Help the player, but do not play the game for them

Situation

After the playtest, it was clear that several states provided too little feedback. The easiest response would have been to highlight the 'optimal' move at all times or automatically advance the player. In a strategy board game, however, that crosses from usability into gameplay itself and effectively starts making part of the player's decisions for them.

Approach

I limited guidance to validation and state explanation. The system showed which actions were valid, why an action was blocked and which phase was active, but it did not rank the available options strategically. Track-pricing feedback also received tests so the UX copy expressed the same rule that the engine enforced.

Outcome

There were fewer 'why won't it let me do this?' moments while the player still made the actual decision. Guidance did not become a separate tutorial engine; it remained an understandable presentation of the existing domain state.