• Merci de copier-coller le message d'erreur qui s'affiche à l'écran, s'il y a lieu.

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

• Veuillez expliquer ce que vous vouliez faire, ce que vous avez fait et ce qu'il s'est passé

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• SVP copiez / collez ici le texte affiché en anglais au lieu de votre langue. Si vous disposez d'une capture d'écran du bug (bonne pratique), vous pouvez utiliser le service d'hébergement de votre choix (snipboard.io par exemple) pour la télécharger et en copier/coller le lien ici. Ce texte est-il disponible dans le système de traduction ? Si oui, a-t-il été traduit depuis plus de 24 heures ?

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

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• Merci d'expliquer votre suggestion de manière précise et concise, de façon à ce qu'il soit aussi simple que possible de comprendre ce que vous voulez dire.

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

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• Qu'affichait l'écran lorsque vous avez été bloqué(e) (Un écran vierge ? Une partie de l'interface du jeu ? Un message d'erreur ?)

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

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• Quelle partie des règles n'a pas été respectée par l'adaptation 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

• La violation de règle est-elle visible dans le replay de la partie ? Si oui, à quel numéro de coup ?

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• Quelle action de jeu vouliez-vous faire ?

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

• Qu'avez-vous essayé de faire pour déclencher cette action de jeu ?

• Que s'est-il passé lorsque vous avez essayé de faire cela (message d'erreur, message dans la barre d'état du jeu...) ?

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• À quelle étape de la partie le problème est-il apparu ? Quelles instructions le jeu affichait-il ?

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

• Que s'est-il passé lorsque vous avez essayé de faire cette action de jeu (message d'erreur, message dans la barre d'état du jeu...) ?

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• Veuillez décrire le problème d'affichage. Si vous disposez d'une capture d'écran du bug (bonne pratique), vous pouvez utiliser le service d'hébergement de votre choix (snipboard.io par exemple) pour la télécharger et en copier/coller le lien ici.

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

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• SVP copiez / collez ici le texte affiché en anglais au lieu de votre langue. Si vous disposez d'une capture d'écran du bug (bonne pratique), vous pouvez utiliser le service d'hébergement de votre choix (snipboard.io par exemple) pour la télécharger et en copier/coller le lien ici. Ce texte est-il disponible dans le système de traduction ? Si oui, a-t-il été traduit depuis plus de 24 heures ?

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

• Quel est votre navigateur ?

• Merci d'expliquer votre suggestion de manière précise et concise, de façon à ce qu'il soit aussi simple que possible de comprendre ce que vous voulez dire.

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

• Quel est votre navigateur ?