It feels like it's got Scatters Matters maths running under it (albeit tweaked very slightly), yet the game's design and mechanics are different, so there's a disparity between what I am seeing during play, and what I would expect to happen.
There are only 4 normal symbols that can land in the 6x7 grid and because of this I am expecting to get a natural cluster of 5 or more matching blocks far more often than what actually happens, and when a cluster does land, I cannot see where it is amongst all the noise. The game would benefit from having a couple more low-value symbols adding to the symbol hierarchy, or even blank blocks, to better reflect the hit rate.
The base game looks like it should be really active with plenty of small wins, cascades and lots of opportunities for the player see what they're aiming for and where the money is but the maths doesn't reflect this - it's just another Scatters Matter / Aztec Ascension / Raging Super 2 Ways / Almight Lollipop profile where you wade through dozens of bland base game spins for next-to-nothing in return before a bonus eventually comes along and you win roughly 25, 50, 100 or 200x. There is nothing to keep the player engaged between these events and you might as well have a pie-chart gamble on the screen for the base game that is split up like this -
- 2° - Bonus!
- 2° - Unexpected large base game win out of nowhere
- 5° - Base game win between 1x and 5x stake that inexplicably stops cascading when it looks impossible to do so
- 27° - Base game win less than stake
- 324° - Fuck all
RAW do an excellent job with their graphics, sound and presentation, and as a concept this game is pretty solid with some nice mechanics - get some clusters, drop some coins in at the top, get them all the way down to the bottom to multiply your winnings - very nice. In the bonus the multiplier is persistent, there's extra stuff to help you get bigger cascades, you can see the potential - lovely.
But as we all know, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and this game doesn't taste very good. Like many other games before it, Redbeard's Superstash is being failed by the maths. My brain expects a much better hit rate on the base game because of the number of symbols and size of the grid but it just doesn't happen, possibly because RAW are trying to fit the game on top of an existing math model rather than design the maths around the game to get the best out of it.
The profile therefore is yet again much too harsh for the average player and in my opinion is not conducive to continued play after a bonus or extensive play on anything other than the minimum stake.
| Presentation (out of 5) |      |
| Gameplay (out of 5) |   |
This review was brought to you by Lemon Reviews™ - reviews you can trust!