• 如果有的话，请将你在屏幕上所看到的错误信息粘贴出来.

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

• 请说明你当时想做什么，你做了什么，然后发生了什么

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请以英文复制／粘贴显示文字而非你的语言。 如果你已截取此Bug的屏幕截图（好习惯），可使用任意图片托管服务（例如snipboard.io）上传后，将链接复制粘贴至此处。 这段文本在翻译系统中吗？如果存在，它被翻译是否已超过二十四小时？

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

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请简明而精确地解释您的建议，以便让人明白您想表达的意思。

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

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 当你被封锁的时候，屏幕上出现了些什么呢？(空白的屏幕？部分游戏平台画面？错误的信息？)

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

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 哪个规则没有被BGA的设计小组写进游戏里？

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

• 在游戏回放中，是否有不符合游戏规则的地方？如果有的话，请问是在哪一步呢？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 你当时是想做哪个游戏行动？

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

• 你在想做什么的时候，触发了这个游戏选项？

• 当你想这么做时，发生了什么事(错误信息，游戏状态信息，......)？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请问这个问题发生在游戏的哪个阶段(当前的游戏说明是什么)？

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

• 当你想进行一个游戏行动时，发生了什么事(错误信息，游戏状态信息，......)？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请描述一下显示画面上面的问题。 如果你已截取此Bug的屏幕截图（好习惯），可使用任意图片托管服务（例如snipboard.io）上传后，将链接复制粘贴至此处。

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

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请以英文复制／粘贴显示文字而非你的语言。 如果你已截取此Bug的屏幕截图（好习惯），可使用任意图片托管服务（例如snipboard.io）上传后，将链接复制粘贴至此处。 这段文本在翻译系统中吗？如果存在，它被翻译是否已超过二十四小时？

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

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请简明而精确地解释您的建议，以便让人明白您想表达的意思。

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

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？