• Пожалуйста, скопируйте/вставьте текст ошибки, которую вы видите на экране (если она есть).

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Пожалуйста, объясните, что вы хотели сделать, что вы сделали и что случилось

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Пожалуйста, скопируйте/вставьте текст, который отображается на английском языке, вместо вашего. Если у вас есть скриншот этой ошибки (что является хорошей практикой), вы можете использовать любой сервис для размещения изображений (например, snipboard.io), чтобы загрузить его и скопировать/вставить ссылку сюда. Доступен ли этот текст в системе перевода? Если да, был ли он переведён более 24 часов назад?

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Пожалуйста, точно и кратко опишите своё предложение, чтобы сделать его наиболее доступным для понимания.

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Что было изображено на экране, когда вас заблокировало? (Пустой экран? Часть игрового стола? Сообщение об ошибке?)

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Какая часть правил не соблюдена в версии BGA?

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Видно ли нарушение правил в повторе игры? Если да, то на каком ходу?

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Какое игровое действие вы хотели совершить?

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Что вы пытались сделать, чтобы выполнить это игровое действие?

• Что произошло, когда вы попробовали сделать это (сообщение об ошибке, сообщение в строке состояния игры...)?

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• На каком шаге игры произошла проблема (какой была текущая игровая инструкция)?

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Что произошло, когда вы попробовали совершить игровое действие (сообщение об ошибке, сообщение в строке состояния игры...)?

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Пожалуйста, опишите ошибку отображения. Если у вас есть скриншот этой ошибки (что является хорошей практикой), вы можете использовать любой сервис для размещения изображений (например, snipboard.io), чтобы загрузить его и скопировать/вставить ссылку сюда.

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Пожалуйста, скопируйте/вставьте текст, который отображается на английском языке, вместо вашего. Если у вас есть скриншот этой ошибки (что является хорошей практикой), вы можете использовать любой сервис для размещения изображений (например, snipboard.io), чтобы загрузить его и скопировать/вставить ссылку сюда. Доступен ли этот текст в системе перевода? Если да, был ли он переведён более 24 часов назад?

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Какой браузер вы используете?

• Пожалуйста, точно и кратко опишите своё предложение, чтобы сделать его наиболее доступным для понимания.

There are scenarios where a player has no choice to make, but must still manually act.

An example of this when the player holds exactly one card of the lead suit, and is therefore forced to play it.

Similar to the last card of the round, it's possible for the game engine to automatically detect this and play the only choice. A private log message could be logged to the player letting them know this happened.

There are also examples where there are choices to make, however the choice wont affect the outcome of this hand

An example of this when the player holds either:
- A sequential run (and only this) of the lead suit, and therefore it's inconsequential which card is played (e.g. Having the 7,8,9 of Hearts when Hearts is lead -- Any card from an opponent will have the same outcome relative to all three 'choices')
---OR---
- ("COMPLEX SCENARIO") Multiple cards from the same suit where public information means that all cards between those cards are in play already -- e.g. Holding the 8 and Q of Diamonds; when the 9 is the displayed trump; and the 10 and J have already been played -- Much like the above scenario the choice here will not affect the outcome.

In the case of multiple cards (especially the second example), even though sometimes the card chosen may not matter for the outcome of this trick, you may want to pick one over the other as it may affect what other players perceive you're doing. This a relatively minor point though. This could be mitigated by allowing player agency on how this is selected, and allowing random selection.

It may also highlight to a player information they weren't thinking about when the second example happens -- e.g. If I get a message "You auto-played Q of diamonds because it wouldn't affect outcome" it might make me aware the 8 I hold is far more powerful than I anticipated! I think this is a good thing, this offsets the possible information leakage discussed below, providing a minor reward/benefit for players speeding up the game.

=== Information Leakage ===
Auto-play like this would have a downside of possibly exposing information in turn-based games especially if this was to happen automatically while a player was offline.

If only the most basic auto-play was implemented it'd be a lot of information; if the auto-play for both runs and the "complex scenario" was implemented then the impacts are reduced partially, it wouldn't be clear to opponents all the time if the auto-play occurred for one reason or the other.

One way to mitigate this would be a user-configurable options for:
1) Whether they'd like to auto-play at all (Set to be opt-in, so off by default);
2) How long to delay the move by (suggesting a maximum of one hour);
3) In the case of playing when multiple cards could be played, how to select the card to play

Even with a delay if an opponent could ascertain that the player was offline (by checking their profile) it still has information leakage -- mitigated, and requiring effort + not working 100% of the time though. (If the player comes online after an auto-move was made, but before an opponent checks there's no way for the opponent to tell it was automatic; however if they didn't come online then it can be determined it was automatic)


If the game could detect when the player was online and alter this behaviour this would be handy -- I don't know if the platform can do this though! I've asked here though boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21193#p88012

• Какой браузер вы используете?