WWTBAM (Who Wants to be a Millionaire Slot) BTG

Sasukdcf

Full Member
PABnorogue
Joined
Jan 3, 2015
Location
Norwich
hi guys long time no speak!

Main reason the font on here is so small I was finding it hard to read until I finally gave in and got some specs!!!

I have seen a couple of threads on this game and haven’t seen this question asked as such so if it has I apologise...:


I’ve been playing this a lot recently and echo many of the comments over the lifeline bullshit but I have 2 questions/observations that I wondered ring true with others.

1) is there not an argument that if the game gives you a percentage figure that it’s actually a real one?

( which it’s blatently not even close to being )

Giving you a false percentage surely is tantamount to fraud in essence.

The national lottery couldn’t get away with telling you odds of winning are x when in fact they are y for instance

It’s hard enough to get the feature as it is without losing in at least 50% of the time if not more which brings me to my next point.


What I have found without a shadow of a doubt is that the higher you stake the harder it is to get the feature and moreover it appears to be nigh on impossible to actually get to play it...

I had a good run on other slots recently and have been punting this quite hard from stakes of £5 to £20

I have yet to play a feature over about £7 having lost the first gamble every single time without exception, and that includes on an 83% ask the audience. ( the tablet did fly across the room )

It’s not been that many features I’ve manages to hit but I would estimate 12 features at say £7 or more with all of them losing on first lifeline.... and that includes 4 on the bounce at £10 stake

Like many I have always maintained all games play totally differently as you increase the stakes but this one appears to take the biscuit

Anyone agree/disagree from experience?
 
Big Time Gaming is reviewed by Casinomeister - read our review and comment here in this forum thread.

Siohmy

Experienced Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Location
Blighty
The only thing I’d say about the first one is that it would seem an odd way to go in showing these gamble elements and deliberately rigging it to lose more than it should. Hypothetically speaking it would appear from peoples arguments that BTG are going out of their way to highlight this as it is so “blatant”. Obviously an 83% chance of success equally means a 17% chance of failure or around 1 in 6. I’d be interested to see a significant, honest, set of results for the first gamble only.

As for the stakes issues. Well outside of feature buys I rarely venture over £1/spin so can’t really comment too much. If some games do change their maths over a certain stake level then I can only assume they become less volatile as they still have to play to their TRTP and are not hitting the monster wins as frequently. Not sure how much exposure some casinos can handle at large stakes so this observation has some merit. I thought the way casinos mitigated this risk was to limit the max stake level however.
 

Sasukdcf

Full Member
PABnorogue
Joined
Jan 3, 2015
Location
Norwich
I think you have hit the nail on the head there and although I have had this argument in the past with tracemonkey, and he was staunchly against my theory I can only go on personal experience which is vast and I think you are spot on re the volatility....

But again and I have raised this before the whole industry is so cloak and dagger it’s ridiculous....

The very fact that RTP is used as a measuring stick is in itself laughable as it’s a totally useless meaningless figure and actually trying to find out how it’s tested on what stakes etc is nigh on impossible....

But how the industry gets away with using a measuring stick that’s so pointless I have never understood!

Just to put that into an example.

If I play 1 spin at £10 and lose my rtp is 0 %

If I then play another spin at £1 and win say £3 my rtp for that session is 150% yet I am £7 down !!!

So how that’s in anyway helpful to a player has always been beyond me!!

I have initiated a subject access request from one of my regular casinos purely for that reason however they are saying they are not obligated to supply me with the info, which I’m not convinced is right but not had time to look into it as yet sadly!

And yes seeing the honest results of first gambles would be great but never gonna happen!!

Sure as hell ain’t as posted tho!!

Another thing that would be interesting tho..

Every now and then you get a very high ask the audience percentage... 93% for instance

Now as the features are “ pre determined” re outcome... does that mean if you chose the lowest percentage answer it would say correct...

Feature is so hard to hit I’ve never tried it!!

I’ve tried hitting second most popular answer a few times now as I have found if the top one is 60% to 70% you are very likely to lose...

And it always shows the second highest answer as being right...

I have only tried it 4 times ( maybe 5)

They have all lost! Shock
 

brianmon

Ueber Meister
webby
mm4
Joined
May 22, 2013
Location
Cumbria
I had a 96%, 1%, 1%, 2%, 'ask the audience' on a first gamble, and lost to a 1%.
Haven't played it since.
I wonder how many first time (and now one time) players, they've lost because of things like this?

I'm sure BTG thought they were being clever with 'loseable' features. But has it maybe cost them many, potentially, long-term players, and not been such a clever move?
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
I think you have hit the nail on the head there and although I have had this argument in the past with tracemonkey, and he was staunchly against my theory I can only go on personal experience which is vast and I think you are spot on re the volatility....

But again and I have raised this before the whole industry is so cloak and dagger it’s ridiculous....

The very fact that RTP is used as a measuring stick is in itself laughable as it’s a totally useless meaningless figure and actually trying to find out how it’s tested on what stakes etc is nigh on impossible....

But how the industry gets away with using a measuring stick that’s so pointless I have never understood!

Just to put that into an example.

If I play 1 spin at £10 and lose my rtp is 0 %

If I then play another spin at £1 and win say £3 my rtp for that session is 150% yet I am £7 down !!!

So how that’s in anyway helpful to a player has always been beyond me!!

I have initiated a subject access request from one of my regular casinos purely for that reason however they are saying they are not obligated to supply me with the info, which I’m not convinced is right but not had time to look into it as yet sadly!

And yes seeing the honest results of first gambles would be great but never gonna happen!!

Sure as hell ain’t as posted tho!!

Another thing that would be interesting tho..

Every now and then you get a very high ask the audience percentage... 93% for instance

Now as the features are “ pre determined” re outcome... does that mean if you chose the lowest percentage answer it would say correct...

Feature is so hard to hit I’ve never tried it!!

I’ve tried hitting second most popular answer a few times now as I have found if the top one is 60% to 70% you are very likely to lose...

And it always shows the second highest answer as being right...

I have only tried it 4 times ( maybe 5)

They have all lost! Shock

as far as I understood the ukgc regulations, there was an option for the game producer/casino to either display the slot's odds or the rtp and obviously they chose rtp as its largely meaningless especially if all games have roughly the same 96% rtp.

I've read that on a 96% rtp slot the casino profit is 4% and so if a 100,000 thousand is wagered the profit would be £4,000.

I also wonder at which point do they measure the rtp, to be an equal fair measure it ought be the same across all games, e.g after 5 million spins or something. It would seem odd to me to allow one game to be measured after 4 million and another after 7million and both claim 95.9% or whatever.
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
as far as I understood the ukgc regulations, there was an option for the game producer/casino to either display the slot's odds or the rtp and obviously they chose rtp as its largely meaningless especially if all games have roughly the same 96% rtp.

I've read that on a 96% rtp slot the casino profit is 4% and so if a 100,000 thousand is wagered the profit would be £4,000.

I also wonder at which point do they measure the rtp, to be an equal fair measure it ought be the same across all games, e.g after 5 million spins or something. It would seem odd to me to allow one game to be measured after 4 million and another after 7million and both claim 95.9% or whatever.

Usually more than 2 billion spins, some do more than 10 billion. :D
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
oh that many, but shouldn't it be the same number if it's a statistical measurement that means something?

Let's put it this way. I have not seen a slot being tested with less than 2 billion spins. So that might be the minimum.
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
Let's put it this way. I have not seen a slot being tested with less than 2 billion spins. So that might be the minimum.

right so at around 2 billion most games might be near their target rtp.

I think there's a margin allowed on the live rtp analysis they have to do, so it could be 96% +/- 2%, at some point it will hit rtp and then shift off again I suppose.

makes you wonder how they account for huge wins like the new member had the other day on book of ra deluxe, a 1st spin bonus on £20 stake that paid £50,000+ [I think it was], if no one else plays at £20 stake, or very few, how does it absorb such a payout if many players are only playing on 10p stake and not affect their rtp share :confused:

seems like rtp and the testing process is similar to the question 'how long is a piece of string'
 

Aryol

Experienced Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2018
Location
DE
Well, I just take the 8 Spins and only trying a bit more when I hit 4 scatters (when 10 FS are safe, then I try sometimes up to 14 or 16, happens not often^^)

I think that the gamble feature is not showing the true odds, but it is not rigged or something. Probably best longtime strategy is to stick with the highest % but I believe that the chance to lose free spins at all is a toxic design decision. It leads to losing streaks which tempting you to go risky until you got something back, and losing free spins 7 times in a row is nothing special for a BTG Game. Look at Extra Chili, you buy the feature like 20 times and it can lose everything at first gamble (or at first two gambles). This truly makes people go crazy...

To answer your question: I am not sure, I did not feel a significant change in behavior (at least nothing that would be enough for a proof). I usually play on 0,20 € WWTBAM and sometimes increasing to 0,80 € and sometimes this goes well and sometimes not. I mean higher stake, same balance means mostly fewer spins. Maybe the behavior changes on super high stakes to a different variance, but not sure.
 

Luckyscouser45

Head honcho
MM
Joined
Aug 13, 2018
Location
No mans land
I despise this slot. Lost way to many spins stupidly gambling and the majority of my okish wins on the bonus have came from 8 spins anyway same as extra chilli always got bigger wins on 8 spins. Yesterday I got three bonus symbols which means 10 spins guarantee I didn’t gamble but got a shit bonus payout which begs the question why is this game set up to pay shit when u get the extra spins like on bonanza the +5 is shit and on chilli the +4 is shit
 
Last edited:

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
I had a 96%, 1%, 1%, 2%, 'ask the audience' on a first gamble, and lost to a 1%.
Haven't played it since.
I wonder how many first time (and now one time) players, they've lost because of things like this?

I'm sure BTG thought they were being clever with 'loseable' features. But has it maybe cost them many, potentially, long-term players, and not been such a clever move?

Same here, exactly the same from memory, and I haven't played it since either.
Moral of the story, take the piss out your customers, they won't be customers for long!
 

interlog

Meister Member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
MM
Joined
Mar 29, 2015
Location
London
right so at around 2 billion most games might be near their target rtp.

I think there's a margin allowed on the live rtp analysis they have to do, so it could be 96% +/- 2%, at some point it will hit rtp and then shift off again I suppose.

makes you wonder how they account for huge wins like the new member had the other day on book of ra deluxe, a 1st spin bonus on £20 stake that paid £50,000+ [I think it was], if no one else plays at £20 stake, or very few, how does it absorb such a payout if many players are only playing on 10p stake and not affect their rtp share :confused:

seems like rtp and the testing process is similar to the question 'how long is a piece of string'

I may well be totally wrong here, but size of the stake is not taken into account when calculating the RTP. It would be impossible to do so because how do you know how many spins are going to be made at a particular stake when doing that calculation if bet size is part of it?
 

pinnit2014

Meister Member
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
I may well be totally wrong here, but size of the stake is not taken into account when calculating the RTP. It would be impossible to do so because how do you know how many spins are going to be made at a particular stake when doing that calculation if bet size is part of it?

Maybe wrong, but surely that does impact on the RTP, especially when a lot of games have max cashouts?
 

Sasukdcf

Full Member
PABnorogue
Joined
Jan 3, 2015
Location
Norwich
Well, I just take the 8 Spins and only trying a bit more when I hit 4 scatters (when 10 FS are safe, then I try sometimes up to 14 or 16, happens not often^^)

I think that the gamble feature is not showing the true odds, but it is not rigged or something. Probably best longtime strategy is to stick with the highest % but I believe that the chance to lose free spins at all is a toxic design decision. It leads to losing streaks which tempting you to go risky until you got something back, and losing free spins 7 times in a row is nothing special for a BTG Game. Look at Extra Chili, you buy the feature like 20 times and it can lose everything at first gamble (or at first two gambles). This truly makes people go crazy...

To answer your question: I am not sure, I did not feel a significant change in behavior (at least nothing that would be enough for a proof). I usually play on 0,20 € WWTBAM and sometimes increasing to 0,80 € and sometimes this goes well and sometimes not. I mean higher stake, same balance means mostly fewer spins. Maybe the behavior changes on super high stakes to a different variance, but not sure.


Yes but that’s the argument we always get..: none of us have definitive data sets large enough to be classed as “ proof”

That’s always the “ get out clause” so you can only go on an overall view of your experience...

As for taking the 8 spins I wish I had posted this thread before!! I’ve had quite poor returns to date on the few times I took the 8 spins ... maybe I should have persevered with taking them a little more!!
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
I think you have hit the nail on the head****
Just to put that into an example.
If I play 1 spin at £10 and lose my rtp is 0 %
If I then play another spin at £1 and win say £3 my rtp for that session is 150% yet I am £7 down !!!
They have all lost! Shock

No, your RTP for the session would be 300%. Actually you will be £8 down - bet 11 and 3 back. So the right way to look at things to that point is that you've spent £11 and got £3 back thus far, so your current RTP is around 28%.

RTP is a transient figure and depending on the type of slot and its volatility, can take relatively few spins to achieve or millions.

The casino makes £40 on every thousand wagered on a 96% game, yes and no. If you deposited £1000 and made 1000 spins at £1 then the casino would expect to make £40 - if you quit then, so yes.
If you got your £960 back, then had another £960 spins at £1 you'd end up with just under £920 in your balance and the casino would have doubled their cash take on average, to a knacker over 8% of your deposit from 4%.

So in real terms your cash RTP reduces 4% on average every time you turn your deposit over (from the point of deposit!) and the casino in increments gets more of it.

So you end up losing EVERY PENNY of your £1000 deposit at £1 a spin, the cash RTP to you is 0% and the casino's is 100% BUT the game, or game performance RTP is exactly 96% as you on average would have turned that money over multiple times and your winning spins would be 96% of the total cost of those spins.

So people often tend to erroneously correlate game RTP with their cash balance.
 
Last edited:

EkJR

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Location
Glasgow
Sometimes for me on this game 60% wins more than 80+%. Have also lost one on 96% ..I mean, it's just ridiculous. The game at that level is saying your losing and you can't not gamble at those percentages
 

Aryol

Experienced Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2018
Location
DE
Yes but that’s the argument we always get..: none of us have definitive data sets large enough to be classed as “ proof”

That’s always the “ get out clause” so you can only go on an overall view of your experience...

As for taking the 8 spins I wish I had posted this thread before!! I’ve had quite poor returns to date on the few times I took the 8 spins ... maybe I should have persevered with taking them a little more!!

Yeah it is pretty hard to proof something as a normal. I mean there is the word "random" even 13 % RTP could happen in 1000 spins. It is unlikely but if it happens "random" ...

8 spins mostly will sometimes return poor, but always better than 0 spins. But even 16 spins can return super bad. Extra Chili says that gambling the wheel is the best strategy but I do not believe that.

Yes my RTP is maybe overall higher, but there is a high chance that I need to invest more money at all to get a 24 spin feature. Then my RTP is maybe 0.2 % higher but my absolute loss is also higher.

(Btw. I am on my way to collect data for extra chili feature buys, It takes ages but If I collected enough I will share them here)
 
Last edited:

trancemonkey

Ueber Meister
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Location
United Kingdom
Maybe wrong, but surely that does impact on the RTP, especially when a lot of games have max cashouts?

It doesn't impact the RTP because we test on one stake, not multiple stakes. Where games have a single RTP across all stakes (I.e most games) I believe the test houses will normally test min stake, max stake and some random stakes in between.

Some casinos keep track of RTP by stake, as well as overall RTP because this give a a clearly picture... But if you just look Cash Out / Cash In, you'll always get the true picture.

And yes, to some ones earlier point, if I load up a new game and play at 100 quid stake. Then 20 spins in a get a 1000x win, that game has paid out £100,000 to me. If no one ever plays that game on high stakes again, then it's possible that that game will always run at a loss. And this happens. There will be some games on some casinos that never make them any money.

I know you guys think it's all a big conspiracy but that's because some of you think it's a lot more complex than it actually is.

And why is RTP meaningless?
 
Last edited:
Top