Belgium
Member #173,925
March 26, 2016
1,396 Posts
Offline
This was the drawing of 6 + R / 45. R = 7th ball drawn.
Cost: €1 / combination
2017-02-04
1
4
5
7
8
32
10
The payouts were
6
1
6.178.703,00 €
5+
16
14.068,20 €
5
387
551,60 €
4+
960
111,10 €
4
11.644
16,90 €
3+
15.742
6,70 €
3
156.974
5,00 €
2+
113.560
3,00 €
The payout in rank one is exceptionally high! Other ranks' payouts are very low.
I consider this as being an unfair payout for the lower ranks.
The entire payout construction has a bad smell.
Open for discussion! Often rank 1 didn't reach a payout of a million.
Texas United States
Member #86,151
January 30, 2010
1,889 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Sunglasses on Feb 4, 2017
This was the drawing of 6 + R / 45. R = 7th ball drawn.
Cost: €1 / combination
2017-02-04
1
4
5
7
8
32
10
The payouts were
6
1
6.178.703,00 €
5+
16
14.068,20 €
5
387
551,60 €
4+
960
111,10 €
4
11.644
16,90 €
3+
15.742
6,70 €
3
156.974
5,00 €
2+
113.560
3,00 €
The payout in rank one is exceptionally high! Other ranks' payouts are very low.
I consider this as being an unfair payout for the lower ranks.
The entire payout construction has a bad smell.
Open for discussion! Often rank 1 didn't reach a payout of a million.
Hey, every game is designed with a default to prevent 'over payout' scenarios, okay. In other words, it's much better to pay out too little than too much because you never when some interesting may happen like an abundance of players with the same numbers. This goes back to the original rule of gambling...'you must have more losers that winners' in order for the game to be successful. That said, I believe that our games can definitely be adjusted to garner more player participation as the amount of winners on any level has actually diminished with the advent of a larger matrix... I believe. You can allow more players to win more lower tier prizes without issues, and, this would actually be a form of a 'stimulus' because players would surely play those same winnings back in hope of netting an even closer winning combination at some point.
Don't be discouraged if you really enjoy playing. Never know when things will fall just right.
Small games, frequent wins, and regular payouts 'cause.....
There are seven days in the week...'Someday' isn't one of them.
Belgium
Member #173,925
March 26, 2016
1,396 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Feb 4, 2017
Hey, every game is designed with a default to prevent 'over payout' scenarios, okay. In other words, it's much better to pay out too little than too much because you never when some interesting may happen like an abundance of players with the same numbers. This goes back to the original rule of gambling...'you must have more losers that winners' in order for the game to be successful. That said, I believe that our games can definitely be adjusted to garner more player participation as the amount of winners on any level has actually diminished with the advent of a larger matrix... I believe. You can allow more players to win more lower tier prizes without issues, and, this would actually be a form of a 'stimulus' because players would surely play those same winnings back in hope of netting an even closer winning combination at some point.
Don't be discouraged if you really enjoy playing. Never know when things will fall just right.
Rank 1 paid 6/8 of the chances. Other payouts for 5/6 for example had like 1/4 of what they should get. Compared to the previous design 3/6 deserves much more than 5 euros payout as it is much harder to get. They added 3/6 to the 2+ to make publicity with 1% more payouts, but worse payouts. This game and payout design discourages playing more as I proved. You cannot enjoy this game if you knew the previous design and payout. Eventually it is getting better if more people play the game and we get rid of Euromillions.