Whamoo Casino - Check RTP via 'Inspect'

bamberfishcake

Senior Member
PABinit
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Location
Essex
I can't see you noticing any difference in play in 10 spins tbh. I'd been playing a 94% Reactoonz2 and if i didn't know better i'd have assumed it was the 96%. You probably notice the difference more if you're not winning :laugh:
What about, if you had only 10 spins on a slot before changing, but did that every time you played, would the lower RTP version pay less?

I think the maths is solid :p
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
What about, if you had only 10 spins on a slot before changing, but did that every time you played, would the lower RTP version pay less?

I think the maths is solid :p
I like to think: i've had more 1000x's in Unibets 94 as opposed to MrQ's 96 as the basis for the maths :p

What i would say, regarding the mechanics, is that you definitely see less two scatter teases on the Book of Dead on 94 than the 96. I think standard deviation is often missed when talking about RTP/Volatility
 

jasonuk

Experienced Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Location
UK
Statistically, it depends on the game. A Quickspin I saw the other day has a bonus hit frequency on a 96%er of 1 in 176ish compared to the 94%er of 1 in 145ish.

So, statistically, you will, even over a small number of spins. There are many more games and developers whose different models, I would suggest, stand out like a sore thumb.
Unless there is a clear and obvious tell such as wonky reel configurations (e.g. bonus symbols) - The Reel Story is right, you certainly wouldn't over 50-100 spins, and for something stark like your example above you'd struggle over 10,000 spins too.

My Binomial Distribution knowledge is a bit rusty, so any errors here are my own (and corrections welcome):

* At 96% (1 in 176) - we would expect 57 bonuses over 10,000 spins, a 95% confidence would cover 42 to 72 bonuses.
* At 94% (1 in 145) - we would expect 69 bonuses over 10,000 spins, a 95% confidence would cover 52 to 85 bonuses.

So even for a modest 95% confidence, you've got a 24% chance to uncover the 96% model (51 or less) and a 32% chance of uncovering the 94% model (73 or more). For a 99.9% confidence, that drops to 1%/5% chance.

The two curves diverge around 200k spins, so would be looking at perhaps 500k+ spins before you could trivially state which is which - a "small number of spins" in the grand scheme of things perhaps, but not in the context of this thread!
 

bamberfishcake

Senior Member
PABinit
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Location
Essex
I like to think: i've had more 1000x's in Unibets 94 as opposed to MrQ's 96 as the basis for the maths :p

What i would say, regarding the mechanics, is that you definitely see less two scatter teases on the Book of Dead on 94 than the 96. I think standard deviation is often missed when talking about RTP/Volatility

I was kind of pulling your leg. I mean who would do just 10 spins? Actually, my pal and I started off doing that, we even went as low as six because we heard the sixth spin was the most probable wait for a win lol
 

bamberfishcake

Senior Member
PABinit
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Location
Essex
My Binomial Distribution knowledge is a bit rusty

Must admit I laughed out loud like a schoolboy when I read that, didn't even know what it meant until I saw your solid maths :)

The Reel Story is right, you certainly wouldn't over 50-100 spins, and for something stark like your example above you'd struggle over 10,000 spins too

Agree to disagree. My point was that the suggestion that you won't notice a difference playing a lower RTP model is wrong and subjective in its statement. I thought it was a sweeping statement and didn't realise we were talking about 10 spins on Raging rex 2, to be honest, I should have read the whole thread.

I don't disagree that you won't notice a difference with ten spins on many games but do those ten spins over and over again and you will. For the simple fact that it pays less. An individual may still score a big win, but there will be less of them, and maybe even a lower max payout, or less wins in the 100x range. Just saying that it is designed to pay less, and it will.

I also agree with many players, just from personal experience, that some games are suspiciously lacking in scatters in lower models, like BOD for example.
 

bamberfishcake

Senior Member
PABinit
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Location
Essex
Where is Dino with his bag of marbles analogy?

@dionysus , remember when you baffled me with science and your bag of marbles analogy?

Is the bag of marbles example you mentioned affected by RTP?

Would you notice the difference between a 96% bag of marbles and a 91% bag? Do they make the bag smaller, or are there fewer marbles? Oh, the mind boggles...
 

jasonuk

Experienced Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Location
UK
Where is Dino with his bag of marbles analogy?

Would you notice the difference between a 96% bag of marbles and a 91% bag? Do they make the bag smaller, or are there fewer marbles? Oh, the mind boggles...
Things get a lot more painful when we swap reel-based slots for scripted games - I'm sure @ChopleyIOM also has his bag of marbles from the Scammin' Jars incident.

For reel-based slots, one symbol change can influence thousands of spins - so there is a chance (if you're studious enough) you'll observe said change, for some providers that provide reel strips you'd be able to confirm that way also. For scripted games, all bets are off...

If we had a bag with one million marbles, of which two offer the top prize of 20,000x (4% of RTP). If they removed one of those jackpot marbles, you now have one 20,000x marble from 999,999 but the game is otherwise identical - and 2% RTP has been lopped off.

How would you verify that independently ? It's basically impossible...
 

slot_zombie

Meister Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Location
UK
If I was in the business of lopping RTP out of a game, which I'm not, I'd definitely do it from the top end of wins. Maybe that max win gets a little harder to land, and the rest of the game remains "untouched".

Of course, once we start dipping below 91% it would get harder to avoid nerfing the lower win ranges as well...
 

The Reel Story

Experienced Member
Joined
May 5, 2019
Location
United Kingdom
There are a lot of ways in which you can alter RTP.

Change symbol payout values
Change symbol frequencies on reels (which doesn't always have the effect you expect).
Change bonus frequencies
Change reel sets in bonuses (so bonuses pay more/less on average).

and probably a bunch I'm forgetting cause I've not done it in many years now :-D
 

dionysus

Good(w)ill Ambassador
CAG
MM
Joined
Apr 27, 2009
Location
the land of snow and maple syrup
Where is Dino with his bag of marbles analogy?

@dionysus , remember when you baffled me with science and your bag of marbles analogy?

Is the bag of marbles example you mentioned affected by RTP?

Would you notice the difference between a 96% bag of marbles and a 91% bag? Do they make the bag smaller, or are there fewer marbles? Oh, the mind boggles...
probably just best to think of playing slots these days as marbles and stick to betting on the next outbreak :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:

1987

Keep It Simple, Stupid.
PABaccred
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Location
Your Happy Place
Statistically, it depends on the game. A Quickspin I saw the other day has a bonus hit frequency on a 96%er of 1 in 176ish compared to the 94%er of 1 in 145ish.

So, statistically, you will, even over a small number of spins. There are many more games and developers whose different models, I would suggest, stand out like a sore thumb.

I don't have enough experience playing different models side by side to back up what I say, but then again, I don't think anyone has, nevertheless, statistically, you will notice the difference, and more on some games than others depending on how the game has been changed.

Its simple, one pays more, fact :)

Why put it down to bad luck? statistically - it's because you are playing a lower-paying version, so logic dictates its because of the model, not bad luck. To me anyway :)
Bring back the Austin Powers avatar!
 

satchnz

Experienced Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2021
Location
Essex, UK
I do subscribe to the notion that the reduced RTP practice is dirty. But at times this doesn’t seem to stack up in reality. I almost exclusively play at bet365 and MrQ, both max RTP establishments. I honestly struggle to win on MrQ, only having had a small number of withdrawals. But I’m hundreds of pounds up on bet365. Makes me wonder sometimes if MrQ truly are running max RTP but I’ll leave that alone for now…
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top