Secret Passage Bots: Testing the 100-to-65 Ratio

Gardenscapes Secret Passage showing four completed partnerships, including two bot partners, with all four colored keys unlocked and five Paws remaining.

Can suggested bots help complete Gardenscapes Secret Passage? We tested two partners, recorded their contributions, and examined a possible 100-to-65 ratio.

Trying a different approach to choosing partners in Gardenscapes Secret Passage led us to an interesting discovery. We teamed up with two of the suggested partners offered directly by the game and found that both contributed enough points to finish our trails while we were offline.

The most interesting part was the contribution ratio. Our results suggest that partners recommended by the game may contribute around 65 points for every 100 points we earn. If this behavior proves consistent, it could change how we approach cooperative events and how much time we spend completing them.

Why We Decided to Try Bots

In Secret Passage, each partnership has its own shared trail and progress bar. We need four partners to collect all four keys and unlock the Grand Prize.

This time, we started by choosing only two partners. For the remaining spots, we considered using our own secondary accounts, but that would have meant spending considerably more time playing on multiple accounts.

We had already spent enough time on the event, so we decided to try something different.

Gardenscapes offers suggested partners directly inside Secret Passage. We can select these accounts immediately without sending a separate invitation and waiting for someone to accept it. Many players refer to these suggested accounts as bots.

We decided to give them a chance.

What Happened on Our Third and Fourth Trails

For the third trail, we selected one of the suggested partners and started collecting points. Once we had earned slightly more than half the required total, we closed the game.

About four hours later, we returned to find that our partner had contributed all the remaining points. The trail was complete.

Encouraged by that result, we repeated the experiment with another suggested partner on the fourth trail.

We followed the same approach, collecting a little more than half the required points before stopping. When we checked again four to five hours later, the second partner had also finished the trail.

Two different suggested partners, two completed trails, and no need to continue playing on secondary accounts.

The 100-to-65 Ratio

Our initial estimate was that a bot might contribute approximately 65% of the points we earn. In practical terms, that would mean about 650 points from the bot for every 1,000 points of our own.

Our Points	Estimated Bot Points (65%)	Combined Points
100	65	165
1,000	650	1,650
5,000	3,250	8,250
10,000	6,500	16,500
14,600	9,490	24,090

This table illustrates the estimated 65% ratio. These are mathematical examples, not five separate gameplay measurements.

We also recorded the actual contributions from one completed trail:

Contribution	Points
Our Account	14,937
Suggested Partner	9,305
Combined Total	24,242
Required Trail Total	24,000

The recorded result gives us a more precise figure: the suggested partner contributed approximately 62.3 points for every 100 points we earned. That is reasonably close to our original estimate, although the actual measurement is lower than 65%.

Using the estimated 65% ratio, completing a trail that requires 24,000 points would take approximately 14,546 points from us and 9,454 from the bot.

That would mean contributing roughly 60.6% of the combined total ourselves, while the bot handles approximately 39.4%.

The important finding is that the workload does not necessarily have to be divided equally. A partner who consistently contributes this much could significantly reduce the effort required to finish a trail.

Is This a Consistent Game Mechanic?

There is an important difference between what we observed and what we can prove.

Our results do not establish that Playrix uses a fixed contribution percentage for every suggested partner. We also do not know whether these accounts earn points independently, respond to our progress, or update their contributions after a delay.

The four-to-five-hour intervals in our experiment simply represent the time between closing the game and checking the results. They do not prove that bots follow a specific schedule.

Other players have reported successful partnerships with accounts they believe are bots, particularly in Fancy Feathers. However, there are also reports of suggested partners contributing fewer points than expected or failing to complete their share.

Playrix has not publicly confirmed that every automatically suggested partner is controlled by a bot. We use the term because it is how players commonly describe these accounts, not because their technical behavior has been officially documented.

Does This Change How We Should Choose Partners?

Until now, choosing reliable partners usually meant turning to friends or active teammates. Suggested accounts were generally considered a less predictable option.

But there is a problem with relying exclusively on friends or members of our team: even a dependable player can struggle to contribute through no fault of their own.

A friend might genuinely want to help us finish Secret Passage but get stuck on a difficult level for two or three days. They may keep trying, use their available lives and boosters, and still make little progress.

While they are stuck, their ability to earn additional event resources is limited. The partnership slows down, and we may have to collect most of the remaining points ourselves.

That does not mean our teammate is lazy or unwilling to contribute. Sometimes the game simply refuses to cooperate.

This is where the suggested partners showed a clear advantage in our experiment.

We did not have to wait for someone to beat a stubborn level, find time to play, or recover from a long losing streak. Both suggested partners completed their contributions while we were away.

In our experiment, both suggested partners came through. We cannot guarantee the same outcome in every future event, but the experience gives us a good reason to reconsider our usual approach.

Rather than filling all four partnership slots with friends or teammates immediately, we can leave some available and decide later whether a suggested partner might be the better choice.

What We Want to Test Next Time

Our next experiment should focus on whether the contribution ratio stays consistent throughout a trail.

We want to find out whether suggested partners consistently contribute a similar percentage of our points, whether their contributions change as we approach the final reward, and whether the same pattern appears with different partners.

It would also be useful to stop at different progress levels instead of always waiting until we have collected more than half the required points.

For example, we could pause after contributing 25%, 40%, or 60% of the target and compare what happens next. That would help us determine whether the suggested partner's contribution is connected to our progress or follows an independent pattern.

Comparing these findings with the cooperative mechanics in Fancy Feathers could also help us understand whether similar partner behavior appears across different Gardenscapes events.

Conclusion

Choosing two suggested partners in Secret Passage allowed us to complete our final two trails without using additional personal accounts.

The most useful numerical finding was the recorded contribution ratio of approximately 62.3 partner points for every 100 of our own, reasonably close to our initial 65% estimate. If future experiments reveal a consistent pattern, we may be able to estimate how much effort is needed to complete a trail before committing additional time and resources.

For now, we have two successful partnerships and a promising observation. Whether this behavior follows a fixed game mechanic remains an open question.

Meanwhile, our backup accounts can enjoy a little time off. The next Secret Passage bot, however, still has a few spins to prove itself.