Topic: bustabit – The original crash game - page 118. (Read 61162 times)

Just wanted to post here to say that I've had over 300 bitcoin in this site at one time and they have paid me out.

Any chance you'd disclose who those two players were? I have my suspicions, but would love to know for sure

@dragonmaster2  actually, counter-intuitively from a maths point of view it doesn't really matter about the max-bet. What really affects the house, is actually the "attempted profit" they are trying to get. As an example, if you go to bustadice.com you are able to bet 2000 btc in a single bet (and take a ~98% chance of winning 20 BTC) or 1 bitcoin @ 21x!

The reason it largely doesn't matter, is because the house edge (1%) is based on the amount you bet, rather than on what you are trying to win. So if someone bet 2000 BTC to win 20 BTC, they would be "paying" 20 BTC in expected loss to the house. And if someone bet 1 BTC to attempt to win 20, they would be "paying" 0.01 BTC in EV to have a chance to win the same amount.
 
So from the house's perspective (at least in terms of expected bankroll growth) these two factors eliminate each other, meaning you should restrict the max-profit not the max bet.


So that raises the question: If the max-bet doesn't matter, why would bustabit even restrict it at all? Why doesn't it let people bet 2000 BTC like bustadice?  And the answer to that is because as bustabit is a multiplayer game, someone winning a lot (in terms of frequency) can have a really big impact on other players, due to the stop loss for the casino (the forced cash out).  Imagine that without the max bet rule, 2 whales were betting 1300 BTC a round (at 1.01x). This means every game would have a "force point" at 1.01x .. which would ruin the game for everyone else.

So that's the logic behind the max-bet rule, even though it doesn't really affect the risk per se

Great stuff seeing here, love the design!
Maybe it's time to add new currencies 

I remember when I found out about Bustabit, like 3years ago or so. Can say the most fun game.

I think another thing to take note of is that max profit was much harder to hit in V1 as the maxBet was capped at 1 btc. So hitting 60 btc only happened roughly 1/60 times. Even assuming max profit was 0.75% instead of 3% and max profit was 20 btc, that's still 1/20 times.

With the new system, you can bet the max profit and hit it roughly 1/2 times. That's 30x higher than before, 10x higher if you assume V1 max profit was 20 btc at 0.75%. V1 was an order of magnitude safer in terms of bankroll fluctuation since kelly/double kelly were hit that much less often.

I still feel that it's not great that double kelly is possible + hit so often when there's 2 accounts used. Yesterday there were 2 sets of 2 accounts that hit double kelly repeatedly: pineappleswrl & offtheshits, xxxrip & perrrrs (all the same guy)

I feel that because max bet isn't 1 BTC but always scales with the max profit, that no matter how large the bankroll, as long as there are whales willing to repeatedly hit double kelly, the bankroll will always be at risk of large fluctuations.

Just for some background, twice the kelly isn't totally arbitrary. The kelly is the point in which your expected bankroll growth is maximized, risky any more passed that means you are over-risking funds and have less expected growth (but more expected profit). Once you get to 2x the kelly, your expected bankroll growth is 0. Anything passed that point puts you in negative expected bankroll growth (basically guaranteeing the house will bust if it's constantly being used).


At least historically on bustabit, when there was a whale playing trying to hit max profit it was almost on a single account and they were the only one. The new system is designed to allow them to do that, without affecting anyone else (i.e. a single account can't ever force everyone to cash out) -- however if there's multiple accounts aiming at max profit like we saw yesterday, it kind of backfires a little.

Honestly, I think what bustabit really needs is a bigger bankroll at the moment. 

If 0.75% is the kelly, are you not worried that double that might be too high? The bankroll just lost over 200 btc to a player running 2 accounts to repeatedly hit that combined 1.5%.

I'm not sure I understand you.  For it to be a positive for those players, it needs to fully offset the higher house edge.  Otherwise it would be a negative.

Example: a player who bets medium bets and cashes out in the 1.4-1.6x range most games would have lost around -.5% to the house edge.  If that player only lost, say, -.2% to the bonus, then they are losing more to the fixed -1% house edge than they did under the bonus system, even if they weren't aware of it.


I agree with you that most players probably weren't bonus hunting, but I was wondering how many lost more than -.5%.  Because those are the players that are helped by the flat house edge.  Obviously the guys shooting for 10x are helped by the increase, but my theory (completely assumed, no actual stats) is that there are a lot of people who cashed out under 2x who were losing less money (theoretically of course) under the old system than the new system and it's unfair to lump them into the "vast majority" just because they weren't actively bonus hunting.

But mainly I'm just curious.


I was thinking about this yesterday, and I'm not sure.  BaB was great because, like you said, there were tons of people who were indifferent to the bonus that it made it a profitable venture.  I'm not sure how many people would be attracted to a pure skill game, especially considering how poorly bitcoin poker sites are doing (although that's mostly due to their horrible marketing).

I am noob to bustabit site. Just signed up and watching each rounds ongoing and people's chat also. Please confirm that bonus you mentioned 1% will be above every crash and the max hits.
Since I am part of OneHash Now concentrating on gambling to side to invest. Hope get the better advice from the support to get the more profit than loose in gambling.

I can compute when I have the time -- but honestly, for the vast majority of gamblers removing the bonus and the 0x was the right thing to do. When I did some analysis of who was playing for bonuses, I realized there's really only a handful of people doing so. The vast majority of people are simply playing and gambling to have fun.

And of those people playing for bonuses, they were pretty much totally dominated by two bot-owners (who had several bots) that were exceedingly good at bonus play. One of which didn't have a huge bankroll, and couldn't play high-stakes and the other guy who net'd about 1.1M USD profit in a 1 year period.  I think it's fantastic that people are taking the game so seriously and doing exactly what it was designed for  -- but I think the mistake was that a 1% bonus was small enough that casual players assumed it wasn't worth worrying about.

There's definitely a lot of  potential for pvp gambling games, but I think the important thing is ensuring that people fully realize how competitive it is

The short answer to your question about investments is risk: In many cases a stable revenue stream with limited downside is preferable to a larger revenue stream with lots of variance.

The bonus was 1% of what was wagered in a round and was paid to the player(s) that cashed out last. It was paid in all games except those that crashed instantly at 0.00x. How large the multiplier actually was wasn't important, only that you cashed out last.

bustabit might see the bonus again in the future. A player-versus-player version of the game with a very small rake and a significantly higher bonus than previously could be interesting.

My intention wasn't to imply that players making use of the bonus system were doing anything wrong and it certainly wasn't to cause offense. The point is that the bonus was beneficial to competitive players and detrimental to casual players who ignored it. Since the second group outnumbers the first, we chose to remove the bonus, improving the game for most players.

I haven't seen the numbers from the old database myself, but regardless of whether the removal of the bonus fully offsets the higher house edge or not, it is a positive for the majority of players. However, I do think that it very likely does, especially in recent history where some established bonus hunting bots were running round the clock.

First off, saying that it was "taking advantage" is pretty insulting and frankly misleading as that was the goal of the game.  It was explained indepth in the rules and in giant letters and numbers on the screen. 

Secondly, I'd love to see some stats.  I'm sure Ryan has access to them, I wonder if he'd share what % of players on BaB were at -.5% or worse lifetime for the bonus.  Since those are the only players that this change helps and you are claiming that this change helps well over 50% of the players.

Either way, my point still stands.  BaB is now a much slower dice game.  Hopefully you have some plans to throw in some interesting variations or modifications, I know Ryan was talking last month about launching a game with a 100% bonus.  I hope those plans haven't been scraped.

There is always good and bad news here, the good news is bustabit v2 is really smooth and has a better design. And also you guys are makin and open investment so anyone can do the investment here. But why suddenly make an open investment when you are already have make it woth your own private bankroll?
The bad news is we will never see the bonus things again. Btw about the bonus, we do not get it on 0.00x or on the highest multiplier? Usually there is a little bonus too for the one that make huge multiplier

For better or worse, this is how the majority of our players were already playing it. I understand that the bonus system in particular distinguished bustabit from other games, but most players didn't compete for the bonus and were essentially being taken advantage of by the few that did.

Sadly, this takes BaB from a revolutionary social gambling game to a much slower dice roll. 

Thank you, Ryan, that means a lot! While there's definitely work to be done, I believe that bustabit has a bright future ahead.

Congratulation on the smooth launch. I know bustabit is in capable hands!

Hey everyone,

Some people might already know me from bustadice, which launched last October. A little over a week ago I also acquired bustabit from Ryan and will be running it going forwards. Due to the change in ownership it was necessary to  generate a new hash chain and hold bustabit's second provably fair seed event, which you can find here.

I also took the opportunity to release version 2 of bustabit, a complete rewrite that is more scalable and brings a number of new features and improvements.

Removal of the bonus system
Both instant busts at 0.00x and the bonus have been removed and the house edge is now a flat 1 % (read below). Although the bonus was one of bustabit's most interesting features and I am sad to see it go, our experience has shown that most players didn't consider the bonus an important part of the game. Consequently only a handful of players benefited from the bonus at the expense of all other players that ignored it.

Despite the house edge being increased in v2, the majority of players are likely better off in terms of expected value thanks to the removal of the bonus system.

Investment system
bustabit is no longer privately bankrolled. Instead, anyone can invest in the bankroll to participate in the casino's profits (and losses). To fund further development, marketing and to turn a profit, we charge a 50% commission on net profits. New investors are charged a fee of 2 %, which is shared among existing investors. This compensates them for being diluted and encourages long-term investments into a stable bankroll.

Just like in bustadice, the majority of funds are held in a multisignature cold wallet by myself, Ryan and a trusted third party.

Higher bet limits
To protect investors, the most a single player can win in one game is 1% of the bankroll, in line with the Kelly criterion. If a player were to win more than that, he will be forced to cash out. In addition, if all players in a game combined would win more than 1.5% of the bankroll, they are also forced to cash out. The bet limit has been removed entirely, allowing bets of virtually any size.

As a result, high rollers can make larger bets and overall players will be forced to cash out less often.

Deposit precredits
Don't want to wait for your deposit to be confirmed? Precredit it for a small fee and start playing immediately!

Not all deposits are eligible to be precredited and your precredited balance cannot be withdrawn, tipped or invested until your deposit confirms.

Highly optimized withdrawal system
bustabit v2 makes full use Segwit for all of its addresses. In addition, withdrawals are processed using a sophisticated custom-built coin selection algorithm which provides fantastic privacy properties.

Since it also significantly lowers our transaction costs, we are able to pass those savings on to our players. Players that would like to save even more on fees have the option of choosing a non-immediate withdrawal, which is batched with others and even cheaper.

We are confident that no other service can currently provide cheaper Bitcoin withdrawals at cost.

Friend system
You can now add other players to your friend list to see when they are online. Friends are specially highlighted, making them easy to recognize in chat and in the game's player list.

If you want to discuss something in private, you can now do so using direct messages. To prevent spam, both players must add each other before they are able to send and receive each other's private messages.

Script editor
Scripts authors can automatically generate UI for configuration, allowing scripts to be shared and used more comfortable, especially by non-technical players.
We've also sandboxed the script editor, preventing malicious scripts from accessing the rest of the browser.