But can the overall RTP / model include in-built variance to exploit the player psychology or reduce potentially fatal spikes in the customer(s) (the casinos) losses ??
Can the maths include legitimate switches to the way that the game plays ?? (e.g. through symbol changes on reels, increases/decreases in random feature chances) . As long as the game plays within its stated RTP then I can’t see why a developer wouldn’t want to make it more exciting for the player-base, but at the same time not wanting to see deviation in hundreds of Steves hitting the top of the ReelKing ladder in quick succession and denting the smaller casino customers. I know that, over time, the game will do what it says without modification but, games get replaced and you don’t want to lose a customer because the are currently down far too much to afford to take on your next game.
As you are testing these games though the billions of spins, are subtle changes being made by the server on the fly to iron out the bumps?? You’re not ‘compensating’ as the RTP has to stay the same – just shifting what percentage of that RTP comes from where.
Not ‘Rigged’ but ‘Dynamically Adapted’
Masquerade