This isn't just compensated. It's a fix!

[Boulderdash]

Sort of a duplicate of the comment I left on Chop's thread here for anyone that wants to discuss 'fixed' machines...

I was playing Club Attraction today and noticed from the RAM/GAM files saved on that post it ALWAYS lands grape, grape, pear, pear on the first spin, then plum, plum, apple, melon on the second. Then it offers a hold so you can hold the 3 an 2 on the plum and apple to get on the feature. It ALWAYS then spins lemon on reel 1, apple on 4 and a 10 for hi-lo gamble. The ten goes to a 7, then 11, 6, 8, 11, 10, 9, 5. If you go in any other direction you lose. And you always lose on the 5. 

That's not compensation. That's fixed!

 

[Retrofruit]

43 minutes ago, Boulderdash said:

Sort of a duplicate of the comment I left on Chop's thread here for anyone that wants to discuss 'fixed' machines...

I was playing Club Attraction today and noticed from the RAM/GAM files saved on that post it ALWAYS lands grape, grape, pear, pear on the first spin, then plum, plum, apple, melon on the second. Then it offers a hold so you can hold the 3 an 2 on the plum and apple to get on the feature. It ALWAYS then spins lemon on reel 1, apple on 4 and a 10 for hi-lo gamble. The ten goes to a 7, then 11, 6, 8, 11, 10, 9, 5. If you go in any other direction you lose. And you always lose on the 5. 

That's not compensation. That's fixed!

 

Yes similar to the Chinatown RAM I posted that you can hi-lo out in £2. As long as you follow the pattern of holds the sequence is always the same and you can always get the win and hi-lo it out.

Doesn't necessarily mean it's "fixed" just that the decision making process at that time always favours the same outcome so no pseudo randomness built in like JPM? So what happens if you don't hold the 3 and 2 on the plum and apple does it force it back in or is it then off on another path?

I have had something similar with EastEnders, I was saving the ram regularly until it got so desperate it literally spins in three 7's direct. However I noticed there were always two outcomes from that position, either the 7's spin in or you get the feature that always goes to Fruit Stall and repeats for the same amounts.

I guess where there is decision making logic if the machine is at a point where the outcome is weighted heavily in one direction it is always going to take the same decision, at least until the player changes the outcome by making a different decision, like holding or not holding something.

[Tommy c]

Eastenders is deffo rigged, you can obtain a nudge offer for jackpot if you decline it will somehow make the usual losing positions rewards, like Frank selling a motor for the amount you need in dosh to make it a jackpot or any other feature. Does this on both bwb and maygay versions.

Like @Retrofruit said if you push it in to a critical point of under percentage it will just chuck the 7s in or force I'm off to the Vic feature which will pay decent. I think towards the £8 jackpot conversions the 7s roll in was chipped out and would not do it for anything. It would Still offer the light after nudges way, JPM IMPACT on token settings would just throw jackpot in if it was way under, also did it on the £10 versions but no we're near as much. 

That's why my favourite  manufacturer is electrocoin, yes the machines are basic low tech games, but alot of thought has gone in to the coding we're it makes a compensated game random. How many high tech games can you have for 150 plus, then give the next player along a win of 200 without being completely dead. Flip it and catch an electrocoin in the wrong state you will pay the price.

[Retrofruit]

9 hours ago, Tommy c said:

Eastenders is deffo rigged, you can obtain a nudge offer for jackpot if you decline it will somehow make the usual losing positions rewards, like Frank selling a motor for the amount you need in dosh to make it a jackpot or any other feature. Does this on both bwb and maygay versions.

Like @Retrofruit said if you push it in to a critical point of under percentage it will just chuck the 7s in or force I'm off to the Vic feature which will pay decent. I think towards the £8 jackpot conversions the 7s roll in was chipped out and would not do it for anything. It would Still offer the light after nudges way, JPM IMPACT on token settings would just throw jackpot in if it was way under, also did it on the £10 versions but no we're near as much. 

That's why my favourite  manufacturer is electrocoin, yes the machines are basic low tech games, but alot of thought has gone in to the coding we're it makes a compensated game random. How many high tech games can you have for 150 plus, then give the next player along a win of 200 without being completely dead. Flip it and catch an electrocoin in the wrong state you will pay the price.

It would be interesting to hear from someone who used to program for Electrocoin whether the next statement is true but I was told once that as far back as the original Bar-X the entire sequence of spins was pre-determined to a given percentage. The machine had a number of tables to select from so if a player went off track and missed a few wins it would simply select a slightly higher percentage pay table for the next sequence to bring it back in line. This is why hold after nudge could spin in the "wrong" win, sometimes hold after nudge on X would spin bars for example, and sometimes there was some strange behaviour like hold one bar and the other two would spin in - entirely consistent with a pre-determined selection for the reels.

Chuzzy kits changed all that of course and made the outcomes variable and introduced things like three holds which the originals would never do.

I wonder if the Magic-7's era behaves the same way?

[edwardb]

What was not common, but was certainly done now and then (I did it on games for the Czech Republic) is to make games essentially like buying a scratchcard or raffle ticket.

You literally generate, say, 10000 "tickets" - each of which has a win value (which might be zero) and run that in sequence. If the player makes a decision that runs contrary to the outcome (i.e. holds something that isn't optimal, or gambles too far and loses) you save that money in a pot and chuck it back at them later on.

This way, you can script exactly how the game plays, build in streaks etc, and make it exciting. As I said, in Czech games which didn't have holds, nudges or even features, this was quite a common way of doing things.

 

Cheers

 

[WonkySausage]

not sure if this counts as "fixed" or what, but whenever I download a new machine to play, i always like to start fresh and RAM clear.

Anyways, on RAM resetting all 3 slave machines on Golden Game 3 player link up (£25 jp version), put some cash in all 3, and all 3 followed the exact same pattern - even to the point where all 3 offered the wink nudges to the golden game at the same amount of credits played, all needing 9 nudges, and all 3 paid exactly the same amount, and the reel stops on the top board were also identical!

Obviously when you break the cycle, such as holding something different on one of the machines. Of course over time, all 3 slave machines will play differently as they're played by different people but I couldn't help wondering if this could be classed as "fixed" ?

[cliffc]

1 hour ago, Retrofruit said:

It would be interesting to hear from someone who used to program for Electrocoin whether the next statement is true but I was told once that as far back as the original Bar-X the entire sequence of spins was pre-determined to a given percentage. The machine had a number of tables to select from so if a player went off track and missed a few wins it would simply select a slightly higher percentage pay table for the next sequence to bring it back in line. This is why hold after nudge could spin in the "wrong" win, sometimes hold after nudge on X would spin bars for example, and sometimes there was some strange behaviour like hold one bar and the other two would spin in - entirely consistent with a pre-determined selection for the reels.

Chuzzy kits changed all that of course and made the outcomes variable and introduced things like three holds which the originals would never do.

I wonder if the Magic-7's era behaves the same way?

Hi 

 

I never herd this from any one but as I used to have a super red bar with an electrocoin kit in and i always thought it used some kind of win table for game control, as i saw the same patterns of came round often.

[Tommy c]

7 hours ago, Retrofruit said:

It would be interesting to hear from someone who used to program for Electrocoin whether the next statement is true but I was told once that as far back as the original Bar-X the entire sequence of spins was pre-determined to a given percentage. The machine had a number of tables to select from so if a player went off track and missed a few wins it would simply select a slightly higher percentage pay table for the next sequence to bring it back in line. This is why hold after nudge could spin in the "wrong" win, sometimes hold after nudge on X would spin bars for example, and sometimes there was some strange behaviour like hold one bar and the other two would spin in - entirely consistent with a pre-determined selection for the reels.

Chuzzy kits changed all that of course and made the outcomes variable and introduced things like three holds which the originals would never do.

I wonder if the Magic-7's era behaves the same way?

You are right with that, but it did change on the later bar x and magic series. When they changed from mechanical to sec meters for the classic versions, they were coded with a saved up streak which come at random from the 1st pound inserted, after the first dead spin of that pound every other spin is a win.

These could go huge if you was in a decent place that would keep refilling it. Let it alarm up when reset the streak would stop, and the game would select a random chart in the pot and start again. Baring in mind the machine is now over percentage the compensation kicks in and the game goes dead. I've seen £400 go in one of these without a single win. Massive sways in drifts both ways, if you play one for long enough you will see what I mean. I put a vid up of my bar x 7 doing the win every spin streak a while a go.

[woodsy]

47 minutes ago, Tommy c said:

You are right with that, but it did change on the later bar x and magic series. When they changed from mechanical to sec meters for the classic versions, they were coded with a saved up streak which come at random from the 1st pound inserted, after the first dead spin of that pound every other spin is a win.

These could go huge if you was in a decent place that would keep refilling it. Let it alarm up when reset the streak would stop, and the game would select a random chart in the pot and start again. Baring in mind the machine is now over percentage the compensation kicks in and the game goes dead. I've seen £400 go in one of these without a single win. Massive sways in drifts both ways, if you play one for long enough you will see what I mean. I put a vid up of my bar x 7 doing the win every spin streak a while a go.

i love bar x sevens etc i'd like to see that vid and some sevens layouts would be nice too.. blacklisted magic 7's is all ican find of the genre.. have you made any?

[Tommy c]

I will try find the video it is on here somewhere. No haven't done any of them as it's only the concept roms you can run. To me they are very poor games that are a shadow of the original classic bar x 7 software. Yeah you may hit a streak of 3-£500 if you hit it right but the cycle of those coupled with the shite in between game play proper put me off these, especially when they started to release them with a hard coded 88% payout.

May sound high but on a game like this it would be the recommended minimum % I've played those bar x 7 which were £1 a spin with a £70 jackpot at that time, they6 used to be set at 90% and could streak for £600 plus, once this was known by the operator they go moaning to concept so they then rechip with a hard coded 88% payout which makes the game brutal 90% of the time and halves the streak pot from £600 + to about £300 max if you were lucky.

Used to go all over playing electrocoins so i know what i'm on about and the shenanigans when these started getting rechipped with concept software. Concept on 90% very fair! Concept on hard coded 88% absolute tripe, Just stops the game being enjoyable.

[woodsy]

41 minutes ago, Tommy c said:

I will try find the video it is on here somewhere. No haven't done any of them as it's only the concept roms you can run. To me they are very poor games that are a shadow of the original classic bar x 7 software. Yeah you may hit a streak of 3-£500 if you hit it right but the cycle of those coupled with the shite in between game play proper put me off these, especially when they started to release them with a hard coded 88% payout.

May sound high but on a game like this it would be the recommended minimum % I've played those bar x 7 which were £1 a spin with a £70 jackpot at that time, they6 used to be set at 90% and could streak for £600 plus, once this was known by the operator they go moaning to concept so they then rechip with a hard coded 88% payout which makes the game brutal 90% of the time and halves the streak pot from £600 + to about £300 max if you were lucky.

Used to go all over playing electrocoins so i know what i'm on about and the shenanigans when these started getting rechipped with concept software. Concept on 90% very fair! Concept on hard coded 88% absolute tripe, Just stops the game being enjoyable.

Thanks, I’m learning (reading) so much about the ins and outs of machines instead of my previous world of pier punter. Is mind boggling the stuff behind it! I’d be lying if i said I totally get it all haha. But of course it’s all too late to change my past but thankfully my future is a whole lot better thanks to this site and wizards work!