Table games using a modified deck
Spanish 21 uses decks that don't have any tens. (Actual tens. They still have ten value face cards.)
There's probably others.
It's perfectly legal as long as it's disclosed.
What about table games that are essentially mash-ups of a few different games?
For example, I've been working on a modified deck game combining Ceelo, 3 card poker, Pai Gow, and Baccarat. Even though it's actually alot of fun, saying that aloud makes it sound gross. Any suggestions for packaging and marketing such a monstrosity :) ?
Quote: shrimpboatcaptIs there any hope for table games that use a modified deck (i.e. stripping suits, only using paint cards, etc)?
I'm not sure if a game with a modified deck will work, but from a patent standpoint it is easier to get around the 101 rejection when using a modified deck.
@RealizeGaming
@Paigowdan
My card game is a riff off of a dice game. It uses a deck full of only A-6 cards. Am I in the ballpark of viability or out in the parking lot :)?
Some use dice to select random cards which then produce the outcome, some merely use random/shuffled cards for the outcome.
Quote: shrimpboatcapt@DJTeddyBear
@RealizeGaming
@Paigowdan
My card game is a riff off of a dice game. It uses a deck full of only A-6 cards. Am I in the ballpark of viability or out in the parking lot :)?
Yes, this is good, as is a Royal deck (10 to Ace) and a Spanish deck.
Many card companies produce casino quality special decks on demand for games that use "special but reasonable" deck compositions, to ease their casino use.
@Paigowdan - Thanks! I have a new paigow variant - if you want to play I can pm link.
Quote: shrimpboatcaptIs there any hope for table games that use a modified deck (i.e. stripping suits, only using paint cards, etc)?
Yes.
Resist the temptation. There are precisely zero successful new games that are merely combinations of features found in existing games. Moreover, since "make a new casino game by combining existing casino games" has been tried so many times, you'll be hard-pressed to argue to the patent office that your particular combination is non-obvious.Quote: shrimpboatcaptFor example, I've been working on a modified deck game combining Ceelo, 3 card poker, Pai Gow, and Baccarat.
So if you're going to pursue it, don't pitch it as "this game combines Ceelo, Three Card Poker, Pai Gow, and Baccarat," instead pitch it as something altogether new.
If I had to take an educated guess based on those four games, I'd presume that your game deals six cards in the range 1..6 to both the player and dealer, then the cards are separated into two three-card hands and then placed front/back (where the back hand has to be higher according to baccarat-style scoring). Then there are side bets based on both Ceelo and 3CP ranking schemes. Am I close?
Quote: MathExtremistResist the temptation. There are precisely zero successful new games that are merely combinations of features found in existing games. Moreover, since "make a new casino game by combining existing casino games" has been tried so many times, you'll be hard-pressed to argue to the patent office that your particular combination is non-obvious.
So if you're going to pursue it, don't pitch it as "this game combines Ceelo, Three Card Poker, Pai Gow, and Baccarat," instead pitch it as something altogether new.
Thanks for the explanation and advice!
Quote: MathExtremistIf I had to take an educated guess based on those four games, I'd presume that your game deals six cards in the range 1..6 to both the player and dealer,
Yes
Quote: MathExtremistthen the cards are separated into two three-card hands
Yes
Quote: MathExtremistand then placed front/back (where the back hand has to be higher according to baccarat-style scoring).
Not exactly - Yes you make a high and low hand. However, the hands are scored using Ceelo hand rankings. And if you cannot make a Ceelo hand, then you use baccarat scoring.
Quote: MathExtremistThen there are side bets based on both Ceelo and 3CP ranking schemes. Am I close?
Very impressive.
So what do you think?
I see, so it's more like Pai Gow (tiles) than I had anticipated where there are "special" hands that outrank the non-special hands. If Ceelo rankings come before non-Ceelo rankings then you're going to have a strange-looking hand order. For example, the following four hands are counterintuitively ranked from highest to lowest:Quote: shrimpboatcaptNot exactly - Yes you make a high and low hand. However, the hands are scored using Ceelo hand rankings. And if you cannot make a Ceelo hand, then you use baccarat scoring.
456 - highest Ceelo hand
123 - lowest Ceelo hand
234 - not a Ceelo hand, worth 9
345 - not a Ceelo hand, worth 2
Also, here's another backwards-looking hand ordering:
233 - Ceelo pair
234 - non-Ceelo 9
235 - non-Ceelo 0
I might suggest switching up a few things to make the game more intuitive.
Quote: MathExtremistI see, so it's more like Pai Gow (tiles) than I had anticipated where there are "special" hands that outrank the non-special hands.
Yes
Quote: MathExtremistCeelo rankings come before non-Ceelo rankings
Yes. A non Ceelo hand loses to a Ceelo hand, except for 123.
Hand order:
456 - best possible hand
222 - any trips
225 - any pair and a singleton (225 would be 5)
235 - any non ceelo hands
123 - worst possible hand
Quote: MathExtremistyou're going to have a strange-looking hand order. For example, the following four hands are counterintuitively ranked from highest to lowest:
456 - highest Ceelo hand
123 - lowest Ceelo hand
234 - not a Ceelo hand, worth 9
345 - not a Ceelo hand, worth 2
Also, here's another backwards-looking hand ordering:
233 - Ceelo pair
234 - non-Ceelo 9
235 - non-Ceelo 0
Ceelo hands are awkwardly ordered and mathematically out of whack. Trips are the most difficult to get, but 456 is the best hand. And 123 or 456 qualify as Ceelo hands, but 234 and 345 don't. 123 is more difficult to get than 225, but 123 automatically loses to all. Is that perfect imbalance what makes this game fun to play? Would revising this game to be mathematically correct negatively impact its playability?
I have tried an iteration where non Ceelo hands are evaluated based on descending order, like poker hi/lo rules. For example, a non Ceelo hand of 432 would beat a non Ceelo hand of 532 because 432 has a lower descending order.
Quote: MathExtremistI might suggest switching up a few things to make the game more intuitive.
Such as... :)?
Quote: shrimpboatcaptCeelo hands are awkwardly ordered and mathematically out of whack. Trips are the most difficult to get, but 456 is the best hand. And 123 or 456 qualify as Ceelo hands, but 234 and 345 don't. 123 is more difficult to get than 225, but 123 automatically loses to all. Is that perfect imbalance what makes this game fun to play? Would revising this game to be mathematically correct negatively impact its playability?
I have tried an iteration where non Ceelo hands are evaluated based on descending order, like poker hi/lo rules. For example, a non Ceelo hand of 432 would beat a non Ceelo hand of 532 because 432 has a lower descending order.
"Mathematically correct" is not well-defined, and "fun to play" is entirely in the eye of the players. If the goal is to have a game based on Ceelo, then that's how it should work. To my knowledge, no Ceelo games have ever been successful in casinos, but there's no harm trying again. But throwing in baccarat-style scoring to fill the holes in the Ceelo hand rankings seems confusing. I think the poker-style scoring is better because it's easier to see automatically, especially in the context of trips and pairs which are already Ceelo ranks. If you were doing a whole game using mod-10 scoring that's different -- I've done exactly that, it works great -- but only doing mod-10 scoring for some of the hands seems like a jumbled mess.
Quote: MathExtremist"Mathematically correct" is not well-defined,.
Sorry. The mathematical correctness I was referring to is the reordering of hand rankings according to their statistical probabilities:
Trips
Straights
paired points
non Ceelo hands
Quote: MathExtremist"fun to play" is entirely in the eye of the players. If the goal is to have a game based on Ceelo, then that's how it should work. To my knowledge, no Ceelo games have ever been successful in casinos, but there's no harm trying again. But throwing in baccarat-style scoring to fill the holes in the Ceelo hand rankings seems confusing. I think the poker-style scoring is better because it's easier to see automatically, especially in the context of trips and pairs which are already Ceelo ranks. If you were doing a whole game using mod-10 scoring that's different -- I've done exactly that, it works great -- but only doing mod-10 scoring for some of the hands seems like a jumbled mess.
That makes sense. I'm working on other game variations using the same Ceelo Poker rules (with varying degrees of success). The blackjack version lets players redraw, and non ceelo hands are a bust. It's definitely a challenge to find the right balance. When a solution fits it easy to stop looking for a more efficient answer.
You can use that ranking scheme with just two Ceelo-type exceptions and I think it becomes far clearer:Quote: shrimpboatcaptSorry. The mathematical correctness I was referring to is the reordering of hand rankings according to their statistical probabilities:
Trips
Straights
paired points
non Ceelo hands
4-5-6 (automatic winner)
Trips
3-4-5
2-3-4
Paired points
non Ceelo hands
1-2-3 (automatic loser)
That's going to be the easiest to explain, I think. I don't know what kind of a game it makes, and I'm concerned about the complexity of the dealer's house way, but that's outside the scope of my free Internet consulting. :)
Edit: or if you're trying to capture a slightly different demographic, make the game based on Bunco instead of Ceelo. Just make sure the cocktail servers know they'll have a run on white wine when the game goes live.
Quote: MathExtremistEdit: or if you're trying to capture a slightly different demographic, make the game based on Bunco instead of Ceelo. Just make sure the cocktail servers know they'll have a run on white wine when the game goes live.
This was tried...I remember seeing it at G2E many years ago (2008 or 2009) and thinking "not a chance"...If I remember correctly, it was based on how many Fives were rolled!
Quote: ParadigmThis was tried...I remember seeing it at G2E many years ago (2008 or 2009) and thinking "not a chance"...If I remember correctly, it was based on how many Fives were rolled!
BUNKO BUCKS. You saw it at the Southern Gaming Summit in 2009. The game had one failed install at the old Sheraton in Tunica.
Premise was that since there were millions of Bunko players around the world that the appeal would transfer to the casino floor. Problem is the multitudes of women who gather to drink wine and gossip do not fit the demographic of women who gamble in a casino. BIG SURPRISE!
