A foot in the door: Standards in electronic signaling protocols used for live gaming

A foot in the door: Standards in electronic signaling protocols used for live gaming interactions across multi-vendor implementations and networks.

A good example of this is ShuffleMaster's RapidRoulette game. This represents a new trend in live gaming based upon chip-less wagering implemented over a server-based architecture.

I am certain this is the future of live gaming, and warrants a full and OPEN discussion. I think a great opportunity to mold the future architecture of server-based gaming presents itself here.

Starting with new bets like DJTeddyBear’s Poker-For-Roulette side bet, the need to introduce electronic signaling into a live game of Roulette is apparent. Although DJ did a fair job detailing the signaling interactions his interface requires, I felt that there were a lot of details that he didn’t work out. Since I’ve spent over 10 man years exclusively working this out, I feel I’m qualified to discuss it.

I own a company involved in exactly these topics, and I want to start selling some products, for example, a server-based system to accept chip-less bets and run the game… OK, it's just like ShuffleMaster’s RapidRoulette, but I’m trying to approach it from a STANDARDS point of view.

I keep telling DJ that his new wager represents an important step in the evolution of gaming… the introduction of the All-Bets-Down signaling required for the electronics to calculate his bet payouts and track his jackpot balances.

But this is a big step for a casino to take. First of all, it costs a lot of money for DJ’s license, for the hardware and to re-train the dealers and floor managers. Next, the casino needs to consider a lot of new things like security procedures, fail-over strategies in case of hardware problems, new gaming regulations concerning the use of such products, setting up pay-back programs for DJ and his vendor, etc., etc…

I’m sure that DJ has wondered if a casino will weigh the potential profits his new bet could provide against all of these other considerations and still buy it. The thing is, DJ doesn’t care about changing the world, he just want to sell his wager.

DJ needs to world to catch-up to his framework requirements… chip-less gaming and server-based architecture. My company needs the same thing, well, actually, my company IS that same thing. What is needed here is a way to jump-start the use of such framework.

One of my older ideas to help jump-start the introduction of chip-less gaming in casinos was to use "the handicap card"... it could be said that the casino needs to establish All-Bets-Down signaling in order to allow handicapped people to use electronic interfaces to make bets. I discussed this at length with my lawyer. He nodded and charged me $300 to listen. I also included it in one of my patents. However, that was all done before RapidRoulette was available.

Still, I think its a good approach... its a good FOOT IN THE DOOR.

One of my dream goals is to STANDARDIZE this interface. For example, a "standard" protocol for taking Roulette bets from a variety of multi-vendor hardware interfaces, for example, one for the visually impaired, one, for the hearing impaired, and one for Steven Hawking.

Once the interface is established for the handicapped, there is nothing to preclude the use of remote terminals, Kiosks, etc.

And once THAT is established, THEN the world opens up for new and exciting Poker-For-Roulette-like side bets, enhancements to existing games, as well as brand new games that could never be played with the physical limitations of chips on a table.

Before MathEx gets a chance to jump on my shit and proclaim that I will need a gaming license to do this, let me repeat again that I have a WORKING DEMO. As such, I have already worked out the exact message sequencing required to accept wagers and play the games.

Because of the layered architecture this messaging is based upon, the functions of the PLAYER program are isolated and encapsulated within it, connected to the rest of the system ONLY by the protocols implemented by the message sequencing.

In other words, MathEx, I have the PROTOCOLS worked out.

Vendors are then unleashed to create player units that cater to every kind of handicap, playing any kind of game, using any kind of fancy animation they desire.
using any kind of fancy animation they desire.
using any kind of fancy animation they desire.
using any kind of fancy animation they desire.
(just so MathEx will finally get my point and stop dissin' me for those lame wagering layouts my demo currently uses)

They can create new dealer and game sever programs in the same isolated manner. Even the underlying transport mechanisms of these protocols can be changed, for example, wireless technologies, encrypted message transports, whatever… hardware can change, the system can be scaled up or down, etc.. THE SYSTEM REMAINS.

I am considering GIVING this protocol to the public… I might to do so to get MY foot in the door in the gaming business. My protocols ALREADY support multiple games. I don't think there is currently anything like it in the public domain of the industry, and (if not) I think the industry needs it badly.

It will open up the competition, allowing game inventors like DJ to go wild... dont forget, once the interface is established, programming new bets like Poker-For-Roullette will literal be a snap (a snap-in).

Yup, I really am interested in what you’re trying to accomplish, DJ!

Am I the only one here who doesn't understand any of that?

Given all that, how do you make money?

good question, mathex, and thanks for taking the time to read it.

i am hoping to be able to sell the demos for people like DJ who want to sell their ideas but cant afford a $50,000 demo

i want to sell my system to developers to use as a rapid-prototyping tool to help them create new bets and to test these bets using my "betmaker" strategy tool

im eventually hoping to sell my "trueplacebet" just like DJ

eventually eventually, i might try to get my system approved for gaming and sell it to casinos

but if anyone will pay me, i will shoot jerry logan.

takers?

What I seriously think you need is for someone to translate your ideas and web pages into something much more succinct and marketable.

I really have trouble following what your trying to do, but think I get it. But as 1/3rd of my job (and skill set) is trying to work out what a technical wizard/ideas guy is trying to do I have an advantage....

I KNOW! I SUCK at describing stuff.. I ALWAYS go off into far too much detail and nobody can see my forests because of all the trees.

However, what I'm trying to sell is very complex.

Its like trying to sell somebody the concept of the OSF model of computer architecture... difficult to explain, elusive in purpose, and really high-tech. However, once in place, this model allows multiple vendors to collaborate and everyone benifits.

Its just like that.

THANK YOU for reading through it. It was not intended for low level readers.

BTW, your suggestion to try using my system to create a set of stragtegies to test DJs bet was a good one, and that is a service I want to start selling as well.

Geez, if you're looking to make money in the gaming business how about I introduce you to my pal Singer, and save all that stuff for the next generation?

I'm not belittling it, I'm just not nearly schooled enough to even begin to understand it.

Quote: discflicker

I KNOW! I SUCK at describing stuff.. I ALWAYS go off into far too much detail and nobody can see my forests because of all the trees.

However, what I'm trying to sell is very complex.

I find even the most complicated things can be broken down into a level where the reader can quickly ascertain if the subject matter is of interest. Or they find the targets in the relavant area and explain to them direct. I don't think your target market is on WoV, or if it is, they can't readily ascertain what it is you propose.

Indeed there's far too many trees, and possibly three different forests in what your proposing.

Quote:

Its like trying to sell somebody the concept of the OSF model of computer architecture... difficult to explain, elusive in purpose, and really high-tech. However, once in place, this model allows multiple vendors to collaborate and everyone benifits.

You see, I had to look up OSF, and I assume your talking about Air Traffic Control?

Quote:

Its just like that.

THANK YOU for reading through it. It was not intended for low level readers.

BTW, your suggestion to try using my system to create a set of stragtegies to test DJs bet was a good one, and that is a service I want to start selling as well.

Quote: JerryLogan

Am I the only one here who doesn't understand any of that?

No.

Quote: thecesspit

I had to look up OSF...

In a prior post about this, I had to ask what "ABD" meant. DiscFlicker then admitted that it's a term he coined himself: All Bets Down.

I've yet to see a reason why he expects to have his "standards" be accepted by anyone, when he's busy creating new terms, abbreviating them and expecting readers to know what the hell he's talking about, rather than using an industry standard term such as "No More Bets."

Quote: DJTeddyBear

In a prior post about this, I had to ask what "ABD" meant. DiscFlicker then admitted that it's a term he coined himself: All Bets Down.

I've yet to see a reason why he expects to have his "standards" be accepted by anyone, when he's busy creating new terms, abbreviating them and expecting readers to know what the hell he's talking about, rather than using an industry standard term such as "No More Bets."

So I don’t talk good. What is the problem?

OSF is the standard TLA for Open Software Foundation and this describes the standard layered architecture used to make the Unix operating system OPEN to a set of common STANDARDS. One of the reasons my posts are so long is I don’t like using abbreviations like TLA.

DJ, why you would pick on me for choosing the term All Bets Down vs. "No More Bets"? I didn’t design my system to specifically run the game of Roulette, and I had mentioned what ABD meant before I used it again as a TLA.

My system works! It is NOT Mickey-Mouse!

It is designed EXACTLY like the OSF model from UNIX because I was involved in those decisions, I worked for DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation), and you can bet I used the same layered architectural approach to implement my software.

Please don't get hung up on my choice of terminology.

Why don’t you try my stuff and see if it works for yourself?

It took me all of 2 days to program a new bet I'm calling "Home-Slide-Side-Bet", and it works exactly like paigowdan's abandoned project. 2 days to integrate this new bet into 4 of my existing games.

I challenge anyone to create prototypes as fast as I can. I bet I can program the "hard-pass" bet in less than 1 hour using my system.

My stuff works.


TLA = Three Letter Acronym, but these first have to be reviewed by the Ford Acronym Review Team (FART).

Quote: discflicker

good question, mathex, and thanks for taking the time to read it.

1. i am hoping to be able to sell the demos for people like DJ who want to sell their ideas but cant afford a $50,000 demo

2. i want to sell my system to developers to use as a rapid-prototyping tool to help them create new bets and to test these bets using my "betmaker" strategy tool

3. im eventually hoping to sell my "trueplacebet" just like DJ

4. eventually eventually, i might try to get my system approved for gaming and sell it to casinos

5. but if anyone will pay me, i will shoot jerry logan.

takers?

I'll number those 1 to 5 for the sake of not having a mishmash of quotes.
1. I don't see any money in that. The indy game developer market is very small and underfunded. The dirty little secret is that it's not how good your game is, it's who you know. I have learned this first hand, having mostly failed getting a game out by myself, and then finding recent success by leveraging the connections of others. The best demo in the world won't change this. So I can't imagine you'd have any meaningful revenue from that market.

2. Are these the same developers as above? If so, my comments still hold. Otherwise I don't know who you're talking about. Larger game companies have dedicated staff to handle game design tasks.

3. Start networking. Technology should be way down on your list.

4. This is where things get expensive. I wouldn't even consider this until you have a product that isn't, by your own admission, just like Rapid Roulette. Or that you're considering giving away. You should have a bankroll of multiple six figures.

5. That might be your most profitable short-term play, but the prospects aren't very good for the long run...

Also:

Quote:

I challenge anyone to create prototypes as fast as I can. I bet I can program the "hard-pass" bet in less than 1 hour using my system.

While your rapid prototyping cycle is notable, you should know that Hard Pass is covered by US Patent No. 7,661,677.

Quote: discflicker

DJ, why you would pick on me for choosing the term All Bets Down vs. "No More Bets"? I didn’t design my system to specifically run the game of Roulette, and I had mentioned what ABD meant before I used it again as a TLA.

"No more bets" is not exclusive to Roulette. It, or it's hand signal, is used in a variety of games, including BlackJack Insurance, Sic-Bo and Big 6 (Wheel Of Fortune), and perhaps others.

All Bets Down is a term you invented, which, as far as I can tell, is synonymous with No More Bets.

I point this out because, to me anyway, it illustrates how you don't know enough about the gaming industry to be qualified to propose any 'standards'.

Quote: discflicker

So I don’t talk good. What is the problem?

Because ideas need to seat well into others heads or everyone gets frustrated...

Quote:

OSF is the standard TLA for Open Software Foundation and this describes the standard layered architecture used to make the Unix operating system OPEN to a set of common STANDARDS. One of the reasons my posts are so long is I don’t like using abbreviations like TLA.

Ah.... it's not a TLA I am familiar with, but I was didn't get into software until around 1994 as an undergraduate, and the Unix/Linux world seriously until around 97.

This is like Mr. Spock talking to Robbie The Robot. This guy can out-babble mkl!

Quote: DJTeddyBear

"No more bets" is not exclusive to Roulette. It, or it's hand signal, is used in a variety of games, including BlackJack Insurance, Sic-Bo and Big 6 (Wheel Of Fortune), and perhaps others.

All Bets Down is a term you invented, which, as far as I can tell, is synonymous with No More Bets.

I point this out because, to me anyway, it illustrates how you don't know enough about the gaming industry to be qualified to propose any 'standards'.

You're gonna gage how much I know about gaming because of this one thing? What other minor detail have I said to support your assumption? I'm sure you can find a bunch among my posts. But I'm not trying to act like a know-it-all gaming expert, I'm trying to sell software that mimicks what occurs on the gaming floor.

The standards I'm trying to sell are COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS. Do you also question my qualifications for doing this? I think the system is as applicable to the gaming floor as it is to the factory floor it was really invented for. Ford totally believed in me, trusted me, and MY SOFTWARE is still running in over 200 plants, world-wide. This is over the past 20 years, and used in some cases for medical emergency dispatches.

I don't need to get defensive about what I know, MY SYSTEMS WORK! The code does not lie...

Have you tried my gaming software yet?

It works, and it's based upon this same protocol. The protocol is PURE... in computing terms, that means it is independent from any particular software implementation or any hardware it runs upon. Once proven, it can be considered as being "eternally correct". If the industry is in need of such a protocol as a means of implementing a standard, why can't it be my protocol?

Why does the industry need such a standard?

I have seen this all first hand in computer operating systems. ShuffleMaster comes out with RapidRoulette but uses a PROPRIATARY protocol. So no 3rd party company who specializes in, say, HANDICAPPED ACCESS can just invent a player unit that will "snap - in" to ShuffleMaster's server protocol. No, they need to ask if it OK, and let ShuffleMaster make all the calls and money.

My old company, DEC failed becauase of this. This is EXACTLY what the OSF and POXIX and LINUX are all about. The list goes on and on.

If these standards were in place, it would unleash MULTIPLE vendors and allow them to COMPETE with each other because of these are OPEN standards, not OWNED by any company at all.

Quote: discflicker

The standards I'm trying to sell are COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS. Do you also question my qualifications for doing this?

Not your qualifications, your business model. You can only sell standards if you hold a monopoly on their implementation *and* the industry can't work without them. I don't believe that's true in your case. I refer you to the Gaming Standards Association (GSA) and their work with G2S and S2S. Note that these standards are free:

http://www.gamingstandards.com/index.php?page=standards/free_downloads_standards

So I'm not sure the gaming industry is a ripe market for selling architectural standards. But if you want to pursue that avenue further, I'd look into joining the GSA. However, their lowest-level membership costs over 21k/year, so that may not be a financially-viable option.

Quote: MathExtremist

Not your qualifications, your business model. You can only sell standards if you hold a monopoly on their implementation *and* the industry can't work without them. I don't believe that's true in your case. I refer you to the Gaming Standards Association (GSA) and their work with G2S and S2S. Note that these standards are free:

http://www.gamingstandards.com/index.php?page=standards/free_downloads_standards

So I'm not sure the gaming industry is a ripe market for selling architectural standards. But if you want to pursue that avenue further, I'd look into joining the GSA. However, their lowest-level membership costs over 21k/year, so that may not be a financially-viable option.

Math, nobody SELLS standards. They're free to be used by anyone who wants to compete. That's the point. If they arent free, they are propriatary and (most likely) cost to use.

Here is my extremely long reply from your previous post:

Quote: MathExtremist

I'll number those 1 to 5 for the sake of not having a mishmash of quotes.
1. I don't see any money in that. The indy game developer market is very small and underfunded. The dirty little secret is that it's not how good your game is, it's who you know. I have learned this first hand, having mostly failed getting a game out by myself, and then finding recent success by leveraging the connections of others. The best demo in the world won't change this. So I can't imagine you'd have any meaningful revenue from that market.

2. Are these the same developers as above? If so, my comments still hold. Otherwise I don't know who you're talking about. Larger game companies have dedicated staff to handle game design tasks.

3. Start networking. Technology should be way down on your list.

4. This is where things get expensive. I wouldn't even consider this until you have a product that isn't, by your own admission, just like Rapid Roulette. Or that you're considering giving away. You should have a bankroll of multiple six figures.

5. That might be your most profitable short-term play, but the prospects aren't very good for the long run...

Once again, thanks for taking the time to read. MathEx, I owe you a SHITLOAD of golf discs. I can ship ‘em if you want, I’ll even pay for shipping! If you’re still awake after reading this LONG-ASS post, PM me your address… (oh oh…)


(1) I think I have a niche here… because of my rapid prototyping capability, I can usually knock off a demo really quick. If they want fancy graphics they can add them or get it done, its just VB for now, so you don’t need to be a programmer to play around with the layouts. But to a part-time wannabe inventor, I'm thinkin that $5,000 is a lot cheaper than $50,000 and these are just numbers for discussion, you get the point. I hope... GEEZE its like I'm talkin Chinese or sumpin.

(2) Yup same exact wannabe customers. You know all about 'em, RIGHT??? See the niche?

(3) and (4) OK. Here it comes. The cold, hard truth I have yet to discuss on this forum...

You are correct, sir (as usual). About 5 years ago, I convinced my nephew David Wollner, whom I love dearly, of my plans to own Vegas. He knew about my success at Ford, and he visualized the potential in my gaming applications of this technology, so David and me started SpikerSystems.

He was the CEO and he is all business. His approach was to go directly to the lawyers and try to get everything patented. It took years, but we did it, (I think), we broke it down into 4 separate patents. But David ran out of money and I was always fixated on doing all the code all by myself. 3 man-years later, the code is finally ready, but David is long gone. Hey Dave… IF YOU’RE READING THIS, …

OR

Maybe I’m just a hugely delusional maniac, and David realized this and jumped ship. Hmmm. It seems I have gone way off the deep end lately, having slipped in a couple of extra man-years of work on insane books about physics and reality in the hours I can’t sleep.

But the thing is, I can’t be nuts because MY FREEKING CODE WORKS GREAT! And my architecture is like a finely-tuned symphony… it’s a thing of beauty. No shit!

I could go on and on about it in my geek-like way, and THAT is currently my main problem!!! I need someone who speaks English to relay my concepts and make business decisions. This forum has translators, such as yourself, to help me find the path I need to travel to make my dreams come true.

MY POINT? Your suggestions on (3) and (4) are correct, and this is the exact same approach David wanted to take, and I really do appreciate your feedback, Math.

Still awake?

(5) Did you see the post that asshole made about handicapped people? Not trying to say this from way up on my high horse, but that guy really offended me with that comment and with his follow-up about Hawking. I am a newbie to this forum, and maybe out of line, but I think that not only should he be banned from this forum, I think that some authority figures should be informed to investigate these statements, as they constitute hate crimes.

As for his reasons for making such statements, whether it because he is lonely as other members have accused him of, or whatever the fuck his problem is, DOES NOT MATTER. Free speech is one thing, but HE CROSSED THE LINE!

Jerry.. if you read this, SHUT THE FUCK UP BEFORE YOU WIND UP IN JAIL, and DO NOT reply to anything I post., or I will be the guy to call the authorities, and I won't warn you twice - DO NOT TEST ME on this.

EVERYBODY PLEASE... THINK BEFORE YOU POST.

Marty
Discflicker.com

Quote: discflicker

But the thing is, I can’t be nuts because MY FREEKING CODE WORKS GREAT! And my architecture is like a finely-tuned symphony… it’s a thing of beauty.

I don't doubt the architecture is technically functional. I just doubt that the architecture is worthwhile from a business standpoint. Basically, the question boils down to this: Why would a casino (or vendor) choose to use a mapping of a 3-dice distribution to a bunch of other random distributions (roulette, etc) when they can just use a central RNG and generate randomness as needed? See US Patent No. 6,986,055 for an example. Why is your system better for the casino than that?

Quote: MathExtremist

I don't doubt the architecture is technically functional. I just doubt that the architecture is worthwhile from a business standpoint. Basically, the question boils down to this: Why would a casino (or vendor) choose to use a mapping of a 3-dice distribution to a bunch of other random distributions (roulette, etc) when they can just use a central RNG and generate randomness as needed? See US Patent No. 6,986,055 for an example. Why is your system better for the casino than that?

I thought that horse was dead and buried. I'm all about live gaming, that's why. The 3-dice mapping would most likely NOT be used in any industry - wide accepted standard protocol. In fact, standard protocols generally would not include anything as specific as that, they're made to apply to general uses, and leave it up to the application to jump through whatever hoops it needs to.

OK, I just read 9,986,055. And excuse my ignorance of patents, the description said "filing date...", and “publication date...". Hey Math, does this mean it was approved? (I have yet to have any of my 5 currently "in review" patents be approved, so I really don't know).

Anyway, what the creator of 6,986,055 has done has some definite overlap with my RollStation. Although the author mentioned the fact that ONE RNG can concurrently feed many different kinds of games, there are some important differences. These are detailed in the “too technical to read any make any sense of” section below. Here is the human-readable summary:

Bottom line: my system is better because:

1) It can seamlessly accept a live randomization as an alternative to RND gaming from several randomization devices (dice, wheels, etc), OR it can use an RND. The RND system presented can not handle live gaming inputs at all as shown.
2) It specifically addresses all of the randomization ranges available from a 3-distingushable dice roll all the way down to “coin flip”. The RND system does not specify any mappings, it only states that they do take place.
3) It has the TRUE capability to play multiple concurrent games where they ARE all in synch with each other. The RND system handles all concurrently played games completely independent from one another.
4) If it were ever needed for whatever reason, I do have the capacity to map randomization across to other ranges, so one unskilled dealer can run an entire casino like my “house of Cube” dream. The RND system is not capable of this at all.






If you want to get confused, read the following “too technical to read any make any sense of” section:

This RNG-based system doesn't obtain a single randomized number and then map it using a set of equivalent other ranges (like is done in my "fair-mapping" methods), and then distribute each if these mapped numbers to the component games. Instead, it calls the RNG routine for each and every randomization required for each and every game being played, and these games are NOT synchronized with each other in any way.. It just a bunch of independent calls, so realistically, his claim of support for concurrent multiple games is a misnomer.. they are not in my system; in my system, concurrent means concurrent and in - synch with one another.

Now, granted, this is a stated advantage of my system, but you have questioned this benefit, and I do tend to agree with you on this... (The advantage is the capability, for example, of mapping a single 3-dice roll into many games).

Because of the multiple calls to a RND, if the author wanted to implement his system using live randomization input as a replacement for the RNG, and then use the rest of it to distribute the randomization to several instances of a game, he could do so, it would work OK.

However, this limits the capability to a one-for-one scenario; one (for example) dice throw is used for only one dice game. Again its not like I'm depending upon my slight advantage to be used, but the author states the capability to distribute randomization results as being a feature, but my system implements this feature in a much more powerful way and allows LIVE randomization to be used as a seamless alternative to RNG randomization.

2) The author does not specifically show any mapping from the RNG output into useable randomization ranges. He simply states in a general manner that his RNG can "feed" any game. However, he clearly states that such mappings do occur.

In my RollStation patent, I clearly state every possible randomization range the invention is capable of accepting and what (possibly other) ranges these can then be mapped to, and exactly how these ARE mapped (vs. a concept only states that they CAN BE mapped). My lawyer told me this is key... it makes my RollStation viable as "THE definitive mapping machine".

Quote: discflicker

I thought that horse was dead and buried. I'm all about live gaming, that's why. The 3-dice mapping would most likely NOT be used in any industry - wide accepted standard protocol. In fact, standard protocols generally would not include anything as specific as that, they're made to apply to general uses, and leave it up to the application to jump through whatever hoops it needs to.

OK, I just read 9,986,055. And excuse my ignorance of patents, the description said "filing date...", and “publication date...". Hey Math, does this mean it was approved? (I have yet to have any of my 5 currently "in review" patents be approved, so I really don't know).

Oh, that clears things up. I didn't realize you had more than one patent pending. The only one I found was the dice mapping piece. If you have other pending apps directed toward the protocols/architectures/standards aspect, I didn't see those. And yes, 6,986,055 is an issued patent. The point I was making is that it was filed a long, long time ago.

Quote:

3) It has the TRUE capability to play multiple concurrent games where they ARE all in synch with each other. The RND system handle all concurrently played games completely independent from one another.

Be careful with this argument, though. It's just as easy to do a RNG pull, get 64 bits, and then scale the same 64 bits to a 2-dice outcome and then to a 3-dice outcome simply by using the bits differently. That's been around for a while. As for doing it with live gaming elements instead of an RNG, Interblock has a system that does this already:

"We are very pleased to present our fully automated G4 Organic Dice generator. The Organic Dice is designed to randomly generate results for Craps, Sicbo, Fish – Shrimp - Crab or even all three at once."
http://www.interblock.si/products/G4/dice/

(No, I don't yet understand "Fish - Shrimp - Crab". It's a Chinese street game with specialty dice, from what I can tell.)

Quote:

In my RollStation patent, I clearly state every possible randomization range the invention is capable of accepting and what (possibly other) ranges these can then be mapped to, and exactly how these ARE mapped (vs. a concept only states that they CAN BE mapped). My lawyer told me this is key... it makes my RollStation viable as "THE definitive mapping machine".

Hmm. I'm not an attorney, but I'm not convinced by this reasoning. The fact that you have implemented a mapping that someone else has indicated was possible doesn't make it sound like you invented the idea of doing the mapping. Just that you implemented someone else's idea, and in doing so, demonstrated that *they* were right that it can be mapped. Why does your attorney think your specific set of numbers/ranges/mappings is independently patentable over the suggestion that such a mapping is possible?