[fancyfredbot]

The game didn't seem to work - it asked me to donate but none of the choices would move the game forward.

The bots repeated themselves and didn't seem to understand the game, for example they repeatedly mentioned it was my first move after I'd played several times.

It generally had a vibe coded feeling to it and I'm not at all sure I trust the outcomes.

[lout332]

Fixed - donation flow no longer blocks the game. Thanks for the report.

[fancyfredbot]

Nice! Thanks for fixing that. Very responsive.

I am interested to know a bit more about what's going on here. Please take my questions as well intentioned even though they are a bit critical.

The donation bug seems to me like it would have made most games impossible to complete. But I'm sure you must have tried it before launching. How come it wasn't noticed earlier? Was this bug introduced after launch? Is this game written using AI?

In my game I noticed the vAI players seemed absolutely terrible. They seemed unaware of recent moves and would make obvious mistakes like passing play to someone who would immediately capture their pieces when they had clearly better options. Although they proposed and formed alliances they didn't seem to do so very strategically. It was trivial to have far more tokens than the other players without any alliances and I am fairly sure I was about to win. Did you also notice this? Any idea why they play so badly?

[lout332]

the interactive demo uses lighter models for cost reasons. The research data (162 games, 90% Gemini win rate) came from longer AI-vs-AI games where strategic depth emerged over 50+ turns. Short games with a human tend to expose the models' weaknesses faster. I've just added more Gemini model options which should play better.