I have a box with about a six inch stack of PARS sheets, and I've never seen a game where the reel stripping changes depending on number of paylines or coins bet. You're right that if you go up in denomination, the reel stripping often does change -- the higher the denom. the higher the return.
Didn't IGT's Star Wars game do this? The reels definitely changed visually between 1-4 coins/line, 5-9 coins/line, and then 10 coins/line. It was one of their touted features when they showed it off at G2E several years back. I'm pretty sure the math changed between those coin levels too; that is, it wasn't just a re-skin, and I don't think it was a buy-a-pay like Blazing 7s.
Please forgive my ignorance, but do the penny and dollar Megabucks machines feed the same progressive jackpot?
Please forgive my ignorance, but do the penny and dollar Megabucks machines feed the same progressive jackpot? If so, wouldn't there be an advantage to playing the old style three reel, instead of the video 5 reel, "crazy paylines" if the big prize was your only goal? It seems that lining up three symbols should be easier than 5.
It is my theory that the odds of hitting are equal, or nearly equal, on both. I haven't proven or disproven it yet, but give me time. If IGT was intent to make the odds the same, it would be easy to achieve. For example, I claim the odds of winning on the 3-reel game are (1/368)^3 = 1 in 49,836,032. That could be accomplished on a 5-reel game by putting one logo on each of 5 reels, with 46 stops on reels 1, 2, and 3, 32 on reel 4, and 16 on reel 5. Remember, it takes five logos on the center payline to win the jackpot.
You've got to read the whole thread, but here's the short version:
The reels in a 3 reel machine have 22 symbols each. But internally, there are 368 'stops' on a virtual reel. Each of those virtual stops has an equal chance. However, the virtual stops are not evenly distributed among the 22 symbols.
Therefore, the one symbol for the megabucks prize may be programmed to only one of the 368 virtual stops, making the 1 in 368 ^ 3 calculation correct.