mcd_chicken wrote:
You said S16 were 'COMpletely Random' if l'm not wrong. That in itself is wrong.
l'm not arguing, 'There are more losing combinations than winning ones....yes occasionally they will empty themselves with a consecutive series of large wins, but over time they will make plenty of money'
But your just stating the obvious lol, that happens as a result from a set percentage on the machine, lol.
There are things that can be use to your advantage on a few s16 machines.
Totally Random, direct from the manufacturer. The reason they display an average %, is because this is generally what it will payout with the RNG as it is.
The only thing to use to your advantage on these is to not play them full stop.
Matt
"Sixty percent of the time, it works, every time!"
I get you... but what your saying is it doesn't streak, or it streaks randomly?
So if l lost £4000 in a s16, wouldn't there be a greater chance for the next player to win?
ok, what if the hopper held £200 coins, then when l played it it held £495 and it started backing after l put £5 in it. Bare in mind its nowhere near the refill day, so your saying there won't be a higher chance of me winning if l knew alot of money was lost in it in the past few days?
or if l just started playing after someone won the jackpot?
how can a s16 be completely random? would you put them in your shop knowing that you might lose money.
Obviously they make buckets of cash for the owner thats why they put it there. So therefore it must streak and have a set percentage which the venue profits from it.
Regards,
Well I for one would question the value of your site's 'advice', given that you know something between zero and nought about how S16s work. Are you questioning why someone would site a random machine with the risk it might give a big payout? Ever been in a casino? The state of Nevada is full of random machines. The owners seem to be doing quite well
Sorry mate, but it's not simply a case of us having different opinions. I code machines for a living, and for the last two years that has been exclusively Sections 16s. Therefore I feel I am in a comfortable enough position to contest anything you throw at me with regard to said machines. If you would care to enlighten me with your theories, I will gladly discuss.
I don't mind discussing my ideas with you l think this is why this forum is here. Happy to discuss.
But l would rather people discuss problems with me rather than telling me l'm a con, or that don't know what l'm talking about.
As far as l'm concerned l'm still here making the constructive comments, l'm just putting forward my opinion. No need to be all sarcastic about it.
If you have the knowledge l will accept.
I give you an example, in the machine 'Mega slots' (think its astra not sure) the feature gives between a minimum of £14 and a maximum of £500. If s16's are completely random, you shouldn't be able to tell the next time you go up the feature again.
On the feature, the average win people usually get is from £50 - £90. However if you manage to only get a £14 win on this feature ... you 'always' go back up the feature within a tenner.
Surely if its totally random l won't be able to see that happening again and again. Like you say, if its completely random theres no point in playing them but if people can make money from them like 'megaslots' its not random. In my local nobles, there is 4 connected together, averages out about a fornight between a jackpot on a single machine. in conjunction with other methods its possible to make good profit.
mcd_chicken wrote:I don't mind discussing my ideas with you l think this is why this forum is here. Happy to discuss.
But l would rather people discuss problems with me rather than telling me l'm a con, or that don't know what l'm talking about.
As far as l'm concerned l'm still here making the constructive comments, l'm just putting forward my opinion. No need to be all sarcastic about it.
If you have the knowledge l will accept.
I give you an example, in the machine 'Mega slots' (think its astra not sure) the feature gives between a minimum of £14 and a maximum of £500. If s16's are completely random, you shouldn't be able to tell the next time you go up the feature again.
On the feature, the average win people usually get is from £50 - £90. However if you manage to only get a £14 win on this feature ... you 'always' go back up the feature within a tenner.
Surely if its totally random l won't be able to see that happening again and again. Like you say, if its completely random theres no point in playing them but if people can make money from them like 'megaslots' its not random. In my local nobles, there is 4 connected together, averages out about a fornight between a jackpot on a single machine. in conjunction with other methods its possible to make good profit.
At what point in my post did I say you were a con? Nor did I think of myself as being sarcastic. But if you check the numerous threads on this subject both here and elsewhere, you will see for yourself why I treat them with a pinch of salt. The fact of the matter is that S16s are random - end of.
mcd_chicken wrote:I get you... but what your saying is it doesn't streak, or it streaks randomly?
So if l lost £4000 in a s16, wouldn't there be a greater chance for the next player to win?
regards,
No each 'event' is a seperate event it. the previous event has no bearing on on the next. Therefore any 'streak' is pure coincidence and your no more likely to win a jp with your 4000th pound coin as you are with your first.
@ Doctor: Spot on, I was just about to say that. To re-itterate, each 'spin' or 'event' has no tie whatsoever to the next. As we 'all' know and have said time and time before, you could win J/P for 2/3/4/x/y/z spins in a row. Or, never win it at all!
Take the national lottery: You have just as much chance of winning the lottery two weeks in the row by picking the same numbers as if you picked different numbers.
I can't think of any other way to describe 'true randomness'. But, to steal from Googles' definition search:
Random suggests that no matter what the cause of something, its nature is not only unknown but the consequences of its operation are also unknown.
I think that sums it up nicely!
"And do you ever contradict yourself, Minister?" "Well, yes and no..."
Yes, that is also true. In a simulated environment (computer based) it is pretty easy to have different 'entities' (for the sake of argument) that exist but know nothing about each other, such as what values they hold etc.
It's just the way that anything 'termed' as random, really has a 'seed' value, that the random number is generated from. So, you could argue that two (or hundreds or thousands!) of numbers that are randomly generated are in fact linked by this 'seed'.
I haven't got time to go into much more about it now (I'm sure the boss is lurking!) but I'm sure you get the idea!
"And do you ever contradict yourself, Minister?" "Well, yes and no..."
i was just being devil's advocate.
as a journalist there are certain words which ring the bells. 'unique' 'esoteric' and 'quintessential' are three other rotters.
anyway, as far as anyone without several doctorates in applied mathematics and theoretical physics is concerned, these machines are random.
as i understand it (i might be miles off) one RNG gives up 1000s of numbers every second and the instant the button is struck the number it stops at is offset to another independent RNG which generates a second random number from the prompt of the first. if this corresponds to the JP coding you get £500, if not then tough tit old buddy you get squat.
anyone who thinks you can manipulate RNGs like this is deluded. the only possible oneupmanship you are going to have over a machine like this are its mechanical elements. like putting in 10p and it registering as £1. unlikely.
Matt Vinyl wrote:@ Doctor: Spot on, I was just about to say that. To re-itterate, each 'spin' or 'event' has no tie whatsoever to the next. As we 'all' know and have said time and time before, you could win J/P for 2/3/4/x/y/z spins in a row. Or, never win it at all! ]Random suggests that no matter what the cause of something, its nature is not only unknown but the consequences of its operation are also unknown.[/b]
I think that sums it up nicely!
Cheers, its as random as a machine can get. like UP said it will have its limitations but non that can be successfully exploited.
but i find it shocking that the person who is peddling a 'knowledge' site does not know this and if you apply their theory to a throw of a dice its like saying if you throw a 6 it wont come up again for at least another 6 throws i.e until you've rolled 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. That itself is ridiculous.
also any payout percentage attributed to S16 is a statistical percentage not an actual percentage like AWP's - hence no need for them to streak to achieve their programmed %age
