SECTION 16, £1 STAKE, TRUTH from an experienced player!

General fruit machine related chat, if it doesn't fit another category discuss it here..
borgcontact4

Post by borgcontact4 »

OK time we heard from an insider. A RNG was used in section 16 machines. The numbers generated were random however and here it is, they were manipulated, for want of a better word. The general RNG was say 1 to 1000 but when they, manufacturer, wanted to pay out they reduced the RNG to give a win. If you take Astra Slotto for instance. When you look at the combination required to deliver a £25 win over 20 games it becomes obvious.The odds are greater than say Tony Blair being elected the next conservative leader of the opposition or winning the National lottery top prize 1,000 time on the trot. We are talking a about making centillion a small number by comparison.
Very easy to understand Astra produced a very good game by using a method of random numbers but, seedee them.
There, that is the secret out , just for anyone who didn't already know.
theoak
Senior Member
Posts: 1374
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:52 pm

Post by theoak »

blackmogu wrote:I'll reiterate - I don't claim my hypothesis is correct, but it certainly is the best-fitting model from the discussion held so far.
I thought I came up with the Hypothesis?!
theoak
Senior Member
Posts: 1374
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:52 pm

Post by theoak »

are you saying each spin is random, but NOT from teh same set of random numbers? Eg: one spin chance of £500 is 1 in 512000, the next spin (due to it paying out nothing for £72 years) is a 'random' selection with a chance of 1in2 for the £500?
ob
Senior Member
Posts: 3275
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 1:04 pm

Post by ob »

There is no need for manufacturers to make these machines non-random, just because it says 92% does NOT MEAN it HAS to give 92% over any specific amount of time - I think people forget this...

92% is the AVERAGE payout PER spin, like 97.3% is the average per spin for roulette (or 98.6% for even chance casino bets). For those of us who are statistically informed, that leads in the long run to a normal distribution with a mean of 92% and a standard deviation that gets smaller with increasing number of spins.

REMEMBER - it does not matter what it has paid in the past (i.e. be it only 80% for 10000 spins), it does not change the odds for the next 10000 spins, its still 92% average for those spins.

What would be interesting, is finding out whether you can force these new non-random ones like CMS/BFM ones, anyone that has tried: feel free to PM.
Mystery_Plum

Post by Mystery_Plum »

I doubt you'll find any of these compensated B3's easy to force to be honest, and I'm not keen on trying either.

It was OK say 10 years ago because it didn't really cost that much to mess about with a £250 jackpot game and work out the profile. Worse you'd do is pick a Bell Fruit and bang £500 in for a straight force on a typical 72% setting, 6:1 Main Vs Pot, give up and cream your £310 back off the main reflex, lose £140 into the box and leave the jackpot reflex £50 better off for some lucky sod a week later.

I don't fancy trying a £500 armed with a grand at least, on the off-chance that it might be compensated enough to warrant a force. Random has been let in and we're stuck with it...
Locked