Difference between revisions of "End State Scoring"
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[Category:To be Published]] | [[Category:To be Published]] | ||
[[Category:Staffan's current workpage]] | [[Category:Staffan's current workpage]] | ||
| − | ''The | + | ''The process of adding up all points to players in a phase after gameplay has finished.'' |
| − | + | Some games end by a player winning, a player losing, or a draw is reached. Other games have criteria for when game ends and the outcome of all players are first determined then. Such games typically use [[End State Scoring]] in that all points are officially and publicly counted after players possibility to affect the game state has ended. | |
=== Examples === | === Examples === | ||
Revision as of 15:25, 21 December 2014
The process of adding up all points to players in a phase after gameplay has finished.
Some games end by a player winning, a player losing, or a draw is reached. Other games have criteria for when game ends and the outcome of all players are first determined then. Such games typically use End State Scoring in that all points are officially and publicly counted after players possibility to affect the game state has ended.
Contents
Examples
Amun-Re, Egizia, and Lords of Waterdeep are all Board Games where players have cards with conditional score bonus that are only give out after gameplay finishes.
Using the pattern
The main requirement of End State Scoring is to postpone the handing out of at least some points to players Scores until gameplay ends. The main design decision regarding End State Scoring is if people should have Imperfect Information or Perfect Information regarding the game state and how players can get points based on the game state. The former promotes Exaggerated Perception of Influence and Tension while the latter promotes Analysis Paralysis. For this reason, Imperfect Information seems to be the much more common choice.
A typical way of combining Imperfect Information and End State Scoring is to give players Asymmetric Goals related to how they score in a game. An example of this is which lord one plays in Lords of Waterdeep since different lords provide different bonus points depending what quests and buildings one has completed.
Consequences
End State Scoring makes it important for gameplay to know their relative positions before the end state as well as what possible points all players can add to their Scores during the final scoring. When players cannot calculate the positions for all players before an End State Scoring, the use of this pattern can provide Exaggerated Perception of Influence and Tension. If the scoring is at least partly based on Imperfect Information, players can be motivated to engage in Bluffing to make it more difficult for other players to be able and correctly deduce their position before the end state and how much points they can get in the end state.
Regardless of if players can accurately or not calculate positions, the presence of End State Scoring can create Analysis Paralysis since players may spend time trying to do so. The presence of Perfect Information more or less guarantees Analysis Paralysis unless it is very easy to determine player positions and possible points to be gotten during the End State Scoring.
Relations
Can Instantiate
Analysis Paralysis, Exaggerated Perception of Influence, Tension
with Imperfect Information
Can Modulate
Can Be Instantiated By
-
Can Be Modulated By
Asymmetric Goals, Imperfect Information, Perfect Information,
Possible Closure Effects
-
Potentially Conflicting With
-
History
New pattern created in this wiki.
References
-
Acknowledgements
Alexander Kjäll, Kristina Knaving
