If your goal was to make it feel as rigged as casino black jack you nailed it.
No Deathzealot, there is no such thing as "fair" because there's no penalty for restarting and there is a specific goal where you win and a specific depth where you lose. The goal is apparently to be 6 ahead before being 3 behind, you lose if at any point you are 3 behind, and you win if you're 6 ahead. And without split, double down and the blackjack bonus, you'd be keenly aware that the odds are stacked against you in a real casino with real money at risk, and you're certainly going to win this thing less than 1 time out of 3 since you would win EXACTLY 1 time out of 3 if you had an equal probability of losing to winning each individual hand. So let's say it's maybe 41% win, 47% loss, 12% push for each individual hand so then it would be a 20.9395% chance of winning the game instead of 33.3333%. But so what. So you have to play it 5 times before winning on average instead of 3, it doesn't even double the number of times you have to try in order to win on average. The 5 games you have to play instead of 5 will also take less time on average since you will on average lose them more quickly than you would if the odds of winning individual hands was the odds of losing them. Besides, you also get a bonus that you automatically win if you don't bust after 5 cards. You don't get that in a real casino, that's for sure, not even in spanish 21. Also you win immediately if you get blackjack, even if the dealer has it too, and you PUSH if you get 21 the hard way against a dealer's blackjack.
Actually, I was wrong now that I think about it, you don't win when you're 6 ahead before being 3 behind. You don't have to be 6 ahead, just 6 ahead of your lowest point, so if you get 2 behind, you win if you then get 4 ahead from there without getting 3 behind total, so it's slightly better, probably you'll win this thing close to 1 time out of 4.
Optimistically, it's an exercise in basic logic and random walks.
That said, it's a pretty dumb and simple version of blackjack and who cares about the catgirl, they're all gross and too furry. And this one has ridiculous press-on nails it looks like. Not even claws, just like the most tacky hideous press-on nails that probably walmart sells. And by the end, a partially exposed nipple that will take your appetite away rather than allure you. Though not as badly as the one with the nuclear cameltoe (and that's what she looks like in the BEGINNING, I'm glad I didn't play THAT one).
I give it 3.5 just because Newgrounds is utterly lacking in a halfway decent blackjack game and it has no competition. Not a ONE of them. Almost none of them even allow split or double down! It's shameful that there isn't one on the whole site that is anywhere as near as Masque Blackjack for MS Dos from the early 1980s, now THAT was a good program, I'd even call it educational because it teaches you to properly count cards.
Love it but it could be improved.
Since for a Blackjack you only win 1 piece of clothing instead of 1.5 (Blackjack normally pays 3 to 2), AND since you can't split, double down or buy insurance, ties should have been given to the player. This would be Ties Win Blackjack, a variation where the dealer is still slightly favored to win. Otherwise this is good for a demo version. It's nice that you win with 5 Card Charlies.
its short, you gets nothing special at the end, and she doesn't even lose all her clothes. Not much to like really