Roulette: Early Access

Welcome to Roulette: The Little Wheel

You heard about it in the poll and now here it is :raised_hands:

I’m trying to iron out the wrinkles on this one and I think it’s almost ready to go, but I want to get some community feedback before we run an actual give away with it.

:warning: Early Access :warning:

There are no prizes here, folks. This thread exists so we can make this a playable game and eventually get a real prize pool to go with it.

The Table

  • There are eighteen (18) Animal cells
  • There are eighteen (18) Food cells
  • And one (1) Skull cell

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  
  :tiger: :hamburger: :tropical_fish: :frog: :cheese: :unicorn: :dragon: :doughnut: :duck: :bird: :ice_cream: :cow: A
:skull: :candy: :rabbit2: :pretzel: :coconut: :t_rex: :corn: :carrot: :elephant: :cherries: :pizza: :pig: :lollipop: B
  :whale: :honey_pot: :gorilla: :avocado: :taco: :octopus: :hatching_chick: :sushi: :sauropod: :ramen: :takeout_box: :wolf: C

Proposed Entry Instructions

  1. Everyone begins with 1,000 :gem: to play three (3) spins

  2. Make three (3) wagers (one per spin), each which consist of -

    • An non-zero amount of gems
    • and a bet
  3. Bets are selected from the following table -

    Bet Pay Example
    Left Half 1:1 columns (1 - 6)
    Right Half 1:1 columns (7 - 12)
    Animal 1:1 any animal cell (Animals)
    Food 1:1 any food cell (Foods)
    Dozen 2:1 columns (1 - 4), (5 - 9), or (9 - 12)
    Row 2:1 (A), (B), or (C)
    Corner 8:1 intersection of any 4 cells (:coconut: :t_rex: :avocado: :taco:)
    Column 11:1 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), or (12)
    Pair 17:1 intersection of any 2 cells (:carrot: :elephant:)
    Single 35:1 any single non-skull cell (:honey_pot:)

Entry Example 1: Sally

We see a Pair bet, a Row bet, and a Single bet. All 1,000 gems are wagered. If all bets are lost, Sally ends with 0 gems.

500 on (:cherries: :pizza:)
300 on (A)
200 on (:hamburger:)

Entry Example 2: Alice

We see a Half bet, Animal bet, and a Corner bet. Only 700 gems are wagered. If all bets are lost, Alice still ends with 300 gems.

300 on (7-12)
200 on (Animals)
200 on (:doughnut: :duck: :elephant: :cherries:)

Entry Example 3: Cindy

We see a Food bet, a Column bet, and a Dozen bet. Only 900 gems are wagered. If all bets are lost, Cindy still ends with 100 gems.

200 on (Foods)
500 on (3)
200 on (1 - 4)

The Spins

There will be three (3) spins, to coincide with each player’s three (3) wagers. Each spin pays out the player’s wagered amount of gems based on the Pay column in the betting table.

Let’s see some example spins and how the players would score –

  • First spin: :cherries:
  • Second spin: :tropical_fish:
  • Third spin: :elephant:

Player Entry Bet Pay Win
Sally 1 500 on (:cherries: :pizza:) 17:1 9,000
  2 300 on (A) 2:1 900
  3 200 on (:hamburger:) 35:1 0
Alice 1 300 on (7-12) 2:1 900
  2 200 on (Animals) 1:1 400
  3 200 on (:doughnut: :duck: :elephant: :cherries:) 8:1 1800
Cindy 1 200 on (Foods) 1:1 400
  2 500 on (3) 11:1 6,000
  3 200 on (1 - 4) 2:1 0

The Skull

A :skull: results in a loss for everyone on that spin. It’s possible (but highly improbable) that the skull could appear on all three (3) spins.

Final Scoring

Player Unwagered Wins Total
Sally 0 9,000 + 900 9,900
Alice 300 900 + 600 + 1,800 3,600
Cindy 100 600 + 6,000 6,700


I think we’ll do winners like we’ve done in Lottery 1. Scores will be ordered highest-to-lowest and the top scores will be eligible to pick a prize

Thoughts and Feedback

This game seems like it will be the most demanding on the players. Rules will have to be followed very closely in order to produce a valid entry. I want to get out as many snags as possible while still keeping the betting options plentiful and fun. Please send me any ideas or feedback on how you think the entire process could be improved.

Thanks for your time and I look forward to seeing you in Roulette 1.



It would be helpful if you could reduce the amount of explanation here or better organize it. It feels overwhelming despite being a relatively simple idea.

Can we do a test run in this thread?


An example of a valid entry would be incredibly helpful. :smiley:


this confuses me. oof


whats the point of betting on any of the 1:1 ? unless im a dumb dumb you have nothing to gain and everything to lose on those bets

In the example Alice put up 200 on animals, if she wins its a 1:1 so she wins nothing, if no animals come up she loses 200 >.< again, sorry not a betting person myself maybe its obvious to everyone else but I dont see the point of 1:1 bets


There’s 3 valid entries in the post. Player 1, Player 2, and Player 3


Oh sorry just easily confused.


Sorry, there was a typo in the scoring table. Some of the 2:1 entries were actually 1:1.

1:1 just refers to the NET gain when you win a bet. So if you wager 200 gems and win, your NET gain will be 200. The total payout is of course 400.

3:1 means if you win a bet of 200, your NET gain will be 600. Total payout is 800.

11:1 means if you win a bet of 500, your NET gain will be 5500. Total payout is 6000.

I think we’ll want to avoid requiring a video primer on the contest entry, but here’s the basics on how Roulette works. It’s a bit more complicated than the version proposed in this thread, but many of the mechanics and betting options are here


I get it now, you get to keep what you bet sort of and then everything else is icing on the cake. Thanks for the explanation. Again sorry but yeah im not a betting person so I had no idea how it worked.


:crazy_face: - HehE-h-how do I ween?

1 Like

So is there really any point in leaving leftover gems? Or is it just to hedge yourself Incase all of your bets fail?

1 Like

@Vindace that’s right. If you had leftover gems, you could still beat a player who wagered everything and lost it all.


In this case it will likely be better to spend all you gems. Given there will only be maybe 4 or 5 prizes and the amount of entries will likely be high statustucally at least a few people would make back more than the original 1000 gems. And since there will only be three spins with no chance to reinvest your “winnings” there is very little chance it would help you win. Unless I am thinking about it incorrectly the only chance this would likely help you all 3 results were skulls. You are probably better off betting the leftover money on 1/2 of the numbers because then you have a 50% chance of doubling that money


This is definitely the strategic move. I just wanted to explain that not all gems need to be wagered. You could wager 1 on each bet and maybe you think a final score of 997 is enough to win. More power to you!

1 Like

That’s what I was thinking. In normal circumstances you’d want to hedge yourself for later but with no carry-over that appears to be the best option.

1 Like

I wanted to make it possible to have multiple rounds where you could double-down your wins, but that leaves us with two choices:

  1. We do one spin per day for 3 days but disallow new players after the first spin
  2. allow new players to enter even after the first spin, but they’re at a disadvantage by starting a day or two late

At first I thought neither of these would be acceptable. But the more I think about it, I like the idea of 1 quite a bit. We could announce the Roulette with a half-day lead time and then give 24 hours for the first spin. All new players are locked in now and no new players can enter. The players play for 2 more spins, then the game is over. Players are scored and prizes are distributed.

A spin per day would make it interesting as this gives us the carry over and potential for snowball effect is there like in a real game of roulette. Some players might get knocked out after the first day or two and your strategy can adapt as the game goes on.


And it feels a lot less like a lottery! More player choice.


Definitley not saying you are wrong but more that it most likely would not be a winning strategy

This would likely cause you and others issues.

  1. people would have to see that post for the new spin in amongst the other people entires and you know that some people would miss the second or third spin purely from not seeing a post or not being around the forums and complain about it
  2. people who lost a significant amount or all of their money in the first round may be less incentivised to keep being involved as it will be much harder for them to catch up to people who won the first spin
  3. you would have to update every entrant with the amount of gems they have available to bet after each of the first 2 spins, it would likely be a lot of work for you and confusing for some entrants

@PeteMcc definitely some big stuff to consider there…

1 Like

I’m thinking this could be communicated pretty effectively. At the beginning of the game we explain that you will need to be present at least once per day if you want to participate in all the spins. Participating in every spin does not have to be a requirement either.

I kinda like the elimination factor. By the first day, we should probably have about 30 entries, and if ~5 people get knocked out, I think that builds some excitement for the remaining 25. Also a knockout is pretty unlikely if you don’t wager all of your gems with high stakes so this is somewhat in the player’s control

Each day there would be one spin and one post to give a table of everyone’s current score. Much like the results of on Lottery 1. Again, this could be communicated up front that each player will need to check in once per day and see the updated status.

It’s definitely different than the giveaways I’ve run so far, but that’s okay too. I’m still open to this if we can just find a good way to communicate the process so everyone knows what’s going on. I don’t mind the bits of extra work involved.

1 Like

Just to give a sort of action plan. I will plan to rewrite the entire thing and re-post it tomorrow sometime. Hopefully that will remove some confusion. I think we’ll do a trial run too.