This is not actually a bug, but it does concern the overall intelligence of the bots in Cribbage, which is the reason I placed this conversation in this category.

While it is understood that the developer of this platform has chosen to make games challenging by increasing the artificial intelligence of bots on the system, I have noticed that the bots in Cribbage are definitely overly difficult and almost impossible to beat. While they have not made their sentiments public, other gamers who play Cribbage and are pretty competent at the game have made the same coments to me privately.

It's also my understanding, though I admit I may be wrong about this), that the developer of this platform desires to encourage gamers to be sociable, which is the likely reason the social score was implemented, and why the bots have increased in difficulty over the years in all games. However, there are many of us on the system who choose not to be sociable for a variety of reasons that are not important for this topic.

My comments about sociability relate to the difficulty of the Cribbage bots simply because it's absolutely no fun to play games on here if we're going to lose all the time. I think they need to be tamed down a bit. I actually cut down my time playing Cribbage because it's no fun to lose all the time. While we could be social and play humans, some of us choose not to do so. It does not matter the reason. However, we can discuss the reasons in a different topic.

In conclusion, for the sake of enjoyment, please lower the artificial intelligence level of the bots in Cribbage to where we can prevail, at least some of the time. If skilled Cribbage players can't win against these bots, then they're too difficult.

Thanks.

First of all, it's still possible to beat bots. Secondly, you can try to play just for the sake of playing, not for winning. It's fun too, and it doesn't make much of a difference if you lose, because losing to a bot doesn't hurt as much as losing to a real person. At least in cribbage.

Caoimhe, you are correct. It is possible to beat bots in Cribbage, maybe 3% of the time.

The other statements you made deal with a person's outlook our attitude when playing Cribbage and can't be addressed in this topic because this topic category deals with bug reports. Feel free to open up another discussion in the Tea Room category about attitude, outlook, and sportsmenship when playing games, and we can discuss it there. I placed this discussion in this category because it has to do with the performance of the bots in this particular game.

Check my statistic with bots in Cribbage and then ask admins to delete the post.

LOL this post makes no sense. The bots are calculating the cards they have in their hands according to the rules. Why should they purposefully go against the rules of the game and do something they know isn't correct. I don't think a human would do such a thing if their goal was to win. Cribbage is not like chess or reversie where the moves of other players necessarily matter when calculating the points.

Hello,
first of all, I really don't know how you reached the conclusion that you can defeat a bot only 3 percent of the times, but it's definitely incorrect.
If it was, that would indeed be extremely annoying and we would need difficulty settings. My assumption is that you just got unlucky. Even though Cribbage requires a reasonable amount of skill, it also requires quite a bit of luck.

Even looking at your own statistics, you have 503 wins against a bot and 855 losses. Granted, it's important to note that these can also include games with humans and bots together, but still I am sure that the final outcome would be much, much higher than 3 percent.

If any change is made here, I would really prefer for it to be optional. Cribbage is one of a very small amount of games that is actually enjoyable to play with a bot. In most games, especially with server-side bots (almost all games except a few board games), bots are extremely predictable and stupid. I have recently made a Backgammon specific comment, but it applies to probably some other games too, in this game, the bot tries as hard as possible not to win the game.

Of course, difficulty selection for bots in all games wouldn't be bad, but that's obviously a larger project that would take quite a bit of time.

For me personally, there are only two reasons to play with a bot:

1. You don't know the game and want to learn it. But, if a bot is too stupid, you aren't learning anything. You will later give it a try with a human and will quickly lose and probably give up. If a bot is too smart, you may lose, once, 5 times, but you will gradually improve and probably eventually win. Of course, that depends on the complexity of the game and how much you want to learn it, but for Cribbage, this was my case. I really liked this game and wanted to learn it, and found the bots to be a nice challenge.
2. No humans are around and you want to play. Again, if this is just too easy, it's pointless, you will always win and I see nothing fun in that. This is for instance why I don't really play super interceptions Uno with a bot, unless I want to try something ridiculous like draw the entire deck. A good or a decent player will never lose against a bot there.
3. Bonus reason, you want to test a bug :P

I guess the biggest issue you see with the Cribbage bots are that they always count their hand correctly. However, in my view, everything else depends a lot on luck, and this is the only way to make a Cribbage bot actually decent. The first phase of the game doesn't really offer you that much, it's pretty simple to figure out what your best move is/or at least attempt to estimate it.

The last thing worth pointing out is that improving the AI isn't done so people stop playing with bots. If it was, it would probably have the opposite effect on me, I enjoy a good challenge and the best part of testing the V3 beta was trying to figure out a good way to defeat the Connect 4 bot on the highest difficulty. Of course, I realize that this is absolutely not the case for everyone, hence bots in all games shouldn't have an insane difficulty by default, but I personally don't see it as such in Cribbage.

Well, hopefully we get difficulty settings in all games eventually and that will make everybody happy :).

Where a lot of folks wouldn’t, I’m going to take the high road here.
Vojvoda, it’s clear that, based on your Cribbage stats against bots, that you are a highly intelligent individual and maybe someone with above average intelligence. According to Healthline at https://www.healthline.com/health/average-iq#average-iq, about 68% of the world’s population has an average “intelligence quotient” of between 85 and 115, with a very small fraction of people having an IQ of over 130 and below 70. You might be part of the populous that has an exceptionally high IQ, which if this is the case, that’s fantastic! However, your good stats against bots in the game of Cribbage on this platform do not disprove that the bots are geared at too high a level. On the contrary, they prove that you are just a bright individual who has figured out the formula to competing with and prevailing over the bots in their current formation. I, however, am a person with average IQ so have not discovered the formula.

Quintin-C, it’s clear that you have a very good understanding of coding, AI building, and maybe even software development based on the fact that you stated that the bots are configured to follow the rules of Cribbage. If this is the case, I compliment you on your skills and knowledge. My knowledge of coding, AI building and software development can be compared to a newborn baby’s knowledge of crawling and talking.

According to Myk Eff Sound & Design at https://soundand.design/audiences-game-titles-player-types-1b3400850e7, knowing the skill level and average intellect of the core demographic is one of the most important factors to consider when constructing online games. Since the average IQ of gamers here on QuentinC’s Gameroom likely mirrors the world population’s, one might assume that an online game developer would want to gear the bots in cribbage or any game on this particular platform for someone with an IQ of between 85 and 115, and gearing them any higher could potentially reduce the entertainment value. I can also confirm that there are other online Cribbage platforms that I have experienced, and their bots are not geared at such a high level of difficulty to where it’s almost impossible for someone with average intelligence and skill level to prevail at least some of the time.

Nikola, I appreciate your comments. I have been playing Cribbage for over ten years now and play with a fifteen second thinking time limit. I no I exaggerated my stats for affect because I consider myself to be a pretty good Cribbage player, especially since I’ve played on other online platforms and perform much better on those platforms than on this one. I understand your concern about being challenged. You might be another one with higher than average IQ.

These are just some thoughts from a guy who wants to enjoy playing the game of Cribbage on this particular platform because QPR is the most unique and accessible platform for blind folks right now.

Thanks,

Thanks for your flattering comments, you nearly made me blush. Sorry for shattering your false image of me, but I do not know anything about coding or programming. Just like you, I most likely have an average IQ but what I do possess is a decent amount of common sense.Cribbage is based of a set of rules. Card combinations are scored according to a predetermined set of rules as I'm sure you know. A bot obviously needs a set of instructions to work from, and naturally these instructions would come from these cribbage rules. With all of this in mind, where would be the sense in having the bot purposefully go against these game rules? I think my average IQ level is preventing me from grasping this idea. I would appreciate it if the previously mentioned users with high IQs would assist me in understanding this strange idea.The actual Quentin-C has more constructive things to do rather than addressing this issue that only seems to concern a minuscule portion of the playerbase. Afterall, he must have a very high IQ unlike us normies and knows better than to waste his points on this L, O, L.

Well it's kind of unfortunate that someone took the time to give you a detailed response, and instead of having a constructive conversation the response Is exaggerated sarcasm. The forum really needs moderation lately.

Hello,

First of all, none of the AI are cheating. They just follow the rules.
Why would I make cheating AI ? It's totally stupid, except if I wanted to discourage you from playing, so please, stop that accusation, it doesn't make sense.

Now, sorry but I'm not going to lower the level of any AI on the playroom.

First of all because it isn't that easy as turning a button. Making a decently playing AI is hard, and making an AI with adaptable difficulty is much harder.
It's quite doable with two player pure strategy games because algorithms for that type of game are well known, and you can rather easily adjust the difficulty by basically choosing how many moves or turns the AI will attempt to predict. You can, if you want, make a totally unbeatable AI at these games, but it will take a lot of processing power.
It isn't as easy for games when you have to compose with randomness (car deal) and/or when you have to make your decision while some information is hidden or unknown (typically, the cards of other players or in the draw pile).
It's also harder because, in general, there are quite clear winning strategies for pure strategy games, and they are well documented because they have been studied for a long time. For card games, this isn't as well documented, and most often we don't even know if there exists, or if there should exists one or more winning strategies that would work all the time.
In some sense that's also what makes many card games interesting to play: a well balanced mix of skills and chance.

Secondly because I globally agree with Nikola's point of view: bot have two main functions: help you learning the game, and allow you to play when not enough humans are around. That's essentially how they have been thought.
In both cases, bots should be challenging enough, otherwise you won't learn anything and/or have real fun.
Look at that other post where it's globally said that bots which automatically join to replace someone basically ruin the game. Why ? Because no human would play so stupidly.

Third, keep in mind that the playroom is a project that I'm doing in my spare time and for which I don't earn any money. Hence, above all, it must stay fun to develop.
Delibrating lowering an AI is definitely not fun at all. I'm having much more fun when I manage to program bots I can no longer beat... I consider it as a small success.
There aren't that many games among all those available where I consider bots as being such a success. Cribbage is one of them. So I certainly won't make it weaker.

In conclusion, it's generally the opposite that I should try to do: improve AIs.

I would be generally interested to know how do you find bots. In which games do you find them challenging, and in which games do you find them totally uninteresting or stupid ?
In which games should they be improved ?
The debate can start if you like ! But certainly not to make any of the AI weaker.

Concerning cribbage specifically, it's perfectly normal that the AI always count its hand correctly, otherwise it would be a bug. It's also perfectly normal to assume that players do it always correctly as well.
Now, if you remove the counting steps of the game, two bits of strategy remain: choosing which cards to put to the cribe, and the first play phase of the game. The strategy to maximize your chances to score aren't that hard to comceptualize, and that's why the AI of cribbage is probably near from the possible optimal.

Note that setting a time limit to count your hand is obviously unfair if you play against bots. You can of course do it if you play for training, and it's a good way to do so, but certainly not if you play for winning.

Keep also in mind that cribbage is normally not supposed to be among the easiest games.
If you want to chill out, then you have farkle or shut the boxes...

Maybe it could be interesting to ask the whole community to vote: how difficult do you find each game ? How challenging or stupid do you find bots ?
This may help players to choose a game to discover, depending on if they want to have some challenge or just chill out at the moment, with humans or with bots.

Poor bots. How many times have you joined a table and replaced a bot? If no bots maybe that person wouldn't be playing. Everybody is at different levels so you can't please everybody. If there is a new game I always want to play a bot first so I can learn the game. If I am not beating the bot then I need to improve and do better as some have already said here.

The only particular issue with bots I can think of is in Rummy. The bot takes say 30 cards and puts down say about 20 of them in different combinations and does it within 3 seconds making a hell of a racket.

Aminiel, while I genuinely appreciate the time you took to respond to my concern and to educate me on how AI development works generally since the QPR project is something that you do on the side and reap no monetary benefits, publicly and indirectly labeling someone’s thoughts, ideas, or concerns as “stupid” is not kosher, even if you privately believe that his ideas are dumb. Directly or indirectly labeling a gamer’s thoughts in this manor could potentially keep others from raising their concerns because they wouldn’t want to be labeled as “stupid.” However, giving someone the benefit of the doubt is my forte, and I understand that English is not your native language. If I were to communicate in French, I might say something that Frenchmen view as offensive, especially since I would have to use an online translator to communicate.

You stated that the bots are available for learning purposes. Since this is the case, it would be interesting to compare the number of gamers who choose to play with bots to the number of gamers who choose to play with humans. I raise this point because it’s possible that not everyone who plays with bots do so to learn or to play when there is no one around. It’s possible that some gamers play with bots for other unknown reasons, and it would be potentially important to make those reasons known in order to develop philosophies and objectives not only for the bots, but for the entire platform generally.

Nevertheless, even though you offered the community a half-hearted chance to voice their views on challenging bots versus bots that aren’t so competitive, I realize I am beating a dead horse because I am concluding that you have made it pretty clear that you don’t see the importance in changing the bot algorithms in order to accommodate the motivations and desires of gamers generally, but to accommodate your desire to make AI much more challenging and possibly even unbeatable. This is your baby; you can do what you want with it.

This is my last message in this discussion.

Thanks,

I'm curious, why else would people want to play with bots if not to practice, or play when they have no one else to play with, or if they don't want to engage with other people but still want to play. Also even if that's considered offensive, I, too, agree that intentionally making bots cheat makes absolutely no sense. It's like competing against someone who isn't as skilled as you are in a particular area and then taking pride in beeting them. If you have reasons for wanting bots to lose to you, it doesn't mean that the developer should accommodate, as that's not the purpose for which the bots were created. Even if it's not explicitly stated anywhere, it should be obvious to people with an average IQ that the purpose of the Playroom is playing and meeting new people. Playing is generally about having fun and striving to win.

I sincerely apologize if anyone was offended by M_A_G_A's comments, as he is clearly not a native speaker himself. Putting aside the unfortunate reality that you decided to share your opinion on a "Forum" and then respond to anyone who objected with pompousness, sarcasm, arrogance and mockery (as hard as it is). I honestly wonder how could you get out of Aminiel's message only that it's his project and he will do whatever he wants? I suggest strongly that you take the "Education" he gave you more seriously. I myself, as someone who doesn't understand much about programming, got that 1. Programming a bot is hard and adjusting it's difficulty is harder. With that considered, it's perfectly understandable that this may not be a priority for a small, volunteer team, especially considering the only person asking for bots to be made weaker in my 4 years on here is some arrogant and pompus dude. 2. Cribbage is a game still dependent on luck as cards are dealt and also has very few published strategies (and from my own interpretation variables) thus there is little that can be done to change the strategy of bots - making bots count wrong is stupid and beyond that there isn't much that can be done to change the result of a game. 3. It is also implied that beyond those two desires of the developer, there isn't much intention for bots. If you believe it, I have a lot of problems with the inaccessibility of Facebook games, the ad dashboard and much more. I really wish I had a direct line to Mark Zuckerberg to tell him how obligated he is to forget about everything and deal with my concerns.

I hope these sentences makes sense to you. As a non-native speaker, I understand there may be some vocabulary you struggle to grasp. So feel free to let us know which language you speak - I am sure with the numerous players from numerous countries (who are able to beat bots in Cribbage at more than a 3% rate), someone can translate it for you. Lastly, I also found it interesting that you thought Aminiel called you stupid as a supposedly proficient English speaker, when I am sure he was referring to the idea of making "Cheating" AI (which I do personally think is damn stupid). But the interesting part is that in my experience, when someone shares their opinion and then "Takes the high road" or responds with pompusness and sarcasm, they are in fact, objectively trying to defend a stupid statement or position. It would be also great to get a survey on that, what are the experiences of others on this point?

Oh I could literally do a whole essay about the word stupid and its different accidental uses in the two languages but I’ll narrow it down to this: whilst french and English people use the exact same word, in English its an offensive term but in french its simply another way to say something is rather silly to think of. Naturally french people would see that stupid is used in English and by default use it but its a long history of them scratching their heads the first time to wonder why it triggers English people so much. Cultural differences are to blame; I’m only saying to make it clear and to not discourage anyone from ever voicing their concerns again, he most likely diddn’t mean it and in that way we are all thinking he did, I.E that he was belittling/insulting. Just wanted to bring this up.
Second, I must say there was a very good awareness brought with IQ, AI and human tendencies. This would actually be a good philosophical debate, should the tone have been adjusted in a few places but to be fair these are only triggered based on emotional responses. However, conpaired to other arguments on here, it has been constructive, each with evidence given and detailed explanations. Of course it wouldn’t hurt to just remind, at least to me, that there would be nothing wrong with thinking before replying. Disagreements are bound to happen at any stage—we don’t expect things to be happy all the time—but it should be noted that bringing up any sort of critics, typical of someone’s work, can lead to one thinking their work is unappreciated and thus bring out a defense mode. The developers, those that are admins and in any sort of aid, are all trying their best to run this platform and often at a cost we do not realise. I may sound like you should never be bringing up anything and be greatful but really my point is that they are doing this because they are people centred people who want to give back to their communities. When we think this way we can start to write in the tone of hey I found this diddn’t work, how about rather than straight attack that I found this is wrong, fix it please. We should aim to make it open for discussions in a friendly environment where we are all helping out. It can not be one sided of reporting and expecting things to go ones way. However, it also can’t be expected that the system is built in a specific way and expect the users to be entirely 100% ok with it, especially if there are things that effect the overall experience so feedback is vital; its a two way thing to make it work. What i saw here was people getting hurt not intentionally of course But this is the only explanation I thought of to explain how this topic became a bit on the edge.
I appologise if I offended anyone. I hope all this makes sense to you guys. This was just my view point. If I go back to the original post topic, I can’t lie, bots in general are going to have this limitation. I remember getting that frustration when I was playing games on other platforms, and the bot was always winning. It is not something that is not common at all but universal. The author probably is very dedicated to playing this game, and when you enjoy something so much, you want to be getting good at it. Loosing so many times to a bot can be draining but at the end of the day it is a game and nothing can really be done. Certainly it is a good thing here at least you got the option of getting an answer and dialogue with the person who made the whole process of playing in this way. Most platforms won’t allow you to do so and you got to go on with your day. The best advice is just to keep playing the game with bots and hope that one day you can beat them, or make the game more popular that you can have more chances to play with friends.
The last point is the topic of why we play with humans or bots. I guess the unknown reasons could be due to anxiety as most people generally come on here to relax and have a good time. It means that sadly, some players won’t have time to deal with people saying they got to go here and there, unless they are good friends, or play slow, etc so they are more looking after themselves mentally and will not really look at individual needs, such as maybe this person is slow because they’re thinking. I’ve met several players where their idea of a game is fast paste and not with any communication and some are more into socially developing themselves. So it’s really a matter of style of playing. Thats the only other reason I can think of that is not listed.
Once again I do not mean to make anyone uncomfortable but only expressing my side of the story here and I hope it has changed people’s mindset or made some parts more clearer.
Have a good day all.

@ EmeraldPupMato_lemon Not wrong and offensive at all. This seems like a more than reasonable way to have a discussion. I think the key thing is that while these sort of players might be here, Aminiel is not attempting to cater to them.

I was wanting to reply to your reply and say I aggree with it but I must of been typing when you sent it and therefore my reply came directly after yours. I aggree with your views. That in no way do creators of any kind have to owe anyone of their users anything. It’s actually a good thing we get this option of talking directly with developers because most don’t do it because they simply want to do their own thing and know how messy it can be. Thank God we have someone here who is willing to actually make the platform a good place and this can’t really be be abused by any of us. This is why many projects gets dropped because ironically blind people are coming here saying it’s not the best world, that things need to be changed, etc, but …. You are literally living this on a daily basis when you are going into the real world offline. Unless you are in a blind only comunity where the norm is that things are going to be designed to revolve around you, this is hardly the deal with people in general. No one likes to be told that something is wrong.
Anyways I’m going off track from the main topic. Thank you for your response. I don’t think I’ll be in this thread much since really the matter has been decided and it’s reasonable that this won’t really be taken on due to it being a minor issue in the view of the developer and majority which is fair.
Good day again to everyone I’m out.

I can't believe that you guys take time to respond so detailed to the individual who's just not even respectful at the first place, just put minus to the post and that's enough. It makes me think that you all are as crazy as he is.

Hello,

I'm sorry if someone felt offended by my previous post, it was of course not my intention.
Of course I don't call anyone as stupid. I just say that it's stupid, idiot, silly, strange, to accuse bots of cheating, because it doesn't make sense except if I wanted to discourage people from playing, which is of course not the case.

I have one more argument to add to what I have already said: for many games on the playroom, I actually never played them in real life. This is the case for cribbage for example.
This makes it harder to think about how bots should behave to better play like humans generally do, since I don't have any real experience.

it would be interesting to compare the number of gamers who choose to play with bots to the number of gamers who choose to play with humans. I raise this point because it’s possible that not everyone who plays with bots do so to learn or to play when there is no one around. It’s possible that some gamers play with bots for other unknown reasons

When I say that the purposes of bots are globally 1/learning and 2/when there are no humans to play with, this is my point of view. If they can additionally be challenging, for me, this would make a third valid interesting reason to play with bots regularely.

However, many people play with bots for another reason than learning or when there is no one around. This was already obvious before this post.

In fact, I don't well understand those who play for hours with bots when they aren't challenging, as in most games currently. There are a lot of that kind of player, I know it, I see it everyday, but I still don't understand well.
This isn't like in audio/video games where you may prefer to play simply for enjoying the story without hassle, rather than playing for the challenge it can offer (in that case I do it sometimes ).
Here there is no story, so if it's too easy, you are finally winning in loop quickly without any effort. Where is the fun ?
OK, maybe you just want to chill out or you have 10 minutes to kill; but in this case I would choose farkle, yahtzee, or zanzibar, probably not cribbage. Less intellectually demanding games are there for that purpose, this is how I see it.

IF you don't mind, maybe you can explain ? I'm not completely closed to the discussion. It would be interesting to know.
I think I will open a survey in another post: why do you play with bots ?

Well, I don't understand very well why it is so. This should be because I have an IQ over 130 (warning: this is sarcasm)

Hello,
you can of course open a survey, but I think this won't give you any significant results.

In my view, these people who play with bots only don't really participate on the forum, at least I can be relatively confident this is so on the English side. Our most successful poll was the potential categories of a new game, having 95 votes. Not a bad number on its own, but compared to the entire platform, a very, very small minority. People who play with bots exclusively don't really have a high interest to socialize, which is the exact opposite of a forum, so in a way this is logical. It would be very interesting to somehow get global views of everybody in terms of whether they are even aware that the forum offers surveys you can vote on from time to time. I wouldn't at all be surprised if a large number of users doesn't even know, so we wouldn't be getting the feedback from the intended target audience anyway.

In a certain way, it is not so surprising. It would be the same as just playing an offline card game on a computer. So, you may say, why not just play an offline game then? Well, the Playroom offers many games not available anywhere else. Cribbage can for instance be played offline, but I've never seen a Scopa game before I came here. Assuming I am a Scopa fan, but I have no interest in playing with people, it would basically mean I came here just to play a few rounds and leave.

Even for Cribbage, without going into pointless advertizing and off topic, the game I know uses SAPI and doesn't offer you to count your hand, so it's a significantly worse experience. Certainly there could be better ones out there, I don't play board games offline so haven't searched too much, but that's beside the point and is just one example.

Your point about playing against bad bots still stands though, I don't understand that either, but I guess people just don't care so much. This is the same as the people who play 100 rounds of only 1000 miles every day. I will never understand that either.
This is not to be taken as something rude, it's just genuinely surprising that you don't get bored after a while. Even if I somewhat like 1000 Miles, and play it from time to time, still there are games where I play half asleep, especially when not much is going on and you are waiting for one particular card. Imagine that all the time.

PS: for chilling out, I would never play Shut the boxes with a bot. Congratulations to everybody who does so, but it's unbelievably slow waiting for the bot to do what it has to do. This has to be an intentional troll right? The bot takes longer for a first move in Shut the boxes, just to roll a die, then it takes in Rummy with combination manipulation enabled to figure out a complete turn.

However people play games it is up to them and their choice. The most important is people get the most out of the games on offer. If you don't want to play others for whatever reason then the only option is to play bots. There is no option to take control of more than one player. In Citadels you can take control of two characters. In Belote for example would people prefer to take control of 2 players or play with 2 bots? If 3 people join a game of Belote then the player partnering the bot feels disadvantaged. Maybe they would feel better off if they were 2 players playing against 2 others.

I realize I said that I would not post again, but I wanted to answer the question about why I choose to play mostly with bots. It has to do with several instances of bullying that my wife and I experienced over the past several years on QPR. When I got tired of experiencing these actions from other players and groups of players, I started playing with bots somewhat exclusively. I then began to realize that I enjoyed being able to set the rules to my preference without having to worry about the concerns of a human player. I am also not a big fan of idle chit-chat and just want to play the games. I guess you can say that I am pretty introverted. I will play games with my wife, and she will play games with people that she knows very well. When I am in the mood which is very rare, I will play someone random. I also join the tournaments here on QPR because I know that the odds of bullying are diminished, and the tournaments are pretty fun! To sum it up, my playing with bots on QPR can be compared to how a sighted person plays Solitaire, Tetris or Angry Birds. I hope this answers the question.

M_A_G_A Thank you for sharing this. Can you tell us more about what would have happened? There is a report feature on playroom which you can use if something affects you with other players.

Hello,

Thank you for your answer on the question.

I would also be interested in knowing what happened. What made you thired of playing with humans ?
What kind of behavior are you talking about ?

The question isn't especially to "save" you or anything. This isn't at all a problem if you play exclusively with bots. I'm just trying to understand.
But if you answer, maybe we could prevent someone else from having a bad experience later on.

Yeah, I think bringing those details to light wouldn't be prudent right now, especially since a lot of time has passed since those actions occurred. Another reason is that there are antics that some people believe to be fun, that others would view as intolerable. A third reason is that I am no longer associated with those people and wouldn't actually want to throw people under the bus who, to the best of my knowledge, aren't harming anyone right now. The fourth reason is based on my philosophy that if someone doesn't like his situation, find the best way to either fix it or get out. I chose to get out and did not have to involve moderators or staff. I think admins have enough on their plate. I read the forums. There's a lot of drama around here.

For me I play with bots because I don’t want to have to deal with anyone trying to date. So the game can sometimes be slowed down because people want to know your relationship status, though I’d add it is not as bad as RS. Nevertheless, it does happen and its just easier to make a game private if none of your friends are online, then have to experience drama of this kind.