Quick Hits Simulator

Greetings!

7Craps recently linked us to the following simulator:

http://www.beatingbonuses.com/simulator_java.htm

Tringlomane provided a link to the Quick Hits Probabilities:

http://www.arcade-history.com/?n=black-and-white-sevens-quick-hit-platinum&page=detail&id=32113

I believe that I can alter the simulator to run simulations for Quick Hits based on the increase to the expected return of the Progressives.

First the Progressive Probabilities:

Any nine QH symbols pays 2,000 × total bet. Occurs every 2,073,600 games.
Any eight QH symbols pays 650 × total bet. Occurs every 87,617 games.
Any seven QH symbols pays100 × total bet. Occurs every 9,327 games.
Any six QH symbols pays 50 × total bet. Occurs every 1,329 games.
Any five QH symbols pays 10 × total bet . Occurs every 230 games.

Expressed as a decimal:

NINE QH: 1/2073600 = .0000004822530864197531
EIGHT QH: 1/87617 = 0.00001141331020235799
SEVEN QH: 1/9327 = 0.00010721561059290232
SIX QH: 1/1329 = 0.0007524454477050414
FIVE QH = 1/230 = 0.004347826086956522

The Base Returns are:

$3000
$975
$150
$75
$15

The Base ER is, at a minimum, 88.05%.

The Base hold for each game should be .1195 of any amount bet.

The probability of any result other than a QH Progressive is:

1 - .0000004822530864197531 - 0.00001141331020235799 - 0.00010721561059290232 - 0.0007524454477050414 - 0.004347826086956522 = 0.9947806172914567

Programming the Simulator

1.) Unfortunately, without knowing the exact probabilities of every possbile paying result, we have no choice but to assume perfect distribution of results. Therefore, we will pick any game from the simulator, delete all probabilities/pays and first enter 0.9947806172914567 and -0.1195

2.) Add the increases to the Progressives. Go through and insert the probability of the Progressive hitting as well as the INCREASE to the Progressive Meter:

If the Progressive Meter is at:

$5000
$2000
$300
$200
$30

The increases are:

$2000
$1025
$150
$125
$15

The increase to ER is:

(15 * 0.004347826086956522) + (125 * 0.0007524454477050414) + (150 * 0.00010721561059290232) + (1025 * 0.00001141331020235799) + (2000 * .0000004822530864197531) = 0.18801856298666977

The new ER should be: 0.18801856298666977 + .8805 = 1.0685185629866698 or 106.85185629866698%

The simulator is returning a HE of -6.91%. Good enough. See next post for simulations.

Simulating this is mostly pointless without a reasonable distribution of the payouts. We have discussed this game so much, we need to somehow snatch a damn PAR sheet. :(

Simulations

These simulations will be useful in determining the expected profit off of x amount bet on these Quick Hits, as well as the ratio of overall gains to losses.

The only area where the simulation is weak is that there is nowhere to program it to stop when it does hit a certain result. For example, you would stop if you hit any combination of 5QH+7QH, 5QH+8QH or 6QH alone because then you would be at -ER.

Additional Inputs

Deposit: This is essentially the same as bankroll

Bonus: 0 (There is no bonus)

Wagering: This is the total amount to be wagered.

Bet: $1.50 (This would be for the Quick Hits Platinum at the $0.01/denom, the bet amount may vary by machine)

Runs: 500000 (How many simulations to perform)

***Uncheck, "Reduce bets to raise," you may not bet less than $1.50.

Simulation Results

Deposit = $100 Wagering = $100

Loss: 70.38%
Gain: 29.62%
Average Return: +7.00

Deposit = $100 Wagering = 1000

Loss: 52.19%
Gain: 47.81%
Bust: 5.32%
Average Return: +69.15

Deposit = $1000 Wagering = 1000

Loss: 51.78%
Gain: 48.22%
Average Return: +69.25

Analysis

What we can take away from these results is that someone wagering this kind of amount will lose more often than he wins, but will experience a positive return overall. We should also keep in mind that the value is largely wrapped up in the 6QH result, and the probability of hitting that in with $1000 wagered (667 plays) is:

(1-0.0007524454477050414)^667 = 0.6052764231856973 or about 39.47% to hit.

If we increase our chances of hitting the 6QH to .50, then we end up with:

(1-0.0007524454477050414)^921 = .50

Which is 921 * 1.5 = 1381.50 wagered.

New Simulations Based on 1381.50 Wagered

Deposit = $100 Wagering = 1381.50

Loss: 45.82%
Gain: 54.18%
Bust: 18.25%
Average Return: +90.49

Deposit = $1000 Wagering = 1381.50

Loss: 42.41%
Gain: 57.59%
Average Return: +96.11

Analysis

In comparing these two sets of results, we can see that some of those who busted ended up making a comeback and ended up with a gain. You'll also notice that the average return was higher, and the reason for that is because the ones who busted never had a chance to approach the ER after busting.

The bankroll need not be great, either. For example, a bankroll of $155 yields a bust rate of 0.99% and 1.00% in two simulations. The bankroll of $160 busted at least once in two consecutive simulations, but it was less than 0.005% of the time.

Let's give ourselves a 75% chance of hitting that 6QH now.

(1-0.0007524454477050414)^1842 = 0.24994204130256706 or 75% to hit.

1842 * 1.5 = 2763 wagered.

Simulation on $2763 Wagered

Deposit = $100 Wagered = $2763

Loss: 42.96%
Win: 57.04%
Bust: 36.01%
Average Return: +156.72

Deposit = $1000 Wagered = $2763

Loss: 28.80%
Win: 71.20%
Average Return: +190.65

Analysis

It's the same thing with assuring that one has adequate bankroll. The overall return actually falls under 6% due to the bust-out rate.

A bankroll of $255 returns a bust rate of 1.03%, and a bankroll of $320 returns a 0.01% bust rate.

CONCLUSION

The most important consideration when pursuing these Progressives is bankroll, one must be adequately bankrolled or will risk taking a loss that will have to be recovered with the +ER another day. It's also important to understand that there will be a high loss rate, and this is especially true (even with adequate bankroll) when much of the Progressive increase is wrapped up in 5QH. Here's a good example:

5QH @ $45

30 * 0.004347826086956522 = 0.13043478260869565 + .8801 = 1.0105347826086956 or 101.05 ER

Let's assume all of the other Progressives are only $0.01 overall, just to illustrate the point:

It's giving me an HE of -1.16%, but, whatever.

Deposit = $100 Wagered = $100

Loss: 74.64%
Gain: 25.36%
Average Return: +1.19

The best comparison I can think of for that is card counting a side bet of some kind, you'll still lose the bet the majority of the time, but the wins eventually compensate for that loss.

Quote: tringlomane

Simulating this is mostly pointless without a reasonable distribution of the payouts. We have discussed this game so much, we need to somehow snatch a damn PAR sheet. :(

I definitely agree with the latter statement!!!

I think the simulations are good for ER's on amounts wagered in a given situation, but perhaps not the best indicator of bankroll. The problem with using them to calculate bankroll requirements is that much of the ER is still going to be wrapped up in profitable results that aren't necessarily very likely. In any event, though, it seems like they should still get reasonably close on the bankroll requirements.

Hello, I have been following this discussion of the quick hits since it started. I am not a real heavy math guy so some of it was over my head. I tried to take some notes with me into the Casino to determine playable machines. It did not help. Is there a base at which you could look at a machine and say that it might be playable? I noticed some quick hits had reels some had video screens. I saw them anywhere from $1.50 to $3.00 with max coins played. So if I am looking at a $1.50 machine is there a certain amount the progressives shoukld be that would make it playable. I understand meter rise form video poker progressives and the 9 and 10 quick hits are very long odds but is there some sort of base for the more common hits based on the max bet required to hit it? Thank you for all your previous work on these games.

Quote: MrRalph

Hello, I have been following this discussion of the quick hits since it started. I am not a real heavy math guy so some of it was over my head. I tried to take some notes with me into the Casino to determine playable machines. It did not help. Is there a base at which you could look at a machine and say that it might be playable? I noticed some quick hits had reels some had video screens. I saw them anywhere from $1.50 to $3.00 with max coins played. So if I am looking at a $1.50 machine is there a certain amount the progressives shoukld be that would make it playable. I understand meter rise form video poker progressives and the 9 and 10 quick hits are very long odds but is there some sort of base for the more common hits based on the max bet required to hit it? Thank you for all your previous work on these games.

You're welcome, and thanks for following the discussions!

Here are a couple of simple things:

1.) The machine MUST BE Quick Hits Platinum and only Quick Hits Platinum. I do not know the Progressive Probabilities for any other Quick Hits machine, and that's where all of the +ER will come from.

2.) You would want to assume a Base Return of 88.05% or .8805, unless you are in New York State or Maine.

3.) You will never really have to worry about 9QH. It is so improbable that it would take an obscene increase to the Progressives to really accomplish anything at all from an ER standpoint.

(As an aside, you should hear some of the stuff people have said to me for playing a machine where 9QH was at $4,xxx.xx sitting next to one at $9,xxx.xx!!! Of course, they were playing at a disadvantage and I was + 4-5% ER at the time!)

4.) To determine the increase in ER, you will simply multiply the INCREASE to the Progressives by the probability of each Progressive hitting. You will then add those results and then add the sum of those results to .8805, which tells you your ER.

For a $1.50 machine, the base amounts are:

$15
$75
$150
$975
$3000

You will subtract those amounts from where the meter is at to get your increase, then multiply according to the Probability.

Example:

5QH Progressive Meter = $28.25
Difference = $28.25 - $15 = $13.25
Probability: 0.004347826086956522

0.004347826086956522 * 13.25 = 0.057608695652173913

0.004347826086956522 * 15 = 0.06521739130434782***

0.004347826086956522 * 28.25 = 0.12282608695652174***

0.12282608695652174-0.06521739130434782 = 0.057608695652173913***

***The last three steps are unnecessary, I was just showing you that as a proof.

.8805 + 0.057608695652173913 = 0.9381086956521738---New ER with Increase to 5QH

You would basically just go through and do that for the others.

5.) Alternatively, you could determine the necessary increase to the Progressive for any ONE Progressive to put you at +ER, in the case of a machine that pays 88.05% or .8805, you would simply divide .1195 by the probability:

.1195/0.004347826086956522= 27.485 (5QH @ 42.49)

.1195/0.0007524454477050414 = 158.8155 (6QH @ 233.82)

.1195/0.00010721561059290232= 1114.5765 (7QH @ 1264.58)

.1195/0.00001141331020235799 = 10470.2315 (8QH @ 11445.24)

.1195/.0000004822530864197531 = 247795.19999999998 (9QH @ 250795.20)

Conclusion

If you want to assume the .8805, then the easiest thing to do would be to use the amounts above if you don't want to get into any math, otherwise use the formulas I provided up top to calculate an overall ER for the machine.

You can see why I stated than 9QH will almost always be completely worthless from an ER standpoint. 7QH + 8QH will usually be non-factors in and of themselves, but if you do the calculations for the overall ER, then they can become a factor...particularly 7QH. 7QH represents about 1.61% of your ER at its base, so if it is above 300, then you are adding 1.61% ER, at a minimum. Eight QH accounts for about 1.11%, so it can account for a good chunk of an overall calculation. Contrastly, 9QH at base accounts for only .145%.

The biggest ones where you will find ER are going to be 5QH and 6QH, so I strongly urge you to be prepared mathematically to add those two increases to ER to the overall, and probably for 7QH, as well.

It would be very unusual to see 5QH put the machine at +ER by itself, though seeing 6QH do it by itself is common...by comparison. You would need it to be 233.82, assuming .8805 Base Return, and I semi-frequently find one over $300, certainly above $250, at times.

Curious how the simulation was done? And math

Quote: akkadian50001

Curious how the simulation was done? And math

The math is all contained within, so it seems like it should be pretty clear. If you ask me something more specific, then I can give you a meaningful answer.

As previously stated, the simulation is not ideal. The most meaningful simulation would be one in which every possible payout was assigned to the simulator for $1.50 bet based on pays/probabilities, but I would need a PAR Sheet to know those. The only thing that I know is the probabilities for the QH Progressives, and Free Games, but Free Games are factored into the Base Pays anyway.

The simulation is, I believe, as meaningful as it can be with such limited information. First, I figured out the loss based on the Base Return (.8805-1) = -.1195 and I assigned that for all results except the Progressives. In other words, if it is not a Progressive, then it is a loss of $0.17925, effectively. For the Progressive results, I took the Progressive probabilities and multiplied them by the assigned increases to the Progressives, and said increases will differ, of course. Those were the only possible wins.

Thanks, understand now. By the way, i have fully simulated the quickhits game to its entirety including the bonus game with all the interactions one can experience with the machine, just doing some math research. I'm sure because of Bally Tech patents, I cannot post anything except probably some general math papers which are in the works. Not affiliated with casino industry and have no inside info. Playing the game repeatedly allowed me to figure out how it works mathematically. Once you figure out how it actually works, it is sort of overwhelming to not be able to share a deconstruction. I will probably have to contact Wizard of Odds to get some advice since other machines have been deconstructed. I will have to better understand the legal ramifications and have seen papers but they don't provide algorithms or code, obviously, because of potential issues; don't know yet.

Quote: akkadian50001

Thanks, understand now. By the way, i have fully simulated the quickhits game to its entirety including the bonus game with all the interactions one can experience with the machine, just doing some math research. I'm sure because of Bally Tech patents, I cannot post anything except probably some general math papers which are in the works. Not affiliated with casino industry and have no inside info. Playing the game repeatedly allowed me to figure out how it works mathematically. Once you figure out how it actually works, it is sort of overwhelming to not be able to share a deconstruction. I will probably have to contact Wizard of Odds to get some advice since other machines have been deconstructed. I will have to better understand the legal ramifications and have seen papers but they don't provide algorithms or code, obviously, because of potential issues; don't know yet.

Hmmm....

I would say that it would be very difficult to determine the reel assignments unless you have played the machine very extensively and are using the Wizard's general mechanism for determination of same. If that is the case, then I do not believe there would be any legal ramnifications provided that you did not sign anything binding you to non-disclosure...and I'm sure you didn't since you say you have no inside information.

The patents are irrelevant because you would not be attempting to sell or make a machine out of your information.

Thanks for the feedback, yes the reel assignments did have to use assumptions, number of virtual stops that are typical, for example, 64 or 128 or 256 which identifies the virtual reel stop position..to simulate as close as possible, like the machines are in theory typically done..... What was helpful in an earlier post was the quickhit quantities by reel position, for example, from left to right, 1 quickhit, 2, 3, 2, then 1... , note anything i come up with on the virtual reel strips will have to be just a representation or emulation of the actual strips.... Any success on my virtual reel strip builds would only be a an example

Hi Mission,

Good analysis!
I also like this game. The problem for me
is that in the local casinos I visit, those machines are linked together ( bank of 8 or so).
Most of the time all are occupied and as a result, the 5QH and 6QH are hit (and reset!) very frequently.
They never go very high.

BTW, do you think if they are linked together will affect the EV?

Pokerface,

Thanks for the compliment!

I would say that it does affect the ER because then you have the potential of someone hitting it before you. In this situation, you would probably want to take the increase to the Progressives from an ER standpoint, and then divide it by the number of machines being played at Max Bet less the number of machines you are playing and add the result to the Base ER. The reason Max Bet is relevant is because someone who is not betting Max cannot hit it, yet they add to the Progressives, so they actually help your ER.

In any case, if you are going to play machines in such a situation, all you can really do is play them hard and fast (preferably two at a time if at +ER) and hope for the best. You'd even want to do this if there was noone Max Betting at the time, because there eventually could be. It's tough to meaningfully factor in people who could only theoretically be there into ER, though.

If anyone else is Max Betting at the time, and you look at the change to ER the way I do, then you will very rarely, if ever, find one that is still at +ER if there are so much as two people Max Betting and you play two machines.

Hi Mission,

Thanks for the advice.
Yesterday I did find a chance when two other players were not max betting,
one of them only playing 30C, the other one mostly 120C.
I played about 30mins, put in a $100, cashed out $290.
I hit one 6QH with ~100$; 3 or 4 5QH with the first one ~30$.
Not really a +ER game, but I enjoyed it.

Quote: pokerface

Hi Mission,

Thanks for the advice.
Yesterday I did find a chance when two other players were not max betting,
one of them only playing 30C, the other one mostly 120C.
I played about 30mins, put in a $100, cashed out $290.
I hit one 6QH with ~100$; 3 or 4 5QH with the first one ~30$.
Not really a +ER game, but I enjoyed it.

You're welcome, PokerFace!

Congratulations on your win, a return of +$190 on one of those machines with $100 in is really pretty good!

I can sort of understand someone playing the $0.30 bet, in a way, maybe they don't have much of a bankroll and they want to be playing for awhile; the $1.50 bet can obviously knock you out pretty quick if you have anything less than $100 in the machine. Even with $100 in an individual can occasionally get knocked out in fifteen minutes or less if they don't hit for Free Games or one or more decent pays.

I am always flabbergasted anytime I see someone making the $1.20 bet, though. It's unbelievable, for only an increase to the bet of 25% of what one is already betting, the individual gets the +ER of the Progressives, and even though 9QH is nearly worthless from an ER standpoint, it would suck to hit for that at the $1.20 bet when 9QH is often at 5k or more.

I'm afraid you weren't really at +ER, but for someone who is not a professional AP (and I'm sure not) there is definitely something to be said for the enjoyment factor. In addition to that, prior to your first 5QH hit, at $30, you'd be getting a little over an extra 6.5% in added ER, so that's decent. On the lowest return machine, just with the 5QH and 6QH increases, you are at .8805 + ((1/230 * 15) + (1/1329 * 25)) = 0.9645285274969738 ER, so that's not bad and you would be at an advantage on other machines.

Quote: Mission146

I can sort of understand someone playing the $0.30 bet, in a way, maybe they don't have much of a bankroll and they want to be playing for awhile....
I am always flabbergasted anytime I see someone making the $1.20 bet, though. It's unbelievable, for only an increase to the bet of 25% of what one is already betting, the individual gets the +ER of the Progressives, and even though 9QH is nearly worthless from an ER standpoint, it would suck to hit for that at the $1.20 bet when 9QH is often at 5k or more.

I feel this way about video poker a lot. Either bet 1 or 5 credits depending on how much you want to gamble. One credit can be okay if there is a big difference in paytables between denominations. In my hometown, 1 credit at "full-pay" quarters has a higher return than any nickel machine. But betting 2-4 credits is really, really dumb.

I consider 96% is pretty good for a slot game with max bet only $1.50.
Before I read this thread, I never thought this game could be +ER.
a few weeks ago I did get a 7QH around $700. Now I know that was pretty good.
Overall I feel rather lucky with this game.

Quote: pokerface

I consider 96% is pretty good for a slot game with max bet only $1.50.
Before I read this thread, I never thought this game could be +ER.
a few weeks ago I did get a 7QH around $700. Now I know that was pretty good.
Overall I feel rather lucky with this game.

The 7QH at $700 was an excellent hit, and provided an additional 5.897% ER by itself!

The great thing about Progressives, with exception to certain Progressives that are capped, is that they can always theoretically hit a point at which they are +ER, whether it be slot machines, bingo, keno, video poker with some kind of progressive for RF or a table game with some sort of Progressive. Even the Powerball can theoretically enter +ER territory! It's all a matter of knowing where that point(s) is, which you won't for mny slot machines because you won't know the probabilities, so QHP is an exception there.

I'm glad that you've been having a great run recently, but don't count on your luck holding out as the expectation is generally going to be that you lose. For example, you mentioned hitting the 6QH and then hitting the 5QH multiple times in your earlier post, so unless that bank of QHP with the $1.50 Max was the only such bank in the house, then you likely would have been better off to switch to a different bank or play something else.

I hope that your winning continues, though!

It really makes me wonder though how these machines and other progressives work in the VLT markets. Sometimes I wonder if the awards may not even be available at certain times until the pool is replenished or however they do it. I did see someone play 4/5 Max on nickel QHs winning $9,000 once getting the 5 Platinums. Of course, you never know, but sometimes the stupid bets like that may have better odds than smart bets, if the winning combinations are in high proportions.

Quote: Mission146

unless that bank of QHP with the $1.50 Max was the only such bank in the house, then you likely would have been better off to switch to a different bank or play something else.

I hope that your winning continues, though!

Thanks Mission !

Yes, I did switch to something else as usual, but still -ER games.
First lunch buffet, which is always a -ER game and you never win ! (but people seem not complaining much)
Then I played some tables games, PGP and mini Baccarat, didn't do any good.
I like Quick Hits more.

Quote: Mission146

5.) Alternatively, you could determine the necessary increase to the Progressive for any ONE Progressive to put you at +ER, in the case of a machine that pays 88.05% or .8805, you would simply divide .1195 by the probability:

.1195/0.004347826086956522= 27.485 (5QH @ 42.49)

.1195/0.0007524454477050414 = 158.8155 (6QH @ 233.82)

.1195/0.00010721561059290232= 1114.5765 (7QH @ 1264.58)

.1195/0.00001141331020235799 = 10470.2315 (8QH @ 11445.24)

.1195/.0000004822530864197531 = 247795.19999999998 (9QH @ 250795.20)

Thanks for the analysis, Mission! Varying your BR the way you did in the sims give some interesting results provided the "limited" info that we have. I have many PAR sheets but none for this game!

By the way, I have seen this game with its progressives linked one by one to a Playmate Quick Hits game, which has a similar silhouette to our Platinum Quick Hits machine. Would you figure that the return and the odds to hit jackpots and features to be about the same for these two games? Arcade History has limited information on the Playmate version of the game.

FYI, one discrepancy I found is in your calculation of the play points. I believe that you must multiply your "hold divided by probability" by the bet size before adding it to the seed value. In other words, the figures need to be a bit higher to be at true break even (assuming all others are at reset). Please verify. Thanks again for the work, Mission, and thank you as well, tringlomane, for the link to arcade-history.com! I have found much useful information there...

$1.50 X .1195/0.004347826086956522= $41.23 (5QH @ $56.23)

$1.50 X .1195/0.0007524454477050414 = $238.22 (6QH @ $313.22)

$1.50 X .1195/0.00010721561059290232= $1,671.86 (7QH @ $1,821.86)

$1.50 X .1195/0.00001141331020235799 = $15,705.35 (8QH @ $16,680.35)

$1.50 X .1195/.0000004822530864197531 = $371,692.80 (9QH @ $374,692.80)

Generally, Optimal Play Point, OPN, for progressives that have NO must-hit-by amount (for reels, keno, or VP) is given by:
OPN = SEED + (BET x CYCLE x HOLD)
-OR-
OPN = SEED + ((BET x HOLD) / PROBABILITY),
where SEED = the reset value of the progressive;
BET = your total bet per hand, spin, round, etc.;
HOLD = the house advantage of the base game;
PROBABILITY = 1 / CYCLE = the chance of the progressive hitting on any one hand, spin, round, etc.
CYCLE = the expected number of hands, spins, rounds, etc. or the expected frequency of the progressive

(One important point is that this is the same calculation for the expected cost of playing until you hit the progressive. This is how much you expect this play to cost you, or how much you will be stuck, on average before you hit your desired jackpot.)

Quote: camapl

Thanks for the analysis, Mission! Varying your BR the way you did in the sims give some interesting results provided the "limited" info that we have. I have many PAR sheets but none for this game!

By the way, I have seen this game with its progressives linked one by one to a Playmate Quick Hits game, which has a similar silhouette to our Platinum Quick Hits machine. Would you figure that the return and the odds to hit jackpots and features to be about the same for these two games? Arcade History has limited information on the Playmate version of the game.

I wouldn't speculate on the Playmate version of the game, because I only know the probabilities for Quick Hits Platinum. If I were to speculate, then I would say the game has a license from Playboy, which would cost both Bally Tech and the casino more money, so the overall returns would be worse. They could be the same, though, I don't know.

Quote:

FYI, one discrepancy I found is in your calculation of the play points. I believe that you must multiply your "hold divided by probability" by the bet size before adding it to the seed value. In other words, the figures need to be a bit higher to be at true break even (assuming all others are at reset). Please verify. Thanks again for the work, Mission, and thank you as well, tringlomane, for the link to arcade-history.com! I have found much useful information there...

I could be wrong, but I don't believe so. The reason is because the Expected Return is based on one unit bet, which is already $1.50.

Quote: Mission146

I wouldn't speculate on the Playmate version of the game, because I only know the probabilities for Quick Hits Platinum. If I were to speculate, then I would say the game has a license from Playboy, which would cost both Bally Tech and the casino more money, so the overall returns would be worse. They could be the same, though, I don't know.

Hadn't considered the licensing aspect, but I was thinking that the respective minimum returns of the base games could be different, but the chance to hit the jackpots would be roughly the same. Fortunately, I can enjoy the Playmates just as easily while sitting at the Platinum machine! ;-}

That's possible, I'd just assume jurisdictional minimum even if you wanted to go with that, though.

This is a great thread. Took me a while to understand the math. Anyone able to program a quick calculator or app where we can just punch in numbers at the casino or something to see theoretical EV?

Quote: BranCook

This is a great thread. Took me a while to understand the math. Anyone able to program a quick calculator or app where we can just punch in numbers at the casino or something to see theoretical EV?

I'm sure you could, if you can save equations in your phone. Basically, just use the formula at the bottom of my OP and fill in the blanks for the increases to the Progressives.

Finally, wherever you are gambling, definitely check the jurisdictional minimum returns. If such exceeds the lowest possible return on a QHP machine, then you know that the .8805 must not be the return so it is at least the next highest one. I also tended to exclude ALL of the ER from the 8QH and 9QH results because of the extreme unlikelihood of them hitting, especially considering the probability that some other Progressive hits before that and drops the ER below 100%. Technically, the ER is there, so such exclusion is completely optional.

Hi Mission, great read. As with a lot of progressive type slots/VP, I like to see what the return is on the lowest amounts, so that way I can have a realistic shot of achieving +EV, without it being a longshot (such as sequential royals).

If I want to figure out the +EV rate of 5 or 6 hits, do I just leave the 7,8, and 9 hits at the base rate, and ramp up the 5 and 6 until a good spot is reached? If so what is a good target if 5 and 6 go up evenly? I've seen 6 hits get close to 7 hits and seemed like a good play but of course I have no idea.

I did play these games for a bit and made a ton more on the bonus games ($300 on a locked wild free spin), but they don't come up so frequently.

Let me hit the paragraphs in order:

1.) Thanks for the compliment! I think that is what makes the QHP machines such a strong play, you have your Progressives that have a very reasonable likelihood of hitting. As stated, eight and nine QH's contributes very close to nothing to the overall +ER of increased Progressives, anyway. The other thing is, unlike VP, the strategy for exploiting this is quick and dirty: determine the payout percentage, slam on the button, stop playing when you have hit a Progressive(s) such that it went below 100%.

It's also good for your comp purposes because you are getting full slots credit on a +EV play, and for houses that look only at your theoretical, I should assume that is going to be based only on the Base Pays + Contribution to the Progressives, so as far as the House is concerned, you're playing a 90% game, or however much.

2.) If you wanted to do that, you would just take the Base Pays and calculate for the increase to those two Progressives only, then add that to the ER of the Base Pays. Like I said, I would probably be inclined to calculate for 7QH in looking at the ER, because:

A.) 1 in 9,000-something isn't a stupidly unlikely result.

B.) At base, 7QH is worth about 1.61% of your overall ER, so the increase to that Progressive can easily become relevant.

C.) Remember, it's not about hitting any individual one, just playing at +ER and not playing at -ER, so if 7QH is what puts it over, but a 5QH hit puts you back under, then you'd stop playing.

Again, it's just a matter of your personal preference, though. The ER is something that unfolds over the long run, so if 5QH and 6QH are supplying most of your +ER (as with anything else, or VP) then you will still often hit one of the Progressives, but be down on the play overall. If time is a big factor for you, then it might be in your best interest just to focus on 5QH and 6QH and consider the rest gravy, should you happen to hit it.

3.) Free Games hit at a decent quip and often pay well. Although, I question whether you were playing a QHP machine, because the Wilds don't lock on those games. If you were playing any Quick Hits machine (and there are a number of them) other than Quick Hits Platinum, I don't know what the Progressive probabilities are for those, so my numbers likely do not hold.

They have this game at my local racino. They are always packed. I saw a 5QH for $95 the other day! I really wanted the guy playing that machine to bust out, but he hit it...

That sucks! The +ER for that machine would have been ridiculous!

Quote: Mission146

I wouldn't speculate on the Playmate version of the game, because I only know the probabilities for Quick Hits Platinum. If I were to speculate, then I would say the game has a license from Playboy, which would cost both Bally Tech and the casino more money, so the overall returns would be worse. They could be the same, though, I don't know.

According to slotspert on Slot Machines Forum, Playboy Platinum games have a return between 85% and 96%, which is backed up by Global Business Gaming, which indicates a hold between 4.10% and 14.92%. With a lower possible minimum return, I would agree with Mission to play the QHP over the Playboy if given a choice. However, if I find these progressives linked to only Playboy Platinum machines, I would expect that the jackpot frequencies would be the same (because I have seen one of these linked to a QHP game), adjust for the 3% lower return, and bang away at those bunnies! ;-}

Quote: Mission146

I could be wrong, but I don't believe so. The reason is because the Expected Return is based on one unit bet, which is already $1.50.

The problem I see is adding a value in unit bets to a dollar amount. This fails "unit analysis." You may be questioning why the numbers that I get are higher than yours and yet you have had success with your numbers. Perhaps it is because neither of our numbers take into account the rate of meter rise from the jackpots that we aren't playing for. In other words, my decision of when to play for the 6QH is dependent on the base return, the bet amount, and the frequency and reset of the 6QH jackpot. Consider this, the "base return" with respect to 6QH is 88% plus the meter rise rates of all the other meters. Sure you could discount, or exclude, the meter rise of the higher jackpots, but if you do that, you might as well discount ALL of the return from these. Food for thought.


On a slightly different subject, does anyone know the frequency of the top jackpot (for 5 Quick Hit Platinum symbols)? The info that I have seen only includes the ones for 5 through 9 Quick Hit symbols...

Thanks again for the info and the sim analysis!

Quote: camapl

According to slotspert on Slot Machines Forum, Playboy Platinum games have a return between 85% and 96%, which is backed up by Global Business Gaming, which indicates a hold between 4.10% and 14.92%. With a lower possible minimum return, I would agree with Mission to play the QHP over the Playboy if given a choice. However, if I find these progressives linked to only Playboy Platinum machines, I would expect that the jackpot frequencies would be the same (because I have seen one of these linked to a QHP game), adjust for the 3% lower return, and bang away at those bunnies! ;-}

That's a good sign. It's definitely possible to do that, you just keep the total number of symbols constant, but in the case of the bunny game, you substitute lower paying symbols for higher ones to lower the overall return.

Quote: tringlomane

That's a good sign. It's definitely possible to do that, you just keep the total number of symbols constant, but in the case of the bunny game, you substitute lower paying symbols for higher ones to lower the overall return.

Exactly, and it is in that way that one QHP machine will even differ from another, because the Progressive Probabilities remain a constant regardless of the base return percentage. I might also suggest, with the frequency of Bonus Games being what it is, perhaps the symbol distribution for the Bonus Games is the only thing that is changed, it'd be nearly impossible for a player to notice that.

Quote: camapl

According to slotspert on Slot Machines Forum, Playboy Platinum games have a return between 85% and 96%, which is backed up by Global Business Gaming, which indicates a hold between 4.10% and 14.92%. With a lower possible minimum return, I would agree with Mission to play the QHP over the Playboy if given a choice. However, if I find these progressives linked to only Playboy Platinum machines, I would expect that the jackpot frequencies would be the same (because I have seen one of these linked to a QHP game), adjust for the 3% lower return, and bang away at those bunnies! ;-}

That makes sense, and if this is the case, you might look for a machine such as, "Hee-Haw," to see if it is linked up to a QHP, that could be interesting. The general premise of both games, as with Playboy, is exactly the same.

Quote:

The problem I see is adding a value in unit bets to a dollar amount. This fails "unit analysis." You may be questioning why the numbers that I get are higher than yours and yet you have had success with your numbers. Perhaps it is because neither of our numbers take into account the rate of meter rise from the jackpots that we aren't playing for. In other words, my decision of when to play for the 6QH is dependent on the base return, the bet amount, and the frequency and reset of the 6QH jackpot. Consider this, the "base return" with respect to 6QH is 88% plus the meter rise rates of all the other meters. Sure you could discount, or exclude, the meter rise of the higher jackpots, but if you do that, you might as well discount ALL of the return from these. Food for thought.


On a slightly different subject, does anyone know the frequency of the top jackpot (for 5 Quick Hit Platinum symbols)? The info that I have seen only includes the ones for 5 through 9 Quick Hit symbols...

Thanks again for the info and the sim analysis!

I think that makes sense, as I have not taken into account the rate of the meter rise at all. I wouldn't discount the Base Returns of the higher payouts, personally, just because it is part of the Base Return. That would be similar to discounting the RF in Video Poker as part of the Base Return, given the fact that the RF is unlikely. My other argument for including it, particularly for 8 QH at a minimum, is the fact that if you pursue this as an advantage play enough, it becomes increasingly likely that you will hit 8 QH and 9 QH at some point.

I'm afraid I have never seen a probability for the 5 QHP symbols, but rest assured, it isn't very good!

Quote: Mission146

...That would be similar to discounting the RF in Video Poker as part of the Base Return, given the fact that the RF is unlikely. My other argument for including it, particularly for 8 QH at a minimum, is the fact that if you pursue this as an advantage play enough, it becomes increasingly likely that you will hit 8 QH and 9 QH at some point...

Well put, sir, especially the analogy to the RF. It has been suggested that when playing for a quad or SF progressive, not to include the contribution to the RF meter, as the cycle length is so much larger. So, I say why not discount RF's entirely - how is the base return any more important than the progressive contribution? Count it all or discount it all. Does that make me an all or nothing kind of guy?

The thing to keep in mind is that including the entire contribution to the return of an event that is less likely than the event that you're "going for" can negatively affect the bottom line for any single attempt. However, including it will lower your play number letting you "go for" it more often. The more often you can make the same +EV play, the sooner you realize long term profits. Theoretically.

As you said, Mission, if this is a play for you more often, eventually you will hit those "harder to hit" hands. In practice!

Quote: camapl

Well put, sir, especially the analogy to the RF. It has been suggested that when playing for a quad or SF progressive, not to include the contribution to the RF meter, as the cycle length is so much larger. So, I say why not discount RF's entirely - how is the base return any more important than the progressive contribution? Count it all or discount it all. Does that make me an all or nothing kind of guy?

I can understand why someone might disclude the RF Progressive or base return from such a calculation in pursuit of a quad or SF Progressive, if it is a play that they don't think they are going to make very often. They're basically looking at what their short term expectation is, based on the fact that they are really going after the SF or Quads.

In reality, the best way to do it would probably be to look at the average number of plays necessary to hit that SF, determine the probability of hitting the RF in that number of plays, assuming Optimal Strategy, multiply that probability by the overall return that the RF represents (base + Progressive) and then factor that number into the overall return. Again, that's if you're not playing this a ton. If you believe that you will find such a play and play it to the extent that the RF actually becomes expected in the number of plays you will make, lifetime, then I would argue that you at least include the Base Pay on the Royal.

That's why I certainly argue for including the Base Pays for the 8 QH, at a minimum. I've actually seen Eight, but it was on the flat-top Quick Hits, not the Progressive game. I probably am expected to have seen 8QH on the QHP machine by now (even though I haven't), I've probably made over 200,000 plays on QHP, lifetime, so I include the 8 QH. I should not have seen the 9QH by now, though.

Quote:

The thing to keep in mind is that including the entire contribution to the return of an event that is less likely than the event that you're "going for" can negatively affect the bottom line for any single attempt. However, including it will lower your play number letting you "go for" it more often. The more often you can make the same +EV play, the sooner you realize long term profits. Theoretically.

Right. In my opinion, it's all about whether you want to define a short-term expectation or a long-term expectation. If you want to define a session expectation, then figure out how many plays it should take to hit the desired outcome, then determine the probability of hitting the longer-shot outcome based on that number of trials, and multiply it by the overall ER of the longer shot outcome to get a, "Session," expected return for that outcome.

Again, if this is going to be a long-term play for you to be looking for these machines at +ER, then you could always include the full amount of those longer shot outcomes, particularly 8QH in your ER, because with enough total plays, you're expected to hit it at some point. That's why the 9QH is a bit different, in my opinion, even if you pursue this play at +ER at every opportunity, I don't know that you ever reach a total amount of plays where hitting the 9QH becomes an expected result. It would take a tremendous amount of plays just to have a 50% probability of hitting it.

The other problem with session expectations is that you may have a combination of elements (i.e. 5QH, 6QH and 7QH) that put the overall play at over 100% ER, but hitting the 5QH might drop you back down under 100% ER. How do you look at that? If it is the combination, rather than any one result putting you at +ER, to such an extent that hitting any one of them would drop you under 100% ER, then the most likely result is to eventually hit the 5QH which would necessitate that you stop playing. In this event, if this isn't going to be a long-term play for you, then you might choose not to play unless Any individual progressive puts you at over 100% ER, based on the Base Returns.

If it is a long-term play, though, even in combinations in which it takes all three to put you at over 100% ER, eventually you would hit either the 6QH or 7QH prior to hitting the 5QH, despite the greater likelihood of hitting the 5QH in any individual session.

Please allow me to join this established thread :P

The distinction between the idea of a 'short term' expectation and 'long term' expectation (quoting from the messages above) is indeed very intriguing.

This reminds me of some discussions for table games about whether you do have the advantage on every hand or not (since "in the long run we're all dead"), and how one should treat his/hers entire life as one single long session.

If I'm not mistaken, what Peter Liston did was what Mission described as the 'long term' expectation, using exponential approximation for Probability{NOT hitting within n spins} = (1-p)^n with extremely low p and large n.
I guess he took n = one cycle length = 1/p as a reference point to see if it's there's an advantage or not, comparing the jackpot (including the increase during these future n spins) to n * Bet * HE.

Does this sound reasonable?



Besides that, similar to what camapl pointed out, I'm also confused by the calculation shown at the end of the very first page(post) of this thread:

Quote: Mission146

The increases (from the base of jackpots) are:

$2000
$1025
$150
$125
$15

The increase to ER is:

(15 * 0.004347826086956522) + (125 * 0.0007524454477050414) + (150 * 0.00010721561059290232) + (1025 * 0.00001141331020235799) + (2000 * .0000004822530864197531) = 0.18801856298666977

The new ER should be: 0.18801856298666977 + .8805 = 1.0685185629866698 or 106.85185629866698%

My question is, it seems that 0.18801856298666977 is the DOLLAR AMOUNT increased PER SPIN, not yet a percentage per dollar bet.

That is, I think $0.18801856298666977 / $1.50 ~= 12.535% is the increase in expected return.

One can then add this 12.535% to the base return of 88.05% (which already includes the jackpot base amount).

Does this make sense?



I have no idea why that 6.8~6.9% advantage was 'confirmed' by the simulation.

Quote: Robert215

Please allow me to join this established thread :P

The distinction between the idea of a 'short term' expectation and 'long term' expectation (quoting from the messages above) is indeed very intriguing.

This reminds me of some discussions for table games about whether you do have the advantage on every hand or not (since "in the long run we're all dead"), and how one should treat his/hers entire life as one single long session.

If I'm not mistaken, what Peter Liston did was what Mission described as the 'long term' expectation, using exponential approximation for Probability{NOT hitting within n spins} = (1-p)^n with extremely low p and large n.
I guess he took n = one cycle length = 1/p as a reference point to see if it's there's an advantage or not, comparing the jackpot (including the increase during these future n spins) to n * Bet * HE.

Does this sound reasonable?

Yes, and I'm sure he did a better job of it than I did.

Quote:

My question is, it seems that 0.18801856298666977 is the DOLLAR AMOUNT increased PER SPIN, not yet a percentage per dollar bet.

That is, I think $0.18801856298666977 / $1.50 ~= 12.535% is the increase in expected return.

One can then add this 12.535% to the base return of 88.05% (which already includes the jackpot base amount).

Does this make sense?

I have no idea why that 6.8~6.9% advantage was 'confirmed' by the simulation.

I believe it is because the Progressive Probabilities and the Base Pays of the jackpots already assume that $1.50 is being bet, so as a result, the increases to the jackpots are still from the standpoint of $1.50 being bet.

Rather than looking at it in dollars and cents, look at the $1.50 as one unit. The 5QH pays 10 Units for 1 Unit and the increase to the Progressives is 10 Units making the pay 20 Units for 1 Unit. The $1.50 amount bet is already assumed, so no additional accounting for it is needed.

Quote: Mission146

Rather than looking at it in dollars and cents, look at the $1.50 as one unit. The 5QH pays 10 Units for 1 Unit and the increase to the Progressives is 10 Units making the pay 20 Units for 1 Unit.

yeah, thus the contribution of the increase in expected return (per unit bet) by 5QH should be

10 (unit) * 0.004347826086956522 = 0.043478.... = expected extra return per unit

for the $15 --> $30 in the example.

This 0.043478 is the amount that should be added to the base ER of 0.8805, not the 15*0.004347826086956522


This conversion should be done for all other jackpots increment as well, and this is equivalent to dividing $1.50 afterwards.

I do understand that the ER = 0.8805 already includes the none-jackpot payouts and all the jackpot base amount.
However, the way that 0.18801856... was calculated on page 1 indeed has a $ attached to it (the 15, the 125, the 150, the 1025, etc), and I think this bet size should be accounted for.


Similarly, I agree with what camapl said earlier (page 3), that

.1195/0.004347826086956522= 27.485

for 5QH is the number of UNITS needed on top of the base = 10 units,

and 10 + 27.485 = 37.485 units ~= $56.23




I'm not questioning your analysis or anything, just a bit confused by the numbers :P

Thanks.

Edited: oops repeated post

Quote: Mission146

Greetings!

7Craps recently linked us to the following simulator:

http://www.beatingbonuses.com/simulator_java.htm

Tringlomane provided a link to the Quick Hits Probabilities:

http://www.arcade-history.com/?n=black-and-white-sevens-quick-hit-platinum&page=detail&id=32113

I believe that I can alter the simulator to run simulations for Quick Hits based on the increase to the expected return of the Progressives.

First the Progressive Probabilities:

Any nine QH symbols pays 2,000 × total bet. Occurs every 2,073,600 games.
Any eight QH symbols pays 650 × total bet. Occurs every 87,617 games.
Any seven QH symbols pays100 × total bet. Occurs every 9,327 games.
Any six QH symbols pays 50 × total bet. Occurs every 1,329 games.
Any five QH symbols pays 10 × total bet . Occurs every 230 games.

Expressed as a decimal:

NINE QH: 1/2073600 = .0000004822530864197531
EIGHT QH: 1/87617 = 0.00001141331020235799
SEVEN QH: 1/9327 = 0.00010721561059290232
SIX QH: 1/1329 = 0.0007524454477050414
FIVE QH = 1/230 = 0.004347826086956522

The Base Returns are:

$3000
$975
$150
$75
$15

The Base ER is, at a minimum, 88.05%.

The Base hold for each game should be .1195 of any amount bet.

The probability of any result other than a QH Progressive is:

1 - .0000004822530864197531 - 0.00001141331020235799 - 0.00010721561059290232 - 0.0007524454477050414 - 0.004347826086956522 = 0.9947806172914567

Programming the Simulator

1.) Unfortunately, without knowing the exact probabilities of every possbile paying result, we have no choice but to assume perfect distribution of results. Therefore, we will pick any game from the simulator, delete all probabilities/pays and first enter 0.9947806172914567 and -0.1195

2.) Add the increases to the Progressives. Go through and insert the probability of the Progressive hitting as well as the INCREASE to the Progressive Meter:

If the Progressive Meter is at:

$5000
$2000
$300
$200
$30

The increases are:

$2000
$1025
$150
$125
$15

The increase to ER is:

(15 * 0.004347826086956522) + (125 * 0.0007524454477050414) + (150 * 0.00010721561059290232) + (1025 * 0.00001141331020235799) + (2000 * .0000004822530864197531) = 0.18801856298666977

The new ER should be: 0.18801856298666977 + .8805 = 1.0685185629866698 or 106.85185629866698%

The simulator is returning a HE of -6.91%. Good enough. See next post for simulations.

I have looked for the progressive of this game time and time again at my local casino but all they have had is the non progressive version, that is until i found a progressive one tonight, it is a 2 machine bank, one QHP and one Playboy. The bet unit is $.25 and max bet is 45 credits or $11.25, I assume the base payouts of the progressives would be much greater than the version talked about in the thread. Any information on how much change it would be?

Quote: Transcend

I have looked for the progressive of this game time and time again at my local casino but all they have had is the non progressive version, that is until i found a progressive one tonight, it is a 2 machine bank, one QHP and one Playboy. The bet unit is $.25 and max bet is 45 credits or $11.25, I assume the base payouts of the progressives would be much greater than the version talked about in the thread. Any information on how much change it would be?

I have seen Quick Hits Platinum machines in multiple denominations, and the relative Progressive amounts have always been the same:

5QH: 10x
6QH: 50x
7QH: 100x
8QH: 650x
9QH: 2000x

That's not to say they couldn't be different, but the Beating Bonuses site (based on the information originally published on the Bally Tech site which is now gone) seems to indicate that is the only way to set the Base Pays. In fact, this has been the set up on ALL Quick Hits machines I have ever seen for those Progressives (not to say it couldn't be otherwise) and for many other Bally games with five Progressive levels, as well.

Quote: Mission146

I have seen Quick Hits Platinum machines in multiple denominations, and the relative Progressive amounts have always been the same:

5QH: 10x
6QH: 50x
7QH: 100x
8QH: 650x
9QH: 2000x

That's not to say they couldn't be different, but the Beating Bonuses site (based on the information originally published on the Bally Tech site which is now gone) seems to indicate that is the only way to set the Base Pays. In fact, this has been the set up on ALL Quick Hits machines I have ever seen for those Progressives (not to say it couldn't be otherwise) and for many other Bally games with five Progressive levels, as well.

So no math would need to be changed and I can plug them in to your original equation? Based on the increase to each respective meter. Also at this casino they have a sign that slots return something in the 90% range, I assume this is probably over all and leaving the base return at the .88 value would be correct?

Quote: Transcend

So no math would need to be changed and I can plug them in to your original equation? Based on the increase to each respective meter. Also at this casino they have a sign that slots return something in the 90% range, I assume this is probably over all and leaving the base return at the .88 value would be correct?

Camapl's formulas on Page Three are correct, I was originally doing it wrong. Just replace the, "$1.50," with whatever the base bet is.

I have no way of knowing what the base return is set at, the only thing I know is that it does not include Meter increase. There are five possible base pay settings. I wouldn't be surprised if it was one of the higher ones being a $1.00 denom, but don't rely on that to be the case. The safest thing to do is always assume the lowest.

Quote: Mission146

Camapl's formulas on Page Three are correct, I was originally doing it wrong. Just replace the, "$1.50," with whatever the base bet is.

I have no way of knowing what the base return is set at, the only thing I know is that it does not include Meter increase. There are five possible base pay settings. I wouldn't be surprised if it was one of the higher ones being a $1.00 denom, but don't rely on that to be the case. The safest thing to do is always assume the lowest.

So if I did my math right this is what it should be for the machine i am looking at


Base Pays
$11.25 Bet

5QH: 10x $112.5
6QH: 50x $562.5
7QH: 100x $1,125
8QH: 650x $7,312.5
9QH: 2000x $22,500

Play Points with other progressives assumed at reset

$11.25 X .1195/0.004347826086956522= ~$309.21 (5QH @ ~$421.71)

$11.25 X .1195/0.0007524454477050414 = ~$1,786.67 (6QH @ ~$2,349.17)

$11.25 X .1195/0.00010721561059290232= ~$12,538.99 (7QH @ ~$13,663.99)

$11.25 X .1195/0.00001141331020235799 = ~$117,790.10 (8QH @ ~$125,102.60)

$11.25 X .1195/.0000004822530864197531 = ~$2,787,696 (9QH @ ~$2,810,196)


Is the equation for figuring out +EV still hold true?


v=respective progressive value

(5QHv * 0.004347826086956522) + (6QHv * 0.0007524454477050414) + (7QHv * 0.00010721561059290232) + (8QHv * 0.00001141331020235799) + (9QHv * .0000004822530864197531) = +EV

.8805 + (+EV)=New EV

But one should probably drop the 8QHv and 9QHv from their +EV equation as their likely hood is rather slim?

The bottom still reflects my error, you would use the increase to the Progressive multiplied by probability in parenthesis and have divided by $11.25 outside the parenthesis to get the added EV from the increase.

How you want to handle 8QH and 9QH is up to you. Personally, I don't include those increases. You might even subtract those values from base, but I just don't assign any value to meter increase which is close enough to subtracting them out for my purposes. You're playing for serious coin, though, so I suggest as much precision as possible and maybe exclude ALL value from eight and nine.

Quote: Mission146

The bottom still reflects my error, you would use the increase to the Progressive multiplied by probability in parenthesis and have divided by $11.25 outside the parenthesis to get the added EV from the increase.

How you want to handle 8QH and 9QH is up to you. Personally, I don't include those increases. You might even subtract those values from base, but I just don't assign any value to meter increase which is close enough to subtracting them out for my purposes. You're playing for serious coin, though, so I suggest as much precision as possible and maybe exclude ALL value from eight and nine.

Just out of curiosity how many par sheets did the one you see cover? What if they have versions where the progressives are harder to hit?

Quote: AxelWolf

Just out of curiosity how many par sheets did the one you see cover? What if they have versions where the progressives are harder to hit?

They don't, I have that straight from Bally Tech. I called them once and smooth talked them into thinking I was calling from a casino. Either that, or they would freely tell anyone. That's why I always emphasize PLATINUM, I have no idea about any other QH machine type.

I went back to check on it today and unfortunately...it is not a progressive like I thought, standard qhp with a jackpot the jackpot is what I had originally looked at and thought was progressive...oh well...I went and found the lower $3 a spin version because I had hopes of playing it and put in $30 two spins later I walked away with $75...so it wasn't all bad I guess

Mission, is this the game that you are talking about? I have not followed all of the talk on this game but what do you consider a playable number? If this was already mentioned, sorry I missed it. The max bet on this game is $1.50