An overdue Money$uit 31 update (new game demo)
Due to reasons out of my control, the game was unfortunately pulled off of the floor regardless of its performance. I walked out of the second day of the Bar Exam and came back to the multiple text messages from the Director apologizing about the situation. Needless to say, the timing was horrible. After discussing the issue with several people involved I went through every portal possible, but unfortunately could do nothing to resolve the issue on my own. The fact that it had nothing to do with the game made it even harder to swallow. I want those of you aspiring developers to keep that in the back of your mind before undertaking this journey. It is a brutal industry, with many twists and turns.
Luckily I’m still very close with at the Director at the facility and can perhaps get the game back up and running, when the time comes. He constantly expresses that he would happily vouch for the game in the meantime.
Even though the game had a very heavy boulder dropped on it from above, I was at least able to compile very positive data from the five months of play to show proof of concept. As a result of the data and additional feedback from new players and dealers, I have decided to make one final change to the paytables before taking the game to the Table Games Conference this upcoming year. The website has been updated with the changes and a new demo is ready to play. These new paytables are, in my opinion and many others, the cleanest and easiest to read. The game layout looks much cleaner as well.
I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on the new paytables, layout and demo. As most know, this feedback has helped the game improve over the years. The math is on the site as well, pending GLI approval, for those that may be interested. The only thing not yet updated is the procedural video. That is coming soon.
I look forward to hearing what everyone has to say.
The game is fine. With performance like you stated, this isn't technical, it's political. That's Different: get installs outside of the State.
Five month of data, successful data at that, is great. But as soon as you present it to another casino, they're gonna ask why it was pulled from that casino.Quote: mrsuit31... Even though the game had a very heavy boulder dropped on it from above, I was at least able to compile very positive data from the five months of play to show proof of concept. ...
Do you have a good answer?
If so, can you share it here?
Continued best of luck to you...
were 'out of your control'.
Quote: DJTeddyBearFive month of data, successful data at that, is great. But as soon as you present it to another casino, they're gonna ask why it was pulled from that casino.
Do you have a good answer?
If so, can you share it here?
Continued best of luck to you...
Yes. But he has to mention the scenario with innocence. Brent was told: "Mr. Weiss, your game is doing exceptionally well here, to say the least. In fact, we are quite impressed! - Unfortunately, counselor, for some undisclosed reason, we have to remove it." People in this business know that politics are involved; the numbers say "keep the game." He needs a straw man.
Because it's tribal, neither State gaming or Federal gaming (NIGC) have jurisdiction to answer questions or do anything.
I spoke to people at both agencies who agree with my reasoning, yet again can do nothing about it.
If it's a tribal casino, the tribal gaming commission has jurisdiction, not the state regulators (or federal ones). I assume you took care of all your compliance and licensing requirements before installing the game, but if you missed something, that's probably why the game was removed.Quote: mrsuit31In a nutshell, it was a compact issue. I not being part of the tribe can not even ask questions of the Governor's office about it. I tried...
Because it's tribal, neither State gaming or Federal gaming (NIGC) have jurisdiction to answer questions or do anything.
I spoke to people at both agencies who agree with my reasoning, yet again can do nothing about it.
Quote: EvenBobWhat casino was it in. What were the reasons that
were 'out of your control'.
I forget which one but it was one of the U.P. casinos in the western part.
You're welcome to contact me privately if you want my advice or just a shoulder to cry on.
Quote: MathExtremistIf it's a tribal casino, the tribal gaming commission has jurisdiction, not the state regulators (or federal ones). I assume you took care of all your compliance and licensing requirements before installing the game, but if you missed something, that's probably why the game was removed.
In this situation it's both the tribal commission and the governors office. The governors office could have taken care of the situation with a simple letter.
I know exactly why it happened, again it's nothing to do with the game. It took some investigation but I found out. Explaining the situation in depth to someone is not an issue.
In regard to the casino, the director would be happy to confirm how the game was performing. That's one bonus of the relationship I have with him.
Licensing and everything was taken care of early on... That wasn't involved.
The things that seemed to create some confusion with the tribe was the proper classification for my game. They couldn't figure out if it was class III or not. Some thought it was in its own category because of the dice used in place of an electronic RNG. The game is very obviously class III. That all said, the game was ultimately removed for another reason not involving myself or the game.
While an underlying issue is being resolved, no new additions (even though this was ongoing for five months) was worth bringing into the equation... At least that's how it was explained to me. (Paraphrased of course)
Quote: mrsuit31Due to reasons out of my control, the game was unfortunately pulled off of the floor regardless of its performance. I walked out of the second day of the Bar Exam and came back to the multiple text messages from the Director apologizing about the situation.
Pardon for the thread tangent, but (a) what state, and (b) what result?
It feels like a blend of 3CP and a "flushes only" game but uses a BJ point scoring system. I get that it is "31", but with the proliferation of High Card Flush and both Sci Games & AGS coming out with their own "flush variants", the concept of only counting suited cards in your hand is becoming more familiar to players. So look at only your suited cards and count up the points...did you or are you likely to hit the pay table with one more draw card? That is the player decision...simple.
Brent, keep the faith brother, I think your next opportunity is coming.
Lac Vieux Desert, Watersmeet, MIQuote: IbeatyouracesI forget which one but it was one of the U.P. casinos in the western part.
Quote: teddysLac Vieux Desert, Watersmeet, MI
The place gets little action.
Really sorry to hear this is going on. :( Hang in there, especially since it's not a problem within the game!
Quote: ThatDonGuyAm I the only person who saw this?
Quote: mrsuit31Due to reasons out of my control, the game was unfortunately pulled off of the floor regardless of its performance. I walked out of the second day of the Bar Exam and came back to the multiple text messages from the Director apologizing about the situation.
Pardon for the thread tangent, but (a) what state, and (b) what result?
Florida, and I'm a lawyer now... Thanks for asking!
Quote: RonCI am not sure what exactly you have to do next, but good luck! I have played the demo and enjoy the game. It is easy to understand. I hope to see it installed in a casino near me!
Thank you Ron! I promise I'm doing my best to make that happen...
Quote: MathExtremistIf it's a tribal casino, the tribal gaming commission has jurisdiction, not the state regulators (or federal ones). I assume you took care of all your compliance and licensing requirements before installing the game, but if you missed something, that's probably why the game was removed.
As with everything in life, some tribal commissions are better than others at making sure everything is handled to their satisfaction. And sometimes Commissions change their minds....I think M$31 mentioned this was a tribal compliance issue/Class III vs. Class II or something along those lines. My guess is the game ended up on the wrong side of a commission decision made after the game was installed. End of story, not really much to discuss.
Lots of installation specific, not necessarily game specific, things can go wrong when you have a single trial installation. That is why it is better to get 3-4 trial installations in different geographic markets and in different sized properties. That is what the big distributors are able to do with new games. Then you neutralize any property specific issues and get a better read on if the game works.
Certainly game specific issues can and do come up in a trial, but M$31 says he has good performance data from the 5 months of live play (which I doubt the property wants shared on this board). I believe M$31. Not sure why this thread keeps veering back to what technicality caused the game to get pulled instead of focusing on feedback for the new layout & game play.
Possibly because those of us budding game designers, who haven't traveled down that road yet, are curious...Quote: Paradigm... Not sure why this thread keeps veering back to what technicality caused the game to get pulled instead of focusing on feedback for the new layout & game play.
Quote: ParadigmSo you're looking for a general discussion about the hundreds of ways a trial can go wrong and a game gets pulled? Start a new thresd...M$31 was already asked and answered this question as it relates to M$31 in as much detail as he can provide...My guess is he started this thread to get feedback on the new game tweaks...stop derailing.
I truely would like to hear everyone's feedback on the game updates.
Without going further into the speculation, it can't be a Class II issue. House-banked (player vs. dealer) card games are defined as not Class II -- see 25 CFR 502.3 and 502.4.Quote: ParadigmAs with everything in life, some tribal commissions are better than others at making sure everything is handled to their satisfaction. And sometimes Commissions change their minds....I think M$31 mentioned this was a tribal compliance issue/Class III vs. Class II or something along those lines.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/25/502.3
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/25/502.4
Still a fan. I like the new layout of the pay table with moneysuit bonus. Did any of the payouts/math change much? Might just be my small sampling size, but I got killed for 3 buy ins in a row =P.Quote: mrsuit31I truely would like to hear everyone's feedback on the game updates.
Regarding the demo: it works well, even on my iPhone.Quote: mrsuit31I truely would like to hear everyone's feedback on the game updates.
Regarding the game: I like it and would play it in a casino.
Regarding the updates: sorry, but I don't remember the prior version enough to comment on the changes.
Quote: DJTeddyBearRegarding the demo: it works well, even on my iPhone.
Regarding the game: I like it and would play it in a casino.
Regarding the updates: sorry, but I don't remember the prior version enough to comment on the changes.
Thanks DJ.
Stacy I PMed you...
The demo isn't very good. Nowhere on the demo or the game rules does it say how you add up cards. You may have that somewhere on your website, but not on game rules or on the demo page. Is an Ace high or low? What is the benefit of suited cards? What does the money suit actually do?
I don't care for the game.
Quote: RomesStill a fan. I like the new layout of the pay table with moneysuit bonus. Did any of the payouts/math change much? Might just be my small sampling size, but I got killed for 3 buy ins in a row =P.
Haha we all know that happens sometimes. The payouts changed slightly. Not so much for the bonus, but for the base game. We took out the push ms16 and increased payouts on the low end significantly. We also incorporated a slightly higher pay for a non-ms mini royal instead of paying it simply as a 31 on both wagers. The house edge was increased on both wagers, however the hit rate is still virtually the same. You just had a bad run ;)
For the side wager we removed the increase in pay for the ms21 and, like the base game, increased payouts on most of lower MS payouts.
Overdue (sorry), but here's what I think. The game is still very good. The layout is a LOT cleaner. I'm wondering if you can go one step cleaner still by having the paytables between 2 player spots (a total of 3) instead of both paytables per player (a total of 6). I figure after people figure out they're trying to get to 17, (hopefully, what, 2 hands?) they don't need to constantly refer to them, but you're the one with real-world feedback, so I could easily be wrong.
I miss the other paytable. I miss the Moneysuit 16 push, the earlier Moneysuit pays, and the big top pays. I'm guessing this is less volatile, and perhaps less scary a paytable for the house in 2 ways; there's more value alignment (so fewer mispays) and not as high exposure on the top pays (if I'm remembering the old one correctly). Maybe the change makes the game better, but one of the things I enjoyed was the idiosyncrasies of the Moneysuit paying so much differently. That's me, liking complex games.
I lost much more often than I expected following the posted strategy regarding pairs. I think it's essentially the same strategy, though, so I may have been running bad. Otherwise, I caught a 31 (with the 4th card) and a dealt 29, so a couple of decent bonus pays in about 100 hands, but I busted out 6 times before I got a good run going (playing max bets, so that's on me, too).
Don't give up on it; I think there's a solid core and it doesn't get boring quickly, so should have some legs wherever installed. Keep us posted! :)
Quote: beachbumbabsHi, Brett!
Overdue (sorry), but here's what I think. The game is still very good. The layout is a LOT cleaner. I'm wondering if you can go one step cleaner still by having the paytables between 2 player spots (a total of 3) instead of both paytables per player (a total of 6). I figure after people figure out they're trying to get to 17, (hopefully, what, 2 hands?) they don't need to constantly refer to them, but you're the one with real-world feedback, so I could easily be wrong.
I miss the other paytable. I miss the Moneysuit 16 push, the earlier Moneysuit pays, and the big top pays. I'm guessing this is less volatile, and perhaps less scary a paytable for the house in 2 ways; there's more value alignment (so fewer mispays) and not as high exposure on the top pays (if I'm remembering the old one correctly). Maybe the change makes the game better, but one of the things I enjoyed was the idiosyncrasies of the Moneysuit paying so much differently. That's me, liking complex games.
I lost much more often than I expected following the posted strategy regarding pairs. I think it's essentially the same strategy, though, so I may have been running bad. Otherwise, I caught a 31 (with the 4th card) and a dealt 29, so a couple of decent bonus pays in about 100 hands, but I busted out 6 times before I got a good run going (playing max bets, so that's on me, too).
Don't give up on it; I think there's a solid core and it doesn't get boring quickly, so should have some legs wherever installed. Keep us posted! :)
Hey Babs,
Thank you for this. As far as the paytables between the player spots, that is what we used to have. People
Wanted their own because they kept getting confused on which to look at.
I think you aren't reading the paytables right based on your top pays statement. The top pays and a large number of the ms pays on this version are bigger than the old paytables. The top pays on these are 300 to 1 for the ms mini Royal (100 to 1 times 3) vs the old 250 to one for the bonus, and 45 to 1 (15 to 1 times 3) instead of 40 on the base game. Perhaps you didn't pick up on the multiplier as quickly as I had hoped.
It was weird, I was running pretty bad yesterday also. Hopefully it's just a bad day because the hit rates are the same on the bonus and deceased by only 1% on the base game, so it shouldn't go that fast.
As always, please keep the feedback coming and after you register the multiplier now in place of the double paytable, let me know what you think about the high pays. (Any ms hand over the 1 to 1 payout on both tables now doubles or triples the non ms payout)...
Quote: HittemThe layout is awfully intimidating. Way too many things going on. I assume plenty of people looked at the table, and kept moving. Three betting spots, two paytables, two spots for cards is just way too much.
The demo isn't very good. Nowhere on the demo or the game rules does it say how you add up cards. You may have that somewhere on your website, but not on game rules or on the demo page. Is an Ace high or low? What is the benefit of suited cards? What does the money suit actually do?
I don't care for the game.
Although the layout has alot going on I don't think it's worse than uth or high card flush.
I added a little blue on both re rules leg and put the slogan at the top of the demo page... That should satisfy your statements as far as he lack of rules.
As far as the 3 betting spaces, I'm pretty sure that one of the lowest number of spaces on any table game that exists these days. UTH has 4, three card has 3, double draw poker has 4, miss stud has four, crazy for card has four, cross cross poker has like 47...
Of course you are entitled to you opinion and I thank you for taking a look at the materials I had posted...
Quote: HunterhillAlthough the layout has alot going on I don't think it's worse than uth or high card flush.
Hunter, did you actually experiment with the demo at all?
Quote: HunterhillI did along time ago but I haven't recently.I will give it another try.
Cool, I'll look forward to your thoughts when the time comes.
Quote: HunterhillI just played it now.For anyone that plays table games I think the layout is fine.It's actually pretty clean. High card flush seems to be gaining popularity I think anyone that plays that would like your game.
I appreciate that Hunterhill. Thank you for taking the time to mess around with it.
1) Remove the "Play Must Equal Ante Wager". I think Play = Ante is the default and if a game allows something else, it will be noted on the layout. If a play = ante indication is deemed to be required, I could see a small "1X" inside the Play circle just below the "Play" text.
2) You don't need "Money$uit" above and below the "Money$uit Indicator" circle, it seems redundant. Alternatively, keep the lower "Money$uit" and get rid of the upper and the text in the circle ("Money$uit Indicator"). It is clear from the word MoneySuit that this is the spot that is going to designate the Money$uit and after one hand of play that is going to be really obvious to players.
3) I might replace the big "$" in the 3 Card Natural Box with the word "Natural". When I see "$" I may think that is where I put a wager (similar to I believe the third betting spot in Let It Ride...didn't it have a "$" in the middle of it?). Using the word "Natural" also ties that hand and those 3 cards to the Natural Bonus Pay Table which should allow you to drop the "Applies to first three cards only" from underneath the Natural Bonus Pay Table.
4) For the title of the "Natural 31 Bonus Pays", I would either use the logo (with all the above and below text seen on the betting spot) or just use the words Natural Bonus, but not both. So the pay table title would be "(Logo Here) Pays" of "Natural Bonus Pays" and not have the little circle with 31 in the center above the current text title.
5) Remove the "Don't Touch Draw Card" and put "Do Not Touch" just under the word "Draw" inside the box. I think I have a developed a visual hang up with layout text that is outside of boxes or circles to which the text relates :-).
So that is a lot of suggestions M$31, I don't know if any of them make sense with any other feedback I am sure the layout has been through.
+1 +1 Paradigm is a true friend.Quote: ParadigmThere have been some comments that the layout is too busy. I haven't really focused on the layout before but less is always more in layout design, here are things that could be changed (note I said could not should :-p):
1) Remove the "Play Must Equal Ante Wager". I think Play = Ante is the default and if a game allows something else, it will be noted on the layout. If a play = ante indication is deemed to be required, I could see a small "1X" inside the Play circle just below the "Play" text.
2) You don't need "Money$uit" above and below the "Money$uit Indicator" circle, it seems redundant. Alternatively, keep the lower "Money$uit" and get rid of the upper and the text in the circle ("Money$uit Indicator"). It is clear from the word MoneySuit that this is the spot that is going to designate the Money$uit and after one hand of play that is going to be really obvious to players.
3) I might replace the big "$" in the 3 Card Natural Box with the word "Natural". When I see "$" I may think that is where I put a wager (similar to I believe the third betting spot in Let It Ride...didn't it have a "$" in the middle of it?). Using the word "Natural" also ties that hand and those 3 cards to the Natural Bonus Pay Table which should allow you to drop the "Applies to first three cards only" from underneath the Natural Bonus Pay Table.
4) For the title of the "Natural 31 Bonus Pays", I would either use the logo (with all the above and below text seen on the betting spot) or just use the words Natural Bonus, but not both. So the pay table title would be "(Logo Here) Pays" of "Natural Bonus Pays" and not have the little circle with 31 in the center above the current text title.
5) Remove the "Don't Touch Draw Card" and put "Do Not Touch" just under the word "Draw" inside the box. I think I have a developed a visual hang up with layout text that is outside of boxes or circles to which the text relates :-).
So that is a lot of suggestions M$31, I don't know if any of them make sense with any other feedback I am sure the layout has been through.
Compared to him, others are just like table game guys who merely take down your game without saying too much. Most people do not have the patience, or expect to get paid, to comment.
Quote: ParadigmThere have been some comments that the layout is too busy. I haven't really focused on the layout before but less is always more in layout design, here are things that could be changed (note I said could not should :-p):
1) Remove the "Play Must Equal Ante Wager". I think Play = Ante is the default and if a game allows something else, it will be noted on the layout. If a play = ante indication is deemed to be required, I could see a small "1X" inside the Play circle just below the "Play" text.
2) You don't need "Money$uit" above and below the "Money$uit Indicator" circle, it seems redundant. Alternatively, keep the lower "Money$uit" and get rid of the upper and the text in the circle ("Money$uit Indicator"). It is clear from the word MoneySuit that this is the spot that is going to designate the Money$uit and after one hand of play that is going to be really obvious to players.
3) I might replace the big "$" in the 3 Card Natural Box with the word "Natural". When I see "$" I may think that is where I put a wager (similar to I believe the third betting spot in Let It Ride...didn't it have a "$" in the middle of it?). Using the word "Natural" also ties that hand and those 3 cards to the Natural Bonus Pay Table which should allow you to drop the "Applies to first three cards only" from underneath the Natural Bonus Pay Table.
4) For the title of the "Natural 31 Bonus Pays", I would either use the logo (with all the above and below text seen on the betting spot) or just use the words Natural Bonus, but not both. So the pay table title would be "(Logo Here) Pays" of "Natural Bonus Pays" and not have the little circle with 31 in the center above the current text title.
5) Remove the "Don't Touch Draw Card" and put "Do Not Touch" just under the word "Draw" inside the box. I think I have a developed a visual hang up with layout text that is outside of boxes or circles to which the text relates :-).
So that is a lot of suggestions M$31, I don't know if any of them make sense with any other feedback I am sure the layout has been through.
1)I'll probably do this, as you have suggested many times at this point.
2)In reality this will be covered with the dice cup (or printed suit in non-dice jurisdictions), so during play it isn't seen. But I could pull the indicator language out.
3) keeping the $ sign, that's mine haha
4) that's how it was originally, I thought the little logo made it easier to quickly recognize. I think the text alone may be best. I'll play around and see how it looks.
5) That's out of the box purely for functionality. When the draw card is there, it needs to be seen I feel. I could. It I'm not sure about putting it in.
Quote: UCivan+1 +1 Paradigm is a true friend.
Compared to him, others are just like table game guys who merely take down your game without saying too much. Most people do not have the patience, or expect to get paid, to comment.
He is a friend. We have done a lot together along the way. Always happy to bounce ideas off of one another.
I figure what goes around comes around, pay it forward, etc. I got lots of input along the way from folks with much more experience than I had.
I also do like the game and look at it as "A 3 Card variant of High Card Flush using a blackjack point counting system against a pay table. After the Ante/Play decision, the player gets a 4th card to improve their hand". It is really that simple of a game and could have some broad appeal as new 3 card games come to market post the 3CP patent expiration and the new emphasis on suited games like HCF and Flushes Gone Wild, etc.
Quote: nodummy57New kid here, so I did not see the other versions. But this one sure looks like a winner. I am working on a game myself and heard it was a brutal business. Nothing I read here changed my opinion of that for sure.
Thank you nodummy!
Good luck with your project. Unfortunately the things you have read are merely just the tip of the iceberg regarding the industry.
There is a lot of useful information on here. And many people that can offer good advice.
Quote: mrsuit31Thank you nodummy!
Good luck with your project. Unfortunately the things you have read are merely just the tip of the iceberg regarding the industry.
There is a lot of useful information on here. And many people that can offer good advice.
Brent,
Thanks for the response on my post. I see what you're talking about with the MS paying multiples (and I did when I made my comments). I think your new pay table is a good one, probably better over all, and I didn't recall the previous one correctly as to the max pays. I just enjoyed the quirky nature of the first one and was talking about that. May the game live long and prosper! :)
