3 Card Trade N' Place Poker

As we continue to work on the math for our original 5x3 Trade N' Place Poker game, we have started discussing a 3x3 option. We have a number of questions or things to think about with this game and we always welcome the communities feedback. Give the "very rough" demo a play and let me know what you think about the following items. If you have additional questions or concerns, please let us know those, too.

Demo
https://www.realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/

1. Do you like using 6 total paylines? Would you like it more if we just used the 3 horizontal lines and eliminate the vertical hands? Part of me thinks the label at the end of the hand makes the game seem crowded, so maybe we need to find a different way to show the winning hands or offset them next to the hands and use an arrow to point the direction of the outcome for the player.

2. To keep in line with video poker games, I'm thinking the wager will be 5 credits per hand. With this in mind, the wager for our current build will be ($5 x 6 hands = 30). We may have to change this based on the fact that it is not typical three card poker since the player is not stuck with their dealt hands.

3. My original thinking is that the player will get one trade or one place only. It just feels like anything more than that may be too much and it starts interfering with the hands you have already build.

4. This is a very early build, so let us know what other things you have in mind.

Do you realize there is no way to lose with the high card payout.

Yes. We will be removing the high card and adjusting the pay table.

Quote: RealizeGaming

Yes. We will be removing the high card and adjusting the pay table.

Uhhhh.... yeah! I think as devised it has a player advantage of around 100%.

I was slightly confused to get back a card I had thrown away - easy to spot there were three Aces on a diagonal and I threw two away and got two back! Had some luck getting two SFs but seemed to have a winning run.

Did you consider 8 pay lines for the 3x3? With the two diagonals counting also?

Definitely early beta testing for the criss-cross format. Offhand I'm thinking the number of trade/place cards should be reduced from 3 to 2.

Edit: Hmm... I had a hand where the forced placement actually reduced my payout. That's something to think about.

This 3-card version will be an interesting nut for you to crack.

Game has been updated. You may have to refresh it.

I'll be back later today to answer questions and respond to everyone.

The update is only one $5 unit in, so you're getting six paylines for the price of one.

Quote: unJon

Did you consider 8 pay lines for the 3x3? With the two diagonals counting also?

We have that ability in the patent, but using the diagonals really gets confusing. Plus when you add the trading and placing feature it really slows the game down.

Quote: charliepatrick

I was slightly confused to get back a card I had thrown away - easy to spot there were three Aces on a diagonal and I threw two away and got two back! Had some luck getting two SFs but seemed to have a winning run.

You definitely shouldn't get the same card back. The entire game is dealt from one single deck. I will keep an eye out for this.

Quote: Gialmere

Definitely early beta testing for the criss-cross format. Offhand I'm thinking the number of trade/place cards should be reduced from 3 to 2.

Edit: Hmm... I had a hand where the forced placement actually reduced my payout. That's something to think about.

This 3-card version will be an interesting nut for you to crack.

Gialmere,

Our latest version of the 3x3 game allows for either one trade n place or just a single place (if the trade card isn't dealt into the matrix). This seems like a good balance, but will need more time to get a better feel for it.

I've also had a few situations where the place card hurt me, but I enjoyed the challenge of trying to find the best place for it with the least amount of sacrifice to my win.

Quote: Gialmere

The update is only one $5 unit in, so you're getting six paylines for the price of one.

Good catch, Gialmere. We will get it updated to show 30 credits for the wager.

Game is updated to 30 credit wager.

I don't know about this one RG. The 6 units in helps a little but the game still hemorrhages money. The math just might not be there for this configuration.

I can usually win around $40 per hand and the average take would be higher since straight flushes are uncommon but hardly rarities. In fact, a rarity would be a hand that loses. So the game really needs a hammer and chisel taken to it.

You could make the trade card a single card in the deck so it shows up every 5 or 6 hands but, as Gordon points out in the 5-card thread, the trade card is the big fun factor. That leaves a heavily watered down pay table like...

Pair..............$5
Flush...........$10
Straight.......$15
3 OaK..........$20
St Flush.......$25
Mini Royal...$30

Even this (with the trade card appearing at its current rate) would be too generous.

Quote: Gialmere

I don't know about this one RG. The 6 units in helps a little but the game still hemorrhages money. The math just might not be there for this configuration.

I can usually win around $40 per hand and the average take would be higher since straight flushes are uncommon but hardly rarities. In fact, a rarity would be a hand that loses. So the game really needs a hammer and chisel taken to it.

You could make the trade card a single card in the deck so it shows up every 5 or 6 hands but, as Gordon points out in the 5-card thread, the trade card is the big fun factor. That leaves a heavily watered down pay table like...

Pair..............$5
Flush...........$10
Straight.......$15
3 OaK..........$20
St Flush.......$25
Mini Royal...$30

Even this (with the trade card appearing at its current rate) would be too generous.

Agree with Gialmere. At present pay table player advantage likely exceeds 100%. The problem with the paytable Gialmere presents is that it would take the fun out of the game. Imagine hitting your mini royal and just breaking even! No way a pair should pay anything. Eliminate that and bump the mini royal.

Quote: charliepatrick

I was slightly confused to get back a card I had thrown away - easy to spot there were three Aces on a diagonal and I threw two away and got two back! Had some luck getting two SFs but seemed to have a winning run.

From playing a few more times I have worked out that "Trade" actually means "Swap" - personally I have heard "Trade in cards" as a term in Lunar or similar Poker when you can trade one (or more) of your cards for new ones.

I can see the "Swap" feature enables you to create (say) a straight or, more importantly, three of a kind. So it is probably a very useful feature for the player.

We are working on getting the logic down for the "place" portion of the game. The link below will highlight the most optimal "place" location after the trade is complete. Give it a try and let us know if you see any issue with the "auto-placer" logic.

http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/


Also, we might be a bit adventurous using six payline for this game, but I like it. I wonder if we just play the three horizontal lines if that would be a better option to keep the game more balanced. I appreciate all your comments because it really gets us thinking.

Quote: RealizeGaming

We are working on getting the logic down for the "place" portion of the game. The link below will highlight the most optimal "place" location after the trade is complete. Give it a try and let us know if you see any issue with the "auto-placer" logic.

http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/


Also, we might be a bit adventurous using six payline for this game, but I like it. I wonder if we just play the three horizontal lines if that would be a better option to keep the game more balanced. I appreciate all your comments because it really gets us thinking.

I enjoy playing the game. I think if all the payouts were halved it would approach a slight house edge game. Just a guess of course. The 'thinking' part is complicated (and why I enjoy it) because of the need to think both vertically and horizontally. If it is just horizontal I surmise it will feel like a slot machine where you just push some buttons and can turn off your mind.

The check above will enable the auto placer so you can see the logic the program is using to place cards.

Quote: RealizeGaming

The check above will enable the auto placer so you can see the logic the program is using to place cards.

I checked the above, and it seems to be working correctly for the first 125 games I played.

I also checked if "never trading " would change the game from a player edge game into a house edge one, here are the results.

Estimated cost of "never trading": $2,500
Actual Profit/(loss): $3,360
Turnover: $3,750
Profit on turnover: 89.6%
Estimated profit on turnover (if I traded "optimally"): 156.26....%

Note: For the above, I wanted to test at least 200 games, but the game refreshed and when it came back on, it now has a check box for something that says "show best trade".

So, I played another 125 games, using both the "show best place" and "show best trade", but this time I was mainly testing the "wins to losses" (see results below).

Win: 119 games
Push/"Breal-even": 3 games
Loss: 3 games***
***: I only lost $25 in total over these 3 games.

Actual Profit/(loss): $9,055
Turnover: $3,750
Profit on turnover: 241.466...%

If I add the two tests together, then this is my overall result (this summary assumes I traded close to optimally in the first test).

Actual Profit/(loss): $14,915
Turnover: $7,500
Profit on turnover: 198.866....%

----

Thanks for the information ksdjdj. We definitely need to adjust the numbers and we are working on it.

The game has been updated to show the "trade logic" and the "place logic" by default. If both boxes are checked, the auto trade and place will highlight the location that the card(s) will be traded and placed. If anyone notices any questionable trades or places, please post a screen so we can then go back and adjust the logic. Overall, I think the logic is very good, but we could have missed some tougher hands.




http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/

Quote: RealizeGaming

Thanks for the information ksdjdj. We definitely need to adjust the numbers and we are working on it.

Hope this is helpful:
I did another 100 game test, to see how many of the "big payouts" occur:

Short Royal: 2
St. Flush: 15
3 of a kind: 21

Profit: 7,700
Turnover: 3,000
"Profit on turnover": 256.66...%

----
To "try and keep the pay table in it's current format", one idea I had would be to charge*** an extra $30 for a "trade", $30 for a "place", and also only pay out the single biggest prize (see examples)

***: This would mean a game could cost up to $90 (probably too expensive).

Eg1: If your final hand consists of a st. flush, and a 3 of a kind, you would only get paid 200, instead of 350.

Eg2: If your final hands consists of 2 straights and a flush, you would only get paid 25, instead of 65

Important: By doing this, I don't know if the game will have a house edge or not, as it is above my skill level to work out.

There are plenty of other ideas to try, one could be to reduce the payout by about 30%, again, it is above my skill level to work out if this results in a house edge (this is just a "ball-park" guess).

----
The "show best place" and "show best trade" feature seem to be working properly for me, so far.

Quote: ksdjdj

Hope this is helpful:
I did another 100 game test, to see how many of the "big payouts" occur:

Short Royal: 2
St. Flush: 15
3 of a kind: 21

Profit: 7,700
Turnover: 3,000
"Profit on turnover": 256.66...%

----
To "try and keep the pay table in it's current format", one idea I had would be to charge*** an extra $30 for a "trade", $30 for a "place", and also only pay out the single biggest prize (see examples)

***: This would mean a game could cost up to $90 (probably too expensive).

Eg1: If your final hand consists of a st. flush, and a 3 of a kind, you would only get paid 200, instead of 350.

Eg2: If your final hands consists of 2 straights and a flush, you would only get paid 25, instead of 65

Important: By doing this, I don't know if the game will have a house edge or not, as it is above my skill level to work out.

There are plenty of other ideas to try, one could be to reduce the payout by about 30%, again, it is above my skill level to work out if this results in a house edge (this is just a "ball-park" guess).

----
The "show best place" and "show best trade" feature seem to be working properly for me, so far.

All great idea, ksdjdj. Ideally, I think we may have to really look at changing the pay scale, but we will see. I also don't mind going with a 60 credit wager as I think that will help a bit. Time will tell!

Sorry it has taken the whole day for me to post this and respond to some of the new posts, but my other job took most of my time today.

Just a reminder that you can uncheck the buttons at the bottom if you want to choose which cards to trade and where to place each of the "place" cards. If you want to see the logic of either the "auto trader" or "auto placer", keep the boxes checked and the move will be highlighted for you.

We have also added a new button that can be used to replay the hand. Change the pull down arrow shown below from random to "place card test 1" and the game will replay the last hand.

Quote: RealizeGaming

Sorry it has taken the whole day for me to post this and respond to some of the new posts, but my other job took most of my time today.

Just a reminder that you can uncheck the buttons at the bottom if you want to choose which cards to trade and where to place each of the "place" cards. If you want to see the logic of either the "auto trader" or "auto placer", keep the boxes checked and the move will be highlighted for you.

We have also added a new button that can be used to replay the hand. Change the pull down arrow shown below from random to "place card test 1" and the game will replay the last hand.

I made a mistake on this post, but we have since added a "replay last round" button where you can choose this option to see a replay of the last hand. Huge props to Alex, my computer/math guy, for taking the time to put this feature into the testing phase of the game.

Just played the 3 card game. Now getting the trade card a LOT less frequently. Probably lowered the player advantage to 20-30%. But also took most of the 'fun' out of the equation. Just placing a single card is mindless. If you know the paytable there is no strategy involved. I enjoyed it when you had to think as you do on a possible trade.

For the 5 card game, you do have to think because you are getting two cards, so there are a few neurons involved on the first place card.

Keep refining!

Quote: SOOPOO

Just played the 3 card game. Now getting the trade card a LOT less frequently. Probably lowered the player advantage to 20-30%. But also took most of the 'fun' out of the equation. Just placing a single card is mindless. If you know the paytable there is no strategy involved. I enjoyed it when you had to think as you do on a possible trade.

For the 5 card game, you do have to think because you are getting two cards, so there are a few neurons involved on the first place card.

Keep refining!

Thanks SOOPOO. I agree with you. The three card version needs alot of work yet. I personally like the 5x3 version better right now for the reason you mentioned above. We will keep working on it.

Our early simulations show a return of around 152% without using the trade card at all. If we keep the trade card (the current frequency of it's appearance), we may have to move the bet to 75 credits. We are still working on it, but we may have to adjust the pay scale a bit which shouldn't be a problem since it is not traditional three card poker.

After playing for awhile the last two days, do you think the straight should be worth more than the flush? It just seems like the straight in this game is much easier to achieve. I know that is not the case when playing traditional three card poker as the straight is harder to obtain.

Quote: RealizeGaming

Our early simulations show a return of around 152% without using the trade card at all. If we keep the trade card (the current frequency of it's appearance), we may have to move the bet to 75 credits. We are still working on it, but we may have to adjust the pay scale a bit which shouldn't be a problem since it is not traditional three card poker.

After playing for awhile the last two days, do you think the straight should be worth more than the flush? It just seems like the straight in this game is much easier to achieve. I know that is not the case when playing traditional three card poker as the straight is harder to obtain.

Make the 'pair' just jacks or better. That's an easy one. Cut the straight to 15 and the flush to 10. Cut the trips to 75. Double the mini royal. try that.

Quote: SOOPOO

Make the 'pair' just jacks or better. That's an easy one. Cut the straight to 15 and the flush to 10. Cut the trips to 75. Double the mini royal. try that.

We will give this a try in the next update. Thanks for the suggestion.

We've updated the 3x3 demo. We are getting around a 98% RTP with a 90 credit wager, the trade card occurring almost on every hand, and paying only the high pairs instead of all pairs.

Demo: http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3



Here is some of the information from the sim we did with the latest build.

{
"parameters": {
"timesPlayed": 1000000,
"cash": {
"coinValue": 10,
"paylines": 6,
"playCost": 1.5,
"totalGameCost": 90
},
"bonusChance": 800
},
"payTable": {
"Short Royal": {
"reward": 20,
"totalCount": 16517,
"fromBonus": 15974,
"noBonus": 543
},
"St. Flush": {
"reward": 15,
"totalCount": 156460,
"fromBonus": 150303,
"noBonus": 6157
},
"3 of Kind ": {
"reward": 10,
"totalCount": 163962,
"fromBonus": 156960,
"noBonus": 7002
},
"Straight": {
"reward": 3,
"totalCount": 844914,
"fromBonus": 777695,
"noBonus": 67219
},
"Flush": {
"reward": 2,
"totalCount": 780785,
"fromBonus": 703406,
"noBonus": 77379
},
"High Pair": {
"reward": 1,
"totalCount": 361147,
"fromBonus": 313276,
"noBonus": 47871
}
},
"overallResults": {
"bet": 90000000,
"totalWin": 87743190,
"trade": {
"bestMoveNoTrade": 3,
"count": 866641
},
"RTP": 97.49243333333332
},
"RTPs": [
97.26569227094201,
97.378121102528,
97.45633869065145,
97.55530833642358,
97.5270247297527,
97.54909449828659,
97.45414516880435,
97.51737662750719,
97.5761245770857,
97.44501277493612,
97.39561789870652,
97.38019610103477,
97.39300147990883,
97.40080293364032,
97.37019395120535,
97.3730637647313,
97.4115435608196,
97.39800105493535,
97.42372022997601,
97.42589532415057,
97.40826013906316,
97.42909675205283,
97.42073024478933,
97.42463499497339,
97.44493844345644,
97.43891518157338,
97.4431734591438,
97.45690930313815,
97.48100051168494,
97.48894862953006,
97.49305063844879,
97.47996921532588,
97.51135057202775,
97.49614747298574,
97.5009876970017,
97.50244174043586,
97.50920757013992,
97.50968163930779,
97.5039205790192,
97.48987813765233,
97.50238786971669,
97.50021461614662,
97.47665668089016,
97.47928316748124,
97.48863242003806,
97.48320321874047,
97.49618469673023,
97.4952109424886,
97.50618168303457
]
}

Quote: RealizeGaming

We've updated the 3x3 demo. We are getting around a 98% RTP with a 90 credit wager, the trade card occurring almost on every hand, and paying only the high pairs instead of all pairs.

Demo: http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3



(snip)

FYI: The demo game still has the following paytable:

Short Royal: 300
St. Flush: 225
3 of Kind: 150
The rest are the same as the above image.

It looks like you have found a "good pay table*** " going by your RTP figures.

***: You may still need to tweak it (but it is obviously a lot better than before).
Also, below are some things you may already know before trying to sell the game( but you may find helpful, if you didn't know ).

Things I think a casual/average player may look for:
Enjoyment/entertainment, High RTP, doesn't get boring after the "newness" of the game wears off and "Big Pays" for the "rare" occurrences (optional, but may increase the "entertainment value")

Things I think a casino may look for:
Decent customer "loyalty/replay" (in other words the customers will come back "many times" to play the game)
Adequate House edge vs "customer loyalty/replay" (as other people have mentioned, would you rather sheer the sheep many times or only slaughter it once?)
Decent Return vs Cost of "renting / buying" and other direct costs of running the game (I don't know how this works, so you need to ask an expert in this area).

Thing(s) I personally would like to see (if it is legal to do so):
A bonus/higher pay-table, but still less than 100% RTP, when playing the game manually (in other words, with both the "show best place" and "show best trade" disabled).

Hope this is helpful.

Spelling/Grammar not checked.

I've played the latest version of the game.

1. The pay table certainly does not communicate to the prospective player how big the payouts can be or how frequently they can occur!

2. I do like this game quite a bit, but not as much as the 3x5 version.

3. It may be <100% RTP as you state, but then it must have a lot of variance! In both sessions that I played, I ended ahead by over 1,000, and I never seemed to be in jeopardy of going negative.

Quote: gordonm888

3. It may be <100% RTP as you state, but then it must have a lot of variance! In both sessions that I played, I ended ahead by over 1,000, and I never seemed to be in jeopardy of going negative.

Ditto. You spin your wheels for 5 or 6 hands then get a straight flush. Repeat until you tire of winning money.

Maybe if you don't break even or better you lose all your wager?

With the current demo I won 5,220 over a 35 to 40 minute run.
With the "show best trade" and "show best place" features enabled, I can play 5 to 6 game per minute.
Profit on turnover estimate (for this session): somewhere between 24.1666...% and 33.142857...%

Note: I originally wanted to test "how many times I won 1000" vs "how many times i lost 1000", but by the the time I was up 3000 I decided to scrap doing that test, and just turn it into a "Profit on turnover" test/run.

Quote: ksdjdj

Quote: RealizeGaming

We've updated the 3x3 demo. We are getting around a 98% RTP with a 90 credit wager, the trade card occurring almost on every hand, and paying only the high pairs instead of all pairs.

Demo: http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3



(snip)

FYI: The demo game still has the following paytable:

Short Royal: 300
St. Flush: 225
3 of Kind: 150
The rest are the same as the above image.

It looks like you have found a "good pay table*** " going by your RTP figures.

***: You may still need to tweak it (but it is obviously a lot better than before).
Also, below are some things you may already know before trying to sell the game( but you may find helpful, if you didn't know ).

Things I think a casual/average player may look for:
Enjoyment/entertainment, High RTP, doesn't get boring after the "newness" of the game wears off and "Big Pays" for the "rare" occurrences (optional, but may increase the "entertainment value")

Things I think a casino may look for:
Decent customer "loyalty/replay" (in other words the customers will come back "many times" to play the game)
Adequate House edge vs "customer loyalty/replay" (as other people have mentioned, would you rather sheer the sheep many times or only slaughter it once?)
Decent Return vs Cost of "renting / buying" and other direct costs of running the game (I don't know how this works, so you need to ask an expert in this area).

Thing(s) I personally would like to see (if it is legal to do so):
A bonus/higher pay-table, but still less than 100% RTP, when playing the game manually (in other words, with both the "show best place" and "show best trade" disabled).

Hope this is helpful.

Spelling/Grammar not checked.

ksksdj thanks for all your feedback on the 3x3 version of the game. I think we are getting close, but still a ways from getting it to where I want it.

1. We will check the RTP again to make sure the game was using the new pay scale.

2. I agree with your observations about the game in terms of how the player would perceive the game. I still want to find a way to get get bigger pays into the game. Right now even the straight flush is very common.
-Two things I would like to experiment with is dropping the pay down for straights and flushes and maybe even switching them around where the flush pays more than the straight. Straights seem to be very common in this version of the game which seems much different when comparing it to traditional three card poker.

3. It's funny you mention the "show best trade" and "place button." It makes so many moves where I find myself thinking what the heck would they make that move for and then after looking at it closer I find out the auto trader and place is correct. I know I would make a ton of errors without it for sure.

Quote: gordonm888

I've played the latest version of the game.

1. The pay table certainly does not communicate to the prospective player how big the payouts can be or how frequently they can occur!

2. I do like this game quite a bit, but not as much as the 3x5 version.

3. It may be <100% RTP as you state, but then it must have a lot of variance! In both sessions that I played, I ended ahead by over 1,000, and I never seemed to be in jeopardy of going negative.

gordonm888 thanks for playing the latest version. It's still a work in progress.

On your third point, we need to go back and check it again as I've play a few rounds of 100 hands and each time I've been up 1000 credits.

Quote: Gialmere

Ditto. You spin your wheels for 5 or 6 hands then get a straight flush. Repeat until you tire of winning money.

Maybe if you don't break even or better you lose all your wager?

Wow Gialmere! I kind of like the idea of either win more than the wager or lose it all concept. The only thing I don't think players will welcome is the high wager that is required to play the game and then feeling the need to win at least those credits back or get nothing in return. Interesting concept and I won't rule it out.

We have another update to the Trade N' Place 3x3 version. We have slightly reduced the appearance of the trade card and adjusted the pay scale. I'm sure we will do some additional adjusting as the RTP seems to be coming out very high so far.


Also, in this update you will have the option of using the turbo button to play a huge amount of hands and it will also keep track of your RTP, rounds, total bet, total win, trades, and trade percentages. Huge props to Alex for including this feature in the demo build of the game! Hope this makes it easier for the people testing out our latest version of the game.

As always, feedback is encouraged and welcomed!

Demo: http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/

131.67% Played 50 rounds. Drop the trade card to 50%. Increase the 'cost' to 100 from 90. Imagine it as a choice of nickels ($5 a spin), dimes ($10 a spin), or quarters ($25 a spin).

Quote: RealizeGaming

We have another update to the Trade N' Place 3x3 version. We have slightly reduced the appearance of the trade card and adjusted the pay scale. I'm sure we will do some additional adjusting as the RTP seems to be coming out very high so far.


Also, in this update you will have the option of using the turbo button to play a huge amount of hands and it will also keep track of your RTP, rounds, total bet, total win, trades, and trade percentages. Huge props to Alex for including this feature in the demo build of the game! Hope this makes it easier for the people testing out our latest version of the game.

As always, feedback is encouraged and welcomed!

Demo: http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/

Yep, I just experienced a return, RTP, of 145% over 50 hands with a Trade Rate of about 50%.

Frequency of at least one straight flush after using the Trade option (rough estimate)

1. Frequency of 3 consecutive suited cards being among the 9 initial cards = 48 * combin(49,6)/combin(52,9) =0.182443

2. Given 3 consecutive suited cards among the 9 cards, the chance that you will have a straight flush after a trade = 0.92857. That breaks out like this:
a) PAT; chance of a pat straight flush (no trade needed) = 0.071429
b) TRADEABLE: not pat, but a tradeable straight flush = 0.85714
c) STIFF: not pat, not tradeable (6 configurations out of 84) = 0.071419

3. 0.182443 * 0.92857= 0.16941

So, the player can make a straight flush or royal flush a little less than 17 percent of the time after the Trade decision. Of course that is:

Short royal frequency (after trade) = 0.16941 * 1/12 = 0.01412

Straight Flush frequency (after trade) = 0.16941 * 11/12 =0.15529
**********************************************************************

In reality, the actual frequency pf a straight flush after a trade decision is closer to 0.165 - 0.167, because the above calculation does not account for:
- cases in which a 9 card board has two sets of 3 consecutive suited cards
- cases in which a 9 card board has a set of 4 or more consecutive suited cards

I'll show that calculation in my next post, when I get some time.

Another 50. 127%.

Quote: RealizeGaming

We have another update to the Trade N' Place 3x3 version. We have slightly reduced the appearance of the trade card and adjusted the pay scale. I'm sure we will do some additional adjusting as the RTP seems to be coming out very high so far.


Also, in this update you will have the option of using the turbo button to play a huge amount of hands and it will also keep track of your RTP, rounds, total bet, total win, trades, and trade percentages. Huge props to Alex for including this feature in the demo build of the game! Hope this makes it easier for the people testing out our latest version of the game.

As always, feedback is encouraged and welcomed!

Demo: http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/

Here are my results using "Best trade and best place in turbo mode" and the games own "tracking system"

RTP: 124.45%
Round: 3,000
Total Bet: $270,000
Total Win: $336,015 ***
Trades: 1819, 60.63%

*** "Net Win": $66,015

Quote: Gialmere

(snip)
Maybe if you don't break even or better you lose all your wager?

I like this idea too, but I don't know if the "average player" would like it.

A number of players have been coming out around 125% so that seems to be the norm for those settings.

The game is updated again with a reduced pay scale. A few trials have been around 97% so we are getting closer. Give it a try and let me know what you come up with.

http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/

Quote: RealizeGaming

A number of players have been coming out around 125% so that seems to be the norm for those settings.

The game is updated again with a reduced pay scale. A few trials have been around 97% so we are getting closer. Give it a try and let me know what you come up with.

http://realizegamingllc.com/dev/tradeNPlace3x3/

Played my 50 rounds. Around 97%. But I still believe you need a bigger top prize. Gotta make the mini royal higher. Cut regular straight flush a bit if you have to. With the current paytable there are NO big wins. I think VP players pine after the rare royal, the rare 4oaK with a kicker, etc.... As constructed, there is no chance for a 'wow' moment.

Quote: SOOPOO

Played my 50 rounds. Around 97%. But I still believe you need a bigger top prize. Gotta make the mini royal higher. Cut regular straight flush a bit if you have to. With the current paytable there are NO big wins. I think VP players pine after the rare royal, the rare 4oaK with a kicker, etc.... As constructed, there is no chance for a 'wow' moment.

Totally agree with you on this thought. The game has to be intriguing for players to sit down and play and most video poker players want the feel like they accomplish something by hitting the top prize. Any suggestions on what to make the top prize?

Quote: RealizeGaming

Totally agree with you on this thought. The game has to be intriguing for players to sit down and play and most video poker players want the feel like they accomplish something by hitting the top prize. Any suggestions on what to make the top prize?

Make the bet $10, not a silly $9.

Raise the mini royal enough to keep the RTP whatever you deem appropriate. Maybe $400? It will of course increase the variance substantially, but give a big prize to hope for.

How about $150 for mini royal clubs, diamonds, hearts, and $1000 for spades?

Also... just had a hand of straight flush, flush, flush, straight. Won $22 on a $9 bet. I don't think there is enough variance at all.