WWTBAM (Who Wants to be a Millionaire Slot) BTG

[Siohmy]

Well I have posted this before and the number is increasing by the week. How can it be random when every time I have walked away the answer it shows has always without fail been the highest percentage. This is probably factored in as a clever way of keeping the overall figures correct. I am talking around a hundred features and to never have been one of the lower percentages come on.

Think I have posted this elsewhere but I suspect that if you walk away the game does not even bother running the gamble and the answer shown is simply the highest percentage probably as another example of best strategy.

I certainly agree that, if this is the case, it is a bit poor though as it comes across as, it would have been this had you gambled. It is one area of the game I’d say is misleading. And yes, I don’t think I’ve ever seen it be anything other than the highest %age. Only just started looking though and I don’t often walk away.

 

[brianmon]

At 96% you would expect to lose 1 in 25 gambles.

If the chance of winning is stated then it HAS to be correct... there is no way that the game would have passed GLI or BMM or any other test house if it told the player that you had X chance of winning but really that was Y

Is it actually stated in the game rules that they ARE the odds of winning a gamble?
Or could the win/lose be pre-determined, like most other 'pick' features, and those graphics are just generated to simulate the actual game show?

BGT have said on here that they are the actual odds. But saying something on an internet forum, isn't particularly legally binding.

 

[trancemonkey]

Is it actually stated in the game rules that they ARE the odds of winning a gamble?
Or could the win/lose be pre-determined, like most other 'pick' features, and those graphics are just generated to simulate the actual game show?

BGT have said on here that they are the actual odds. But saying something on an internet forum, isn't particularly legally binding.

You are not allowed to mislead the player. And why would they lie...

 

[snorky510238]

It is misleading though as the answer is obviously predetermined so every choice should say 25% as they are the true odds. Apart from the 50/50 and surprise surprise I find I am wrong on that 75% of the time.

 

[EkJR]

Lost 8 spins on 83%, 89% and 91% last night on 3 consecutive features. Two were audience one was phone. It's just absolute bullshit and is the game blatantly stealing spins from a player. As said before, you win more gambles at 60% than the percentages stated above. It's like Chilli all over again where the 50/50 gamble wins more than the 60/40 gamble. Something absolutely stinks with these games.

 

[trancemonkey]

It is misleading though as the answer is obviously predetermined so every choice should say 25% as they are the true odds. Apart from the 50/50 and surprise surprise I find I am wrong on that 75% of the time.

No it isn't... the answer will likely be determined on the press of the button...

You know it's interesting because at impulse we did a game called Frantic where we told the player the chance for every gamble. What it told us was that actually telling people the odds was worse ..

This is because if you tell someone they have a 85% chance of winning, they FEEL like that should mean they should almost never lose. Yet they will lose every 6.5 gambles.

 

[aceking123]

No it isn't... the answer will likely be determined on the press of the button...

You know it's interesting because at impulse we did a game called Frantic where we told the player the chance for every gamble. What it told us was that actually telling people the odds was worse ..

This is because if you tell someone they have a 85% chance of winning, they FEEL like that should mean they should almost never lose. Yet they will lose every 6.5 gambles.

????
No wonder your slots dont pay ) 6.5?? 10 gambles at 85% hm 6.5 you should work for btg ) winding you up trance)

 

[Siohmy]

I’m still trying to get my head around why BTG would go out of their way to show gambles at 80% plus and then supposedly only be 50% behind the scenes.

If this were legit the case it would stand out far more than a few examples and the slot would die on its arse. As trace has said I suspect BTG may actually be concerned a perfectly fair gamble is being perceived as bent due to player perception of what 80% represents.

Having played poker I can tell you that I have lost numerous times with AA against other hands where I am at least a 4 to 1 favourite, and sometimes these runs go in batches (and no, not all at Pokerstars!).

I think the key thing is, can fixing the odds behind the scenes be done? Technically, of course, although getting them through testing should fail. Is there any need in the slightest to do it and if anything damage the slots reputation? Not from where I’m sitting.

 

[Greigssy]

£40 to get a bonus, so a 94% chance of the answer A being right and nope it's wrong, next bonus £10 later 10 spins paid £0.27
Bonuses on this feel like they have a no win scenario no matter what choices are made.

I had built up a nice balance from £6 on IR, DOA and Book of RA to £60 to get mauled on this slot, I wish could exclude myself from certain slots for set periods.

 

[Nate]

£40 to get a bonus, so a 94% chance of the answer A being right and nope it's wrong, next bonus £10 later 10 spins paid £0.27
Bonuses on this feel like they have a no win scenario no matter what choices are made.

I had built up a nice balance from £6 on IR, DOA and Book of RA to £60 to get mauled on this slot, I wish could exclude myself from certain slots for set periods.

Oh trust me... You would save yourself tons rather than chase a marketing ploy by BTG.

These guys a renowned for making their slots look like they have massive wins in their paytables. It's actually quite the opposite. You will probably only see 5k - 10k x stake once every 2-3 years... and that will be a screenshot from someone else... mostly on other forums and from some preferred streamers (Read: Marketing Partners).

Their slots are toxic pieces of crap. When they do hit, It's a MASSIVE occasion at the BTG Office ... The BTG rep will celebrate the win and even tag the entire forum

Nate

 

[Sasukdcf]

I have to agree here and question the maths..:

I have lost countless gambles including 5 on the bounce when playing higher stakes...

I’ve never had a percentage as high as 96%
But lost on high 80s and below way more times than I have won...

And to confirm ... if you walk away it’s ALWAYS top answer that was right....

I have also tried choosing 2nd too answer a few times as this always appears to be the one that comes up of top answer is wrong

That failed too

So best strategy in my opinion is take the 8 spins

Doesn’t mean I always do it... but definitely doing it more often now

 

[snorky510238]

I am starting to believe less and less concerning what I am told. There are to many coincidences. Games undoubtedly play better on release than ever after. A big thing was made about the 50 spins when this game was launched and low and behold right on cue someone hits it. I believe that is set up, a guarantee someone will hit it. What bad publicity for them if nobody did. Since then where are all the posts of big wins and people achieving 50 spins? They may exist but I haven’t seen a single one. Not even a post where someone made it past 20.

 

[shadow123]

Has anyone documented the outcome of going with the stated best stratagy over a decent run of features.

I spent 25 years working with odds while developing machines and have a fair idea of what certain chances
feel like. After playing 5 or so features on this game ,It was obvious that the gamble was as bent as a nine bob note as
they used to say.

 

[Sasukdcf]

I tend to agree and it feels all the way through you are up against it on all slots and that’s not just with the fact they are a negative expectation game anyway!!


Here’s a slight change of tact... have you ever noticed this on this game and bonanza and gold rush ( not sure that’s the right name but blueprint version of bonanza )

And this is fact....

Let’s say you are playing £2 a spin and have £200 starting pot and hit a losing streak and you’re pot dwindles...
Once you get down to around 20x stake remaining you will without any exception hit a decent win ..: not a large win but large enough to keep you playing some more after which point you normally not tend to hit bigger all and lose... now I’m not sure of the benefit or reasoning behind this as the individual players session will still be an RTP of 0% however I presume overall the little spike in RTP is a way of increasing the overall payout of the game knowing that the player will continue to play and lose..:

Does that make sense as a ligitimate reason for it happening every single time and if you don’t believe me try it!!

Seems to be the same on all stakes but only if you keep on same stake and have a large enough starting figure ( I know this co I tried starting at 20x stake level to see if I could manipulate to do it but then you just lose lol!!

There have been a few times I have thought .. oh maybe not this time then and it hits a decent win ( as I say not huge just enough to have big numbers come up on the screen and a bell and whistle or similar so say x10 to x20 ish

The worst for this is Sparta which thinking about it is also blueprint

I have lost count of the amount of times I have hit nothing until last credit and then hit a win or the feature...

Thoughts ?

 

[slotter999]

I tend to agree and it feels all the way through you are up against it on all slots and that’s not just with the fact they are a negative expectation game anyway!!


Here’s a slight change of tact... have you ever noticed this on this game and bonanza and gold rush ( not sure that’s the right name but blueprint version of bonanza )

And this is fact....

Let’s say you are playing £2 a spin and have £200 starting pot and hit a losing streak and you’re pot dwindles...
Once you get down to around 20x stake remaining you will without any exception hit a decent win ..: not a large win but large enough to keep you playing some more after which point you normally not tend to hit bigger all and lose... now I’m not sure of the benefit or reasoning behind this as the individual players session will still be an RTP of 0% however I presume overall the little spike in RTP is a way of increasing the overall payout of the game knowing that the player will continue to play and lose..:

Does that make sense as a ligitimate reason for it happening every single time and if you don’t believe me try it!!

Seems to be the same on all stakes but only if you keep on same stake and have a large enough starting figure ( I know this co I tried starting at 20x stake level to see if I could manipulate to do it but then you just lose lol!!

There have been a few times I have thought .. oh maybe not this time then and it hits a decent win ( as I say not huge just enough to have big numbers come up on the screen and a bell and whistle or similar so say x10 to x20 ish

The worst for this is Sparta which thinking about it is also blueprint

I have lost count of the amount of times I have hit nothing until last credit and then hit a win or the feature...

Thoughts ?

If it happens consistently then you are simply observing the maths of the game in action.

Unless you are trying to peddle more of the conspiracy stuff which is pretty rife on just about every thread these days.

I'd be happy to set you a challenge to try and prove / disprove your theory if you fancy it?

 

[Sasukdcf]

I’m not sure what I’m getting at to be honest !!

Just wondered if anyone else had noticed it and if not to look out for it...

From a conspiracy POV ... maybe if a better mathematical whizz than me explains how this occurance could benefit the long term RTP figures or similar....

I hold firm and always have that games change upon increase of stakes... ( different subject I know )

But yes happy to accept a challenge depending what it is !!

 

[Jono777]

Not read whole thread so this may have been previously mentioned.

Has anyone tried some (lengthy-ish) continually collecting the initial FS award and NOT gambling at all?

Asking as this seems the favorable feeling towards Extra Chilli which works on a similar principal.

IMO amount of FS doesn't really matter - If it wants to pay, it will via re-triggers, large Megaways, whatever. If that particular feature doesn't want to pay then it won't whether you have 1FS or 100!

 

[paul7388]

Not read whole thread so this may have been previously mentioned.

Has anyone tried some (lengthy-ish) continually collecting the initial FS award and NOT gambling at all?

Asking as this seems the favorable feeling towards Extra Chilli which works on a similar principal.

IMO amount of FS doesn't really matter - If it wants to pay, it will via re-triggers, large Megaways, whatever. If that particular feature doesn't want to pay then it won't whether you have 1FS or 100!

Rarely play millionaire as find it total crap.

But i did do a few sessions on demo and several features in real. Took 8 spins several times and also 10 spins lots as always lost gamble in the end.

Out of them all i never hit anything decent at all. Not enough spins to prove anything but from what i saw it is completely different to chilli. As you know i normally collect 8 spins on chilli and have always said if it was going to pay it will and all best wins were on 8 spins. That was before seeing biggest ever win on here that was also from 8 spins.

But millionaire seems totally different. You just don't get the feeling it will give anything on 8 spins. Out of quite a few features never once got a retrigger either whereas chilli gives them often.

Personally i would never touch millionaire again.

 

[Reelsoffun]

as the individual players session will still be an RTP of 0%

Erm no it won't unless they didnt get a single win from the session, even if you lost all your money you still could have won 85% RTP etc And thats what some people dont understand....

 

[Reelsoffun]

Rarely play millionaire as find it total crap.

But i did do a few sessions on demo and several features in real. Took 8 spins several times and also 10 spins lots as always lost gamble in the end.

Out of them all i never hit anything decent at all. Not enough spins to prove anything but from what i saw it is completely different to chilli. As you know i normally collect 8 spins on chilli and have always said if it was going to pay it will and all best wins were on 8 spins. That was before seeing biggest ever win on here that was also from 8 spins.

But millionaire seems totally different. You just don't get the feeling it will give anything on 8 spins. Out of quite a few features never once got a retrigger either whereas chilli gives them often.

Personally i would never touch millionaire again.

The math is totally different though to compensate for the higher chance of 117k ways appearing both in the base and feature, you only really get the bigger features from hitting 1 or more good 117k ways in the feature etc so its technically more volatile.

 

[Jono777]

I played it once, very unlikely to again, £10 down life time on it and its probably going to stay like that.

 

[judgenico]

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

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

my theory is different stakes equals different servers, if ive ever switched stakes on certain games ive certainly noticed a change in the way the games plays

 

[EkJR]

my theory is different stakes equals different servers, if ive ever switched stakes on certain games ive certainly noticed a change in the way the games plays

Seems to play ok on small stakes(below £1). Anything above seems to be a cash grab and amount of losses on the bonus ladder are mental.

 

[brianmon]

my theory is different stakes equals different servers, if ive ever switched stakes on certain games ive certainly noticed a change in the way the games plays

And there's usually a slight delay on the first spin after changing stakes

 

[Sasukdcf]

@Reelsoffun

Ok so what you have put has confused me as your theory is what I used to think but I was corrected on here a while back and told if you lose your pot and end up wit nothing in a session then your RTP is 0%

I previously worked it out using simple maths but was told that was wrong!!

So that said a medium win as you are running out of money would “ up” your overall RTP for the session then and therefore skew the figures ???