences of numbers that appear random. A good example of a PRNG is the
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
. A good deal of research has gone into pseudo-random number theory, and modern algorithms for generating pseudo-random numbers are so good that the numbers look exactly like they were really random.The basic difference between PRNGs and TRNGs is easy to understand if you compare computer-generated random numbers to rolls of a die. Because PRNGs generate random numbers by using mathematical formulae or precalculated lists, using one corresponds to someone rolling a die many times and writing down the results. Whenever you ask for a die roll, you get the next on the list. Effectively, the numbers appear random, but they are really predetermined. TRNGs work by getting a computer to actually roll the die — or, more commonly, use some other physical phenomenon that is easier to connect to a computer than a die is.
PRNGs are efficient, meaning they can produce many numbers in a short time, and deterministic, meaning that a given sequence of numbers can be reproduced at a later date if the starting point in the sequence is known. Efficiency is a nice characteristic if your application needs many numbers, and determinism is handy if you need to replay the same sequence of numbers again at a later stage. PRNGs are typically also periodic, which means that the sequence will eventually repeat itself. While periodicity is hardly ever a desirable characteristic, modern PRNGs have a period that is so long that it can be ignored for most practical purposes.
These characteristics make PRNGs suitable for applications where many numbers are required and where it is useful that the same sequence can be replayed easily. Popular examples of such applications are simulation and modeling applications. PRNGs are not suitable for applications where it is important that the numbers are really unpredictable, such as data encryption and gambling.
True Random Number Generators (TRNGs)
In comparison with PRNGs, TRNGs extract randomness from physical phenomena and introduce it into a computer. You can imagine this as a die connected to a computer, but typically people use a physical phenomenon that is easier to connect to a computer than a die is. The physical phenomenon can be very simple, like the little variations in somebody's mouse movements or in the amount of time between keystrokes. In practice, however, you have to be careful about which source you choose. For example, it can be tricky to use keystrokes in this fashion, because keystrokes are often buffered by the computer's operating system, meaning that several keystrokes are collected before they are sent to the program waiting for them. To a program waiting for the keystrokes, it will seem as though the keys were pressed almost simultaneously, and there may not be a lot of randomness there after all.
However, there are many other ways to get true randomness into your computer. A really good physical phenomenon to use is a radioactive source. The points in time at which a radioactive source decays are completely unpredictable, and they can quite easily be detected and fed into a computer, avoiding any buffering mechanisms in the operating system. The
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
at Fourmilab in Switzerland is an excellent example of a random number generator that uses this technique. Another suitable physical phenomenon is atmospheric noise, which is quite easy to pick up with a normal radio. This is the approach used by RANDOM.ORG. You could also use background noise from an office or laboratory, but you'll have to watch out for patterns. The fan from your computer might contribute to the background noise, and since the fan is a rotating device, chances are the noise it produces won't be as random as atmospheric noise.Regardless of which physical phenomenon is used, the process of generating true random numbers involves identifying little, unpredictable changes in the data. For example, HotBits uses little variations in the delay between occurrences of radioactive decay, and RANDOM.ORG uses little variations in the amplitude of atmospheric noise.
The characteristics of TRNGs are quite different from PRNGs. First, TRNGs are generally rather inefficient compared to PRNGs, taking considerably longer time to produce numbers. They are also nondeterministic, meaning that a given sequence of numbers cannot be reproduced, although the same sequence may of course occur several times by chance. TRNGs have no period.
Comparison of PRNGs and TRNGs
Pseudo-Random Number Generators
Efficiency: Excellent
Determinism: Deterministic
Periodicity: Periodic
True Random Number Generators
Efficiency: Poor
Determinism: Nondeterministic
Periodicity: Aperiodic
These characteristics make TRNGs suitable for roughly the set of applications that PRNGs are unsuitable for, such as data encryption, games and gambling. Conversely, the poor efficiency and nondeterministic nature of TRNGs make them less suitable for simulation and modeling applications, which often require more data than it's feasible to generate with a TRNG. The following table contains a summary of which applications are best served by which type of generator:
Application Most Suitable Generator
Lotteries and Draws TRNG
Games and Gambling TRNG
Random Sampling (e.g., drug screening) TRNG
Simulation and Modelling PRNG
Security (e.g., generation of data encryption keys) TRNG
The Arts Varies
Last edited:
Though I'd heard 'Pseudo-Random' mentioned often, who knew it was so difficult to incorporate true randomness into software programmes....I guess it'd be like teaching animals free will & a conscience - you can't.
By the same token I'm bemused that P-R generators aren't fair as such or left to chance, but rather within scripted mathematical confines, whilst slots are being peddled as 'random & fair'....
....when it's quite clearly gimped to high heaven!
I guess this is when the one recognizes a game's uncanny ability to switch itself off after x amount of wins, it all makes sense now
ps can I have several hundred £££ back please
thanking you
By the same token I'm bemused that P-R generators aren't fair as such or left to chance, but rather within scripted mathematical confines, whilst slots are being peddled as 'random & fair'....
....when it's quite clearly gimped to high heaven!
I guess this is when the one recognizes a game's uncanny ability to switch itself off after x amount of wins, it all makes sense now
ps can I have several hundred £££ back please
thanking you
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
- Location
- UK
Though I'd heard of 'Pseudo-Random' mentioned often, who knew it was so difficult to incorporate true randomness into software programmes....I guess it'd be liking teaching animals free will & a conscience - you can't.
By the same token I'm bemused that P-R generators aren't fair as such or left to chance, but rather within scripted mathematical confines, whilst slots are being peddled as 'random & fair'....
....when it's quite clearly gimped to high heaven!
I guess this is when the one recognizes a game's uncanny ability to switch itself off after x amount of wins, it all makes sense now
ps can I have several hundred £££ back please
thanking you
Theres one company, I won't name them but they are using TRNG, they posted an article about it.
Did you know it is scientifically proven that it’s impossible to generate truly random numbers using computer software because a computer is deterministic.
layman’s terms — a computer always knows all variables and to truly get a random result — you would need a mathematical function of ‘infinite unknown variables’. If you had the same starting inputs and conditions, even if the numbers appear to be random, you could replicate this and end up with the same output. A computer simply cannot know all infinite unknown variables with our current technology.
The most popular and widely used random number generators are Pseudo-Random Number Generators (PRNGs). These are modern, very efficient and make numbers appear as they are random, but in fact, they are not random and perfectly predictable.
PRNGs are very well programmed however you would need to set up a seed state that initializes the generator. This is the fundamental flaw in the PRNGs because high entropy is required and a computer cannot fully randomize this using software alone.
Problem for online gambling, casinos and poker games
This is a massive problem for online gambling because just about every single online casino/website and poker game relies on Pseudo-Random Number Generators. These computer mechanisms and similar methods cannot produce truly random numbers. Therefore, you often encounter many scenarios during your poker game where outcomes seem too ‘extreme’ or ‘rare’. Also these systems are open to alterations which can cause major security issues.
Online gaming platforms get away with it because even when they are certified and tested — the metrics used across all certification bodies permit full use of PRNGs and pass all the tests required.
As we have learned so far, seeding from a computer cannot be random and is possible replicate the ‘randomness’ if the same starting conditions and seeds are used. All major certifications can be found here. These certifications are used even in the biggest poker sites in the world. They all allow PRNGs to operate alone as software and are never 100% random!
All statistical pattern tests through standard PRNGs pass every single third party testing certification across all jurisdictions of the world
Our Solution — Triple-Factor Random Number Generator (TFRNG)
Our Triple-Factor Random Number Generator (TFRNG) method changes the online poker game forever. We combine TRNG’s (Hardware Random Number Generators) with Blockchain Technology to create an efficient chain of processes which results in a more accurate random generated number that a software based system cannot produce.
This has never been done before in this manner.
To truly get a random result, you need to eliminate the limitations of the software process and introduce a ‘quantum phenomenon’. We take this a step further and add another layer of randomization through Blockchain hashes.
What does all this really mean to Poker Players?
As a player, you will get fewer bad beats, fewer ‘coolers’ and less frequent extreme scenarios.
We are not claiming that these scenarios can never happen. We just believe that through our superior card shuffling technique — it happens less frequently meaning a good poker play will result in a more frequent win.
Through our discussions over the past year with many regular online poker players and from what our research has shown — he are some typical scenarios that happen frequently in your traditional online poker room:
How many times have pocket Jacks worked out for you? Even though they are statistically the 4th best starting hand in poker.
How many times have you hit your Ace while at the same your opponent also hit the Ace and one of you will likely get your money in ‘good’ and end up realizing the bad news?
How about playing lower pocket pairs like 9’s through to 2’s in an all-in pre-flop scenario and losing way more than half the time vs none pocket pair hands? Statistically you should be winning 55%* of the time.
Or the most obvious situation where you see crazy plays like 3+ people going all-in because for some reason the system dealt everyone premium hands all in one go? Especially in tournaments
We are not claiming any of these in-game scenarios to be true but through our research and speaking with many online players, you hear these scenarios happening more frequently than they should be, statistically speaking.
This is all really due to using old RNG algorithms and methods that have not been updated for a long time instead of having hardware powered RNG systems that generate truly random numbers or like our system where we went fully bespoke and built something unique.
Conclusion
Since computers are unable to truly generate random numbers, most traditional online casino and poker games are severely lacking in innovation when it comes to game fairness and integrity.
Many regular players simply accept bad beats and continue playing, while many others quit due to unfair money lost in incredibly rare scenarios that keep occurring.
These are serious issues with the current state of online gambling sites and there needs to be a genuine solution. Sites need to be turning towards hardware and innovative solutions to ensure games are fair. Old technology needs to be upgraded.
I wonder why the casinos don't use TRNG?!! oh yeah because it would be truly random, and fair to the player, can't have that can we.
Any potential new casinos / slot developers should market themselves as using TRNG and adapt to only using this technology, I imagine they would take a shit load of business away from all the PRNG casinos / games.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Location
- Uk
Wow thanks for that amazing insight. My problem has always been I am not really able to understand technology and computers very well but when it comes to observation I like to think I am up near the top. That’s why I have always found it difficult to get across that what I am seeing doesn’t seem random. Now it all adds up perfectly. I play a lot of live poker and also used to play online all the time. I knew the way games unfolded online were “out of the ordinary” and that hands/flops/turns and rivers always seemed “action rigged”. There were many scenarios that were completely off and one of the main ones was that playing live many hands were won with one pair or a high card at showdown whereas online full houses were beaten by quads, flushes beaten by full houses, straights beaten by flushes etc far to often compared to the norm. I don’t give up on anything easily but I had seen enough of these unbelievable outcomes to convince me something wasn’t right and I haven’t played online for about 5 years. The same goes for slots, it’s so obvious to me that they are not random in the true sense of the word. That’s why one day you can’t fail and another you can’t hit a thing. If it was truly random you wouldn’t be able to predict what is likely to happen as easily as aI can.
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Location
- Amsterdam
Quite interesting, this Triple-Factor RNG. Perhaps some industry professionals and slot developers can tune in?
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
I still see it all as moot - I mean, unless youre a math prodigy of stellar proportions that makes Hawking look like a mentally deficient amoeba, I'd think any 'predictableness' is still irrelevant.
The fact it's pseudo-random means it's near-true random, not pure-random, but good enough for its purposes.
The article reads more someone is trying to flog a product than anyhing
The fact it's pseudo-random means it's near-true random, not pure-random, but good enough for its purposes.
The article reads more someone is trying to flog a product than anyhing
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Location
- Kent
used to play online poker cash games 7-10 hours a day for 6 if not 7 days a week for a good three or four years, usually 2 tables at the same time, sometimes 3.
i guess this has to happen sometime playing those hours, like monkeys will eventually write out Shakespeare if you hand them a pen while you wait for a wildline on DOA, and that hands are also dealt quicker online.... but I'll never forget getting all the money in one day while being 90-95% (often the 95%) favourite about 10/11 times in a row (not hand after hand, but each time the situation appeared that day) and losing all of them.
made good money from the game, and still play today, just nowhere near even close to those hours anymore.. but always used to say that if i could win the 95% favourite gambles ---> when all the money went in <--- just 75% of the time, well rodney.....
i guess this has to happen sometime playing those hours, like monkeys will eventually write out Shakespeare if you hand them a pen while you wait for a wildline on DOA, and that hands are also dealt quicker online.... but I'll never forget getting all the money in one day while being 90-95% (often the 95%) favourite about 10/11 times in a row (not hand after hand, but each time the situation appeared that day) and losing all of them.
made good money from the game, and still play today, just nowhere near even close to those hours anymore.. but always used to say that if i could win the 95% favourite gambles ---> when all the money went in <--- just 75% of the time, well rodney.....
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
Though I'd heard 'Pseudo-Random' mentioned often, who knew it was so difficult to incorporate true randomness into software programmes....I guess it'd be like teaching animals free will & a conscience - you can't.
By the same token I'm bemused that P-R generators aren't fair as such or left to chance, but rather within scripted mathematical confines, whilst slots are being peddled as 'random & fair'....
....when it's quite clearly gimped to high heaven!
I guess this is when the one recognizes a game's uncanny ability to switch itself off after x amount of wins, it all makes sense now
ps can I have several hundred £££ back please
thanking you
Which is why for a PRNG you need a random seed and an unstable method of clocking thr PRNG. For example, the frame rate (update cycle) on a PC is rarely exactly the same (we are talking in 1000's of a second) so if you update the PRNG using this (or some other unstable method) then the results are much harder to predict. If possible at all.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
Statistically, you couldn't tell the difference between either, so don't spread bullshit.
If you want to argue about true vs pseudo then fine, but it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to how the game plays or the profile or anything about the game.
We don't just pull the next random number in a sequence... imagine it like a waterfall of constantly created numbers. At the point you press start, we get the next one picked. It could be churning out many thousand numbers per second... you're telling me you can predict the one it picks?!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2008
- Location
- uk
Either way trance you can not rule out how common & predictable some games are using your method of programming to make these games are & you also belittle people when they try to say otherwise. Even though players can & do see patterns over time, again results from pseudo mech.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Location
- Uk
How many slots would 1 rng feed?
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
Common and predictable is nothing but gamblers phallacy and/or poor maths design. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what RNG you use.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2017
- Location
- United kingdom
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Location
- Uk
Yeah how can you have a “halfway house”. It either is or isn’t.I suppose it's like Brexit. Britain's half-leaving the EU!
And thinking back years ago, I think my parents may have just had that Half Divorce I heard so much about
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
same way my neice is half-guyanese, my cat my half-grey, the day is mostly sunny, casinos are grey-zoned, my eyes are mostly blue, and my bank acct is nearly empty
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
But again, I still fail to see the issues here.
Noone has denied slots aren't psuedo-random and that the word random when used describing slots into 100% true random but a fine enough measure to warrant the word but anyone is free to insert psuedo-random if it suits them and that if slots were so readily predictable why arent members draining casinos hand over fist and that there's a zillion threads of people shocked time and again regarding their spins and results
Noone has denied slots aren't psuedo-random and that the word random when used describing slots into 100% true random but a fine enough measure to warrant the word but anyone is free to insert psuedo-random if it suits them and that if slots were so readily predictable why arent members draining casinos hand over fist and that there's a zillion threads of people shocked time and again regarding their spins and results
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Location
- London
How did that Russian team manage to crack the PRNG on the novomatic games and predict the next winning cycle if thats the case?
www.wired.com
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Location
- Uk
But your cat isn’t up for sale as a tabby etc etc.same way my neice is half-guyanese, my cat my half-grey, the day is mostly sunny, casinos are grey-zoned, my eyes are mostly blue, and my bank acct is nearly empty
Cloudflare uses a wall of lava lamps fed into a video feed to seed their random number generator.
The technique is called Lavarand and was invented by Silicon Graphics in the late 90’s.
Not very practical to fit inside a fruit machine though.
The technique is called Lavarand and was invented by Silicon Graphics in the late 90’s.
Not very practical to fit inside a fruit machine though.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
and developers like trance are openly stating slots are pseudo-random not 'true'-random and what the rng involves and the product being put out there
I think the industry's keeping it on the down-low on purpose and playing with people's expectation of what random means.
When really they ought to state openly when talking about RNGs, making players assume a machine 'randomly' spits out a sequence of unpredictable number sequences ISN'T actually doing that, and that it is predictive programming and pseudo-random, i.e not fair or down to pure chance.
It's one thing using these softwares for Tiddlywinks Simulator 2017 but when it comes to people's actual money and the supposed associated 20% suicide rate attached to gambling, then it becomes a deception and a massive problem, not to mention underhand tactic. And no this isn't the same as whether KFC disclose their secret ingredient or what goes into a Snickers
When really they ought to state openly when talking about RNGs, making players assume a machine 'randomly' spits out a sequence of unpredictable number sequences ISN'T actually doing that, and that it is predictive programming and pseudo-random, i.e not fair or down to pure chance.
It's one thing using these softwares for Tiddlywinks Simulator 2017 but when it comes to people's actual money and the supposed associated 20% suicide rate attached to gambling, then it becomes a deception and a massive problem, not to mention underhand tactic. And no this isn't the same as whether KFC disclose their secret ingredient or what goes into a Snickers
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
but the games clearly say 94%, 95% et c not 100% - the info is out there
it isnt a secret slots are machines with programmes
sure it isnt the same as disclosing the 11 secrets herbs and spices but the farmer or manufacturing plant foreman doesnt pop into the franchise and pull up a chair and sit down with you while you eat and explain how the food is prepared either
it isnt a secret slots are machines with programmes
sure it isnt the same as disclosing the 11 secrets herbs and spices but the farmer or manufacturing plant foreman doesnt pop into the franchise and pull up a chair and sit down with you while you eat and explain how the food is prepared either
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2017
- Location
- United kingdom
My thoughts aloud - In accordance with electronictonic posted information, I can make the conclusion for my self:
- slots are not random but they are random enough to pass the tests by TST, GLI, eCogra (that's what I thought earlier)
- not random slots - doesn't mean slots are rigged
Similar threads
