Annotated Games: Version 0.3, 4 players

This game was played during the game testing of Find the Bug! Agile. The players pursued different paths towards the victory.

1. Player 1: Aim for many test cases and few tests
2. Player 2: Aim for many tests and few test cases
3. Player 3: Aim for a balance between tests and test cases
4. Player 4: Look for the best use for the codes in the current turn

The players' hands are shown in the table (codes, use cases and CV) and the table is shown by use cases with the left number indicating the product owner and the right number indicating the tester. The game plays with six components.

Round 1

Player 1 must start with a test case (purple and yellow) and since player 2 had all the colors necessary to test it fully (blue, green and red), she did so but failed. Player 3 must then also start with a test case (purple and green) and so did player 4 (blue and green), since she didn't have the necessary red to do a full test.

Round 2

Player 1 tempts player 4 with a test case that can be tested with her purple, blue and yellow cubes. It can also be integrated with her first test case and give player 1 additional victory points. Player 3 tests blue/green test case to spend her red and yellow codes but fails while player 4 accepts player 1's offer but again we see a failed test case.

Round 3

Player 1 would like to create a third test case but only one with blue/red output would be tempting enough for player 2 (who has the other three colors) so she decides to use her two blue to get her first code on the CV. Player 2 does the same with a yellow pair with the intention to copy codes next turn. Player 3 has only 2 red codes left and decides to copy player 1's codes to be able to continue test next turn. Note that by sharing her blue codes instead of purple, player 1 cleared her hand of blue so that "copycats" would only get 4 codes. Player 4 on the other hand passes her test and gets 2 codes on her CV, leaving only player 3 without codes.

Round 4

Player 1 creates another test case. She could have integrated the two passed components but since she is the product owner for both and hence will get two codes whoever integrates them, she's in no hurry. Player 2 rightly suspects that player 1's input is red and green, since neither she nor player 4 has that combination, so she chooses to copy code instead. Player 3 finally passes her test case, after which player 4 accepts player 1's challenge but only partially passes.

Round 5

There is a surplus of purple and shortage of blue in play so player 1 writes a blue code to be able to integrate next turn. Player 2 is fortunate to pass on the first iteration, increasing her CV to five codes, although only three different colors. Player 3 would have needed at least one more yellow to integrate so she decides to share a pair of red to get three different colors as well. Player 4 is unable to continue testing and take the opportunity to copy player 1's code to get one code of each color.

Round 6

Player 1 finds a way to integrate all three passed components! The integration rewards the following codes (product owner first, technical lead second):

• Component purple/yellow: Player 1 blue, player 2 yellow
• Component blue/green: Player 4 yellow, player 3 blue
• Component red/green: Player 1 yellow, player 4 red
• Module: Player 1 red, green

At this point, the game felt unbalanced in favor of the user story strategy. The test game was halted to test modifications in version 0.4.

P&P (PDF, A4)	P&P (PDF, US Letter)

Annotated games

Complete test games are presented under Annotated Games.

• Version 0.2, 4 players
• Version 0.3, 4 players
• Version 0.4, 4 players
• Version 0.5, 4 players
• Version 0.6, 4 players

If you like those game mechanisms, I can also recommend: