Topic created on 09th Jul. 2018 | Page: 5 of 11 | Answers: 102 | Views: 25,937
Anonym
Topic Creator
Former Member
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
19th Dec. 2018, at 01:09 am CET#41
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
Chillaqueen92 wrote on 12/19/2018 at 00:47: Nothing happens by pure chance. I SAY EVERYTHING IS PRECEDENT because of the rtp. As I mentioned in my last post.
Never played extra chilli myself, but as a spectator it looked more than rigged.
A suggested chance of winning 50% became more like 30%.
With loss the complete coal is gone, and the following feature-buy stands also again to 70% on the tipping point.
Not a very good advertisement for BTG and the streamer.
If it was real money, I would go completely crazy.
This post has been translated automatically
Anonym
Former Member
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
19th Dec. 2018, at 12:53 pm CET#43
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
With Chilli I have similar experiences
If I buy FS with the last 30€ in the counter for 10s vereckt the 85% from 8 to 12.
The same when I have freshly deposited
If I have accepted the 8 FS came wins of garnix (yes exactly, zero) to 3.66€ - a joke!
But:
If I just won something at another slot, then switched to Chilli and bought FS - then the store ran!
FS could be gambled up to 16 (more I dare not...) or if I have taken the 8 tats also quite good rattling - wins from 30 € to 55 € (on 0.10 € bet), that's okay.
In principle, but make me the BTG no real fun more, that gibts better and more profitable slots...;-)
The last three Chilli purchases a few weeks ago were a flop - wrecked from 8 to 12. Since then I consistently leave the fingers of the purchase option. Play the slot but anyway less often, because I find that he generally nimmer runs so well.
This post has been translated automatically
Anonym
Topic Creator
Former Member
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
19th Dec. 2018, at 08:53 pm CET#45
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
SevenEleven wrote on 19/12/2018 at 20:45: The last three Chilli purchases a few weeks ago were a flop - wrecked from 8 to 12. Since then I consistently keep my hands off the buy option. But play the slot less often anyway, because I find it generally runs nimmer so well.
How good that you all have understood what it is about in the thread.
If you don't want to go into the content then please just leave it. Points can also be collected elsewhere
Random wrote on 12/19/2018 at 8:53 pm
How good that you all understood what the thread is about.
It's about goose feet scientific goose feet investigations based on which you can, no, better, want to prove fraud goose feet prove . That's your thing. I, on the other hand, don't investigate, I just like to play and share what I've experienced. For me, this thread was good for a chilli experience exchange, among other things, because it is/was one of my favorite games. And by the way, it should be generally ok, if the thread is brought up again and is thus present again. That's what I thought or rather what I assumed. Well, that was not in your sense. Ergo I leave the field again to you and your other scientific comrades and am out.
You can collect points elsewhere.
Points? What kind of points should I collect elsewhere? Is there a point system here? How many points is this post worth here? I suggest three thousand seven hundred and twelve, because at least I used the formats bold and italic .
PS. Take the stick out'm ass, suits you better.
This post has been translated automatically
Anonym
Topic Creator
Former Member
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
19th Dec. 2018, at 10:36 pm CET#47
1 Like
Liked this post: Anonym
SevenEleven wrote on 12/19/2018 at 9:28 pm
Points? What kind of points am I supposed to earn elsewhere? Is there a point system here? How many points is this post worth here? I suggest three thousand seven hundred and twelve, because at least I used the formats bold and italic .
PS. Take the stick out'm ass, suits you better.
Quotation marks can also be made with very simple characters.
Feel free to share your experiences with your former favorite game.
But that you have fallen a few weeks ago three times to zero is not an exchange of experience and has nothing to do with this thread.
Write but equal it come in the Maingame always only two scatters.
The post just seemed so, you write something so that you just wrote something.
But it brings nothing anyway.
Here one could bring perhaps actually times a proof for the fact that not everything runs off so coincidentally as us is suggested, but in the final effect it is nevertheless completely all the same to the players.
Even if the casino would write: You are cheated here, the next 1000 euros Deposit will fall to zero, but then you win again 400 would still 90% of the people probably deposit the 1000.
But then again fraud threads are opened because someone has not got a third Scatter at Bod.
This post has been translated automatically
Anonym
Former Member
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
20th Dec. 2018, at 10:21 am CET#48
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
Mimimi I tried so hard but no one wants to praise me for it.
This post has been translated automatically
Anonym
Former Member
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
20th Dec. 2018, at 10:48 am CET#49
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
Random wrote on 12/19/2018 at 10:36 pm
You can also make quotes with very simple characters.
Feel free to share and also write your experience with your former favorite game.
But that you fell to zero three times a few weeks ago is not an exchange of experience and simply has nothing to do with this thread.
Write but equal it come in the Maingame always only two scatters.
The post just seemed so, you write something so that you just wrote something.
But it brings nothing anyway.
Here one could bring perhaps actually times a proof for the fact that not everything runs off so coincidentally as us is suggested, but in the final effect it is nevertheless completely all the same to the players.
Even if the casino would write: You are cheated here, the next 1000 euros Deposit will fall to zero, but then you win again 400 would still 90% of the people probably deposit the 1000.
But then again fraud threads are opened because someone has not got a third Scatter at Bod.
Who believes that it is "fair" in OCs has simply closed his eyes to reality. The games are programmed so that you lose. It's logical, that's how casinos make money. It has to come from somewhere.
That the wheel at Chilli is not balanced, should be clear to everyone
@Random:
First of all, I think it's great when someone collects data to critically question the whole thing! I especially appreciate when someone does the work to collect so many series.
The RTP has nothing to do with it.
Everything has to do with the RTP - because that is the basis for the yield calculation of a slot. The problem is to describe the RTP, because this is usually based on the lifetime of the slot.
Of course you could gamble several times on 16 FS - but the probability that this happens in a row is very low. That's how these data come about and as you have noticed: No matter how large your data set is, one could always argue that it balances out the RTP again with an even larger number of FS. There you stand on lost post... last comes then still the "high variance" - club with which one could counter your argumentation
Therefore I can only underline this : He could not speak of 100%, but with bordering on certainty 100%.
It cannot be proved, but the knowledge based on the probability is correct
Next problem is the pattern recognition - with a finding "3-6 times no longer let gamble on 16" this would have to be able to be continued arbitrarily long - a single outlier, i.e. 2x on 16 FS in succession lets the pattern become invalid.
But especially with slots like Extra Chilli many questions remain unanswered, e.g. what would be your RTP if you always took the 8 spins (maybe +4) - what would be the RTP if you always tried to gamble to 24 FS ? As you see the calculation degenerates so far that a meaningful collection is hardly possible and here fits then well the statement of your friend with the "bordering on certainty probability" - therefore one should avoid the Gamblingfunktionen
A Gamblefunktion must correspond actually to the actual value, everything else is fraud.
No, it does not have to as long as the chance ratio is not bindingly stated (red/black, for example, says nothing about the chance, even if it suggests a 50% chance). I have noticed years ago with the Novos on StarGames that the Risk does not offer a real 50% chance to double the win.this has not changed until today with any form of gambling function.
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
But the RTP has nothing to do with it.
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
A suggested chance of winning 50% became more like 30%.
With loss the complete coal is gone, and the following feature-buy stands also again to 70% on the tipping point.
Not a very good advertisement for BTG and the streamer.
If it was real money, I would go completely crazy.
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
If I buy FS with the last 30€ in the counter for 10s vereckt the 85% from 8 to 12.
The same when I have freshly deposited
If I have accepted the 8 FS came wins of garnix (yes exactly, zero) to 3.66€ - a joke!
But:
If I just won something at another slot, then switched to Chilli and bought FS - then the store ran!
FS could be gambled up to 16 (more I dare not...) or if I have taken the 8 tats also quite good rattling - wins from 30 € to 55 € (on 0.10 € bet), that's okay.
In principle, but make me the BTG no real fun more, that gibts better and more profitable slots...;-)
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
How good that you all have understood what it is about in the thread.
If you don't want to go into the content then please just leave it. Points can also be collected elsewhere
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
It's about goose feet scientific goose feet investigations based on which you can, no, better, want to prove fraud goose feet prove . That's your thing. I, on the other hand, don't investigate, I just like to play and share what I've experienced. For me, this thread was good for a chilli experience exchange, among other things, because it is/was one of my favorite games. And by the way, it should be generally ok, if the thread is brought up again and is thus present again. That's what I thought or rather what I assumed. Well, that was not in your sense. Ergo I leave the field again to you and your other scientific comrades and am out.
Points? What kind of points should I collect elsewhere? Is there a point system here? How many points is this post worth here? I suggest three thousand seven hundred and twelve, because at least I used the formats bold and italic .
PS. Take the stick out'm ass, suits you better.
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Liked this post: Anonym
Quotation marks can also be made with very simple characters.
Feel free to share your experiences with your former favorite game.
But that you have fallen a few weeks ago three times to zero is not an exchange of experience and has nothing to do with this thread.
Write but equal it come in the Maingame always only two scatters.
The post just seemed so, you write something so that you just wrote something.
But it brings nothing anyway.
Here one could bring perhaps actually times a proof for the fact that not everything runs off so coincidentally as us is suggested, but in the final effect it is nevertheless completely all the same to the players.
Even if the casino would write: You are cheated here, the next 1000 euros Deposit will fall to zero, but then you win again 400 would still 90% of the people probably deposit the 1000.
But then again fraud threads are opened because someone has not got a third Scatter at Bod.
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
Who believes that it is "fair" in OCs has simply closed his eyes to reality. The games are programmed so that you lose. It's logical, that's how casinos make money. It has to come from somewhere.
That the wheel at Chilli is not balanced, should be clear to everyone
This post has been translated automatically
BeTruG - Extra Chilli
Nobody has liked this post so far
First of all, I think it's great when someone collects data to critically question the whole thing! I especially appreciate when someone does the work to collect so many series.
Everything has to do with the RTP - because that is the basis for the yield calculation of a slot. The problem is to describe the RTP, because this is usually based on the lifetime of the slot.
Of course you could gamble several times on 16 FS - but the probability that this happens in a row is very low. That's how these data come about and as you have noticed: No matter how large your data set is, one could always argue that it balances out the RTP again with an even larger number of FS. There you stand on lost post... last comes then still the "high variance" - club with which one could counter your argumentation
Therefore I can only underline this : He could not speak of 100%, but with bordering on certainty 100%.
It cannot be proved, but the knowledge based on the probability is correct
Next problem is the pattern recognition - with a finding "3-6 times no longer let gamble on 16" this would have to be able to be continued arbitrarily long - a single outlier, i.e. 2x on 16 FS in succession lets the pattern become invalid.
But especially with slots like Extra Chilli many questions remain unanswered, e.g. what would be your RTP if you always took the 8 spins (maybe +4) - what would be the RTP if you always tried to gamble to 24 FS ? As you see the calculation degenerates so far that a meaningful collection is hardly possible and here fits then well the statement of your friend with the "bordering on certainty probability" - therefore one should avoid the Gamblingfunktionen
No, it does not have to as long as the chance ratio is not bindingly stated (red/black, for example, says nothing about the chance, even if it suggests a 50% chance). I have noticed years ago with the Novos on StarGames that the Risk does not offer a real 50% chance to double the win.this has not changed until today with any form of gambling function.
This post has been translated automatically