Azul browser extension - official announcement

[FrankJones]

When you play the physical game on tabletop, you can look in the box lid to get the tile count. It's only on BGA that you have to either remember or write it down.

That is not true. Nowhere in the box lid you will find the number of missing tiles. You only find the number of discarded tiles. This is not the same.

Otherwise a tile counter in Carcassonne (everybody could count the tiles each turn, right?), a live score in Carcassonne (everybody could calculate it every turn, right?), a pip count in Backgammon (open information again!),... all would be defined as being identical to Real Life boardgame play. Most players would not agree...

Please note that displaying the number of discarded tiles only would be acceptable for me. But the Azul tile counter does more. It does the summing up, calculating the difference and displays this information as easily accessible numbers. If you do it in your head you have to remember the number of tiles for a whole round or recalculate if you do not remember. In high level play this is valuable time spent on calculations that the other player does not need to perform.

Counting the tiles in the box would give an exact account of the number of each tile left in the bag. Unless I'm missing something? All the tiles are either in the bag or in sight.

As for a live score in Carcassonne - When I play Carcassonne, it goes give the live score. Many other games do as well. What is the issue with a live score?

[Meeplelowda]

Counting the tiles in the box would give an exact account of the number of each tile left in the bag. Unless I'm missing something?

No, it does not. Just because it is a trivial operation to arrive at the count of tiles in the bag from the tiles in the box and the tiles on the players' boards doesn't mean it is the same thing. If you're of the opinion that if it's just arithmetic that gets you there then no one should care that's fine, but other people (particularly those who think they can leverage their vast arithmetic prowess to their advantage) do care.

As for a live score in Carcassonne - When I play Carcassonne, it goes give the live score. Many other games do as well. What is the issue with a live score?

The issue is that the physical version of some games do not have a "live score," for example, in the form of a scoring track. Some people do not want any live scores other than those that are implemented in the physical game, even if it's just simple arithmetic to work it out. But as you note, many BGA games have live scores (or at least an option for it) even when the physical game doesn't, so that means the rights owner was ok with it in those cases.

[FrankJones]

Oh, I see what you mean. I thought the person was saying that counting the tiles in the box is insufficient information to determine what is left in the bag.

So, yes, it's true that an extra calculation is needed, but in all seriousness, can't we assume that anyone who can count the tiles in the box can also count the tiles on the player mats?

I assume anyone playing Azul can count to 20 and subtract from 20. I'm just asking this to no one in particular; I realize you were not advocating for any specific side in this debate.

A thought - maybe the Azul implementation here should just display the box lid with discarded tiles?

I don't use the browser extension, because I don't mind just keeping the information on a notepad.

Has BGA made an official ruling regarding this browser extension? Would it matter? How would it be enforced?

Personally, I like the fact that online gaming, to some extent, takes memory out of the equation in game in which memory is not explicitly mentioned as being a key component of the game. Also, one advantage of playing digital implementations of board games is that we do not need to perform cumbersome or tedious tasks, such as manually keeping score. I don't understand people who say, "Well, in real life, there is no scorekeeping, so the digital version shouldn't have it either."

1) The real life game also does not involve looking at a computer screen and clicking a mouse. There are differences between IRL and digital. I embrace the time-saving advantages of digital.

2) Let's take a game with no score tracker present on the physical board for some or all components of scoring. Would anyone in a live game object to someone keeping score on a notepad? I wouldn't.

3) Someone explicitly mentioned Carcassonne. Maybe I am being dense here, but how exactly are people supposed to keep score in Carcassonne? Once a feature is completed, is there something that tracks who completed the feature and scored the points? No, right? So, surely that has to be kept on a running tally? I don't understand the Carcassonne example at all. In Scythe, for example, all the scoring can be determined at game end by looking at the board. And, the game designer specifically said it is not supposed to be obvious at any given moment who is winning or what the score is. Is it supposed to be a feature of Carcassonne that people are confused about the scoring during the game? (I have only played Carcassonne on here and I have not read the actual rulebook).

[Meeplelowda]

...

Rapid fire because I have to run.

-No official BGA word on extensions that I'm aware of.
-Maybe you wouldn't object to someone taking out a notepad, but have you seen someone do it? I've never seen it done, except obviously for card games, dominoes, etc. where one player is a scorekeeper.
-In the physical Carcassonne game there is a scoring track that scoring pips progress along as each feature is completed. But fields are scored at the end, of course. I don't think the BGA live score includes the current state of fields, does it?

[Andrei3009]

Oh, I see what you mean. I thought the person was saying that counting the tiles in the box is insufficient information to determine what is left in the bag.

So, yes, it's true that an extra calculation is needed, but in all seriousness, can't we assume that anyone who can count the tiles in the box can also count the tiles on the player mats?

I assume anyone playing Azul can count to 20 and subtract from 20. I'm just asking this to no one in particular; I realize you were not advocating for any specific side in this debate.

A thought - maybe the Azul implementation here should just display the box lid with discarded tiles?

I don't use the browser extension, because I don't mind just keeping the information on a notepad.

Has BGA made an official ruling regarding this browser extension? Would it matter? How would it be enforced?

Personally, I like the fact that online gaming, to some extent, takes memory out of the equation in game in which memory is not explicitly mentioned as being a key component of the game. Also, one advantage of playing digital implementations of board games is that we do not need to perform cumbersome or tedious tasks, such as manually keeping score. I don't understand people who say, "Well, in real life, there is no scorekeeping, so the digital version shouldn't have it either."

1) The real life game also does not involve looking at a computer screen and clicking a mouse. There are differences between IRL and digital. I embrace the time-saving advantages of digital.

2) Let's take a game with no score tracker present on the physical board for some or all components of scoring. Would anyone in a live game object to someone keeping score on a notepad? I wouldn't.

3) Someone explicitly mentioned Carcassonne. Maybe I am being dense here, but how exactly are people supposed to keep score in Carcassonne? Once a feature is completed, is there something that tracks who completed the feature and scored the points? No, right? So, surely that has to be kept on a running tally? I don't understand the Carcassonne example at all. In Scythe, for example, all the scoring can be determined at game end by looking at the board. And, the game designer specifically said it is not supposed to be obvious at any given moment who is winning or what the score is. Is it supposed to be a feature of Carcassonne that people are confused about the scoring during the game? (I have only played Carcassonne on here and I have not read the actual rulebook).

Carcassonne has points for incomplete structures and fields. These points are awarded only at the end of the game and can have a significant impact on the final score.

[SereneRose]

Anyone with a tile counter should be banned unless it notifies the opponents during gameplay and allows them to opt out of that game. Essentially, anything unavailable during a standard IRL board game of Azul is kinda .

If using the extension is wrong, then i don't ever want to be right!

[FrankJones]

...

Rapid fire because I have to run.

-No official BGA word on extensions that I'm aware of.
-Maybe you wouldn't object to someone taking out a notepad, but have you seen someone do it? I've never seen it done, except obviously for card games, dominoes, etc. where one player is a scorekeeper.
-In the physical Carcassonne game there is a scoring track that scoring pips progress along as each feature is completed. But fields are scored at the end, of course. I don't think the BGA live score includes the current state of fields, does it?

Correct - the live scoring does not include fields. The scoring track makes sense. I wouldn't object to live scoring of the fields though.

As for other games - I have seen, in a few games here and there, players volunteer to track relevant scoring information during a game. it doesn't bother me; in fact, I welcome anyone who is willing to volunteer for this task, since it helps players be aware of where we stand and saves time at end-game.

Terraforming Mars, for example, is relatively easy to view the scoring for most categories, but not VP from VP icons on cards. My regular OTB opponent and I would often suggest that one or both of us track such points, but we always give up because it's annoying to do while playing. We would be thrilled if someone else was willing to do it.

As I said, I view digital games as ways to play games with the maximum reduction in cumbersome setup and takedown time, and maximum display of visible information. I would guess that the reason many games OTB do not have such scoring is that it's not really feasible. But if the technology existed to include an electronic real-time scoring device, I would guess that many more games would include it rather than not.

Personal preferences, of course, and different players will have different preferences. I don't see much value in hiding public visible information, or information that could easily be tracked with a pencil and paper if desired.

[FrankJones]

Carcassonne has points for incomplete structures and fields. These points are awarded only at the end of the game and can have a significant impact on the final score.

I'm aware. I have played the game - I just haven't played it over the physical board.

I would have no objection to real-time scoring of incomplete features. I would consider it a welcome addition.

[euklid314]

I just mentioned that it is definitely an advantage if (in a real time game) a player uses the browser extension or writes down the missing tiles on a notepad - compared to a player that does not use any written notes.

I do not take written notes in Azul (real time games) and I am well aware that many other players do. I do not really care but I dont want to hear the argument that using the browser extension (or taking written notes) is no help.

In real life tournaments it is usually forbidden to take written notes (chess, Carcassonne,...).

[FrankJones]

I just mentioned that it is definitely an advantage if (in a real time game) a player uses the browser extension or writes down the missing tiles on a notepad - compared to a player that does not use any written notes.

I do not take written notes in Azul (real time games) and I am well aware that many other players do. I do not really care but I dont want to hear the argument that using the browser extension (or taking written notes) is no help.

In real life tournaments it is usually forbidden to take written notes (chess, Carcassonne,...).

I agree that notes and the browser extension help. (I hope I did not indicate otherwise.)

On BGA, I certainly expect my opponents to use notes to track any visible and trackable information.
Real time games (of which I play very few because of spotty internet and I just don't like being rushed when playing complex strategy games) add an extra challenge that I dislike: Either be excellent at memorizing things, or be good at writing very fast notes. Or do nether but be at a disadvantage against those who do.

I understand that some wish to have the digital game experience be as similar as possible to the experience of playing the game in person. But that leads to a situation in which turn-based games become inherently different from real-time games of that same game, which I find a bit odd. Especially since all such players are ranked together in Elo and Arena.

Yes, I am not fond of this browser extension. I don't have it; I rely on my notes and my ability to view the board and calculate what is left in the bag.

When I play in real-time in person, I have a mnemonic that I use to memorize which tiles are left in the bag. Because I know my friends are likely not able to do this, I don't care if they want to take notes. I want the game to be about strategy and optimization of known information, not memorization.

Real life tournaments - Yes, I would think notes would not be allowed. This is relevant to real life tournaments and not really relevant to BGA, where note taking is allowed and often expected. Many things are different about playing on BGA compared to real life or especially real-life tournaments. I am not sure why that matters. In a real-life tournament, I likely cannot look up rules in the middle of my turn. In chess, if you touch a piece, you must move it. Scorekeeping is different in real life. So what? One reason to play games on BGA in the first place is to gain benefits over playing in real time. I mean, the games could have long pauses where the interface says, "shuffling the cards, please wait patiently or go get a beverage", to make the experience most like playing in real life, but does anyone want that?

Splendor is a rather famous game, and there is no score-tracker when playing it in real life. Yet, every digital implementation I have seen tracks the score. Does this bother people? I wouldn't have thought so, but in this very thread I have seen people express objection to live scoring of games that do not have a score tracker built into the game, so, maybe it does bother people.

Unless a game designer specifically says otherwise in the rulebook, my default assumption is that a game designer would want players to make informed strategic decisions with regard to public/visible/trackable information.

People who complain about digital games automating tedious tasks or memorization tasks seem (to me, just personal opinion) analogous to people who continue to whine about using technology in sports to get the calls correct because they prefer "human error".

Maybe that isn't a perfect analogy and as I said, it's just my personal opinion.