Talk:Rings of Fortune

I think that the net gain is 14/16, not 15/16...

1/16*10 + 6/16*1 + 9/16*-2 = -2/16 &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.245.178.137 (talk &bull; contribs) 03:44, 30 June 2006 (CDT).
 * grand prize is 12, not 10 tickets. --68.6.86.154 07:59, 30 June 2006 (CDT)

Why is this recommended over Nine Rings for losses? Standing in the corner in Nine Rings gives you 2/3 losses per round, Rings of Fortune (any location) only gives 9/16 which makes Nine Rings ~18.5% faster. Admittedly Rings of Fortune is cheaper per loss, but it is also slower. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.109.82.138 (talk &bull; contribs) 06:23, 30 June 2006 (CDT).

Because It's about 5 times cheaper. You want to maybe fill 1 third to 2 thirds of your bar on unlucky with 16 rings (rings of fortune), then go to the 9 rings game to start working on the wins probably. It is slower, but it's like 5 times cheaper. It's way too slow for the lucky track though, and not even as great odds of winning tickets. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.112.132.53 (talk &bull; contribs) 06:54, 30 June 2006 (CDT).


 * If you want both titles, it's best to stand in a corner of nine rings until you hit Lucky. This should take approximately 5300 rounds, and by that time, you should be 70% of the way to Unlucky as well. Rings of Fortune can then be used to finish off the title to save money. --68.6.86.154 07:59, 30 June 2006 (CDT)