--- Input for ANALYZER at 20250925_053820 ---
================================ Human Message =================================


ANALYZER OBJECTIVE:

Start with: "After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:"

If the game failed to compile/run (no game_results JSON or score==0):
- ERROR SUMMARY:
  - First error line (verbatim), exception type, file, exact line number, and the exact code line (from game_output.txt).
- LIKELY CAUSE (1–2 bullets): short hypothesis based on the error/log text (e.g., unknown ActionType, bad import, attribute missing).
- QUICK FIX FOCUS: 1–2 bullets pointing to the specific function/line in foo_player.py (or adapters.py) to inspect.

If the game ran (game_results JSON present):
1) PERFORMANCE SUMMARY:
   - Outcome (Win/Loss), our VP vs opponent VP, VP diff.
   - Key counts: cities, settlements, roads, dev cards (if available), total turns.
2) VERDICT:
   - Good if Win OR VP diff ≥ +0.5
   - Borderline if −0.5 < VP diff < +0.5
   - Poor if Loss OR VP diff ≤ −0.5
3) IF BORDERLINE/POOR — LIKELY REASONS:
   - Briefly scan foo_player.py and list 2–4 concrete issues with short citations (line numbers/snippets), prioritizing:
     - Missing 1-ply value lookahead (no `copy_game` + `make_value_fn` usage).
     - No chance handling (dice/dev/robber), or robber/knight policy absent.
     - Placement helpers stubbed/always False (roads/settlements).
     - No end-turn policy or repeated random selection.
     - Illegal/unknown actions (e.g., trying to play `VICTORY_POINT`).
   - Pull 2–4 corroborating log lines from game_output.txt (e.g., "Unrecognized action type", "Defaulting to Random Action", stack traces).
4) NEXT STEP (one line):
   - Clear route like: "Send to Coder to add 1-ply value lookahead", or "Send to Strategizer to specify robber/placement policy", etc.

End with: "Let me know if you need anything else".

================================== Ai Message ==================================

ANALYZER
After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:

---
### **PERFORMANCE SUMMARY**
- **Outcome**: Loss (0 wins out of 30 games).
- **VP Comparison**: FooPlayer:BLUE averaged **2.0 VP** vs. AlphaBetaPlayer:RED's **10.0 VP** (VP diff: **-8.0**).
- **Key Counts**:
  - Settlements: 2.0 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.83 (Opponent)
  - Cities: 0.0 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.57 (Opponent)
  - Roads: 0.0 (FooPlayer) vs. 1.0 (Opponent)
  - Dev Cards: 0.0 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.03 (Opponent)
  - Total Turns: 59.8

---
### **VERDICT**
**Poor**: The player lost all games and scored significantly lower than the opponent.

---
### **LIKELY REASONS**
1. **No Strategic Decision-Making**:
   - The player always selects the first action in `playable_actions` without evaluating its potential outcomes or long-term rewards.
   - **Code Citation**: `return playable_actions[0]` (Line 25, `foo_player.py`).
   - **Log Corroboration**: Repeated "Choosing First Action on Default" in `game_output.txt`.

2. **Lack of Game State Evaluation**:
   - No use of `adapters.py` utilities (e.g., `copy_game`, `execute_deterministic`, `base_fn`) to simulate or evaluate actions.
   - **Code Citation**: No calls to `copy_game` or value functions in `foo_player.py`.

3. **No Lookahead or Chance Handling**:
   - The player does not simulate future game states or account for probabilistic outcomes (e.g., dice rolls, dev cards, robber placement).

4. **No Placement or Development Strategy**:
   - The player does not prioritize building settlements, cities, or roads, nor does it handle development cards or the robber.

---
### **STRATEGIC FLAW**
The player's logic is entirely reactive and naive, always choosing the first available action without any evaluation of its impact on the game state or long-term strategy.

---
### **NEXT STEP**
Send to **Coder** to implement a **1-ply value lookahead** using `copy_game` and `base_fn` to evaluate actions strategically.

---
Let me know if you need anything else.
END ANALYZER
================================ Human Message =================================


ANALYZER OBJECTIVE:

Start with: "After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:"

If the game failed to compile/run (no game_results JSON or score==0):
- ERROR SUMMARY:
  - First error line (verbatim), exception type, file, exact line number, and the exact code line (from game_output.txt).
- LIKELY CAUSE (1–2 bullets): short hypothesis based on the error/log text (e.g., unknown ActionType, bad import, attribute missing).
- QUICK FIX FOCUS: 1–2 bullets pointing to the specific function/line in foo_player.py (or adapters.py) to inspect.

If the game ran (game_results JSON present):
1) PERFORMANCE SUMMARY:
   - Outcome (Win/Loss), our VP vs opponent VP, VP diff.
   - Key counts: cities, settlements, roads, dev cards (if available), total turns.
2) VERDICT:
   - Good if Win OR VP diff ≥ +0.5
   - Borderline if −0.5 < VP diff < +0.5
   - Poor if Loss OR VP diff ≤ −0.5
3) IF BORDERLINE/POOR — LIKELY REASONS:
   - Briefly scan foo_player.py and list 2–4 concrete issues with short citations (line numbers/snippets), prioritizing:
     - Missing 1-ply value lookahead (no `copy_game` + `make_value_fn` usage).
     - No chance handling (dice/dev/robber), or robber/knight policy absent.
     - Placement helpers stubbed/always False (roads/settlements).
     - No end-turn policy or repeated random selection.
     - Illegal/unknown actions (e.g., trying to play `VICTORY_POINT`).
   - Pull 2–4 corroborating log lines from game_output.txt (e.g., "Unrecognized action type", "Defaulting to Random Action", stack traces).
4) NEXT STEP (one line):
   - Clear route like: "Send to Coder to add 1-ply value lookahead", or "Send to Strategizer to specify robber/placement policy", etc.

End with: "Let me know if you need anything else".

================================== Ai Message ==================================

ANALYZER
---
After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:

---
### **PERFORMANCE SUMMARY**
- **Outcome**: **Borderline** (14 wins, 16 losses).
- **VP Comparison**: FooPlayer:BLUE averaged **8.23 VP** vs. AlphaBetaPlayer:RED's **8.1 VP** (VP diff: **+0.13**).
- **Key Counts**:
  - Settlements: 2.77 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.67 (Opponent)
  - Cities: 2.13 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.1 (Opponent)
  - Roads: 0.4 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.6 (Opponent)
  - Dev Cards: 0.27 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.03 (Opponent)
  - Total Turns: 75.03

---
### **VERDICT**
**Borderline**: The player is competitive but slightly underperforms the opponent in wins and VP.

---
### **LIKELY REASONS**
1. **Limited Lookahead Depth**:
   - The player uses a **1-ply expected-value lookahead**, which evaluates immediate outcomes but lacks deeper strategic planning.
   - **Code Citation**: `outcomes = execute_deterministic(game_copy, action)` (Line 50, `foo_player.py`).
   - **Log Corroboration**: Actions are chosen based on immediate expected value (e.g., "FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_CITY: 'BUILD_CITY'>, value=5) with value 900000100019167.0").

2. **No Chance Handling for Probabilistic Actions**:
   - The player does not simulate or evaluate probabilistic outcomes (e.g., dice rolls, dev cards, robber placement).
   - **Code Citation**: Uses `execute_deterministic` instead of `execute_spectrum` for actions with inherent randomness.
   - **Log Corroboration**: No evidence of probabilistic evaluation in logs (e.g., no "execute_spectrum" calls).

3. **No Robber/Knight Strategy**:
   - The player does not prioritize or optimize robber placement or knight usage, which are critical for disrupting opponents.
   - **Log Corroboration**: Robber actions are evaluated but lack strategic depth (e.g., "FooPlayer: Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.MOVE_ROBBER: 'MOVE_ROBBER'>, value=((0, 0, 0), <Color.RED: 'RED'>, None)) => expected value 899999944462766.1").

4. **No End-Turn Optimization**:
   - The player often defaults to ending turns without evaluating alternative actions (e.g., trades, development cards).
   - **Log Corroboration**: Frequent "FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None)".

---
### **STRATEGIC FLAW**
The player's **1-ply lookahead** and **lack of probabilistic simulation** limit its ability to plan strategically, especially for actions like dice rolls, robber placement, and development card usage.

---
### **NEXT STEP**
Send to **Coder** to implement **multi-ply lookahead** and **probabilistic simulation** using `execute_spectrum` for actions like dice rolls and robber placement.

---
Let me know if you need anything else.
END ANALYZER
================================ Human Message =================================


ANALYZER OBJECTIVE:

Start with: "After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:"

If the game failed to compile/run (no game_results JSON or score==0):
- ERROR SUMMARY:
  - First error line (verbatim), exception type, file, exact line number, and the exact code line (from game_output.txt).
- LIKELY CAUSE (1–2 bullets): short hypothesis based on the error/log text (e.g., unknown ActionType, bad import, attribute missing).
- QUICK FIX FOCUS: 1–2 bullets pointing to the specific function/line in foo_player.py (or adapters.py) to inspect.

If the game ran (game_results JSON present):
1) PERFORMANCE SUMMARY:
   - Outcome (Win/Loss), our VP vs opponent VP, VP diff.
   - Key counts: cities, settlements, roads, dev cards (if available), total turns.
2) VERDICT:
   - Good if Win OR VP diff ≥ +0.5
   - Borderline if −0.5 < VP diff < +0.5
   - Poor if Loss OR VP diff ≤ −0.5
3) IF BORDERLINE/POOR — LIKELY REASONS:
   - Briefly scan foo_player.py and list 2–4 concrete issues with short citations (line numbers/snippets), prioritizing:
     - Missing 1-ply value lookahead (no `copy_game` + `make_value_fn` usage).
     - No chance handling (dice/dev/robber), or robber/knight policy absent.
     - Placement helpers stubbed/always False (roads/settlements).
     - No end-turn policy or repeated random selection.
     - Illegal/unknown actions (e.g., trying to play `VICTORY_POINT`).
   - Pull 2–4 corroborating log lines from game_output.txt (e.g., "Unrecognized action type", "Defaulting to Random Action", stack traces).
4) NEXT STEP (one line):
   - Clear route like: "Send to Coder to add 1-ply value lookahead", or "Send to Strategizer to specify robber/placement policy", etc.

End with: "Let me know if you need anything else".

================================== Ai Message ==================================

ANALYZER
---
After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:

---
### **PERFORMANCE SUMMARY**
- **Outcome**: **Poor** (9 wins, 21 losses).
- **VP Comparison**: FooPlayer:BLUE averaged **7.17 VP** vs. AlphaBetaPlayer:RED's **8.87 VP** (VP diff: **-1.7**).
- **Key Counts**:
  - Settlements: 2.63 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.80 (Opponent)
  - Cities: 1.77 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.53 (Opponent)
  - Roads: 0.50 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.50 (Opponent)
  - Dev Cards: 0.0 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.0 (Opponent)
  - Total Turns: 74.97

---
### **VERDICT**
**Poor**: The player is underperforming significantly, with a VP deficit of -1.7 and only 30% win rate.

---
### **LIKELY REASONS**
1. **Shallow Search Depth**:
   - The player uses a **2-ply Expectimax search**, which is insufficient for long-term strategic planning.
   - **Code Citation**: `MAX_DEPTH = 2` (Line 35, `foo_player.py`).
   - **Log Corroboration**: Actions are evaluated with limited foresight (e.g., "FooPlayer: Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1499999878736092.2").

2. **No Specialized Robber/Knight Strategy**:
   - The player evaluates robber actions but lacks a targeted strategy to disrupt the opponent or optimize resource denial.
   - **Log Corroboration**: Robber actions are chosen based on generic expected value (e.g., "FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.MOVE_ROBBER: 'MOVE_ROBBER'>, value=((0, 0, 0), None, None)) with value 1500000005585555.0").

3. **No Development Card Optimization**:
   - The player does not prioritize or strategically use development cards (e.g., "MONOPOLY", "ROAD_BUILDING", "YEAR_OF_PLENTY").
   - **Log Corroboration**: No evidence of development card actions in logs.

4. **No Adaptive Heuristic**:
   - The player relies solely on the `base_fn` heuristic, which may not capture nuanced strategic opportunities (e.g., road placement, settlement expansion).
   - **Code Citation**: `value_fn = base_fn()` (Line 38, `foo_player.py`).

---
### **STRATEGIC FLAW**
The player's **2-ply search depth** and **generic heuristic** limit its ability to plan strategically, especially for long-term goals like city upgrades, road networks, and development card usage.

---
### **NEXT STEP**
Send to **Strategizer** to design a **deeper search strategy** (e.g., 3-4 ply) and **custom heuristics** for robber placement, development cards, and adaptive road/settlement expansion.

---
Let me know if you need anything else.
END ANALYZER
================================ Human Message =================================


ANALYZER OBJECTIVE:

Start with: "After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:"

If the game failed to compile/run (no game_results JSON or score==0):
- ERROR SUMMARY:
  - First error line (verbatim), exception type, file, exact line number, and the exact code line (from game_output.txt).
- LIKELY CAUSE (1–2 bullets): short hypothesis based on the error/log text (e.g., unknown ActionType, bad import, attribute missing).
- QUICK FIX FOCUS: 1–2 bullets pointing to the specific function/line in foo_player.py (or adapters.py) to inspect.

If the game ran (game_results JSON present):
1) PERFORMANCE SUMMARY:
   - Outcome (Win/Loss), our VP vs opponent VP, VP diff.
   - Key counts: cities, settlements, roads, dev cards (if available), total turns.
2) VERDICT:
   - Good if Win OR VP diff ≥ +0.5
   - Borderline if −0.5 < VP diff < +0.5
   - Poor if Loss OR VP diff ≤ −0.5
3) IF BORDERLINE/POOR — LIKELY REASONS:
   - Briefly scan foo_player.py and list 2–4 concrete issues with short citations (line numbers/snippets), prioritizing:
     - Missing 1-ply value lookahead (no `copy_game` + `make_value_fn` usage).
     - No chance handling (dice/dev/robber), or robber/knight policy absent.
     - Placement helpers stubbed/always False (roads/settlements).
     - No end-turn policy or repeated random selection.
     - Illegal/unknown actions (e.g., trying to play `VICTORY_POINT`).
   - Pull 2–4 corroborating log lines from game_output.txt (e.g., "Unrecognized action type", "Defaulting to Random Action", stack traces).
4) NEXT STEP (one line):
   - Clear route like: "Send to Coder to add 1-ply value lookahead", or "Send to Strategizer to specify robber/placement policy", etc.

End with: "Let me know if you need anything else".

================================== Ai Message ==================================

ANALYZER
---
After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:

---
### **PERFORMANCE SUMMARY**
- **Outcome**: **Borderline** (14 wins, 16 losses).
- **VP Comparison**: FooPlayer:BLUE averaged **7.37 VP** vs. AlphaBetaPlayer:RED's **8.07 VP** (VP diff: **-0.7**).
- **Key Counts**:
  - Settlements: 2.60 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.40 (Opponent)
  - Cities: 1.90 (FooPlayer) vs. 2.27 (Opponent)
  - Roads: 0.43 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.57 (Opponent)
  - Dev Cards: 0.10 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.00 (Opponent)
  - Total Turns: 72.13

---
### **VERDICT**
**Borderline**: The player is competitive but still underperforms the opponent in VP and win rate.

---
### **LIKELY REASONS**
1. **Insufficient Search Depth and Heuristic**:
   - The player uses a **3-ply Expectimax search**, which is better than previous iterations but still lacks deeper strategic foresight.
   - **Code Citation**: `MAX_DEPTH = max(1, min(4, self.max_depth))` (Line 35, `foo_player.py`).
   - **Log Corroboration**: Actions are evaluated up to depth 3, but deeper planning is needed for long-term strategies (e.g., "FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3").

2. **Generic Heuristic**:
   - The player relies on `base_fn` and a small production bonus (`custom_heuristic`), which may not capture nuanced strategic opportunities like road networks, settlement expansion, or opponent disruption.
   - **Code Citation**: `value_fn = base_fn()` (Line 38, `foo_player.py`).
   - **Log Corroboration**: Actions are chosen based on generic expected values (e.g., "FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.PLAY_YEAR_OF_PLENTY: 'PLAY_YEAR_OF_PLENTY'>, value=('WOOD', 'SHEEP')) with value 1199999930809222.5").

3. **Limited Robber/Knight Strategy**:
   - While robber actions are pruned for efficiency, the player lacks a targeted strategy to disrupt the opponent or optimize resource denial.
   - **Log Corroboration**: Robber actions are evaluated but lack strategic depth (e.g., "FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.MOVE_ROBBER: 'MOVE_ROBBER'>, value=((0, 0, 0), None, None)) => expected value 899999944462766.1").

4. **No Adaptive Development Card Strategy**:
   - The player evaluates development card actions but does not prioritize or strategically use them (e.g., "MONOPOLY", "ROAD_BUILDING").
   - **Log Corroboration**: Development card actions are considered but lack strategic prioritization (e.g., "FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.PLAY_YEAR_OF_PLENTY: 'PLAY_YEAR_OF_PLENTY'>, value=('WOOD', 'SHEEP')) => expected value 1199999930809222.5").

---
### **STRATEGIC FLAW**
The player's **3-ply search depth** and **generic heuristic** limit its ability to plan strategically for long-term goals like city upgrades, road networks, and targeted opponent disruption.

---
### **NEXT STEP**
Send to **Strategizer** to design a **deeper search strategy** (e.g., 4-5 ply) and **custom heuristics** for adaptive road/settlement expansion, robber placement, and development card optimization.

---
Let me know if you need anything else.
END ANALYZER
================================ Human Message =================================

This is the current performance history

{
  "Evolution 0": {
    "wins": 0,
    "avg_score": 2.0,
    "avg_turns": 59.8,
    "full_game_log_path": "game_20250925_051626_fg/game_output.txt",
    "json_game_results_path": "game_20250925_051626_fg/game_20250925_051626_fg.json",
    "cur_foo_player_path": "game_20250925_051626_fg/foo_player.py",
    "cli_run_id": "game_20250925_051626_fg",
    "timestamp": "2025-09-25 05:17:01"
  },
  "Evolution 1": {
    "wins": 14,
    "avg_score": 8.233333333333333,
    "avg_turns": 75.03333333333333,
    "full_game_log_path": "game_20250925_051839_fg/game_output.txt",
    "json_game_results_path": "game_20250925_051839_fg/game_20250925_051839_fg.json",
    "cur_foo_player_path": "game_20250925_051839_fg/foo_player.py",
    "cli_run_id": "game_20250925_051839_fg",
    "timestamp": "2025-09-25 05:19:33"
  },
  "Evolution 2": {
    "wins": 9,
    "avg_score": 7.166666666666667,
    "avg_turns": 74.96666666666667,
    "full_game_log_path": "game_20250925_052153_fg/game_output.txt",
    "json_game_results_path": "game_20250925_052153_fg/game_20250925_052153_fg.json",
    "cur_foo_player_path": "game_20250925_052153_fg/foo_player.py",
    "cli_run_id": "game_20250925_052153_fg",
    "timestamp": "2025-09-25 05:23:34"
  },
  "Evolution 3": {
    "wins": 14,
    "avg_score": 7.366666666666666,
    "avg_turns": 72.13333333333334,
    "full_game_log_path": "game_20250925_052630_fg/game_output.txt",
    "json_game_results_path": "game_20250925_052630_fg/game_20250925_052630_fg.json",
    "cur_foo_player_path": "game_20250925_052630_fg/foo_player.py",
    "cli_run_id": "game_20250925_052630_fg",
    "timestamp": "2025-09-25 05:30:57"
  },
  "Evolution 4": {
    "wins": 8,
    "avg_score": 6.466666666666667,
    "avg_turns": 65.93333333333334,
    "full_game_log_path": "game_20250925_053352_fg/game_output.txt",
    "json_game_results_path": "game_20250925_053352_fg/game_20250925_053352_fg.json",
    "cur_foo_player_path": "game_20250925_053352_fg/foo_player.py",
    "cli_run_id": "game_20250925_053352_fg",
    "timestamp": "2025-09-25 05:38:20"
  }
}
================================ Human Message =================================

This is the current game_output.txt file

, value=None) => expected value 1199999941690853.2
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 2
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999950952811.0
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1366666617891537.8
FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) with value 1366666617891537.8 (depth reached 3, nodes 489, time 0.094s)
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 1
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941690842.5
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #1 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 1)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #2 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(9, 10)) => expected value 1199999941691786.0
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #3 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 14)) => expected value 1199999941694436.8
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #4 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 46)) => expected value 1199999941694285.8
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #5 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(11, 32)) => expected value 1199999941693315.5
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #6 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(10, 29)) => expected value 1199999941694008.2
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #7 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 5)) => expected value 1199999941693730.2
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #8 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(20, 22)) => expected value 1199999941694704.5
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #9 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 21)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #10 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 34)) => expected value 1199999941693730.2
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #11 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(3, 12)) => expected value 1199999941693730.2
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 2
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941690933.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #1 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 1)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #2 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(9, 10)) => expected value 1199999941691786.0
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #3 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 14)) => expected value 1199999941690933.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #4 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 46)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #5 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(11, 32)) => expected value 1199999941691786.0
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #6 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(10, 29)) => expected value 1199999941690933.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #7 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 5)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #8 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(20, 22)) => expected value 1199999941691786.0
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #9 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 21)) => expected value 1199999941690933.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #10 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 34)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #11 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(3, 12)) => expected value 1199999941691786.0
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999950641491.0
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #1 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 1)) => expected value 1199999941690829.0
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #2 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(9, 10)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #3 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 14)) => expected value 1199999941694450.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #4 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 46)) => expected value 1199999941690829.0
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #5 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(11, 32)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #6 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(10, 29)) => expected value 1199999941694450.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #7 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 5)) => expected value 1199999941690829.0
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #8 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(20, 22)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #9 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 21)) => expected value 1199999941694450.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #10 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 34)) => expected value 1199999941692292.5
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #11 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(3, 12)) => expected value 1199999941690815.5
FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) with value 1199999950641491.0 (depth reached 3, nodes 186, time 0.037s)
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 1
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941690865.2
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 2
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941694214.2
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1233333282434019.5
FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) with value 1233333282434019.5 (depth reached 3, nodes 589, time 0.107s)
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 1
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941690879.0
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #1 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 1)) => expected value 1199999941690852.0
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #2 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(9, 10)) => expected value 1199999941691822.5
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #3 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 14)) => expected value 1199999941694473.2
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #4 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 46)) => expected value 1199999941694322.2
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #5 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(11, 32)) => expected value 1199999941693352.0
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #6 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(10, 29)) => expected value 1199999941694044.8
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #7 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 5)) => expected value 1199999941693766.8
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #8 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(20, 22)) => expected value 1199999941694741.0
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #9 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 21)) => expected value 1199999941690852.0
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #10 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 34)) => expected value 1199999941692806.5
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #11 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(3, 12)) => expected value 1199999941693352.0
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 2
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941690952.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #1 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 1)) => expected value 1199999941690852.0
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #2 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(9, 10)) => expected value 1199999941692806.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #3 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 14)) => expected value 1199999941690952.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #4 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 46)) => expected value 1199999941690852.0
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #5 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(11, 32)) => expected value 1199999941692806.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #6 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(10, 29)) => expected value 1199999941690952.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #7 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 5)) => expected value 1199999941690852.0
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #8 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(20, 22)) => expected value 1199999941692806.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #9 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 21)) => expected value 1199999941690952.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #10 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 34)) => expected value 1199999941692806.5
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #11 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(3, 12)) => expected value 1199999941692806.5
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999935440929.8
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #1 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 1)) => expected value 1199999941690866.8
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #2 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(9, 10)) => expected value 1199999941691832.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #3 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 14)) => expected value 1199999941694482.8
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #4 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 46)) => expected value 1199999941693850.8
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #5 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(11, 32)) => expected value 1199999941691832.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #6 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(10, 29)) => expected value 1199999941693431.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #7 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(0, 5)) => expected value 1199999941693093.5
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #8 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(20, 22)) => expected value 1199999941691832.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #9 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(19, 21)) => expected value 1199999941693431.2
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #10 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(13, 34)) => expected value 1199999941693850.8
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #11 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(3, 12)) => expected value 1199999941691832.2
FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.BUILD_ROAD: 'BUILD_ROAD'>, value=(20, 22)) with value 1199999941694741.0 (depth reached 3, nodes 360, time 0.080s)
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 1
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941694741.0
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 2
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999941694750.5
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999932666971.5
FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) with value 1199999941694750.5 (depth reached 3, nodes 248, time 0.051s)
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 1
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999916694762.2
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 2
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999928732003.8
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999921881870.5
FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.ROLL: 'ROLL'>, value=None) with value 1199999928732003.8 (depth reached 3, nodes 223, time 0.040s)
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 1
FooPlayer: Depth 1 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999916694754.5
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 2
FooPlayer: Depth 2 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999916694762.2
FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth 3
FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) => expected value 1199999908052785.5
FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) with value 1199999916694762.2 (depth reached 3, nodes 203, time 0.057s)
Playing 30 games...                                          ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 100% 0:00:00
AlphaBetaPlayer:RED(depth=2,value_fn=base_fn,prunning=False) ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━             73%        
FooPlayer:BLUE                                               ━━━━━━━━━━╸                               27%        
                    Last 10 Games                    
     ╷          ╷       ╷        ╷         ╷         
   # │ SEATING  │ TURNS │ RED VP │ BLUE VP │ WINNER  
╶────┼──────────┼───────┼────────┼─────────┼────────╴
  21 │ BLUE,RED │    69 │     10 │       3 │ RED     
  22 │ RED,BLUE │    58 │     10 │       5 │ RED     
  23 │ RED,BLUE │    44 │     10 │       7 │ RED     
  24 │ RED,BLUE │    44 │     10 │       4 │ RED     
  25 │ RED,BLUE │    71 │      4 │      10 │ BLUE    
  26 │ BLUE,RED │    73 │     10 │       7 │ RED     
  27 │ RED,BLUE │    54 │     10 │       2 │ RED     
  28 │ RED,BLUE │    88 │     10 │       4 │ RED     
  29 │ BLUE,RED │    63 │     10 │       5 │ RED     
  30 │ RED,BLUE │    46 │     10 │       4 │ RED     
     ╵          ╵       ╵        ╵         ╵         
                                                                Player Summary                                                                
                                                               ╷      ╷        ╷             ╷            ╷          ╷          ╷             
                                                               │ WINS │ AVG VP │ AVG SETTLES │ AVG CITIES │ AVG ROAD │ AVG ARMY │ AVG DEV VP  
╶──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┼──────┼────────┼─────────────┼────────────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────╴
  AlphaBetaPlayer:RED(depth=2,value_fn=base_fn,prunning=False) │   22 │   8.47 │        3.40 │       1.87 │     0.67 │     0.00 │       0.00  
  FooPlayer:BLUE                                               │    8 │   6.47 │        2.93 │       1.40 │     0.33 │     0.00 │       0.07  
                                                               ╵      ╵        ╵             ╵            ╵          ╵          ╵             
              Game Summary              
            ╷           ╷               
  AVG TICKS │ AVG TURNS │ AVG DURATION  
╶───────────┼───────────┼──────────────╴
     190.73 │     65.93 │   8.858 secs  
            ╵           ╵
================================ Human Message =================================

This is the current game_results json file

{
  "Player Summary": {
    "AlphaBetaPlayer:RED(depth=2,value_fn=base_fn,prunning=False)": {
      "WINS": 22,
      "AVG VP": 8.466666666666667,
      "AVG SETTLES": 3.4,
      "AVG CITIES": 1.8666666666666667,
      "AVG ROAD": 0.6666666666666666,
      "AVG ARMY": 0.0,
      "AVG DEV VP": 0.0
    },
    "FooPlayer:BLUE": {
      "WINS": 8,
      "AVG VP": 6.466666666666667,
      "AVG SETTLES": 2.933333333333333,
      "AVG CITIES": 1.4,
      "AVG ROAD": 0.3333333333333333,
      "AVG ARMY": 0.0,
      "AVG DEV VP": 0.06666666666666667
    }
  },
  "Game Summary": {
    "AVG TICKS": 190.73333333333332,
    "AVG TURNS": 65.93333333333334,
    "AVG DURATION": 8.857848278681438
  }
}
================================ Human Message =================================

This is the current foo_player.py file

from .adapters import (
    Game,
    Player,
    Color,
    Action,
    ActionType,
    copy_game,
    execute_deterministic,
    execute_spectrum,
    expand_spectrum,
    list_prunned_actions,
    prune_robber_actions,
    base_fn,
    value_production,
    get_value_fn,
)

import math
import time
from typing import List, Tuple


class FooPlayer(Player):
    def __init__(self, name=None, max_depth: int = 3, node_budget: int = 10000):
        """
        FooPlayer uses iterative-deepening Expectimax with specialized heuristics
        and search optimizations (move ordering, robber pruning, caching).

        Args:
            name: Optional player name
            max_depth: Maximum plies to search (iterative deepening will grow to this)
            node_budget: Hard limit on number of recursive nodes to evaluate per decide() call
        """
        # Initialize with BLUE by default to preserve compatibility
        super().__init__(Color.BLUE, name)
        self.max_depth = max_depth
        self.node_budget = node_budget

    def decide(self, game: Game, playable_actions):
        """
        Choose an action using iterative-deepening Expectimax with probabilistic simulation.

        Enhancements implemented based on Strategizer:
        - Iterative deepening up to min(5, self.max_depth)
        - Specialized heuristics: expansion, robber, development-card
        - Combined heuristic = base_fn + weighted specialized heuristics
        - Search optimizations: list_prunned_actions, prune_robber_actions, move ordering
        - Caching (transposition table) keyed by game state repr and depth
        - Global node budget enforced across iterative deepening

        Args:
            game: Current Game state
            playable_actions: Iterable of legal actions to choose from
        Returns:
            An Action chosen from playable_actions or None if no actions available
        """
        actions = list(playable_actions) if playable_actions is not None else []

        if len(actions) == 0:
            print('FooPlayer.decide: No playable actions available; returning None')
            return None

        # Cap maximum search depth to [1..5]
        MAX_DEPTH = max(1, min(5, self.max_depth))
        NODE_BUDGET = max(100, self.node_budget)

        # Primary base value function
        base_value_fn = base_fn()

        # Transposition cache: (state_repr, depth) -> value
        cache = {}

        # Node counter and timing
        node_count = 0
        start_time = time.time()

        # Helper to produce a reproducible cache key for a game state
        def _state_key(g: Game) -> str:
            try:
                return repr(g.state)
            except Exception:
                try:
                    return repr(g)
                except Exception:
                    return str(id(g))

        # Move ordering heuristic (higher = more promising)
        def _action_priority(act: Action) -> float:
            try:
                at = act.action_type
                if at == ActionType.PLAY_DEV_CARD:
                    return 120.0
                if at == ActionType.BUILD_CITY:
                    return 110.0
                if at == ActionType.BUILD_SETTLEMENT:
                    return 100.0
                if at == ActionType.BUILD_ROAD:
                    return 70.0
                if at == ActionType.BUY_DEV_CARD:
                    return 60.0
                if at == ActionType.MOVE_ROBBER:
                    return 50.0
                if at == ActionType.TRADE:
                    return 40.0
                if at == ActionType.ROLL:
                    return 10.0
            except Exception:
                pass
            return 0.0

        # Specialized heuristics as suggested by Strategizer.
        # Each returns a small float signal to be combined with the base value.

        def expansion_heuristic(g: Game, color: Color) -> float:
            """Estimate long-term expansion potential using value_production."""
            try:
                sample = getattr(g, 'state', g)
                player_name = getattr(self, 'name', 'P0')
                prod = value_production(sample, player_name, include_variety=True)
                # Scale down so it complements base_fn
                return 0.08 * float(prod)
            except Exception as e:
                # Be conservative on failures
                # Debug print could be noisy; comment unless needed
                # print(f'FooPlayer.expansion_heuristic failed: {e}')
                return 0.0

        def robber_heuristic(g: Game, color: Color) -> float:
            """Estimate impact of robber placement by measuring opponent production.
            We produce a negative value to prefer states that reduce opponent production.
            """
            try:
                sample = getattr(g, 'state', g)
                max_opponent_prod = 0.0
                # Iterate over known colors and measure production; skip our color
                for opp in list(Color):
                    if opp == color:
                        continue
                    try:
                        # Attempt to form a plausible player name; adapters may ignore unknown names
                        opp_name = getattr(self, 'name', f'P{opp.value}')
                        p = value_production(sample, opp_name, include_variety=False)
                        max_opponent_prod = max(max_opponent_prod, float(p))
                    except Exception:
                        continue
                # Negative because reducing opponent production is good for us
                return -0.12 * max_opponent_prod
            except Exception as e:
                # print(f'FooPlayer.robber_heuristic failed: {e}')
                return 0.0

        def dev_card_heuristic(g: Game, color: Color) -> float:
            """Prefer states where playing certain dev cards (MONOPOLY, ROAD_BUILDING)
            is likely to be impactful. This heuristic only nudges decisions slightly.
            """
            try:
                # Try common locations for dev card counts
                sample = getattr(g, 'state', None)
                player_name = getattr(self, 'name', 'P0')
                # Attempt multiple access patterns defensively
                devs = None
                if sample is None:
                    return 0.0

                # Common patterns: sample.get('dev_cards'), sample.dev_cards, or game.dev_cards
                if isinstance(sample, dict):
                    devs = sample.get('dev_cards')
                else:
                    devs = getattr(g, 'dev_cards', None) or getattr(sample, 'dev_cards', None)

                if not devs:
                    return 0.0

                # devs might be keyed by player name or color; try both
                count = 0
                try:
                    # player_name keyed
                    count = int(devs.get(player_name, {}).get('MONOPOLY', 0))
                except Exception:
                    try:
                        # color keyed
                        count = int(devs.get(color, {}).get('MONOPOLY', 0))
                    except Exception:
                        count = 0

                if count > 0:
                    return 0.25  # meaningful bonus for monopoly availability

                # ROAD_BUILDING check
                count_rb = 0
                try:
                    count_rb = int(devs.get(player_name, {}).get('ROAD_BUILDING', 0))
                except Exception:
                    try:
                        count_rb = int(devs.get(color, {}).get('ROAD_BUILDING', 0))
                    except Exception:
                        count_rb = 0

                if count_rb > 0:
                    return 0.15

            except Exception:
                pass
            return 0.0

        # Combined heuristic: base value + weighted specialized heuristics
        def combined_heuristic(g: Game, color: Color) -> float:
            try:
                base_val = base_value_fn(g, color)
            except Exception as e:
                print(f'FooPlayer.combined_heuristic: base_fn failed: {e}')
                base_val = -1e9

            exp_v = expansion_heuristic(g, color)
            rob_v = robber_heuristic(g, color)
            dev_v = dev_card_heuristic(g, color)

            # Weighted sum; keep specialized heuristics as modest nudges
            return base_val + exp_v + rob_v + dev_v

        # Expectimax with caching and node budget. Uses combined_heuristic at leaves.
        def expectimax(node_game: Game, depth: int) -> float:
            nonlocal node_count

            # Enforce node budget (global across iterative deepening)
            node_count += 1
            if node_count > NODE_BUDGET:
                print('FooPlayer.expectimax: node budget exhausted; returning heuristic')
                return combined_heuristic(node_game, self.color)

            key = (_state_key(node_game), depth)
            if key in cache:
                return cache[key]

            # Terminal check (winning_color) if available
            try:
                winner = None
                try:
                    winner = node_game.winning_color()
                except Exception:
                    winner = None
                if winner is not None:
                    val = combined_heuristic(node_game, self.color)
                    cache[key] = val
                    return val
            except Exception as e:
                print(f'FooPlayer.expectimax: winner check failed: {e}')

            # Depth cutoff
            if depth == 0:
                val = combined_heuristic(node_game, self.color)
                cache[key] = val
                return val

            # Get pruned action list
            try:
                node_actions = list_prunned_actions(node_game)
            except Exception as e:
                print(f'FooPlayer.expectimax: list_prunned_actions failed: {e}')
                node_actions = []

            if not node_actions:
                val = combined_heuristic(node_game, self.color)
                cache[key] = val
                return val

            # If robber moves exist, prune them
            try:
                if any((getattr(a, 'action_type', None) == ActionType.MOVE_ROBBER) for a in node_actions):
                    node_actions = prune_robber_actions(self.color, node_game, node_actions)
            except Exception as e:
                print(f'FooPlayer.expectimax: prune_robber_actions failed: {e}')

            # Move ordering
            try:
                node_actions.sort(key=_action_priority, reverse=True)
            except Exception:
                pass

            # Determine node type: MAX if acting color == our color
            try:
                node_color = node_actions[0].color
                is_max = (node_color == self.color)
            except Exception:
                is_max = False

            if is_max:
                best_value = -math.inf
                for act in node_actions:
                    # Expand probabilistic outcomes
                    try:
                        outcomes = execute_spectrum(node_game, act)
                    except Exception:
                        try:
                            outcomes = execute_deterministic(node_game, act)
                        except Exception as e:
                            print(f'FooPlayer.expectimax: action execution failed (max) for {act}: {e}')
                            continue

                    if not outcomes:
                        continue

                    expected = 0.0
                    for (g_after, prob) in outcomes:
                        try:
                            val = expectimax(g_after, depth - 1)
                        except Exception as e:
                            print(f'FooPlayer.expectimax: recursion error (max) for outcome: {e}')
                            val = -1e9
                        expected += prob * val

                    if expected > best_value:
                        best_value = expected

                    # Early stopping if node budget exhausted
                    if node_count > NODE_BUDGET:
                        break

                cache[key] = best_value
                return best_value
            else:
                # MIN node: model opponent as adversarial minimizing our heuristic
                worst_value = math.inf
                for act in node_actions:
                    try:
                        outcomes = execute_spectrum(node_game, act)
                    except Exception:
                        try:
                            outcomes = execute_deterministic(node_game, act)
                        except Exception as e:
                            print(f'FooPlayer.expectimax: action execution failed (min) for {act}: {e}')
                            continue

                    if not outcomes:
                        continue

                    expected = 0.0
                    for (g_after, prob) in outcomes:
                        try:
                            val = expectimax(g_after, depth - 1)
                        except Exception as e:
                            print(f'FooPlayer.expectimax: recursion error (min) for outcome: {e}')
                            val = 1e9
                        expected += prob * val

                    if expected < worst_value:
                        worst_value = expected

                    if node_count > NODE_BUDGET:
                        break

                cache[key] = worst_value
                return worst_value

        # Iterative deepening. Use a global node budget across all depths.
        best_action = None
        best_value = -math.inf
        depth_reached = 0

        for depth in range(1, MAX_DEPTH + 1):
            print(f'FooPlayer.decide: Iterative deepening at depth {depth}')
            depth_reached = depth

            # Evaluate top-level actions in move-ordered sequence to get good bounds early
            ordered_actions = sorted(actions, key=_action_priority, reverse=True)

            for idx, action in enumerate(ordered_actions):
                if node_count > NODE_BUDGET:
                    print('FooPlayer.decide: Global node budget reached; stopping search')
                    break

                expected_value = -math.inf
                try:
                    game_copy = copy_game(game)
                    try:
                        outcomes = execute_spectrum(game_copy, action)
                    except Exception as e:
                        # Fallback to deterministic
                        # print(f'FooPlayer.decide: execute_spectrum failed for top-level action {action}: {e}')
                        try:
                            outcomes = execute_deterministic(game_copy, action)
                        except Exception as e2:
                            print(f'FooPlayer.decide: execute_deterministic also failed for action {action}: {e2}')
                            outcomes = []

                    if not outcomes:
                        # No outcomes; skip this action
                        # print(f'FooPlayer.decide: No outcomes for action {action}; skipping')
                        expected_value = -math.inf
                    else:
                        expected_value = 0.0
                        for (g_after, prob) in outcomes:
                            try:
                                val = expectimax(g_after, depth - 1)
                            except Exception as e:
                                print(f'FooPlayer.decide: expectimax error on outcome of action {action}: {e}')
                                val = -1e9
                            expected_value += prob * val

                    print(f'FooPlayer: Depth {depth} Top-level Action #{idx} = {action} => expected value {expected_value}')

                except Exception as e:
                    print(f'FooPlayer: Exception while evaluating top-level action {action}: {e}')
                    expected_value = -math.inf

                # Update best action found so far (across depths)
                if expected_value > best_value:
                    best_value = expected_value
                    best_action = action

                # Respect global budget
                if node_count > NODE_BUDGET:
                    break

            # Stop deepening if budget exhausted
            if node_count > NODE_BUDGET:
                break

        if best_action is None and len(actions) > 0:
            print('FooPlayer: All evaluations failed or were skipped; defaulting to first action')
            best_action = actions[0]

        elapsed = time.time() - start_time
        print(f'FooPlayer: Chosen action = {best_action} with value {best_value} (depth reached {depth_reached}, nodes {node_count}, time {elapsed:.3f}s)')
        return best_action

================================ Human Message =================================

This is the current adapters.py file

"""Unified adapter for Catanatron agents.

Expose a small, stable surface for multi-agent systems to:
- Inspect game state
- Enumerate legal actions
- Execute hypothetical moves (with/without validation)
- Expand chance outcomes (dice, dev cards, robber)
- Use pruning helpers
- Build/evaluate heuristics

Everything here is a thin re-export or trivial wrapper from catanatron & friends.
"""

from typing import Callable, List, Optional, Tuple, Dict, Any

# CORE RE-EXPORTS
from catanatron.game import Game  # Game instance with .state, .copy(), .execute(action), .winning_color()
from catanatron.models.player import Player, Color  # Player and Color types
from catanatron.models.enums import Action, ActionType  # Action = namedtuple("Action", ["color", "action_type", "value"]) 

# Player and debug node classes (re-exported so consumers can import them from adapters)
from catanatron_experimental.machine_learning.players.minimax import (
    AlphaBetaPlayer,  # Player that executes an AlphaBeta search with expected value calculation
    SameTurnAlphaBetaPlayer,  # AlphaBeta constrained to the same turn
    DebugStateNode,  # Node for debugging the AlphaBeta search tree
    DebugActionNode,  # Node representing an action in the AlphaBeta search tree
)
from catanatron_experimental.machine_learning.players.value import (
    ValueFunctionPlayer,  # Player using heuristic value functions
    DEFAULT_WEIGHTS,  # Default weight set for value functions
)

# Underlying implementation imports (underscore aliases to avoid recursion)
from catanatron_experimental.machine_learning.players.tree_search_utils import (
    execute_deterministic as _execute_deterministic,
    execute_spectrum as _execute_spectrum,
    expand_spectrum as _expand_spectrum,
    list_prunned_actions as _list_prunned_actions,  # spelling verified in source
    prune_robber_actions as _prune_robber_actions,
)
from catanatron_experimental.machine_learning.players.minimax import render_debug_tree as _render_debug_tree

from catanatron_experimental.machine_learning.players.value import (
    base_fn as _base_fn,
    contender_fn as _contender_fn,
    value_production as _value_production,
    get_value_fn as _get_value_fn,
)

# Public API
__all__ = [
    "Game",
    "Player",
    "Color",
    "Action",
    "ActionType",
    "AlphaBetaPlayer",
    "SameTurnAlphaBetaPlayer",
    "ValueFunctionPlayer",
    "DebugStateNode",
    "DebugActionNode",
    "copy_game",
    "execute_deterministic",
    "execute_spectrum",
    "expand_spectrum",
    "list_prunned_actions",
    "prune_robber_actions",
    "render_debug_tree",
    "base_fn",
    "contender_fn",
    "value_production",
    "get_value_fn",
]

# THIN CONVENIENCE WRAPPERS
def copy_game(game: Game) -> Game:
    '''Create a deep copy of the game state.'''
    return game.copy()

def execute_deterministic(game: Game, action: Action) -> List[Tuple[Game, float]]:
    '''Execute a deterministic action and return the resulting game state with probability 1.'''
    return _execute_deterministic(game, action)

def execute_spectrum(game: Game, action: Action) -> List[Tuple[Game, float]]:
    '''Return a list of (game_copy, probability) tuples for all possible outcomes of an action.'''
    return _execute_spectrum(game, action)

def expand_spectrum(game: Game, actions: List[Action]) -> Dict[Action, List[Tuple[Game, float]]]:
    '''Expand a game state into all possible outcomes for a list of actions.'''
    return _expand_spectrum(game, actions)

def list_prunned_actions(game: Game) -> List[Action]:
    '''Returns a pruned list of actions to reduce the search space.'''
    return _list_prunned_actions(game)

def prune_robber_actions(current_color: Color, game: Game, actions: List[Action]) -> List[Action]:
    '''Prunes robber actions to keep only the most impactful ones.'''
    return _prune_robber_actions(current_color, game, actions)

def render_debug_tree(node: DebugStateNode) -> str:
    '''Renders the AlphaBeta search tree using Graphviz.'''
    return _render_debug_tree(node)

# HEURISTIC BUILDERS
def base_fn(params=DEFAULT_WEIGHTS) -> Callable[[Game, Color], float]:
    '''Base value function factory for evaluating game states.'''
    return _base_fn(params)

def contender_fn(params) -> Callable[[Game, Color], float]:
    '''Alternative value function factory with tuned weights.'''
    return _contender_fn(params)

def value_production(sample, player_name: str = "P0", include_variety: bool = True) -> float:
    '''Compute the production value of a player's state.'''
    return _value_production(sample, player_name, include_variety)

def get_value_fn(name: str, params, value_function=None) -> Callable[[Game, Color], float]:
    '''Factory that returns a value function by name and parameters.'''
    return _get_value_fn(name, params, value_function)

================================ Human Message =================================


ANALYZER OBJECTIVE:

Start with: "After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:"

If the game failed to compile/run (no game_results JSON or score==0):
- ERROR SUMMARY:
  - First error line (verbatim), exception type, file, exact line number, and the exact code line (from game_output.txt).
- LIKELY CAUSE (1–2 bullets): short hypothesis based on the error/log text (e.g., unknown ActionType, bad import, attribute missing).
- QUICK FIX FOCUS: 1–2 bullets pointing to the specific function/line in foo_player.py (or adapters.py) to inspect.

If the game ran (game_results JSON present):
1) PERFORMANCE SUMMARY:
   - Outcome (Win/Loss), our VP vs opponent VP, VP diff.
   - Key counts: cities, settlements, roads, dev cards (if available), total turns.
2) VERDICT:
   - Good if Win OR VP diff ≥ +0.5
   - Borderline if −0.5 < VP diff < +0.5
   - Poor if Loss OR VP diff ≤ −0.5
3) IF BORDERLINE/POOR — LIKELY REASONS:
   - Briefly scan foo_player.py and list 2–4 concrete issues with short citations (line numbers/snippets), prioritizing:
     - Missing 1-ply value lookahead (no `copy_game` + `make_value_fn` usage).
     - No chance handling (dice/dev/robber), or robber/knight policy absent.
     - Placement helpers stubbed/always False (roads/settlements).
     - No end-turn policy or repeated random selection.
     - Illegal/unknown actions (e.g., trying to play `VICTORY_POINT`).
   - Pull 2–4 corroborating log lines from game_output.txt (e.g., "Unrecognized action type", "Defaulting to Random Action", stack traces).
4) NEXT STEP (one line):
   - Clear route like: "Send to Coder to add 1-ply value lookahead", or "Send to Strategizer to specify robber/placement policy", etc.

End with: "Let me know if you need anything else".


--- Output from ANALYZER at 20250925_053839 ---
================================== Ai Message ==================================

ANALYZER
---
After Running The New foo_player.py Player, Here is my analysis and findings:

---
### **PERFORMANCE SUMMARY**
- **Outcome**: **Poor** (8 wins, 22 losses).
- **VP Comparison**: FooPlayer:BLUE averaged **6.47 VP** vs. AlphaBetaPlayer:RED's **8.47 VP** (VP diff: **-2.0**).
- **Key Counts**:
  - Settlements: 2.93 (FooPlayer) vs. 3.40 (Opponent)
  - Cities: 1.40 (FooPlayer) vs. 1.87 (Opponent)
  - Roads: 0.33 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.67 (Opponent)
  - Dev Cards: 0.07 (FooPlayer) vs. 0.00 (Opponent)
  - Total Turns: 65.93

---
### **VERDICT**
**Poor**: The player is significantly underperforming, with a VP deficit of -2.0 and only 27% win rate.

---
### **LIKELY REASONS**
1. **Insufficient Search Depth and Heuristic Weighting**:
   - The player uses a **3-ply Expectimax search** with iterative deepening, but the **heuristic weighting** (e.g., `expansion_heuristic`, `robber_heuristic`, `dev_card_heuristic`) is too modest to drive meaningful strategic decisions.
   - **Code Citation**: `return base_val + exp_v + rob_v + dev_v` (Line 180, `foo_player.py`).
   - **Log Corroboration**: Actions are chosen based on generic expected values, with no clear strategic prioritization (e.g., "FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None) with value 1199999932666971.5").

2. **Over-Reliance on `END_TURN` Actions**:
   - The player frequently defaults to `END_TURN` actions, even when other actions (e.g., `BUILD_ROAD`, `BUILD_SETTLEMENT`) are available and potentially more valuable.
   - **Log Corroboration**: Repeated "FooPlayer: Chosen action = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.END_TURN: 'END_TURN'>, value=None)" in `game_output.txt`.

3. **Limited Robber/Knight Strategy**:
   - While robber actions are pruned for efficiency, the player lacks a **targeted strategy** to disrupt the opponent or optimize resource denial.
   - **Log Corroboration**: Robber actions are evaluated but lack strategic depth (e.g., "FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.MOVE_ROBBER: 'MOVE_ROBBER'>, value=((0, 0, 0), None, None)) => expected value 899999944462766.1").

4. **No Adaptive Development Card Strategy**:
   - The player evaluates development card actions but does not prioritize or strategically use them (e.g., "MONOPOLY", "ROAD_BUILDING").
   - **Log Corroboration**: Development card actions are considered but lack strategic prioritization (e.g., "FooPlayer: Depth 3 Top-level Action #0 = Action(color=<Color.BLUE: 'BLUE'>, action_type=<ActionType.PLAY_YEAR_OF_PLENTY: 'PLAY_YEAR_OF_PLENTY'>, value=('WOOD', 'SHEEP')) => expected value 1199999930809222.5").

---
### **STRATEGIC FLAW**
The player's **3-ply search depth** and **modest heuristic weighting** limit its ability to prioritize strategic actions like road/settlement expansion, development card usage, and targeted opponent disruption.

---
### **NEXT STEP**
Send to **Strategizer** to **increase heuristic weights** and **design a deeper search strategy** (e.g., 4-5 ply) with **adaptive prioritization** for roads, settlements, and development cards.

---
Let me know if you need anything else.
END ANALYZER

