VP Progressive meter Question
That's my understanding too.Quote: ItsCalledSoccerI thought the meter speed was due to the contribution from all the machines plugged into the progressive? Isn't that part of the programming that goes into the "99% (or whatever) payback" calculation?
Quote: DukemournCan you add the meter speed of a progressive to your EV? For example is a 99% payback machine with a meter speed of 2% worth 101%?
Your question as it stands cannot be answered because there is no such thing as "a meter speed of 2%". What matters is the percentage of coin-in that is added to the meter (as well, of course, as the base paytable). It is true that a fast meter, all other things being equal, will probably be adding more to the jackpot than a slow meter. But the only way you can tell for sure what the +% is is to monitor the meter while tracking the total amount of coin-in on the bank. Obviously, this is easiest to do when there's only one player.
So the base EV of a progressive at reset is the EV of the base paytable + the % of coin-in put onto the jackpot by the meter. That total EV rises as the jackpot grows, as the value of the royal increases.
Quote: DukemournCan you add the meter speed of a progressive to your EV? For example is a 99% payback machine with a meter speed of 2% worth 101%?
That's how much the game costs to the casino. How much it costs to you is a function of what the meter value is when you put your money in.
Quote: mkl654321Your question as it stands cannot be answered because there is no such thing as "a meter speed of 2%". What matters is the percentage of coin-in that is added to the meter (as well, of course, as the base paytable). It is true that a fast meter, all other things being equal, will probably be adding more to the jackpot than a slow meter. But the only way you can tell for sure what the +% is is to monitor the meter while tracking the total amount of coin-in on the bank. Obviously, this is easiest to do when there's only one player.
So the base EV of a progressive at reset is the EV of the base paytable + the % of coin-in put onto the jackpot by the meter. That total EV rises as the jackpot grows, as the value of the royal increases.
That sounds right from the PLAYER EV perspective. But from the CASINO profit perspective, the "99% (or whatever) payout" is still correct, right? The jackpot only goes up if it's not won ...
Side question, but ... I'm guessing the meter that you lay eyes on in the casino is not actually THE meter, but some display that closely approximates THE meter. Are there any regulations on what, at any particular moment, the difference betwen the display and THE meter?
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerThat sounds right from the PLAYER EV perspective. But from the CASINO profit perspective, the "99% (or whatever) payout" is still correct, right? The jackpot only goes up if it's not won ...
Side question, but ... I'm guessing the meter that you lay eyes on in the casino is not actually THE meter, but some display that closely approximates THE meter. Are there any regulations on what, at any particular moment, the difference betwen the display and THE meter?
From the casino's perspective, the amount on the meter matters not at all.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerThat sounds right from the PLAYER EV perspective. But from the CASINO profit perspective, the "99% (or whatever) payout" is still correct, right? The jackpot only goes up if it's not won ...
Side question, but ... I'm guessing the meter that you lay eyes on in the casino is not actually THE meter, but some display that closely approximates THE meter. Are there any regulations on what, at any particular moment, the difference betwen the display and THE meter?
The 99% + whatever the accrual rate is, that's what's correct. Money fed into the meter is simply money not kept by the casino.
There may be various jurisdictional requirements as to how regularly a meter has to update, but it's the value at the server (and not on the LED screen) that matters. You used to hear about two players hitting a jackpot nearly simultaneously, and the second player only winning the reset value even though the meter hadn't yet been reset. Higher speed data connections have hopefully eliminated this issue, because it's a terrible letdown if you think you've won $300k and it turns out you've only won $25k because someone at another machine got the award 2 seconds before you did.
Quote: mkl654321From the casino's perspective, the amount on the meter matters not at all.
Disagree. The higher the amount, the more coin in has transpired since a max coin royal. Thus, the expected payout during that period statistically should be less than normal.
Quote: rdw4potusTo the extent that the meter's average position in the long run is somewhat greater than the basic "reset" position, it seems like it'd be fair to use a very general statement about the payback. Like "this FPDW progressive machine has a payback of _____ (at least / over / more than) 100.71%"
at least 100.71 with optimal play at max coin.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerI thought the meter speed was due to the contribution from all the machines plugged into the progressive? Isn't that part of the programming that goes into the "99% (or whatever) payback" calculation?
Are you talking about the pay table rating or the actual hold results on the machines?
This allows the display to continue to tick those pennies, albeit slowly, even if nobody is playing. Only after a long stretch late at night, does it finally come to a stop.
Quote: dmAre you talking about the pay table rating or the actual hold results on the machines?
Hmmm ... let me state it a different way.
Take a game with no progressive. The EV from the player's perspective and the casino's perspective is the same for all samples AND for infinity. Say the payout is something like this:
99% payout
Spin Result 1 coin 2 coins 3 coins
3 soccer balls 100 200 500
3 lemons 50 100 150
3 bells 25 50 75
3 cherries 10 20 30
Keeping all the inner programming the same for disucssion purposes, let's add a progressive:
99% payout
Spin Result 1 coin 2 coins 3 coins
3 soccer balls 99 198 PROGRESSIVE
3 lemons 50 100 150
3 bells 24 48 72
3 cherries 10 20 30
The question becomes, are the adjustments to the payout table are made to accommodate the progressive payout and still keep the 99% payout?
In practicality, this adjustment (if it even exists) would come in the inner programming so stupid numbers like these don't appear in payout tables. But the question stands.
It would seem there is some range of progressive amounts where, from the player's perspective, EV-1 > EV-2. Then the amount where EV-1 = EV-2 is reached. Then the amount grows and EV-2 > EV-1. (samples)
But from the casino's perspective, it's all 99% back out the door, it's just doled out in different-sized amounts. (infinity) Or, at any particular point in time, the samples are different than the infinity, and are only the same at the one amount.
Does that help?
Quote: DJTeddyBearIn some cases, the amount on the displayed meter is DELIBERATELY lower - but not by much.
This allows the display to continue to tick those pennies, albeit slowly, even if nobody is playing. Only after a long stretch late at night, does it finally come to a stop.
It sounds like the main restriction is that the display is lower than the meter (except for the moments between nearly-contemporaneous jackpot hits). How much lower sounds like a marketing decision.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerTake a game with no progressive. The EV from the player's perspective and the casino's perspective is the same for all samples AND for infinity. Say the payout is something like this:
99% payout
Spin Result 1 coin 2 coins 3 coins
3 soccer balls 100 200 500
3 lemons 50 100 150
3 bells 25 50 75
3 cherries 10 20 30
Keeping all the inner programming the same for disucssion purposes, let's add a progressive:
99% payout
Spin Result 1 coin 2 coins 3 coins
3 soccer balls 99 198 PROGRESSIVE
3 lemons 50 100 150
3 bells 24 48 72
3 cherries 10 20 30
The question becomes, are the adjustments to the payout table are made to accommodate the progressive payout and still keep the 99% payout?
That's usually not how it works. You'd usually keep the paytable the same, which is visible, and tweak the reel weights which aren't. If you wanted to have a 99% game including progressive, and you used a 2% accrual rate, you'd just use a 97% base game. Most games come with multiple models anyway, so bolting on a progressive is straightforward from a math standpoint.
Quote: MathExtremistThat's usually not how it works. You'd usually keep the paytable the same, which is visible, and tweak the reel weights which aren't. If you wanted to have a 99% game including progressive, and you used a 2% accrual rate, you'd just use a 97% base game. Most games come with multiple models anyway, so bolting on a progressive is straightforward from a math standpoint.
I meant to address that when I said ...
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerIn practicality, this adjustment (if it even exists) would come in the inner programming so stupid numbers like these don't appear in payout tables. But the question stands.
I derived the illustrative, if not realistic, example to see if it would better communicate that payout rates (from the casino's perspective) don't change just because there's a progressive.
Quote: dmDisagree. The higher the amount, the more coin in has transpired since a max coin royal. Thus, the expected payout during that period statistically should be less than normal.
But the payout will be more than "normal" when someone hits a royal. All that the casino is doing is taking a certain amount from the payback of every player, banking it, then awarding it to the next player who hits a royal. Functionally, no different from never taking that amount from the payback at all.
Quote: DukemournYes rdw4Potus, an FPDW machine with a progressive has to have a payback of over 100.71%. You've given the best answer so far. I'm trying to figure out how much more. In my example of a 99% payback machine with a 2% meter if the collective of all players playing plays perfect reset strategy the casino's expectation is to lose at a 1% rate. The collective of perfect players always get 2% of the money they put in the machine back. If I knew I would be the only player playing it until it got hit, even if it took an unlimited bankroll and an eternity of time, then my expectation would be 101%. In reality I cannot expect to be the only player playing the machine. So I am asking a very practical question about how to add the meter speed to my expectation.
Are you talking about meter SPEED or meter RATE? Those are two different things.
Assuming you mean meter RATE, it doesn't matter if you are the only player, the bank is full, or anything in between--any given optimal player's expectation would be 101%. Again, that would be at reset.
Quote: mkl654321Are you talking about meter SPEED or meter RATE? Those are two different things.
Assuming you mean meter RATE, it doesn't matter if you are the only player, the bank is full, or anything in between--any given optimal player's expectation would be 101%. Again, that would be at reset.
No, the casino's aggregate expectation is -1%, but each individual player's EV is related to their handle times the instantaneous paytables he was playing against when he wagered. If you play a game when the jackpot is greater, your EV is better. The only thing that matters to an individual player's EV is the specific paytable at the time of the wager.
Quote: MathExtremistNo, the casino's aggregate expectation is -1%, but each individual player's EV is related to their handle times the instantaneous paytables he was playing against when he wagered. If you play a game when the jackpot is greater, your EV is better. The only thing that matters to an individual player's EV is the specific paytable at the time of the wager.
If that is true then you cannot add in the meter rate to your expectation. If you play at reset (99%) and quit at 100%, I presume you are saying my expectation was 99.5%. Is that what you are saying?
There is a bank of Full Pay (99.16%) 3-play Bonus poker machines with progressives on the dealt royal and each of the three individual royals that are often profitable if I can add in the meter rate along with the cashback and comp value to my expectation. If I can't add in the meter rate then they are most often unplayable. That is why I am tryiong to understand this. Four previous answers to my question indicate you can add in the meter rate. Yours is the first that says I can't.
Quote: MathExtremistNo, the casino's aggregate expectation is -1%, but each individual player's EV is related to their handle times the instantaneous paytables he was playing against when he wagered. If you play a game when the jackpot is greater, your EV is better. The only thing that matters to an individual player's EV is the specific paytable at the time of the wager.
I did say "AT RESET". Obviously, a player's EV is greater than that as the progressive amount rises.
You can think of it as: the people who are adding to the meter by playing and not hitting the royal are achieving less than their expectation, and the person who hits the royal achieves more than his expectation, and the two amounts sum to zero.
Quote: DukemournIf that is true then you cannot add in the meter rate to your expectation. If you play at reset (99%) and quit at 100%, I presume you are saying my expectation was 99.5%. Is that what you are saying?
Basically, yes. You have to contend with the effects of other players on the meter, but to reduce the problem, consider that you make two bets: one on a VP game where the fixed paytable yields a 99% RTP and another where the fixed paytable yields a 100% RTP, where the top award is the only thing that changed. There, it's obvious that the aggregate RTP is 99.5%. Okay, now instead of just two bets, make a bunch of them at equal intervals as the top award is increasing between RTP = 99% and 100%. That's all a progressive meter does. Your RTP is still 99.5%.
Quote:There is a bank of Full Pay (99.16%) 3-play Bonus poker machines with progressives on the dealt royal and each of the three individual royals that are often profitable if I can add in the meter rate along with the cashback and comp value to my expectation. If I can't add in the meter rate then they are most often unplayable. That is why I am tryiong to understand this. Four previous answers to my question indicate you can add in the meter rate. Yours is the first that says I can't.
You can't add in the meter rate in the way you're thinking. In other words, a 99.16% game + 2% progressive does not automatically mean you personally have a 101.16% game. What you have to do is figure out the average RTP during the time you're playing. The RTP while you're not playing is irrelevant. You have to calculate profitability from your perspective, not the casino's.
Quote: mkl654321I did say "AT RESET". Obviously, a player's EV is greater than that as the progressive amount rises.
You can think of it as: the people who are adding to the meter by playing and not hitting the royal are achieving less than their expectation, and the person who hits the royal achieves more than his expectation, and the two amounts sum to zero.
I missed the "at reset" part, but the computation is still off. If you have a 99% base game + 2% progressive, and you're at reset, then the coin-in since jackpot is zero. That means the RTP is 99% + 2% * 0 = 99%. Not 101%. This assumes the 99% incorporates the reset value, which for VP it normally does -- consider a standard JoB game with a progressive royal that resets to 4000 coins. That reset is built into the base game, so the instantaneous RTP only rises as coins are added to the meter.
Quote: mkl654321But the payout will be more than "normal" when someone hits a royal. All that the casino is doing is taking a certain amount from the payback of every player, banking it, then awarding it to the next player who hits a royal. Functionally, no different from never taking that amount from the payback at all.
You're missing the point that the progressive amount is an indicator of actual results. If a progressive royal is hit every couple of minutes over a stretch, don't you think they are paying out way more than expected? Not in bonus, but in jackpots. Granted the
bonus progressive will be earned by someone either in small chunks or a big chunk as a % of coin in. If the chunks are small, the casino is experiencing a bad run of royals. And they care.
So, if $1000 accrued to the progressive royal for the week, would you rather that 1 royal earned an extra 1000, or 20 royals earned an additional 50?
Quote: mkl654321But the payout will be more than "normal" when someone hits a royal. All that the casino is doing is taking a certain amount from the payback of every player, banking it, then awarding it to the next player who hits a royal. Functionally, no different from never taking that amount from the payback at all.
I missed this post before, but since this thread is about VP I wanted to address it. For VP, this isn't the way progressives work. A VP paytable P = {RF, SF, 4K, ..., JoB} yields an optimal RTP of R. A VP paytable P' = {RF + x%, SF, 4K, ..., JoB} yields an optimal RTP of R + x. The progressive is funded from the house's money, not the players' money. In other words, a 9/6 JoB non-progressive game is 99.54%; a 9/6 JoB game with a 2% progressive is 101.54%. Unlike a slot game, the odds of hitting given awards in VP aren't changeable.
Quote: dmYou're missing the point that the progressive amount is an indicator of actual results. If a progressive royal is hit every couple of minutes over a stretch, don't you think they are paying out way more than expected? Not in bonus, but in jackpots. Granted the
bonus progressive will be earned by someone either in small chunks or a big chunk as a % of coin in. If the chunks are small, the casino is experiencing a bad run of royals. And they care.
So, if $1000 accrued to the progressive royal for the week, would you rather that 1 royal earned an extra 1000, or 20 royals earned an additional 50?
In the long run (which is all that is significant), the number of royals hit will approach expectation. But even if 5000 royals hit in one day, that expectation is and remains the same.
Quote: MathExtremistI missed the "at reset" part, but the computation is still off. If you have a 99% base game + 2% progressive, and you're at reset, then the coin-in since jackpot is zero. That means the RTP is 99% + 2% * 0 = 99%. Not 101%. This assumes the 99% incorporates the reset value, which for VP it normally does -- consider a standard JoB game with a progressive royal that resets to 4000 coins. That reset is built into the base game, so the instantaneous RTP only rises as coins are added to the meter.
Even if you make one single bet, the casino will add 2% of that bet to the meter as a result. The royal is now worth (say) $1000.02, which raises your expectation by a proportional amount.
Quote: mkl654321In the long run (which is all that is significant), the number of royals hit will approach expectation. But even if 5000 royals hit in one day, that expectation is and remains the same.
The Palms is almost out of business now. If 5000 royals ($1000 per pop) hit in one day, they might no longer be approachable.
Quote: mkl654321Even if you make one single bet, the casino will add 2% of that bet to the meter as a result. The royal is now worth (say) $1000.02, which raises your expectation by a proportional amount.
I agree in the long term. But a player getting in when the royal is above reset has an increased expectation. And a player leaving at other than reset has a decreased expectation. In the real world the meter is nowhere close to 2%.
