Keybet rip off
(02-22-2018, 07:08 PM)ob Wrote: Stats can be misleading tbf. I must have run at like way over 100% plus on normal roulette over a long period and other people could be running way under.

We all accept that we all have to lose a bit more so that you can make more (on everything) ob.

We don't have to take your sly rub downs though, so tone it down please!

Einstein and Newton would look a right pair of mugs if they experimented with you to back their "laws" coz it all becomes bullshit when you change the apple tree for a money tree and you walk past!

If there is ever a film made about you, think Forest Gump with the floating feather, only up the windspeed to a huricane and change the feather for a £50 note and multiply the quantity by infinity?
Seriously I may pop down Ladbrokes in the morning and see if I can get evens on you being God, although based on your appearance I may have to take 1-3?!
I've never had it either, just been told by a few different people they've had pots reset to 100 so I just assumed there was a different program going around that would do that

I've always done fine on them
RNG games are fixed odds, but that doesn't stop them adding 'almost wins' to the programs to make people think a big win is close, fucking with your brain.

For example, the RNG says you lose on a video slot, but it still spins in 2 bonus symbols or lots of scattered jackpots.

I'm sure there's similar shenanigans with KeyBet, but overall the game itself must be random.
Yeah, I put £50 in a FOBT the other day, had a quick go on king kong cash and it was terrible, did FA for the whole money, including two golden barrel spins both paying 0. Landed the top feature with a couple of quid left, and it went £20... so with that last £20 I put a tenner on two numbers (11 and 13) where does it land? 36 obviously!!
(02-22-2018, 09:04 PM)jerz92 Wrote: Don't like what they did with power up. Those P3s that reset the pots to 100 and make them rip everything changes the gameplay and therefore the way you approach the machine, I guess you can look at it and say well the gameplay isn't going to change for the punter, therefore it shouldn't need a retest, but I personally think it's a significant enough change to be considered a bit cheeky

Turbo anyone?
Ive had non maxed reset back to where they was. It can do it no matter how u get it but its rare but an arse when it does
Turbo is actually a way better example because that chip did actually effect gameplay for the punter as well quite significantly..
Nerves too was a big profile change but again punters would more than likely not notice
I personally cant see why roulette would need to be anything but random. Standard roulette that is.

All these messed up bookies versions such as KB's do seem a bit iffy to me. Never play them so cant really comment too much, but normal roulettes been proven to be random/unbeatable, etc, however all I really hear about these bookies machines is from posts on here and the help screen on them saying they are "random". They just generally get a bad press from people and the word rigged is often thrown around (yeah people often say that when they are losing though).

So overall im not too sure really/dont care, but my guess is that they do play a random game, all above board, etc, but as JG said theres some sort of light compensation to allow for the chance of a mega run or even a bad streak dependant on percentage. Also to protect the 500 JP, as they wont want people winning too much when they can only do 50 a spin, as no chance to up the stake, so more likely to walk with a profit, or maybe still do brains, but slower, so always a chance of hitting something before busting out instead of going all in,  not to mention these fucked up bookies games such as dond roulette or the one with about 10000 numbers which are obviously different to the standard 1/37, so the software has to be tweaked to allow all these fancy side games/bets. I am also skeptical on how well these machines are actually tested. Pretty well id assume, but unless you coded these games, then youll never really know exactly how they are designed to play.

However I dont think this compensation would really be noticable to any punter and overall it would feel like a random game, as the compensation would be based over a shit ton of spins, and would only be pretty light, unlike a 100 which is obviously a lower JP and fully compensated to begin with so theres no mistaking a dead/hot machine. As for the slots on the fobtees, I think they are even more "rigged". Again random, but "tweaked". Whereas fruits are rigged, with a hint of randomess imo.

Just my 2cents. Probably bollocks, but I doubt we will ever get a 100% answer on this, and luckily I dont really care either way as I dont play them.
The following 2 users Like dude_se's post:
JG vs SG, megastreaklover01
(02-23-2018, 08:36 AM)SmegHead Wrote:
(02-22-2018, 09:04 PM)jerz92 Wrote: Don't like what they did with power up. Those P3s that reset the pots to 100 and make them rip everything changes the gameplay and therefore the way you approach the machine, I guess you can look at it and say well the gameplay isn't going to change for the punter, therefore it shouldn't need a retest, but I personally think it's a significant enough change to be considered a bit cheeky

Turbo anyone?

What makes u think there is a p3?
I said a few posts back mate, I'd heard from a few different people they'd been having pots reset at 100, not something I'd seen or heard of before so I just assumed there was a third program going round. I'm guessing that's not the case so yeah, forget that post (y)
P2 defence mechanism.
(02-23-2018, 01:00 PM)PMK Wrote:
(02-23-2018, 08:36 AM)SmegHead Wrote:
(02-22-2018, 09:04 PM)jerz92 Wrote: Don't like what they did with power up. Those P3s that reset the pots to 100 and make them rip everything changes the gameplay and therefore the way you approach the machine, I guess you can look at it and say well the gameplay isn't going to change for the punter, therefore it shouldn't need a retest, but I personally think it's a significant enough change to be considered a bit cheeky

Turbo anyone?

What makes u think there is a p3?

Nothing but the gamble down collect program is completely different from the it was released with
Was referring to powerbats mate.
Kidgloves - you're quite right, I'm sure they wouldn't be welcoming me with open arms. At first during the playing of the key I dreamed of storming their offices armed to the teeth, taking programmers hostage left right and centre and demanding the facts. I've calmed down a bit now and gone from wanting to take them to small claims court to happily doing 'eff all as all recent anecdotal evidence from other players suggest that keys are dropping pots for fun so maybe it is absurd bad luck. You can't blame me for going down the conspiracy route though! Lo techs are full on adrenaline fueled excitement compared to the potential prison sentence of a key.

Mystery Plum - Of all the people who have insight into B2 testing/compliance you probably have more than most who post on here. I'd like to ask a bit deeper about what programmers/developers have to do to pass compliance? Essentially how can anyone tell if a game is being unfair with what the random number generator generates? Does the code get checked line by line? Is the game tested by a 'Monte Carlo' simulation (many thousands of games played to determine any potential bias)? To my very limited viewpoint/knowledge it seems that as long as the stakes/prizes and stated nature of the game fit within the category then it's given the green light. I assume it'll be tested for such things as i) Can you bet over the maximum stake allowed? ii) Are there any circumstances this game could pay over the maximum prize allowed? etc However and I may be completely wrong, I could see there being code that interprets the RNG selectively depending on value and it would never be detected. In fact I could see the programming houses thinking this was acceptable, as the game's behaviour is still underpinned by randominity, just not that which matches the implied odds.

Ob - Lies, lies and more damned statistics or something along those lines as the saying goes. Essentially stats can certainly be manipulated on behalf of an agenda. My agenda is being able to see if the program is fair, however I doubt I will ever reach a satisfactory goal on that front.

AMK - yep fortune spins mega pots is a good example of a game that is a B2 and states random. If I have a 499.98 pot 5 how random is it that as soon as that pot increases it's dropping? Surely on a random game the chances should be equal every spin. Do I play that 99/199/299/399/499 or that 0/0/0/0/0? It doesn't matter mate. It's random. B2 games have to be random by law. Why would the LBO or programmer's risk so much for what? Answer, it's not malicious, just the way things are, this industry adores compensation. They probably didn't even know they were in breach of compliance. Simply put random in the help menu, voila! perfection. Game has passed compliance testing criteria. I mean it is random sort of isn't it? As is Card Shark by Vivid. To a degree.

Moff - the odds of no key for 580+ spins, ie if I walk up to a terminal that has just given key and want to know my chances of it taking 580 or more spins to the next key, those odds are 5.2million to one against. Considerably more than the 1444-1 shot of two keys together. I've had three consecutive keys before, which out of three specific spins is 54,872-1 against. Still a good few orders from that 580+ for key. Buddylove's 4 in a row though is a good 2 million to one. However as an average process is around 450 spins, you'll have about that many attempts to see that 4 in a row per process, the odds of which are about 4,500-1 which given the amount of people playing keys regularly, say 100/year then one in 40 will see that 4 in a row within the year.

PMK - sticking with the maths for a bit but it's a bit harder to work out the chances of 3 keys one pot out of 4 spins, but the old nCr/nPr functions may help. Let me tit around for a bit and try and work out the stats. Ok 200,000-1 against approximately of me taking 4 spins at random, 3 being key (one with pot) and one other number spin. However the actual chance of seeing such a thing per process is 1800-1. That last bit may be wrong, I didn't need nPr or nCr as the last one is just 4 combinations of how three keys no key can be organised. The odds of seeing just one 400+ cost for key (assuming starting from 0 spins since last key) are 43,000-1 against. Divide by 12 for the average process of 12 keys and 3500-1 against roughly per process chance of seeing that. Twice as unlikely as your mate's 3 key out of 4 one with pot scenario. And remember I've had 4 of these process out of just over a 100 sessions. So perhaps you'll be a bit more sympathetic to my style of tin foil hat.
I'm not saying that what I'm suggesting is absolutely right or correct beyond doubt. I could, I agree have just been very unlucky. Just remember that Ob himself has suggested key bet is rigged. It was a conversation he had with me a while back and I know his memory is shot but he may or may not remember. He was talking about betting 25p singles to allay heat (another pesky memo) and how much he was getting battered. Pound on key and 16 single 25p bets. His words were along the lines of 'as soon as I started doing that bet it's amazing how quick you get hammered as the damn thing is probably rigged'.

End of the day for my own sanity I won't be playing keys on my own again. If nothing else and say they are fair then I think I have some weird magnetism which they don't like (perhaps SG have my fingerprints!). I got my other half to sit on it for half an hour whilst I took a stress relieving breather and got a bite to eat. She got 3 keys in that half hour which was far better than anything I'd got whilst sat on it. The 400 pot reset to 210 after I finally got it. If I had sat Kesh down in that half hour I'm sure he'd have got pot, reserve and then the £25 reset thereafter just to prove a point.
Anyway I've got a few people I trust who would sit on a key for £20/hour plus food and travel tbc on my behalf. If I found a juicy pot, key not cold preferably, I'd be quite happy to pay them which would free me up. End of the day I know people do still make a wage on them. They usually play in pairs and in my opinion sanity is worth more than money.

Finally back off topic 'However if you don’t realise why cashpots reset back to a ton on either p1 or p2 then I’m amazed you’ve ever won a coin on the game', little bit harsh isn't it Paul?
My understanding is that on this type of game they often over cost for things like phones coming back in order to save up value that eventually gets released as free cashpots or repeats or even natural GATW if enough value present.
When you get a cashpot be it from bust, deal, swap, flicker, whatever, the game looks to see how much excess value there is and makes a decision if the cashpot should be free or not. There's no way to know this before you take the cashpot unless you know the in depth history of the game.
The following 1 user Likes JG vs SG's post:
Thanks mate, I did think that too but I did hear of quite a few occurrences of pots resetting to 100 in quick succession, and nothing of it before that, probably about 2 months after they started showing up everywhere. Knowing what these companies are like, my small brain jumped to the conclusion that they'd chipped the game. I guess it makes sense though that as they're around for longer they're inevitably going to be burned more, therefore go more and more behind and not enjoy giving that free pot quite so much
"free repeats", "free cashpots" - UTTER BOLLOCKS.
The following 1 user Likes Toastie's post:
1 in 5.2 million of not getting a keybet in 580 spins.. my maths is poor please explain your theorem for the budding statisticians of the world  :D :D
37 divided by 38 since that's the odds of no key on an individual spin. Multiply this number by itself 580 times. So essentially 37/38*37/38*37/38....580 times expressed as 37/38 to the power of 580. You'll them get a very small decimal..I like to apply a reciprocal to that decimal which shows me the odds, which in this case were 5.2mill to one.

Toastie - lol short and not too sweet posting there eh?

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why are lots of people playing Keybet roulette? dwa36 24 9,357 10-06-2013, 08:19 AM
Last Post: Jamesy

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)