CasinoKat from NanoTech

Quote: EvenBob

All the player will see is the casino has
his money when he leaves. What's the
point of calling it a skill game if you
can't get ahead and stay ahead. Calling
it skill based is just another marketing
ploy, another way to fool the unsuspecting.

Yay! We totally agree with EvenBob on this point!

Saying you're offering a "skill-based" game that is strictly negative expectation is what we like to call the "illusion of skill" and has been tried-and-true in the casino industry.

Players want their skill to matter. We believe they will seek out games that give them the opportunity for advantage play where their payback can be greater than 100%.

If you take the time to look at CasinoKat, and understand the graphs we're displaying, you'll see that we're not trying to fool anyone; we put all of the math up front so you know what you're getting into.

STV

If the payback is set at 75% to give the player a chance at a 123% return, will the player who sucks know that he is only getting 75%?

I see players figuring out they stink and not playing. Then the casino loses the 75% player. Does the potential 123% player's potential return go down as less players return after they figure out they are bad?

Quote: stv2049

Yay! We totally agree with EvenBob on this point!

Saying you're offering a "skill-based" game that is strictly negative expectation is what we like to call the "illusion of skill" and has been tried-and-true in the casino industry.

STV

I disagree with this. To me the "illusion of skill" games don't offer any meaningful input from the player that can affect the payback percentage. I do believe skill games will be a great asset to the casino floors, but I also believe they will be of the variety where the skill component doesn't allow for a positive expectation of greater than 100%.

I expect they will end up where the skill will very the payback from around 85% to 95%.

I think everyone keeps missing a critical piece of the 'skill' level required to beat the game.

If I understood some of Ahigh's early postings, I believe the 'skill' required to beat the game is dependent on the player skills before you.
So let's say your skill level is 100. If a bunch of 50 skill level players have been playing, they will have lost some percentage of their money, although some may have won, due to randomness. Now if a 75 skill level player sits down, they are better than the previous players, so they have a better chance to win more money than the previous '50 skill level' players. However, as the level 75 player keeps playing, they are driving up the 'skill required to win' on the game, to the point where they are now competing against their own skill, and so they will have a decreasing chance of winning based on skill, and instead will be winning based on randomness.

Now you step in with your 100 skill level. Even though the 75 level player was no longer winning, because you are more skilled, you have a better chance of winning than they did. Alas, after some time, you have now driven the skill of the machine up to a point where you too are now competing against your own skill level, and you will have decreased chances of winning.

What I am not clear about is how the game resets back to the point where the 50 skill level player has an increased chance to win, due to their skill level. Of course, they always have the chance to win, due to randomness, but when does their skill level help them? My guess is, there is no way to know for sure what the required skill level will be at any given time. So as bad players put in some money and walk away, the required skill level has dropped a bit. When enough bad play has occurred, the required skill level will have dropped to the point a mediocre player now has enough skill to start winning some on their own skill level, for a limited time of course.

If this is all correct, what is there to prevent a highly skilled player from coming in every night at 11:00 PM, and picking off all of the lesser skilled play for the day? There will have been winner's during the day, so the game will keep getting play, but that one 200 skill level player it seems, will almost always be able to win something each time they come back, given enough play has occurred before their next visit. It will suck to be any player that plays directly after a highly skilled player, since your only chance to win will be randomness.

Steve, is my understanding correct on how the 'skill' portion of the game works?

I can see this game working in a casino, and here is why. Every gamer feels they have skills, or should I say skillz. And each person playing can have winning sessions, if they are better than the players before them. So people are going to keep playing the game over time, because no one likes to think they don't have more skillz than the player before them.
But even the 200 level player is not going to be able to make this game their personal ATM, since eventually they will be playing against their own skill, and will begin losing.
The hard part will be determining when it is randomness that is causing you to lose, or is it because the skill level required to win is more skill than you can muster. If you guess it is randomness, and you keep playing, you may continue to lose. OTOH, if you decide the skill level required is too high, when it was just randomness, then you will be walking away from winning spins, and someone else with your skill level can swoop in and start their AP play, which means you left money on the table.....

If I have this all correct, I also don't see where there is much advantage to a skilled player camping next to the machine, waiting for enough bad play to occur, and then swoop in for a kill. I assume they would have to wait for much longer than would be profitable. And if you decide to show up every night at 11:00 PM, someone else just as skilled, may start showing up at 10:45 PM, which means when you get there, you might not have enough skill to guarantee a skill win.

OR perhaps, I don't understand the skill component either............

Bingo Machine —
Heres the link http://www.ipdb.org/glossary.php#Bingo_Machine

Bingo games are those games that usually have the following characteristics: no flippers, numbered holes on the playfield in which the balls are captured, Bingo cards displayed on the backglass along with the various odds that can usually be changed by depositing more coins, and replay counters that normally count up to 999 replays to count the awards received.

As balls fall into the playfield holes, the corresponding numbers are lit up on the Bingo card(s) on the backglass. The ball will then stay into that hole until the end of the game. Bingo games normally have 5 balls per game -- to make them distinctive from the one-ball machines made illegal in most areas -- and (similar to normal Bingo) awards can usually be won by getting three to five numbers in a row on one of the Bingo cards, with larger awards for more numbers in a row or more coins deposited to raise the odds. Players can either play off the replays earned or have the owner exchange them for cash or prizes.

Bingo games have their roots in a 16th century Italian lottery game named Beano, later renamed to Bingo. They are a result of the early desire to reward players with money, free games and awards. Early games to accomplish this were single ball games with horse and dog racing themes. The (Federal Government’s) Johnson Act of 1950 caused the demise of one-ball horse racing machines because it outlawed and made a federal offense the inter-state shipment of gambling devices, manuals and repair parts except to states where the devices were legal, and many areas had already declared them illegal since they were deemed a game of chance rather than a game of skill. (The addition of flippers on later pinball machines caused them to be considered a game of skill since the player could have much more affect on the resulting score.)

The candy store has a horse race machine. 1 penny, but extra pennies increased win place show payouts. In late 50's and even late 60's most poolrooms and diners had at least 2 machines.

Quote: RaleighCraps

I think everyone keeps missing a critical piece of the 'skill' level required to beat the game.

If I understood some of Ahigh's early postings, I believe the 'skill' required to beat the game is dependent on the player skills before you.

I literally don't think a single person in this thread missed this.

If it's not there it does not mean nobody has ever tried that before. For some reason arcade games stay at arcades and slots are in casinos.

Quote: RonC

If the payback is set at 75% to give the player a chance at a 123% return, will the player who sucks know that he is only getting 75%?

I see players figuring out they stink and not playing. Then the casino loses the 75% player. Does the potential 123% player's potential return go down as less players return after they figure out they are bad?

Please watch this video carefully:

In this example, I can tell you that the house edge is 1% for bets $100 and above. That means the average payback is 99%.

At maximum effect of skill, where roughly 25% of the outcome of the wager is based on skill, and 75% based on luck you can see the range of payback percentages going from 75% to 123% (where 99% is the average)

This payback percentage range is mapped directly onto the existing score database (the bar graph), along with scores (on top of each bar) associated with whole payback percentages.

In order for a player to receive 75% on a wager, using the example in the video, they would have to achieve a score of less than 146 points. A vast majority of players at G2E were able to score higher than that.

There's a lot of information in the graphs and scores in that video. I hope everyone takes the time to watch it!

STV

Well this seems to be more like the uk fruit machines and uk quiz machines. Some what like the old bingo pinball that have some skill but adjust based on pay out's.

The uk fruit machines and uk quiz machines some times have skill other times fake skill and can cheat you to hit pay out targets. Unlike the us slots there pay out targets are over the shout term.

There are also some arcade games there with cash out and they seem to work in the same way. Skilled payers can win but the game adjusts and you can't keep wining over and over. Unless others start losing.

The stacker games work the same way (they say they are skill but are really not TRUE skill all the time) Seems to be true skill when the game is ready to pay out.

Quote: RaleighCraps

Steve, is my understanding correct on how the 'skill' portion of the game works?

It's much simpler than you describe RaleighCraps. Watch the video. Look at the graph of scores mapped onto the range of payback percentages.

You can't ever 'beat the game' in the sense that you can beat FPDW Video Poker.

Also, CasinoKat (in our observation) is pretty much always in a state where it can be advantage played since it has collected enough theoretical. We did, however, try to visualize the total amount of available theoretical to award and take it all - your 'swoop in for a kill' scenario. To do so would:
a) require a bet amount of ~$50,000 (the average bet amount is ~$1000) and
b) require you to achieve the top score

Even so, you're not guaranteed to win depending on the win amount you chose. If you were certain you could achieve the top score, you'd be safe in choosing a win amount of ~$10,000 so that your chance to lose could be overcome with an advantage.

Additionally, if you were skilled enough to pull off a) and b), you could repeat the process with a ~$40,000 bet because you can't take ALL of the theoretical advantage in a single game. If you were skilled (and lucky) enough to win again, you could repeat this process with lower and lower bet amounts until all of the theoretical advantage was depleted.

After the most amazing display of skill and luck, the house would still have their theoretical 1% hold. In practice, with the random game elements - especially the three prizes with different score values - this display of dominating skill should not happen.

STV

Quote: sabre

I literally don't think a single person in this thread missed this.

I disagree. Anyone who writes that the casinos won't put this game in, because the AP players will just keep playing, and winning all the time, DO NOT understand the concept.

If everyone in this thread truly understands the skill concept, some of them need to improve their writing skills then, because their posts DO NOT convey that understanding.

I understand SKILL. Only the beat players in the pool room would play the Balley Bingo machines. The other 99% played 9 ball.
P.S. Why are the machines so damn small ?

" educate players, operators, manufacturers about the balanced nature of our math model. "

Educating players will be by far your greatest challenge. May I ask how you plan to do that ?

Could you explain the concept here. PLEASE

Quote: redjohn

" educate players, operators, manufacturers about the balanced nature of our math model. "

Educating players will be by far your greatest challenge. May I ask how you plan to do that ?

Could you explain the concept here. PLEASE

You may ask. We're educating players right here, right now. The concept has been explained here, many times over, with videos and graphs and stuff.

It's totally OK to NOT understand as well. Just trust that the casino will get their edge, and the players have an opportunity for advantage play based on their skill. What really matters is how much the game will earn, and while that is open to speculation, only a field trial will serve to prove our claims.

STV

Quote: stv2049

r skill. What really matters is how much the game will earn, and while that is open to speculation, only a field trial will serve to prove our claims.
STV

How much do you have to put in to play.
Is it $100 like on the pinball? Why do
you always say 'bet 100 to win 10', why
would I ever do that.

Quote: EvenBob

How much do you have to put in to play.
Is it $100 like on the pinball? Why do
you always say 'bet 100 to win 10', why
would I ever do that.

Me.

People do it all the time.
It's like a sports bet on the heavy favorite. Look at some entertainment bets like Mike does each year, you can risk thousands to win $100s.



It may be a lock to win $10(all green wheel) over and over assuming your good at pinball. If bet $10 to win $100 you may have an advantage if you're a good player but there's lots of red on the final spin so there's more risk.

You have options and that's a good thing.

I watched the video. It did nothing for me. Thank you for linking it, though...

Quote: stv2049

You may ask. We're educating players right here, right now. The concept has been explained here, many times over, with videos and graphs and stuff.

It's totally OK to NOT understand as well. Just trust that the casino will get their edge, and the players have an opportunity for advantage play based on their skill. What really matters is how much the game will earn, and while that is open to speculation, only a field trial will serve to prove our claims.

STV

You are so ridiculously wrong here it's not even funny. You are not educating players here. After days/weeks/months/years, people here are still confused and most of the people here are probably at the higher end of intelligence.

It's not ok if players don't understand. What experience do you have with this concept? I just went through it first hand with a game. Excellent game, much more interesting than Three Card Poker. But more difficulty to play. Players could not understand the concept in a 30 second description. It died an ugly death.

Once again, I suggest you get an experienced gaming person on the staff or consult with one. Many of the things you say and believe are not based on reality.


ZCore13

Quote: stv2049

Just trust that the casino will get their edge, and the players have an opportunity for advantage play based on their skill. STV

'Opportunity for advantage play' is not
an edge, it's just words. There is no
exploitable edge in your game, so it's
not real AP. Calling it an opportunity
for AP is misleading, because that's
not what it is. Players will find this
out almost immediately, and go
the other way. You cannot have a
game where both the player and
casino have the edge at the same time.

Analysis has to be based on continual play.
If you have an AP player playing 6 hours a day
for a year, at the end of a year of normal
play, will his BR be bigger or smaller. You
can easily figure this out if you know the
math of your machine. If it's is smaller,
this is not an AP game. If it's larger, no
casino will want it on the floor.

Do me a favor. On what page is the explanation ? Or can you just post it again for a mere player like me.

Well I found the brochure. That was not much help .

Is this how you intend to educate the player ?

An example to illustrate this:
bet amount: $100
win amount: $10
house edge: 1%
skill effect: 11.2% skill / 88.8% luck
minimum payback for worst score (90 points): 87.96%
worst chance to win: 80%
average payback for average score (14942 points): 99%
average/base chance to win: 90%
maximum payback for best score (36060 points): 110.04%
best chance to win: 100%
score needed for 100% payback: 15722 points

In this case, if the player scores 36060 points or more, they are 100% guaranteed to win $10 from their $100 bet.

Good luck with that .

Pac Man killed Pong. Who is this game to kill ?

The NanoTech Advantage math model compares your score and bet amount to all previous scores and bet amounts. This gives you a "BEAT%" which is weighted by the bet amount - larger bets carry more weight.

Achieving a score with a BEAT% of exactly 50% will return exactly the payback set by the House Edge.

Whether you win or lose your bet is also determined by your bet amount and win amount (both are adjustable by the player within casino minimum and maximums) the House Edge, and the effect of Skill (also adjustable by the player) on the outcome. Getting a top score does not guarantee that you'll win your bet, just like playing Video Poker optimal strategy does not guarantee you'll win an individual bet.

In practice, the score need not ever be reset; the scores we're seeing for CasinoKat range from 0-36000 points with an average of about 10000 points over hundreds of plays.

The effect of a very Skilled Player putting up top scores simply means that the average score needed to get an above-average payback increases a little bit.

Our math model is balanced, fair, and as transparent as possible

Getting a top score does not guarantee that you'll win your bet, just like playing Video Poker optimal strategy does not guarantee you'll win an individual bet.

Getting a top score does not guarantee that you'll win your bet, just like playing Video Poker optimal strategy does not guarantee you'll win an individual bet.

Good to know a top score does not guarantee you will win your bet. I am sure a player will just love that fact.

Quote: EvenBob

All the player will see is the casino has
his money when he leaves. What's the
point of calling it a skill game if you
can't get ahead and stay ahead.

That's not what "skill" means in the context of the regulations. Skill means physical dexterity (along with knowledge and a few other things). Games involving physical dexterity used to be entirely out of bounds and unapprovable. Now they're not. Whether anyone's particular version of "skill based" is to your liking is not the point; the point is that now the market will get to decide. Until a few weeks ago, that wasn't in the cards (no pun intended).

" Skill means physical dexterity (along with knowledge and a few other things). "

How does that mesh with " Getting a top score does not guarantee that you'll win your bet. " ?

Quote: Zcore13

You are so ridiculously wrong here it's not even funny. You are not educating players here. After days/weeks/months/years, people here are still confused and most of the people here are probably at the higher end of intelligence.

It's not ok if players don't understand. What experience do you have with this concept? I just went through it first hand with a game. Excellent game, much more interesting than Three Card Poker. But more difficulty to play. Players could not understand the concept in a 30 second description. It died an ugly death.

Once again, I suggest you get an experienced gaming person on the staff or consult with one. Many of the things you say and believe are not based on reality.


ZCore13

Perhaps it's because I have a personal interest in the game but I don't think it's hard to understand especially for the market they are targeting.

Quote: redjohn

" Skill means physical dexterity (along with knowledge and a few other things). "

How does that mesh with " Getting a top score does not guarantee that you'll win your bet. " ?

Getting the top score greatly improves you're chances of winning you're bet.

I'm fairly certain for NANOTECH games the bet and odds you choose prior to playing greatly determine you're chances of winning the bet. Your skill adds to that. A crappie player choosing a small bet that pays off big may only have a 10% chance to win their bet (lets say true odds should be 11% the same bet with skill and a good score may have 12% to win that bet.

Quote: AxelWolf

Perhaps it's because I have a personal interest in the game but I don't think it's hard to understand especially for the market they are targeting.

Who's going to explain it to players? In table games you have dealers and supervisors who can help explain a game. And with that, you generally get 30 seconds before the player tunes out and moves on if they don't understand it.

Is someone going to stand next to FurryKat and explain the game to every person who comes up to it? No way.

It's going to be left to people standing next to it and looking at it. Or throwing a few dollars into it, most likely not understanding how you win.

It's got way too much going against it:

*Difficult to understand the math model for the average casino patron.
*Toyish looking design and size compared to other machines in the casino.
*1980's theme and game play. The reason there are no pacman games (or arcades for that matter) anymore is because the are outdated. If there was demand, they would be available.

To keep floor space machines have to earn their space. They have to make area average or room average or casino average, depending on how the suits judge games. You can't sell your product to a few select people or groups.

How many casino patrons consider themselves or even know what an AP is? Less than 1/10th a percent would be my guess. So the AP label on the game is worthless.

How many slot players want to spend time learning a game and losing more than normal because they are not skilled? Not many. Players that want to use their mind and make decisions play table games. Players that want to touch a button, not think and not worry about if they played correctly or not play slots.

Could this math concept work with a different type of game? Maybe. But not as it is currently being pitched and as it is currently being implemented and with the current incorrect assumptions of what players think and want.


ZCore13

Has anybody else noticed that confusion reigns
in this thread. If we're confused, can you imagine
the average casino patron trying to figure it out.

Fuggetaboutit..

Quote: EvenBob

...can you imagine
the average casino patron trying to figure it..

They're already confused even now. Don't you see them straggle along like they're high or something?

Imagine the joy of losing your money, and walking awat from a slot and thinking you are unlucky. With this game you will also know you suck at pinball.

After watching the video and trying to understand the charts I still have a question.

Let's assume what I think is a reasonable scenario: A brand new machine is installed with a $10 bet and the theo is set at 90%. I just don't think $100 denom games are realistic and sustainable

If the first player to play it is a savant and the best player of the game, what is his expected theo return?

If each subsequent player plays worse than all players before them, what are their expected returns?

Quote: DRich

After watching the video and trying to understand the charts I still have a question.

Let's assume what I think is a reasonable scenario: A brand new machine is installed with a $10 bet and the theo is set at 90%. I just don't think $100 denom games are realistic and sustainable.

Alright. We'll talk about the less interesting parts of the game where you need to play around the 75 percentile of skill to advantage play. But stick with your thinking DRich if you choose. I do believe that even less than intelligent people who actually gamble $100 and up will see the unique value of our game and bet accordingly.

Quote: DRich

If the first player to play it is a savant and the best player of the game, what is his expected theo return?

If each subsequent player plays worse than all players before them, what are their expected returns?

full patent for nanotech advantage

The first and second players both get the house advantage regardless of their skill in the game.

This player is the first player who is given a skill ranking (possible for non-binary outcome or best or worst game). But they still cannot get a theoretical advantage over the operator-selected HE%.

The third player gets a beat percent linearly interpolated between 0% if lower than the worst game and 100% if tied or greater than the best game, and linearly interpolated in (HE% interpolated between worst and best from the two score values). There are weights according to bet amounts, but this is a special case where the weights do NOT matter AND there is absolutely zero way to get an advantage. So your payback can only be hurt by skill. This third game scenario is the every game scenario for most products. It's not really important in this case the details, but if you don't score above average, you're going to get a lower payback.

There is a theoretical condition that if you have perfectly intelligent players who will not play the game unless there is a theoretical advantage to be attained, nobody will play the game ever while only being hurt by their skill. For us, this happens from game three until at least one player scores below average and then that theoretical "ding" against that player has a dollar amount that can then be used to "award" subsequent players. So until the 3rd through nth player has a below average game, the machine will have exactly the theo selected by the operator until eventually someone scores below average. Obviously (to me anyway) this won't last very long no matter what the circumstances are around it's arrival (no +EV to award).

After the third game, and after an EV "ding" is assigned, beat percent uses the weights and only is able to award a fraction of the theo stored for "awards" from previously awarded "dings." Awarding only a fraction of the total amount available has a setting for the maximum fractional amount and in our Monte Carlo simulator, we run simulations with different fractions. I believe that these settings are more important for the simulator than for real world, but a simple fraction like 1/3 works well enough I think and IIRC.

The entire point of the fraction is to make it difficult for all of the theo to be sucked up too quickly. But if you count the instances when this hard limit is hit, it is a very small tiny fraction of the time and the frequency decreases with total plays on device. IE: just like the rules for the 3rd through nth games, it's an edge case and does not define general behavior, just prevents really stupid things from happening before there is enough samples to operate more smoothly.

Once there are enough samples, the heuristic edge case rules that people want to talk about (I think hoping to find holes) just don't matter at all. In fact, I believe that if I chose NOT to implement any fail-safe mechanisms, the game would still work just as well in practice. These edge cases are truly pedagogical in value, and serve very little real-world protection just for their infrequency of necessity in the real world with our games the way that we designed them.

I hope this is helpful, DRich. I do appreciate your candid feedback. I also wish you the best of luck in happiness in life. Seeing as you explained how you thought of my vision for increasing bet denominations, let me reciprocate by saying I don't perceive you to be the type of person who would enjoy our game, nor do I see you as someone who would be fun to play our games with. People with hand-to-eye coordination and skill that don't have a college education are possible AP's with our design. Traditionally, AP video caters to math folks and designers like yourself. This is not one of those games. And the game is probably not a good game for your personality type.

However, the proof that bet denominations will go up with our technology is in the "pudding" as they say.

Industry insiders don't even have to "understand" how AP works because they don't have to do anything but monitor the game for exposure just like any other machine (EG: in the high limit room where the edges are low enough). Just like any other PURELY negative expectation game FOR the casino (which our game is), the house can get unlucky and suffer from bad variance. But they cannot suffer from not having the edge over all the players playing the game in combination.

Only the guys who have good motor skills and adaptive brains that can learn quickly need to know. Those people will be defined BY OUR GAME to be the winners. I don't think realistically you are going to be a winner on our games. Of course I could be wrong as I have never seen you play a video game, but I have an idea about where your skill levels are that I'd be surprised to be wrong about.

Quote: Ahigh

The third player gets a beat percent linearly interpolated between 0% if lower than the worst game and 100% if tied or greater than the best game, and linearly interpolated in (HE% interpolated between worst and best from the two score values). ck.

And you're expecting a casino or a player
to understand any of this? I'm realizing
that the more you and Steve talk about
this, the more I realize I have no idea how
this works. I think I get it and then, nope.
I'd love to see a video of a casino games
manager listening to you trying to explain
this, as he fakes a call just to run in the
other direction.

Quote: Zcore13

It's got way too much going against it:

If you measure what's going against it in kilograms possibly. What do you weigh?

Quote: EvenBob

And you're expecting a casino or a player
to understand any of this? I'm realizing
that the more you and Steve talk about
this, the more I realize I have no idea how
this works. I think I get it and then, nope.
I'd love to see a video of a casino games
manager listening to you trying to explain
this, as he fakes a call just to run in the
other direction.

Recognize that most slot players don't fully understand how multi-line games work either. That's what help screens are for. I'm pretty sure that the game won't get approved by regulators if the help screens don't pass muster, so Ahigh and his team have some technical writing to do.

Bob, you underestimate the intelligence of the average casino patron. Surely the person who understands that the guy on third base just took the dealer's break card, or that Red is overdue at Roulette, will easily comprehend " linearly interpolated " as well as
" the heuristic edge case rules ".

Quote: EvenBob

And you're expecting a casino or a player
to understand any of this? I'm realizing
that the more you and Steve talk about
this, the more I realize I have no idea how
this works. I think I get it and then, nope.
I'd love to see a video of a casino games
manager listening to you trying to explain
this, as he fakes a call just to run in the
other direction.

Bob... casino patrons probably don't 'get' lots of the odds stuff, EV stuff, of the games they already play? How many BJ players know how much EV they give up by not splitting 6's against a 7? How many craps players know how much EV they give up by playing the 'right' side instead of the 'dark' side? How many VP players know 'perfect' strategy? So Bob, if I ask my dealer if I should hit my 16 against his jack, what explanation will I get? The point of this new game is that it is supposed to be fun (as opposed to the drudgery which is basic strategy BJ), and the allure of (thinking) you can beat the game with your skill. I think it has a chance, although I would bet with you against it, but I hope I am wrong. My biggest concern would be the stakes they are hoping people will play at. I agree with a previous poster that I think finding people to plop $100 in at a time will be difficult.

Ahigh, thanks for the response.

If I understand correctly you have a mechanism similar to a progressive pool that gets built up and dispersed over time depending on the player skill. In your case it isn't all dispersed to a single winner but fractions of that pool are awarded over time to the skilled players. I think that is a good way to handle it. I have done similar on some of my games as ant-flea protection. Instead of leaving "multipliers" on the screen when a person walks away, I accumulate them and slowly dole them out to future players instead of giving it all to the next player.

You are correct that I wouldn't be a likely player for your games but being in the casino game development field I am very interested. Like I said earlier, I think skill games will definite have a place on the floor of the future.

Quote: DRich

You are correct that I wouldn't be a likely player for your games but being in the casino game development field I am very interested. Like I said earlier, I think skill games will definite have a place on the floor of the future.

DRich, I have a tremendous amount of respect for you. I do hope that any jabs that ever come your way are considered to be friendly. And I absolutely appreciate your interest, buddy.

You have been skeptical, yet very impartial and I appreciate your obvious efforts to be unbiased.

Slot machines don't discriminate, anyone has an equal chance. Skill games, on the other hand, favor the skilled players. March on Washington now, dumb people deserve to win at the same rate as smart one.

Quote: Dicenor33

Slot machines don't discriminate, anyone has an equal chance. Skill games, on the other hand, favor the skilled players. March on Washington now, dumb people deserve to win at the same rate as smart one.

Right. That's why you can turn the skill off.

Casino is agnostic on the subject.

Just want their edge.

Quote: Drich

If each subsequent player plays worse than all players before them, what are their expected returns?

With maximum skill setting on each game and intentionally ditching, our model will not go below the setting we have for "state minimum payback." Here in Nevada with SB9, that may be ZERO, however, we recommend 75% as a minimum setting no matter what the laws, but for skill-only markets, it will be zero payback in this edge case.

Unlike optimal play, the edge case of "intentionally doing as bad as possible" at least on CasionKat, 10 points is easy to attain on each and every game which will cause this edge case to occur if a player were to desire to stuff EV into the game, he may. There will ABSOLUTELY be people who do this just like there are people who throw chips at other players, this is like throwing chips at ALL the players. The casino does not benefit long term from this activity once the activity ceases. The players do.

The really cool part of intentional ditching is that with 75% minimum payback, you can throw EV at the machine WHILE you win at the same time (like winning twice). It's STUPID to do this (obviously) just like giving money to random girls because they look cute is stupid. But people will do it. Guaranteed. And it can be fun, just like other stupid things that I can personally admit to doing that are fun (not bankrolling a hotty at a craps table, but even more stupid things like doing wheelies on the freeway and stuff). My only point is that being stupid can be fun, and we hope it's fun to do this for people besides myself (I do anyway).

Also, you might imagine casinos doing this for their patrons: instead of coupons, the casino just tosses a few games intentionally to make the game easier to beat. There will never be an automated option to do this because you don't need one. The game never complains when you want to give it money for subsequent players and even a relatively stupid player can see how this works with CasinoKat. Each below average game makes the score required for subsequent games to get a particular payback to decrease. You can see the effect by comparing the values between plays.

The casino cannot be hurt OR helped with less or more actual earnings by the aggregate skill level of all players going up or down in the long run (and in the real world). Only the short run or in the theoretical edge cases. In the long run, one machine with terrible players at a consistent bet level and another machine with awesome players at the same bet level, both machines will return the exact same theo edge to the casino no matter how good or bad the group of total players are or even HOW it changes over time, again, in the long run. In the short run, the theoretical house hold can go up to but go beyond ( 100% - "state minimum payback%" ) setting. In the long run the theoretical hold percentage comes down to and approaches but never reaches the target hold percentage set by the casino because theoretical awards are generally omnipresent and available once they arrive after the first 3-5 plays. Just the ratio of available theoretical amounts available to award to the total dollars bet goes down with continued play which creates the effect of approaching but generally never meeting or going below the house hold percentage set by the operator.

Quote: Ahigh

DRich, I have a tremendous amount of respect for you. I do hope that any jabs that ever come your way are considered to be friendly. And I absolutely appreciate your interest, buddy.

You have been skeptical, yet very impartial and I appreciate your obvious efforts to be unbiased.

Thank you, that is very nice. Yes I am skeptical, but I am still rooting for you to be successful. Hopefully you will be the next Randy Adams or Ernie Moody.

Quote: SOOPOO

I agree with a previous poster that I think finding people to plop $100 in at a time will be difficult.

I asked yesterday if it costs $100 to
play CasinoKat and nobody answered.

Quote: EvenBob

I asked yesterday if it costs $100 to
play CasinoKat and nobody answered.

CasinoKat and Vegas2047 may be priced to whatever the casino wants. However, we suggest that the bet denomination and house edge work to give the casino a $1/min theoretical win. We suggest the cost to the player is $1/min theoretical per game. For comparison, a typical penny slot with a 100 credit ($1) bet, 10% house edge, and an average time of resolved bet of 3 seconds has a cost to the player of $2/min theoretical!

CasinoKat has an average game time of about 30 seconds, Vegas2047 about 60 seconds.

The reasoning behind higher bet denominations with lower house edge is to offer greater opportunities for higher potential payback percentages based on player skill. In our previous examples, the payback ranges from 75%-123% with 99% as the average.

It's OK for a casino to allow a player to play CasinoKat at $5 per game with a 10% house edge - that works out to a cost to the player of $1/min theoretical. However, the payback ranges would be 75%-105% with 90% as the average; smaller opportunity for advantage play.

Our games are going to have the effect of teaching players to bet larger denominations because there's a greater value there. Furthermore, for those worried about not getting $100 bets at 1%, remember you can turn the effect of skill off and get a better value than baccarat.

Imagine the first person to wager $100,000 on one of our games! It's gonna happen! There are plenty of superstitious baccarat players who are willing to make this bet over and over!

Thanks for the question, EvenBob! You're our biggest supporter!

STV

You will teach players to bet higher denominations to reduce the house edge. Try that on the players at the 6 to 5 blackjack tables with 10 fdollar 3 yo 2 available. Then convert those penny slot players to dollar slots. You actually belirve eomeone will bet 100 thousand DC dollarso. A pinball game. Can anyone ever give me a line on that happening. Or did DC i mix c thisthread DC with theperception versus reality thread?

Quote: stv2049

Imagine the first person to wager $100,000 on one of our games! It's gonna happen!


STV

No it's not.


ZCore13

Quote: stv2049

It's OK for a casino to allow a player to play CasinoKat at $5 per game
STV

So a player puts in $20 and plays 4 games.
At 30 sec a game, that's 120 games an hour.
That's $600 an hour thru the machine.

The average penny slot player runs twice
that amount thru a machine, probably
more. Your game doesn't sound very
good for the casino.

Quote:

Imagine the first person to wager $100,000 on one of our games!

I can't imagine any casino wanting this on
their floor, let alone putting money in it.

Quote: EvenBob

So a player puts in $20 and plays 4 games.
At 30 sec a game, that's 120 games an hour.
That's $600 an hour thru the machine.

The average penny slot player runs twice
that amount thru a machine, probably
more.

You're stating that the average penny slot player puts $600 x2 through a machine per hour?
You got any proof of that statement? No way in hades that happens on a penny slot. They may play that much in spins, but they sure as heck are not putting that amount of cash through the machine.....

If you're going to make crap up, at least keep it down to almost plausible......

Quote: RaleighCraps

You're stating that the average penny slot player puts $600 x2 through a machine per hour?

My wife bets enough lines so her bet is
$1.25 a spin. 20 spins a minute, times
60min is $1500 an hour. If she bets all
the lines it's more.

Quote: RaleighCraps

You're stating that the average penny slot player puts $600 x2 through a machine per hour?
You got any proof of that statement? No way in hades that happens on a penny slot. They may play that much in spins, but they sure as heck are not putting that amount of cash through the machine.....

If you're going to make crap up, at least keep it down to almost plausible......

Here's some proof from the Nevada Gaming Control Board website, though the way I manipulate their statistics may seem like 'making crap up'.

http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=9691

Let's look at the reported casino win amounts for 2014 in Nevada for penny slots and compare that to baccarat:

1 CENT SLOTS:
==================
number of machine: 53,726
2014 win amount: $2,624,141,000
average win per machine per day = $2,624,141,000 / 53,726 machines / 365 days = $133.82
using the win percent of 10.10, we can estimate that each machine sees $133.82 / .101 = $1,324.92 coin-in per day on average.

BACCARAT:
==================
number of tables: 327
2014 win amount: $1,504,634,000
average win per table per day = $1,504,634,000 / 327 tables / 365 days = $12,606.38
using the win percent of 12.48, we can estimate that each table sees $133.82 / .1248 = $101,012.66 coin-in per day on average.

If the 'average penny slot player' runs $1,200 per hour thru a machine, I'd expect the average daily casino win to be much higher.

If the average baccarat player plays $100,000 on a table per day, I can imagine a $100,000 bet on CasinoKat or Vegas2047!

I'm not super good at math so if I've made a mistake, please point it out.

STV