> I.e. the policy does account for past actions, and these are not encoded in any way. Alright. They should be then. I misunderstood your objection and I woul

> I.e. the policy does account for past actions, and these are not encoded in any way. Alright. They should be then. I misunderstood your objection and I would express a part of it as "the game state is not fully encoded." As an example, my encoding of Splendor gamestates includes which card is secretly in an opponent's hand if the opponent reserved it when it was face-up, and I regard this as "part of the game state," and it seems like the fine article's encoding lacks such information. On the other hand, this discussion has made me realize my Splendor game state encoding is also lossy compared to the information needed for actual play by experts. If an expert player has 2 red chips, then reserves a face-down rank 3 holding, then takes 2 green chips the next turn, that's very different from if they started with the green chips and began collecting red chips after seeing their secret high-point-value card. My encoding does not account for this and I am struggling to think of how to fix it.