Crash games remain a very popular approach for scaling traffic, as the format encourages more users to register and make their first deposits. Players enter the game with a sense of control and an intuitive understanding of the game mechanics.

On one hand, crash games deliver solid results for media buying teams and, in certain GEOs, bring in strong depositors. However, across most Tier 1 and Tier 2 GEOs, teams often face low traffic quality. This is largely driven by attempts to convert non-gambling audiences through promises of quick earnings, misleading creatives, or motivation-based approaches.

Crash games convert — that's a fact no one disputes. But the Rockit team made a strategic decision to completely phase them out in Tier 1 and Tier 2 GEOs and switch to a slot-focused approach.

"The reason was straightforward: we were losing revenue due to traffic cuts. Crash traffic consistently failed to meet quality KPIs. It wasn't about individual campaigns — it was a systemic issue. Advertisers cut what doesn't meet KPI standards and doesn't generate revenue for them. Even high ROI doesn't always compensate for potential traffic cuts," said Rockit CEO Oleg.

With this shift, the media buying team identified clear advantages and drawbacks observed over this period.

Advantages of the Slot Approach

1. Fast transition and visible results.

The transition took one quarter, and the team began seeing results relatively quickly. Cost-to-Deposit on slot campaigns exceeded 35% in the first days and consistently reached 80–100% by the end of the month. For teams used to running crash approach in Tier 1 and Tier 2 GEOs, this represents a fundamentally different level of traffic quality.

2. Traffic cuts nearly disappeared.

When player quality is strong, advertisers have no reason to apply cuts — instead, they're motivated to scale volume. Rockit experienced this firsthand: caps and budgets grew organically once partners saw consistent quality.

3. Predictable KPI performance.

Working with KPIs became far more stable — fewer problematic cases, fewer explanations, and fewer "your traffic didn't pass KPI" conversations.

4. The biggest impact was in Tier-1 GEOs.

This is where quality requirements are the highest, and where crash traffic typically started dying off just a week after launch.

The Downsides

The team's CEO was also transparent about the drawbacks of moving away from crash games:

"Average ROI dropped by around 15%. That's a real number, and we won't sugarcoat it. Slot players are harder and more expensive to acquire, which means you need stronger creatives, more testing, and constant monitoring of player activity across different cohorts.

But here's what we realized: that 15% ROI drop is the price of stability. You're not losing revenue to cuts, not relaunching campaigns over and over, not explaining every month why quality dropped. In the long run, the slot approach isn't more expensive — and often turns out to be even more efficient."

Conclusion

Asked whether it's worth moving away from crash approaches now, the Rockit team says it depends entirely on your goals.

"Crash games still perform well in Tier-3 GEOs, where quality requirements are lower and the format aligns with player behavior. It's not a dead tool — it's a tool with limitations.

However, if your team operates in Tier-1 markets and aims to build long-term relationships with advertisers, the slot approach provides a foundation you can scale on — without the risk of losing everything due to the next traffic cut."