Ultimate X Gold
Thread Rating:
Poll
 | 2 votes (11.76%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 8 votes (47.05%) | ||
| | 7 votes (41.17%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 2 votes (11.76%) | ||
| | 2 votes (11.76%) | ||
| | 3 votes (17.64%) | ||
| | 5 votes (29.41%) | ||
| | 1 vote (5.88%) |
17 members have voted
The rules are a bit hard to explain, but let me try.
- If the player gets any paying hand on the DEAL, then he will earn a "Multiplier Upgrade."
-
Every hand in the pay table, from all four of a kinds to a three of a kind, will have a multiplier associated with it. This multiplier will apply to all hands on the screen.
As the player plays, these multipliers will go up and down, as the player earns then and they are applied to wins. - Usually, a Multiplier Upgrade will bump up the multipliers on the three hands above the hand won on the deal in the pay table. For example, a three of a kind on the deal would bump up the multipliers on a straight, flush, and full house.
- An exception to rule 3 is a high pair on the deal will bump up the lowest three multipliers (three of a kind, straight, and flush).
- Another exception is there is a maximum multiplier on all hands. If that is reached, it can't be bumped more more.
- An exception to the exception in rule 4 is in 3-play and 5-play mode, a high pair will bump up a three of a kind only (except it it's already at the maximum multiplier).
Confused? Here is a video I just made demonstrating and narrating the game.
Direct: https://youtu.be/KO8lGDR4nVg
No, I do not know the return of the game, but Action Gaming, the makers of the game, tend to bump up the return just a little if a max bet is made.
A perfect analysis would be very difficult. I'm already percolating on a basic strategy.
For now, I welcome all questions and comments. I also challenge the other math wizards on the site to contribute their thoughts on analyzing the game.
I welcome the vultures to comment on vulturing the game. Unlike conventional Ultimate X, the player must make a max coin bet to be able to redeem multipliers, otherwise they are greyed out. However, a screen rich in high multipliers might be plus EV for a while, until the player plays them down.
The question for the poll is would you play Ultimate X Gold?
Quote: Wizard
I welcome the vultures to comment on vulturing the game. Unlike conventional Ultimate X, the player must make a max coin bet to be able to redeem multipliers, otherwise they are greyed out. However, a screen rich in high multipliers might be plus EV for a while, until the player plays them down.
The question for the poll is would you play Ultimate X Gold?
(Quote clipped, relevance to my response)
Your video poker hand analyzer would definitely be getting a workout, except I'd probably make a point to know a good number of decision points in advance of actually searching the games and would likely make myself a little, "Cheat sheet." For example, I believe that you should have just kept the Trip-Threes in the hand where you were dealt a Full House. I figured that just by using your hand analyzer and dividing by five then multiplying by nine as to the paytable, where relevant.
Of course, it looks like the current spread of multipliers there (after the full house was dealt) would result in a ten-coin bet return of 94.7668% when disregarding any EV that might come from future multipliers. That's also with making all quads 5-K 9x (where some were actually 4x) for simplicity.
On the hand after your dealt pair of queens, I get that the return would be over 108% based on a ten-credit bet, for the following hand, even though I went ahead and disregarded the multiplier value on JQK (again, for speed) and just had all 5-K return 125 units on a 10 unit bet.
My vulturing, 'Strategy,' would be very simple. The game with the multipliers showing either returns more than 100% based on a ten-coin bet, or it doesn't. For something like this, I would choose just to completely disregard any value associated with potential added multipliers.
Even then, many individual, 'Plays,' will be losing due to going multiple hands without hitting one of the results with an associated multiplier. In the case of ten-play, I would think that most realization of value will come from dealt hands that correspond to hands with a multiplier on it. For instance, on that 108%+ I used the website to give me, more than 20% of the added return is coming from the fact that I'm getting paid triple on those 3OaKs. Ten-Play is a game where you'll often be dealt a pair and will then hit anywhere from 1-3 3OaK's without meaningful improvement elsewhere, so if that follows a few hands where you didn't hit any multiplied hands, you can easily find yourself down a little bit after that, "Play."
Would I play UX Gold for any reason aside from vulturing? Nope. Variance and the probability of my playing something (even if inclined to do -EV gambling) tend to have an inverse correlation.
I've been thinking about a rough basic strategy for 5-play Jacks or Better. The base game has an 8-6 pay table, for a 5-coin per hand return of 98.39%.
I know this is rough thinking, but but if multiply the win for every hand that qualifies for multipliers (four of a kind to three of a kind), by 2.9 and play optimal strategy for such a pay table, the return is 98.83%.
What this tells me is that the average multiplier should close to 3 for the state of the game to be plus EV. At an average multiplier of 3.0, the return is 101.48%. The multiplier on the three of a kind is very important. In conventional 8-6 Jacks, the three of a kind returns 22.33% and every hand from a straight to four of a kind combined returns 26.22%. I feel quite comfortable saying I wouldn't vulture a game if the three of a kind multiplier were 1x.
Here is a strategy for 8-6 Jacks where every hand from a three of a kind to four of a kind is multiplied by 3. This, I think, would be a good starting point. However, I'm sure there would be many exceptions. For example, Mission makes a great point that I probably should have held the three of a kind only on my dealt full house, with a 1x multiplier for a full house and a 9x for four 2's to 4's.
As Mission says, to play well, you would have to run every non-obvious hand through my video poker hand analyzer.
Links:
Video poker pay table analyzer
1.) I think the idea behind this game, fairly obviously, is to compel players to continue playing the game by getting them to, "Chase," those big multipliers on the quads. Casual players will often find themselves getting smacked in the teeth on ten-play, as they will frequently hit the quads on only one of the ten-hands all the while betting 100 credits per hand. 3600 credits, for one example, is not exactly a windfall jackpot when you're betting 100 credits per hand.
2.) One aspect of regular UX that might annoy some players is how frequently they might be dealt something like a Straight-Flush-FH on a game like Bonus Poker or DDB just to basically completely strike out on the following hand. That feeling will be mitigated at least somewhat as players can play hands at peak multiplier value (assuming they get them there in the first place) until the result(s) in question is(are) hit.
3.) Since multipliers will only disappear via being hit on one (or only a few) possible hands at a time (ex: you'll almost never hit Quad Aces on the same play that you've also hit Quad 2,3,4...would require throwing away an entire hand or only holding one card to even be possible) that's another aspect that's more likely to keep people playing. With regular UX, in addition to not having enough credits, another, "Natural stopping point," would be completely striking out on a hand and not having any multipliers for the following hand. That generally won't be the case with this game as almost all future plays will have at least one multiplier result to work with.
Quote: WizardGood comments, Mission, thanks.
I've been thinking about a rough basic strategy for 5-play Jacks or Better. The base game has an 8-6 pay table, for a 5-coin per hand return of 98.39%.
I know this is rough thinking, but but if multiply the win for every hand that qualifies for multipliers (four of a kind to three of a kind), by 2.9 and play optimal strategy for such a pay table, the return is 98.83%.
What this tells me is that the average multiplier should close to 3 for the state of the game to be plus EV. At an average multiplier of 3.0, the return is 101.48%. The multiplier on the three of a kind is very important. In conventional 8-6 Jacks, the three of a kind returns 22.33% and every hand from a straight to four of a kind combined returns 26.22%. I feel quite comfortable saying I wouldn't vulture a game if the three of a kind multiplier were 1x.
Here is a strategy for 8-6 Jacks where every hand from a three of a kind to four of a kind is multiplied by 3. This, I think, would be a good starting point. However, I'm sure there would be many exceptions. For example, Mission makes a great point that I probably should have held the three of a kind only on my dealt full house, with a 1x multiplier for a full house and a 9x for four 2's to 4's.
As Mission says, to play well, you would have to run every non-obvious hand through my video poker hand analyzer.
Links:
Video poker pay table analyzer
You're welcome!
That's definitely really good for, "Rough thinking!" I wouldn't have thought of that. My, "Cheat sheet," (in addition to obvious exceptions to basic strategy) would just include the EV per result based on a ten-credit bet, then you can multiply those by multipliers and add to base ten-credit bet (with zero multipliers) to see if that gets you close. Some hands will conflict with each other due to strategy deviations (example being a bunch of quads loaded with multipliers reduce Full House value---since you'll more frequently throw away a dealt FH in favor of holding trips) but should get me close enough to be generally reliable.
I agree with the thinking on the 3OaK, but I tend to think the entire right side is pretty important when it comes to value, so I'd also like to see multipliers on straights and flushes, especially since getting those hands dealt isn't terribly infrequent.
What is the max? 9x?
Quote: 100xOddshm.. going to take a long time to vulture any game that has quads with kicker and a maxxed out multiplier.
What is the max? 9x?
I've seen multipliers at 10x. I would barely consider the multipliers on the four of a kind hands if I were a vulture. As I wrote earlier, about half the decision should be based on the three of a kind multiplier.
Another interesting point made in Wiz's video, the multipliers are less likely to disappear the fewer hands you play. Makes sense. So, now different return tabes would need to be calculated for the number of hands played, no?
Quote: 100xOddshm.. going to take a long time to vulture any game that has quads with kicker and a maxxed out multiplier.
What is the max? 9x?
At 6:37 of the video, the pay tables are displayed.
1. You don't always get the best score for a hand. I had a 7x multiplier on a flush (playing 2s) and no multiplier on a SF. The machine gave me the 50 for the SF instead of 105 for the flush.
2. I think the strategy is FAR more complicated than just analyzing the game state as is. Say you have a very large multiplier on a flush. A 'basic' strategy using that multiplier will lead you to making plays that are likely to produce at most one flush. For example, it might suggest ATs is a better hold than AQo. But, getting just one flush clears that multiplier, and leaves you in a worse state for the next hand. You might easily flop a 4 flush, where 2 or more is common, or better yet flop a made flush.
One is that you sometimes want to hold a 'bad' card; again, using 2's wild, it can easily be the case where 4K pays more than 5K; if you flop 4K, hold the kicker! If they pay the same, it is still clear to hold the kicker (you don't erase the 5K multiplier)
The game state can get VERY bad; if you clear the multipliers for <4K, you are playing game where the return might be as low as ~50%. Even if this game were somehow playable, it would be very likely that you should just stop and move to another variant.
Maxxed straight and flush.
Anyone have link to a return calculator for ult x gold?
1.) The value of future earned multipliers.
AND
2. It treats all quads 5-K as paying 125 even though JQK pay more than that, at present.
So, it’s better than 137%, at the moment. I think you’d be pretty safe even playing normal strategy, though some dealt Full Houses MIGHT result in you wanting to break off trips (A234—Aces definitely) but you can use the hand calculator to figure out if that is the case.
Edit: Just checked, you’ll want to snap trip 2’s, 3’s, 4’s off a dealt full house, as well. You’ll break Aces off of dealt 2P (even though 2P is 2-For-1, but remember no kicker needed for 3600 credit Aces) and it looks like you prefer dealt full house to trip JQK at this time.
NOTE: For quads 5-K, with this paytable, it looks like a 5x multiplier is when you start snapping trips off of FH if no FH multiplier. Aces—True with ANY multiplier and no FH multiplier. 2/3/4—TRUE with 3x multiplier and no FH multiplier.
If you’re finding lots of plays, my advice is to write down all the paytables and play with the hand analyzer to get more ideas when you snap pairs off of two pairs (this will only happen with Aces) and trips off of dealt FH. The quads are where you’re going to realize a lot of value on these plays.
in another game, i had a maxxed out straight and hit 2 straights and both got the 9x multiplier.
that makes playing 10play better than 5play or 3 play?
Quote: 100xOddsthx Mis!
link to original post
in another game, i had a maxxed out straight and hit 2 straights and both got the 9x multiplier.
that makes playing 10play better than 5play or 3 play?
Percentage-wise or expected profit wise? Assuming same paytables, denomination and multipliers (and that it’s an advantageous spread to begin with); the more the merrier.
Three-Hand might artificially appear better in the short-term if you’re hitting lots of strong hands…because hitting a 9x hand on three-play is more relative to your total bet…but those occasional dealt hands are where that gets made up on ten-hand. Speaking long-term, of course.
This gave me a chance to look at some strategies for this game. The first hand I was dealt QJ997, no 3 flush. I held the 99. This is worth about 3.97 coins. Proper strategy is to hold the QJ9 and go for the straight. That is worth 5.58 coins. This is clearly the correct play if you are just playing this one hand; however, if you knock out the straight the game goes to 109% on the next hand.
If you are playing 3 play, this might be the right idea, but if you are playing 10 play, it probably isn't. Your chances of getting a straight is only 1 in 34, but more importantly, your chances of getting multiple straights is quite poor.
My guess is that the general idea here is to avoid hands with 3 straights/flushes, and make your normal play on those hands. If you get a hand with a 4 flush/straight, it is clearly right to go for the big payoff, even breaking up a made hand to do so.
Of course all of that means the game is not really 129%; if you play for the long(er) haul, you will miss straights and flushes that the 1 game play would have gotten
Quote: 3for3I get 'only' 129%. Not sure what one of us did wrong.
link to original post
This gave me a chance to look at some strategies for this game. The first hand I was dealt QJ997, no 3 flush. I held the 99. This is worth about 3.97 coins. Proper strategy is to hold the QJ9 and go for the straight. That is worth 5.58 coins. This is clearly the correct play if you are just playing this one hand; however, if you knock out the straight the game goes to 109% on the next hand.
If you are playing 3 play, this might be the right idea, but if you are playing 10 play, it probably isn't. Your chances of getting a straight is only 1 in 34, but more importantly, your chances of getting multiple straights is quite poor.
My guess is that the general idea here is to avoid hands with 3 straights/flushes, and make your normal play on those hands. If you get a hand with a 4 flush/straight, it is clearly right to go for the big payoff, even breaking up a made hand to do so.
Of course all of that means the game is not really 129%; if you play for the long(er) haul, you will miss straights and flushes that the 1 game play would have gotten
Game: Bonus Poker
Calculator: https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/analyzer/
Values:
Royal Flush: 8000
Straight Flush: 250
Quad Aces: 3600
Quad 234: 1800
Quad 5-K (Simplicity): 125
Full House: 30
Flush: 225
Straight: 140 (THERE IT IS!!!)
Trips: 15
Two Pair: 10
High Pair: 5
Bet Amount: 10
Result: 120.68% (Not counting increase to KQJ Quads)
The mistake I made was I saw, "Maxed Straight and Flush," and saw the straight as 9x, but the straight is 7x---my bad. That's on me. I should have been paying closer attention.
The strategy deviations I said would still be correct as the straight would have nothing to do with those changes. All of those hands make a straight impossible in the first place.
Those are interesting points about playing for the long haul. I think my inclination would be just to make the best EV hold for whatever is on the board and only to be playing for current EV...but your strategy is probably better. No flush and I'm pretty sure I would automatically hold the pair anyway...even with the 7x straight, I wouldn't have guessed the straight draw to be worth more or even thought enough to look up the hand, to be honest.
Looking at the basic strategy; you never redraw, always better to hold a 2 flush.
This game would be a nightmare to truly program. I wonder how they did it.
Multipliers will never be 1x across the board. You will always have at least two multipliers active, simply because if all multipliers get played off on any particular hand, the machine will give you 2x multipliers on two different lines. Not that this matters to any strong players. Having two 2x multipliers still makes this a very bad game.
In the video, the Wizard had a hand of 44333 (or maybe it was 33444). There was no multiplier on the full house (worth 35) but a 9x multiplier on four 2s-4s (now worth 1800) in addition to a small multiplier on 3-of-a-kind. . to me it seems seat-of-pants obvious to just hold the 3-of-a-kind although in the video Shack didn't even consider that play.
I spoke to the mathematician for videopoker.com and he said for triple play games there are some 3000+ possible configurations of pay schedule/multipliers. For ten play there are up to 500,000. He needed to use a large supercomputer to figure the returns. Anyone who intends to do it by hand or with homemade computer programs --- good luck to you!
Bob
Quote: BobDancerIn the video, the Wizard had a hand of 44333 (or maybe it was 33444). There was no multiplier on the full house (worth 35) but a 9x multiplier on four 2s-4s (now worth 1800) in addition to a small multiplier on 3-of-a-kind. . to me it seems seat-of-pants obvious to just hold the 3-of-a-kind although in the video Shack didn't even consider that play.link to original post
Ooops. I should have considered that.
In doing the math, I see my expected win was 78.73265495 holding three of a kind and a fixed 35 for the full house. What is my punishment?
Max bet on the $5 6/5 JoB vp at Planet Hollywood till you hit a full house :)Quote: WizardQuote: BobDancerIn the video, the Wizard had a hand of 44333 (or maybe it was 33444). There was no multiplier on the full house (worth 35) but a 9x multiplier on four 2s-4s (now worth 1800) in addition to a small multiplier on 3-of-a-kind. . to me it seems seat-of-pants obvious to just hold the 3-of-a-kind although in the video Shack didn't even consider that play.link to original post
Ooops. I should have considered that.
In doing the math, I see my expected win was 78.73265495 holding three of a kind and a fixed 35 for the full house.
What is my punishment?link to original post
Quote: WizardQuote: BobDancerIn the video, the Wizard had a hand of 44333 (or maybe it was 33444). There was no multiplier on the full house (worth 35) but a 9x multiplier on four 2s-4s (now worth 1800) in addition to a small multiplier on 3-of-a-kind. . to me it seems seat-of-pants obvious to just hold the 3-of-a-kind although in the video Shack didn't even consider that play.link to original post
Ooops. I should have considered that.
In doing the math, I see my expected win was 78.73265495 holding three of a kind and a fixed 35 for the full house. What is my punishment?link to original post
43.73265495 push-ups.
Unlike other video poker games, it appears that the pay table, multipliers, and rules do not give all of the information needed to understand the action of the game completely. In particular, there is no exact description of exactly which multipliers are increased given specific starting paying hands. I am mostly figuring it out from having read some descriptions, watched some videos, and played the game on video poker dot com some, but I am still unclear on some of the specifics.
One thing that surprised me, in particular, is that getting a full house on the deal on triple-play Jacks or Better incremented quad multipliers up to FOUR levels above the full house, but I had previously thought that a hand on the deal can only increment up to three multipliers above the dealt hand. I also wonder whether getting dealt any quads will increase any quads multipliers above it, or whether getting dealt a straight flush or royal flush will increase any multipliers at all.
Does anybody have complete information on exactly which multipliers are increased given specific dealt hands, for all of the games (triple-, five-, and ten-play, all games)? I would like to perform an analysis of the game, at least for some specific game/pay table/multiplier configurations. But I cannot do this if I am not sure on which multipliers will be increased for each dealt hand.
Thank you!
Quote: MrBrain3(Using this new handle MrBrain3 because I could not log into my previous handle MrBrain, and the recover password function was not working for my main email address.)
link to original post
Our policy on duplicate ID's is very strict. You also created MrBrain2 yesterday.
I'm going to give you amnesty for now, but Wizard might choose to rescind that.
MrBrain and MrBrain2 have been banned permanently.
Take care of the password of this account, because MrBrain4 will not be tolerated.
Well, I felt that I had something to offer the community here. I did an analysis of Three Card Blitz with my original account, which is what I was trying to log into for this topic. I was prepared to do an extensive analysis of this game as well, but I'll do it on my own now.
So go ahead and ban all of the accounts. I have no intention of ever posting here again.
Quote: MrBrain3The password recovery system was not working properly. It kept saying that it reset my password, and that a link would be sent to my email address, but it never did so after a dozen attempts. The registration of the second account also did not work as it was supposed to, as the confirmation was again not sent to my email address. I can only assume that it does not like the domain for my main email address. It was only when I re-registered using an email address with a different domain that the system worked properly.
Well, I felt that I had something to offer the community here. I did an analysis of Three Card Blitz with my original account, which is what I was trying to log into for this topic. I was prepared to do an extensive analysis of this game as well, but I'll do it on my own now.
So go ahead and ban all of the accounts. I have no intention of ever posting here again.
link to original post
I was looking forward to your work. Please re-consider.
Quote: rsactuary
I was looking forward to your work. Please re-consider.
link to original post
I hope he does, but I felt that the Administration response to the problem was reasonable.
Oh well.
1. A multiplier is far more valuable if it is cleared by multiple hits in the same round of play rather than by just one hit.
2. If a multiplier is not hit, then unlike in Ultimate X, it doesn’t go away. It stays on the screen to be increased by the next upgrade and to be hit on a later potentially more valuable dealt hand. If it is hit, then the machine immediately moves from a more valuable state to a less valuable one. In a sense, hitting a multiplier is converting virtual “state-value” into coin credits….if the multiplier is not hit then the state value remains to be converted later.
Of course, the goal of the vulture is to convert state-value into credits as quickly as possible. But if the goal is to maximize long-run revenue per coin wagered, then the strategic considerations are more complex. In the case of a dealt full house 33344 with 1x on FH and 9X on quad 3’s, the “error” of standing on the house is not really 43.732655 push-ups. Rather it is 43.733 - (change in expected value of the multiplier state between the two actions considered), which is actually quite a bit less than 43. It’s actually possible that standing on the house is long-run optimal. I can report back the exact difference in value for this hand after the holidays.
In developing this game, Action noticed many situations where optimal play was to avoid hitting the current multiplier in order to save the multiplier for a more valuable later hand, either because a later hand was more likely to generate multiple hits or to allow time for the multiplier to grow larger. I can post several weird funky examples here after the holidays.
Quote: MrBrain3…
Unlike other video poker games, it appears that the pay table, multipliers, and rules do not give all of the information needed to understand the action of the game completely. In particular, there is no exact description of exactly which multipliers are increased given specific starting paying hands. I am mostly figuring it out from having read some descriptions, watched some videos, and played the game on video poker dot com some, but I am still unclear on some of the specifics.
…
Does anybody have complete information on exactly which multipliers are increased given specific dealt hands, for all of the games (triple-, five-, and ten-play, all games)? I would like to perform an analysis of the game, at least for some specific game/pay table/multiplier configurations. But I cannot do this if I am not sure on which multipliers will be increased for each dealt hand.
Thank you!
link to original post
The machine’s help screen is vague on this point. But the official IGT par-sheet for each pay-schedule gives the complete rules on which dealt categories increase which multipliers. There is some slight variation among the different families of games.
Quote: Mission146My Other Observations
1.) I think the idea behind this game, fairly obviously, is to compel players to continue playing the game by getting them to, "Chase," those big multipliers on the quads. Casual players will often find themselves getting smacked in the teeth on ten-play, as they will frequently hit the quads on only one of the ten-hands all the while betting 100 credits per hand. 3600 credits, for one example, is not exactly a windfall jackpot when you're betting 100 credits per hand.
2.) One aspect of regular UX that might annoy some players is how frequently they might be dealt something like a Straight-Flush-FH on a game like Bonus Poker or DDB just to basically completely strike out on the following hand. That feeling will be mitigated at least somewhat as players can play hands at peak multiplier value (assuming they get them there in the first place) until the result(s) in question is(are) hit.
3.) Since multipliers will only disappear via being hit on one (or only a few) possible hands at a time (ex: you'll almost never hit Quad Aces on the same play that you've also hit Quad 2,3,4...would require throwing away an entire hand or only holding one card to even be possible) that's another aspect that's more likely to keep people playing. With regular UX, in addition to not having enough credits, another, "Natural stopping point," would be completely striking out on a hand and not having any multipliers for the following hand. That generally won't be the case with this game as almost all future plays will have at least one multiplier result to work with.
link to original post
These comments are dead on and mostly explain why the game exists.
Link to par sheet :)Quote: CroquetIsOKThe machine’s help screen is vague on this point. But the official IGT par-sheet for each pay-schedule gives the complete rules on which dealt categories increase which multipliers. There is some slight variation among the different families of games.
link to original post
In the table below, the "Boosted Cats" column shows which multiplier categories are boosted one level if the dealt hand is in the category that starts the row.
| Hand | Pay | Mult Sequence | Boosted Cats |
|---|---|---|---|
| RF | 8000 | {1} | |
| SF | 250 | {1} | |
| 4K_Ace | 400 | {1, 4, 9} | |
| 4K_234 | 200 | {1, 4, 9} | |
| 4K_JQK | 125 | {3, 4, 9} | |
| 4K_5-T | 125 | {1, 4, 9} | |
| FH | 35 | {1,3,6,7,8,9,10} | All K4's |
| Flush | 25 | {1,3,4,6,8,9} | FH, all K4's |
| Straight | 20 | {1,3,4,6,7} | Flush, FH, K4_5-T, K4_JQK |
| 3K | 15 | {1,3,4,5} | St, Flush, FH |
| 2Pair | 10 | {1} | 3K, St, Flush |
| JOB | 5 | {1} | 3K, St, Flush |
On powerup, the game starts out in an initial state with 9X on 4K_Ace, 9X on 4K_234, 9X on 4K_5-T, 3X on 4K_JQK, 4X on Flush and 4X on Straight. Furthermore, if the game ever reaches the state where all of the sequences are at their lowest level (3X on K4_JQK and 1X on everything else), then the machine will automatically reset the multipliers to the initial powerup state. Thus the powerup multiplier state is also a "reset state" that prevents the machine from ever being in a state where all sequences are at smallest values.
With these parameters, the long-run optimal return to player is 98.238096 % of the wager. If the player chooses to play the suboptimal strategy of maximizing the expected pay on each hand, regardless of the future state of the machine, then the long-run RTP for this strategy is 95.61005 % of the wager. This 2.6% difference is unusual and results from the large 9X multipliers on the K4's. In most versions of UX-Gold, playing to maximize the EV of each hand only costs the player an extra 0.2% to 0.5% compared to the optimal return.
The return to player on a single round played with the multipliers in the initial power-up state is 105.3286 % of the wager for this particular set of parameters. In most versions, the power-up return to player is in the range 98%-100%.
About the "reset" state: I've heard a rumor that the first versions of UX Gold in casinos had an unintended bug in the logic of when the machine is reset to the powerup state, which resulted in an added 0.5 % return to the player above the listed optimal return in the par-sheet. I do not know this for certain, and I do not know if such machines are still powered and available.
The bigger surprise to me is that maximizing the current play only costs ~0.5%. In some game states, that seems so far off as to be laughable. I haven't done it in a while, but I think optimal single hand play is to throw away a pay pair for a high value gut shot straight. I am sure there are other examples that fit these parameters as well, where the right one time only play will lead to a very likely 1/10 result, eliminating a great multiplier that might be much more valuable.
Quote: CroquetIsOK
The return to player on a single round played with the multipliers in the initial power-up state is 105.3286 % of the wager for this particular set of parameters. In most versions, the power-up return to player is in the range 98%-100%.
link to original post
Some more information about the 105.3% return in the powerup state for this 10-play game...Suppose a player starts with the machine in the power-up state and plays exactly 100 rounds, with a strategy of maximizing the expected pay on each individual round. Then his expected return is 103.3 %. But if the player plays 1000 rounds from the power-up state using the same strategy, his expected return is 96.7 %, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 81% to 120%. There's a 0.01 probability that his return exceeds 130% from the 1000 rounds played.
Quote: WizardQuote: BobDancerIn the video, the Wizard had a hand of 44333 (or maybe it was 33444). There was no multiplier on the full house (worth 35) but a 9x multiplier on four 2s-4s (now worth 1800) in addition to a small multiplier on 3-of-a-kind. . to me it seems seat-of-pants obvious to just hold the 3-of-a-kind although in the video Shack didn't even consider that play.link to original post
Ooops. I should have considered that.
In doing the math, I see my expected win was 78.73265495 holding three of a kind and a fixed 35 for the full house. What is my punishment?
link to original post
After the (33344) hand was dealt, the video shows a 9X multiplier for Quad 3's, a 1X multiplier for full house, and a 1X multiplier for 3-Kind. This makes the expected win from holding the 3's 92.1974 coins, not 78.7326. The math for the ending hands after the draw:
Quad 3's: 46/1081 * 1800 coins
Full Hse: 67/1081 * 35 coins
Trip 3's: 968/1081 * 15 coins
Total = 92.1974.
But there are ten ending hands, not just one. So the expected immediate pay from holding trip 3's is 921.97 coins, and the expected pay from standing on the full house is 350 coins, making the error in standing on the house be (921.97 - 350) = 572 coins of expected immediate pay. This is a pretty substantial mistake.
But hitting quad 3's also removes the 9X multiplier from that category and puts a 1X multiplier in its place. This removes hidden equity from the machine, and represents an opportunity cost for future rounds of play. I calculate that holding trip 3's instead of standing on the full house has an expected opportunity cost of 415.74 coins. So if you hold trip 3's instead of standing on the house, you are gaining (921.97 - 350 - 415.74) = 156.23 coins in long-run value. Thus holding only the 3's is both long-run optimal as well as short-run optimal, and the wizard's error as a long-run optimizing player is only 156.23 pushups, not 572 pushups.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtQJhSVPlns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px5P5SeZwn8
Have really been enjoying their daily uploads. They're still negative 1500 for the year I think, but that's an improvement over bring 2300 down. Slow climb back to the positive!Quote: calwatchThe Jackpot Gents (Steve and Matt Bourie) have been chasing the four of a kind recently on Ultimate X Gold and posted videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtQJhSVPlns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px5P5SeZwn8
link to original post
Gold seems like much better game than traditional X. Really hope more casinos on the east coast get Gold.
Quote: ChallengedMillyHave really been enjoying their daily uploads. They're still negative 1500 for the year I think, but that's an improvement over bring 2300 down. Slow climb back to the positive!Quote: calwatchThe Jackpot Gents (Steve and Matt Bourie) have been chasing the four of a kind recently on Ultimate X Gold and posted videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtQJhSVPlns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px5P5SeZwn8
link to original post
Gold seems like much better game than traditional X. Really hope more casinos on the east coast get Gold.
link to original post
I think these VP games, including Ultimate X Gold, 6 card poker, etc. are the future of VP. Tremendous fun factor, but exponentially more complex to play near optimal.
Six card has been ridiculously fun to watch, very hopeful it doesn't get tuned down any when it makes a larger scene around the country. I'm actually going to scour vpfree2 and some other sites to see if there is a list of these Six card machines anywhere near me for a trip.Quote:I think these VP games, including Ultimate X Gold, 6 card poker, etc. are the future of VP. Tremendous fun factor, but exponentially more complex to play near optimal.
link to original post
