Pages:
Author

Topic: bitZino - Bitcoin Casino - Blackjack, Roulette, 3 Card Poker, Slots and more! - page 21. (Read 82361 times)

sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
Well, it turns out I can post outside the newbie thread today so I'll comment on my play yesterday.  It was my fist time playing on your site besides a few minutes of play money BJ.  I've read through the thread but not sure if anything is redundant.

Thanks for the extensive feedback! I've added a comp to your account to thank you for taking the time and effort to provide us with this valuable input.

1.  The site is slick and game play is very quick.  This is both good and bad.  Early on, especially, I made numerous mistakes.  The non-face cards look very much alike.  I had a hard time telling the difference between them and would hit when the dealer was showing a 6 among other stupid errors.  I should note I also had alcohol in my system too so that didn't help.  Maybe work on the styling of these to make them a little more distinctive.  Also, the actual table takes up a limited part of the screen which also made it hard to read the cards.  Maybe some sort of fullscreen feature would help.  Also, maybe a warning button if one tries to hit a hard 17 or above.  Other than that the game play is pretty impressive however frictionless is not always best as our minds don't work in the same manner.

Thanks! We spend a lot of time making sure every single detail of the game-play runs as smoothly as possible.

Regarding the confusion about card values: We do try to make it as easy as possible for you to know your total by showing you the hand value at all times so that you don't even have to do any math. But, I also like your suggestion of the warning button - we'll look into adding this option.

I also like your idea for a fullscreen option. One similar feature we've been considering is an "enlarge" button, which would just make the table 1.5x-2x in size. This might alleviate many of the problems you were facing. In the meantime, you can use your browser's "zoom" functionality to make the table size larger.

2.  I saw where you are going to add a rewards program.  In my opinion, the best thing to do is to keep it simple both in receiving and the rules involved.  A lot of people don't like the huge percentage bonuses and the attached rules.  I never take them because of the limits attached to them and the rules that can complicate withdrawals.  In other words, I would rather have a clean 20% bonus rather than a complicated 50 bonus.  You can do things like have different games could count more or less for play through though.  You want to avoid bonus hunters.  Other rewards such as no deposit bonuses are good as well.  Sometimes somebody just has terrible luck and the rtp is very low, figure out a way to give a bonus if they ask.

Getting the incentives right is indeed very difficult, which we're seeing as we plan our rewards program. Our current plan is basically offer a cash-back program, where the more you play the more you earn. We likely won't include straight-up deposit bonuses, because these are easily abused with bitcoins since it is nearly impossible to determine if the same person is the one making all deposits. Overall, we've got some really exciting and innovative ideas - the rewards program is going to be awesome!

3.  Add a chat room, well maybe. I got banned from a casino, 3dice, because of personality conflicts with manager.  But if you are doing 24 hour customer service it could make it a little easier.  You can do other things with it as well.

In the long term, we are looking to include multi-player functionality, which will include features like a chat room. But for now, we are staying focused on creating the best single-player experience possible. We don't want to spread ourselves too thin and allow the product experience to degrade in any way.

4.  I saw where you are going to add games.  Typically in a casino, I play mostly play Pai Gow but don't that often on online ones.  If you could add Vegas solitaire that would be neat.  It's the only reason I miss 3dice besides the slots.  If you are going to add slots, do a lot of homework and put a lot of effort into aesthetics.  I also like 3-card poker.  Back to Pai Gow though, I like the bonus Pai Gow that's available on MG casinos.  Might be too much for now.

Right now we're actively working on Slots, which is likely going to launch in the next week or so. I appreciate the advice regarding the aesthetics - this is definitely an area we're putting a lot of focus on. We will be working on Three Card Poker following slots. We have also been working on Pai Gow for a while now, but we haven't heard a lot of demand for it - so it's good to know you'd be interested in it!

5. that's it for now,  Anything else, I'll post.

Thanks again! Please do post any more feedback. The more feedback, the better!
full member
Activity: 163
Merit: 100
Well, it turns out I can post outside the newbie thread today so I'll comment on my play yesterday.  It was my fist time playing on your site besides a few minutes of play money BJ.  I've read through the thread but not sure if anything is redundant.

1.  The site is slick and game play is very quick.  This is both good and bad.  Early on, especially, I made numerous mistakes.  The non-face cards look very much alike.  I had a hard time telling the difference between them and would hit when the dealer was showing a 6 among other stupid errors.  I should note I also had alcohol in my system too so that didn't help.  Maybe work on the styling of these to make them a little more distinctive.  Also, the actual table takes up a limited part of the screen which also made it hard to read the cards.  Maybe some sort of fullscreen feature would help.  Also, maybe a warning button if one tries to hit a hard 17 or above.  Other than that the game play is pretty impressive however frictionless is not always best as our minds don't work in the same manner.

2.  I saw where you are going to add a rewards program.  In my opinion, the best thing to do is to keep it simple both in receiving and the rules involved.  A lot of people don't like the huge percentage bonuses and the attached rules.  I never take them because of the limits attached to them and the rules that can complicate withdrawals.  In other words, I would rather have a clean 20% bonus rather than a complicated 50 bonus.  You can do things like have different games could count more or less for play through though.  You want to avoid bonus hunters.  Other rewards such as no deposit bonuses are good as well.  Sometimes somebody just has terrible luck and the rtp is very low, figure out a way to give a bonus if they ask.

3.  Add a chat room, well maybe. I got banned from a casino, 3dice, because of personality conflicts with manager.  But if you are doing 24 hour customer service it could make it a little easier.  You can do other things with it as well.

4.  I saw where you are going to add games.  Typically in a casino, I play mostly play Pai Gow but don't that often on online ones.  If you could add Vegas solitaire that would be neat.  It's the only reason I miss 3dice besides the slots.  If you are going to add slots, do a lot of homework and put a lot of effort into aesthetics.  I also like 3-card poker.  Back to Pai Gow though, I like the bonus Pai Gow that's available on MG casinos.  Might be too much for now.

5. that's it for now,  Anything else, I'll post.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
Good catch! They didn't quite look right. I was able to make them look a little better by tweaking the sizes by a few pixels. They still don't look perfect, but it seems this may just be a trade-off to using an image instead of an HTML table.

They're a lot better now, but still a few dots aren't square.

The QR code is 145x145 pixels.
It has a 12 pixel white border around it.
The data area is 121x121 pixels.
There are 41x41 dots, so almost all dots are 3x3, but two rows and two columns are only 2 pixels tall/wide.
Make the whole image 2 pixels wider and taller and it should look good, since 123 is a multiple of 41.

Thanks for the deep analysis! I've corrected the size to match this formula. It does look much better.

Do I have to type the leading zeroes?

And, yes, you do have to type in the leading zeros.

I just withdrew using a 5 digit OTP "96786", so if you thought you were checking for leading zeroes... you're not.

I stand corrected. I guess it doesn't really make a difference in terms of brute-forcing anyway, but the leading zeros are indeed optional.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
Do I have to type the leading zeroes?

And, yes, you do have to type in the leading zeros.

I just withdrew using a 5 digit OTP "96786", so if you thought you were checking for leading zeroes... you're not.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
Good catch! They didn't quite look right. I was able to make them look a little better by tweaking the sizes by a few pixels. They still don't look perfect, but it seems this may just be a trade-off to using an image instead of an HTML table.

They're a lot better now, but still a few dots aren't square.

The QR code is 145x145 pixels.
It has a 12 pixel white border around it.
The data area is 121x121 pixels.
There are 41x41 dots, so almost all dots are 3x3, but two rows and two columns are only 2 pixels tall/wide.
Make the whole image 2 pixels wider and taller and it should look good, since 123 is a multiple of 41.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
We have improved the method we use for generating QR codes - we now generate an image instead of relying on HTML.

It still doesn't look great.  Take a look at what I see when I zoom in on my deposit QR code:

The 'pixels' are all different shapes and sizes.  Even at 100% zoom it looks rough.  The concentric squares in the corners are meant to be symmetrical aren't they?

I wonder if you're using some non-integer pixel size, and we're seeing the effects of anti-aliasing?

Good catch! They didn't quite look right. I was able to make them look a little better by tweaking the sizes by a few pixels. They still don't look perfect, but it seems this may just be a trade-off to using an image instead of an HTML table.

Most importantly, all the QR codes do scan, and they work properly even when zooming.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
We have improved the method we use for generating QR codes - we now generate an image instead of relying on HTML.

It still doesn't look great.  Take a look at what I see when I zoom in on my deposit QR code:



The 'pixels' are all different shapes and sizes.  Even at 100% zoom it looks rough.  The concentric squares in the corners are meant to be symmetrical aren't they?



I wonder if you're using some non-integer pixel size, and we're seeing the effects of anti-aliasing?

Edit: Oh, and thanks for the tip!  By rewarding my bug-reporting habit you're only reinforcing it...
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
The QR code is squished on the left - compare the square in the top left with the one in the top right; it's taller than it is wide, which isn't a desirable property of squares.

As a result I can't scan the code.

If I change the zoom factor (in Chromium) then it fixes itself, but at certain zoom factors I'm not able to scan it.

Thanks for the bug report! It looks like this was an issue with all of our QR codes due to the way we were generating them. We were using an HTML table, and styling the table with CSS - however, this doesn't work that well when you use the browser's resize feature.

We have improved the method we use for generating QR codes - we now generate an image instead of relying on HTML.

Thanks, as always for the bug report Dooglus! You'll find another quarter BTC in your account Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
I found another problem with the two-factor auth stuff:



The QR code is squished on the left - compare the square in the top left with the one in the top right; it's taller than it is wide, which isn't a desirable property of squares.

As a result I can't scan the code.

If I change the zoom factor (in Chromium) then it fixes itself, but at certain zoom factors I'm not able to scan it.

This is for a dummy account which I never use by the way and so the QR code is worthless.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
I saw the errors coming in. It should be fixed now - sorry about that!

And, yes, you do have to type in the leading zeros.

No problem.  It is fine again now.

Just had an unusual bunch of spins.  4 zeroes!

sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
Good catch! This was indeed an issue with the way we implemented 2-factor auth. Although it would have been very difficult for an attacker to exploit this, it was definitely still worth fixing promptly. We have remedied this issue, so now OTP's are truly one-time use. I've also comped your account with another quarter-BTC bonus. Keep the bug reports coming!

Thanks for the bonus.

I just tried logging in with a OTP and saw the following:



My 6 digit code was only 4 digits: 7709

Do I have to type the leading zeroes?

Oh, I tried again with a 6 digit code, but get the same error code.  I'm now completely unable to log in.

I saw the errors coming in. It should be fixed now - sorry about that!

And, yes, you do have to type in the leading zeros.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
Good catch! This was indeed an issue with the way we implemented 2-factor auth. Although it would have been very difficult for an attacker to exploit this, it was definitely still worth fixing promptly. We have remedied this issue, so now OTP's are truly one-time use. I've also comped your account with another quarter-BTC bonus. Keep the bug reports coming!

Thanks for the bonus.

I just tried logging in with a OTP and saw the following:



My 6 digit code was only 4 digits: 7709

Do I have to type the leading zeroes?

Oh, I tried again with a 6 digit code, but get the same error code.  I'm now completely unable to log in.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
I'm not sure, but I think you're accepting the same code twice.  So if an attacker is logging my keystrokes and is quick enough (ie. within the same 30 second window), he can use the same OTP as I just used to log in to my account.

You should make sure an OTP can only be used One Time....  Smiley

Good catch! This was indeed an issue with the way we implemented 2-factor auth. Although it would have been very difficult for an attacker to exploit this, it was definitely still worth fixing promptly. We have remedied this issue, so now OTP's are truly one-time use. I've also comped your account with another quarter-BTC bonus. Keep the bug reports coming!

Yup! We have a rewards program in the works which I'm really excited about. We've got a lot of long-time loyal players, and we want to make sure to reward you all for playing with us.

Any update on this?

I'm glad your excited about the reward program! We're working hard on it, but we want to make sure we do it right. It can get quite complicated to make sure the right players get rewarded, while also not attracting bonus-abusers. The rough timeline as of now, is that we'll be launching another game shortly, and then be launching the rewards program after that.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000
Yup! We have a rewards program in the works which I'm really excited about. We've got a lot of long-time loyal players, and we want to make sure to reward you all for playing with us.

Any update on this?
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
We have officially launched support for 2-Factor Auth for withdrawals! We utilize Google Authenticator, and allow you to set up your account to require an OTP before every withdrawal request.

I'm not sure, but I think you're accepting the same code twice.  So if an attacker is logging my keystrokes and is quick enough (ie. within the same 30 second window), he can use the same OTP as I just used to log in to my account.

You should make sure an OTP can only be used One Time....  Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
We have raised the limits across our games once again!

We have made a large adjustment to Roulette, and now support wagers up to 100 BTC in total per spin, with a limit of 5 BTC per-number per-spin.

We have also made smaller adjustments to Blackjack and Craps: Blackjack now supports wagers up to 25 BTC per hand, and Craps now supports wagers up to 5 BTC per-bet-type per-roll.

We've kept video poker as-is with a maximum wager of 2 BTC per hand.

We've had a lot of requests for higher stakes action, so hopefully this should help quell that demand! As always though, we will keep our stakes low enough such that the house's risk-of-ruin is infinitesimal.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
Thanks so much for the bug report! I've added a quarter-BTC to your account to show our appreciation.

You're welcome, and thanks.  Smiley

Thanks for the link! I don't think 4000 spins is really an adequate sample size for roulette. In our risk-of-ruin simulations, we found that we had to simulate 1.5 million spins per round in order to adequately ensure that we were ahead at the end of the round. Anything less than this, and we hadn't actually hit the "long-run" yet.

I'd also be happy to do a deeper dive into his specific spins. I'll follow up with him on the reddit thread.

I was wondering in particular if there's any way that network a network timeout on a spin could cause bitZino to repeat the previous spin somehow.  That's what he seems to be suggesting is happening, which would be an exploitable bug.

Ah, I see. The system is designed to be resilient to networking issues. So, a given initial_shuffle will only ever be served once, and once the results of a wager are shown to a user, that shuffle will never be used again, even in the event of networking issues.

That said, bugs certainly are possible, so I wouldn't want to dismiss anything. We always keep a close eye on all our stats, and haven't seen deviations in yet. We'll definitely continue to keep an eye out though!
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
Thanks so much for the bug report! I've added a quarter-BTC to your account to show our appreciation.

You're welcome, and thanks.  Smiley

Thanks for the link! I don't think 4000 spins is really an adequate sample size for roulette. In our risk-of-ruin simulations, we found that we had to simulate 1.5 million spins per round in order to adequately ensure that we were ahead at the end of the round. Anything less than this, and we hadn't actually hit the "long-run" yet.

I'd also be happy to do a deeper dive into his specific spins. I'll follow up with him on the reddit thread.

I was wondering in particular if there's any way that network a network timeout on a spin could cause bitZino to repeat the previous spin somehow.  That's what he seems to be suggesting is happening, which would be an exploitable bug.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 252
I have a zero bitcoin balance.  When I go to bitzino.com, I see the 'welcome to craps!' popup, with a 'or, play with play money' link in its lower left corner.  I click that link, nothing happens for 3 seconds, then the popup fades out and fades back in again, and I'm back where I started.

The same thing happens for all 4 games; I'm unable to play for play money at all.

Yikes! It looks like this was a regression we introduced a few days ago in how we handle play money tables. It looks like we only properly tested it for logged-out users. This is now fixed, and we'll add some automated tests for logged-in users so that it doesn't happen again.

Thanks so much for the bug report! I've added a quarter-BTC to your account to show our appreciation.

Also, you might want to check this out:

  http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/17qthf/opinions_on_bitzino/

Is he on to something, or just had a weird run?

Thanks for the link! I don't think 4000 spins is really an adequate sample size for roulette. In our risk-of-ruin simulations, we found that we had to simulate 1.5 million spins per round in order to adequately ensure that we were ahead at the end of the round. Anything less than this, and we hadn't actually hit the "long-run" yet.

I'd also be happy to do a deeper dive into his specific spins. I'll follow up with him on the reddit thread.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
Also, you might want to check this out:

  http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/17qthf/opinions_on_bitzino/

Is he on to something, or just had a weird run?
Pages:
Jump to: