Hello,
I'm quite happy that The little exam became pretty popular in Serbian, since it was for a long time one of my favorite social games.
Thanks to this, I was able to discover a few bugs I would like to report, and to give one suggestion. Some of them are related to the feature of stopping the round:

1. A judge should not be able to press escape and dismiss the dialog of accepting/refusing the proposal. In the new mode where everybody is the judge for a different proposal, this created a new feature, but I assume this is accidental. If you are the judge, and press escape, and then f11, the option to accept or refuse a word passes to somebody else. This isn't so bad if you aren't really sure about something, so maybe this should really be a feature in this mode, but assigned to a different key and not accidentally triggered with escape. People press escape by accident sometimes and think that something crashed or don't even know that they are the judge, and thus in this mode completely lose the option to accept or refuse a word.
2. Saving and restoring the table is completely broken in the little exam. If you save and restore in the middle of a round, the complete round is lost and we jump to the next one as if nothing happened.
3. This one is related to adding and removing points. When somebody stops the round, you have to be very careful about the distribution of points. If you refuse their proposal by mistake, and then later on you agree that the proposal was correct, you have to add +8. +2 for the correct word, +3 to negate the minus and +3 as a bonus for stopping the round.
If you have many players in a game, sometimes it's hard to keep up with possible mistakes, and especially there is one annoying problem. If the proposal you have just refused is the last one in the current round, you can't do anything until the next round is over, and at that point you may even forget about it.
Would it be possible to allow the judge to manually add and remove points in the pause between two rounds as well? This way, we could pause the game, fix the points if needed, and then continue.

4. This is just a small display bug, but again in the new mode where everybody is the judge, at the start of every round, it says the judge is null. I think it should simply say nothing in this case.

Finally, a small sound suggestion:
Is it possible to add a sound when a proposal has been accepted or refused by the judge?
This is useful when you are, for example, chatting about some proposal that is currently being discussed, and you can make sure to miss nothing. When you hear the sound, you will know to check the history and see what happened.

Thanks for your work and for the new features in this game, they were an excellent addition.

I have another idea in this game when a player presses space, the round stops. I think we should remove the shortcut and it loozes points also people cant type their words. Hope it can be implemented somehow.

You can disable or enable that feature when you are configuring the game. The point is to get a bonus when you fill everything.

thanks for explanation. Now I understood the point.

Hello,

Points 1 and 4 are now solved.

You can no longer close the menu with escape, and there is now a new option to pass the judgment to someone else when the judge is set to change with each proposition. However, note that:

• The random may choose you as a judge again, possibly several times in a row
• You may actually not be able to pass to anyone else if you are the sole person to judge a given proposition. This is for example the case if everybody but you made the same one...

For point 5, the sound, in fact you alredy have one. That's the same sound as when it's your turn. By default, it's only played when you aren't on the game window, though.

For point 3, we need to think about it in more details.
Why not implementing it when the judge is fixed for the whole game or the round, i.e. allow him/her to add/remove points while the game is paused / between rounds.
But how should it be when the judge changes at each proposition ?
Ask a confirmation to a random player that the round is over and that the next one can start ?
Discussions are open.

For point 2, saving, it won't be ever possible to save while a round is in progress.

• You could use that for cheating:
• You don't have any idea ? save the table, take as many time as you like, ask Google, and then restore when you are ready to fill everything
• You can also use that to prevent other players from entering their answers, by cutting them in the middle
• It would be unfair:
• Other players don't expect to have the table saved while a round is in progress
• You prevent them from entering answers, by cutting them in the middle
• It can take a few seconds to bring back some players onto the table when restoring
• Some players may not be fully ready at the exact moment the table is restored
• When the game is restored, it takes a while to find out what was asked, what was alredy answered, and what not; you can lose quite a few of very useful seconds

So I won't ever make it possible. However, it should perhaps be possible to save and restore while judgments are in progress. Maybe I'll try to allow that.

If the Little Exam is saved in the middle of the judging phase then the judge may have forgotten what they previously gave to players during that round such as bonus points or they decided to allow both players 2 points for choosing Colombia/Columbia (as an example) others received 1 point for doing the same thing with previous answers for that round.

Hello,
@Aminiel a bit of a longer post, but I've tried to address everything on my mind regarding the game...

First of all, thanks for the implemented changes. Here are some comments:

Regarding passing the judge to someone else, yes, it's normal that you can be chosen multiple times or that sometimes there might be no other option for a judge than you yourself. This was the same with the old f11 accidental feature too, so nothing unusual there.

However, I think I have a small request because I have the impression we introduced an accidental conflict now:
In English, can't we change "Pass to someone else" to "Give to someone else"?
This is because if we now do shift+P or P to manually add/remove points, we will pass to someone else because this menu uses quick letter selection and P is Pass.
To be more exact with shift+P both actions are performed one after another (because there is another underlying bug in the quick letter selection menus I should report at some point but up to now it did no visible harm...).
Basically when a quick letter selection menu is open, pressing some letter that performs a different shortcut duplicates the event. For example, 1000 miles, try to junk a card, in the yes/no menu press shift+I. The message will be spoken twice and shift+I is duplicated.
-Ironically no such bugs on the Web, this might be a small V3 regression…

For point 5, the sound, in fact you alredy have one. That's the same sound as when it's your turn. By default, it's only played when you aren't on the game window, though.

Yes, this is not a problem, the sound is something I use even when on the game window, and this sound works fine. However, that wasn't my intention.
This sound will play only if it is my turn to judge now. This part is completely logical, and it shouldn't change.
What I was more interested in is a sound when any proposal is accepted or refused, instead of nothing. For instance, something like the Quiz party right answer/wrong answer sound. Now that I think about it a little, it might be more interesting to apply this sound only when your proposals got accepted/refused.

For point 3, we need to think about it in more details.
Why not implementing it when the judge is fixed for the whole game or the round, i.e. allow him/her to add/remove points while the game is paused / between rounds.
But how should it be when the judge changes at each proposition ?
Ask a confirmation to a random player that the round is over and that the next one can start ?
Discussions are open.

Well, I am a little biased for this, so I will let someone else give their opinion, but basically, whenever we play this game, it is either with friends, or with people that we know, and there is usually some kind of voice chat going on because it makes the game more fun and it is much easier to discuss the proposals.
Thus, for us it doesn't really matter who is the judge. The point is that, if there were some mistakes, when the round ends, one person can shout at the master to pause the game, and then whoever was the judge can just fix the points, afterwards the game resumes. In the mode where everybody is the judge, in my example that would just be whoever judged the last word.
Of course, this is certainly not the case for public games with unknown people, so maybe I will come up with a different solution. I'll think about it a little...

Regarding table saving, again, same bias. For our games nobody would really use it to cheat.
It's more of a, ok, I got a phone call, save the game and then we resume after I am done doing whatever I need to do. But, obviously, I understand the loopholes this would introduce, so this is perfectly reasonable. I do however have 1 question:
In this case, wouldn't it be better to completely block saving when a round is in progress and notify with a message that you can only save in the judging phase? It is a shame if somebody saves by accident (or because they don't realize it is impossible) and then all the work done so far is just lost...

I think we should perfectly allow it during the judging phase though. What Ynwa says is valid, but again, in my opinion, this is not a type of game you will just save in the middle of a round and then decide to continue in 7 days, or something similar. If you forget something, the other players are here to flag it, and you yourself should have the history in the worst case to be reminded about what was done.

Now, about saving, I have experienced something a lot more weird that should probably be looked into:
6 of us were in the game, and we were in the middle of a round. Suddenly, one person left and a bot came (see another comment about that below).
The table master wanted to save and restore (in this case we knew the limitation, but thought it might be the best to reset the round, pause and see if we have a player replacement).
However, now after restoring, 3 people became spectators for no reason, and only 3 of us remained in the game. I think that possibly the game took into account that 3 people already wrote some answers during the round, and the 3 other ones wrote nothing and became spectators, but I could also be completely wrong as I have no idea why or how that happened, but it might be worth checking.

Additional comment: The feature where a bot always joins is sometimes extremely useful, but completely ruins the games such as this one, Scrabble, or the Quiz, where the bots do absolutely nothing. I hope you can check this topic and consider fixing this.

Either ways, thanks for the development done so far, and for an awesome game!

Hello,

The conflict should now be fixed. I changed "Pass" into "Give" as suggested. By the way, the problem was also present in French.

Fixing the root cause of the problem will require a client update, unfortunately.

OK for the sound, I should have paid more attention. I was sure that there was already such a sound. That's a good idea.

In this case, wouldn't it be better to completely block saving when a round is in progress

Yes, right. In fact the little exam was implemented long time before the ability to block saving, so I didn't brough that back here.