Topic of the Week: Hidden Scoring

Memory games would be one reason I added that * to “always”. I’m not particularly great at memory games either, but when the entire game is about remembering hidden trackable information, that is where my efforts will be directed.

(This is not to say that your friend couldn’t also remember every bit of information in a game of T&E - maybe she’s one of the rare exceptions that could. The point I suppose I wanted to make is that HTI discussions often seem to devolve into hypotheticals about people with perfect recall, and I have found in practice that that simply isn’t a concern in games other than simple memory games - everyone I have ever played with forgets, even short term simple information.)

3 Likes

Because there’s more to life than efficiency, and it’s fun to move the pieces along the scoring track as you score for each of the gods!

3 Likes

I like a bit of semi-visible by hidden scoring - a stack of chips where you can see the height of the chips, and read the top value, but unless you’ve been paying a lot of attention, the value of the whole stack is not known.

You get a sense of relative position (how big is my stack compared to theirs?) but the final tally can be suspenseful with surprise winners.

6 Likes

Alright, looked down my list.

Games that do it well, @raged_norm hit it on the head. Hidden roles and objectives really thrive on this. Keyflower, Argent: The Consortium, Archipelago.

Despite Tigris & Euphrates working well without it, still better hidden. Not knowing how important that kingdom or battle is to your opponent is a part of the game.

Also games that don’t really need to be hidden but would be a pain to calculate realtime and I can’t see huge benefits to available scores: Concordia, Great Western Trail, Cascadia.

Games that do split scoring well (known + unknown kicker):
DuneImp tops this list. 80-90% known information and the possibility of holding back intrigue cards is on-theme. I love almost knowing but never being quite sure.

New Fronteirs also 90% known. Goals are well deployed as there are only 8 of them, and a player chooses from nearly half of them when choosing, and there are mechanisms to reveal hidden goals. A good mix of control and uncertainty that makes for interest rather than laziness.

Lords of Waterdeep: You generally kind of know. Most goals are of equal value and equally easy to pursue, so you can look at the score track and count the completed quests and you kind of know. But you don’t know so you get some excitement and endgame theater without any real cost to the game. Ticket to Ride and Carcassonne same reasoning.

Isle of Skye I particularly like. Much of the score is public. Private objectives are visible but uncalculated and not worth calculating. So it is easy to check and see what another player will value or not, and therefore engage with them and strategize, but you’re not going to take the time in-game to specifically figure out if you are four points ahead or four points behind. So you get control of the game (check) and also the feel goods and endgame theater (check). Smart design.

Ark Nova I haven’t thought about much but the open score, endgame trigger, and endgame bonuses seem to meld well.

Split Scoring done poorly:
London 2e is a bookkeeping necessity. Tracking the points in your stacks would be cumbersome, And some scores (money, poverty, loans) fluctuate up and down until the end of the game. So I wouldn’t change it. But the end result is that your score is about 30% track, 30% stack, and 30% endgame. You don’t know where you are during the game and you don’t know what won or lost you the game when you are finished. Would definitely activate realtime scoring in a digital version.

Troyes feels like a gimmick. Your goals make up a large part of your score and I’d rather see what you’re trying to do and interact with it. Not egregious, give this one 50/50.

Settlers of Catan could get the DuneImp argument - there is something to holding a dev card and I don’t know if you have a soldier or a point and how close you are to the end of the game. But you might still get that with the soldier / monopoly / year of plenty uncertainty and the endgame never feels good when more than one card is flopped.

Formosa Tea has been a while. But I remember first timers not understanding how much of their score came in end game and thinking they were doing well or even winning only to realize they had half of the winner’s score. Hidden scoring hid half the game from their strategy. Good game, though, remedied with repeat plays. Not sure it can be fixed due to the bookkeeping and fluctuations side.

Gugong it’s been a while but I remember a huge chunk of points showing up at the end and no real reason for it.

Castles of Burgundy, Hansa Tuetonica, and Grand Austria Hotel have split scoring and I don’t really have an opinion good or bad.

Games where hidden scores are better made public:
Deus just lost my first game and, like Formosa Tea, the lack of score info blinded me to a ton of what was actually happening in the game. No benefit to the hidden score, just a trope.

Puerto Rico and Samurai already discussed. High interaction, scores orient you and help you interact.

Oceans? I’m wondering about this one. It has all the hallmarks of other games that have benefited from the screens coming down. Give it a try?

Thurn & Taxis and Dominion I’m a bit ambivalent. Low interaction games to begin with. The main touchpoint is ending the game while you are ahead, so knowing who is ahead and maybe trying to end the game is useful information. I could go either way here. I enjoyed T&T on BGA better when scores were available.

Then there are any number of games where scores aren’t “hidden” so much as “uncalculated” but I’ve found in digital implementations the game thrives on running calculations:
Barenpark, Agricola, Beyond the Sun, Race/Roll ftG, etc

2 Likes

I only bothered with Samurai once we play with open scoring. Interesting to see that people prefer playing it with closed. I thought it also led to nonsense plays without knowing who is on the lead.

2 Likes

Deus can be set to public scoring in BGA, I just left it with the default both games. If we choose to play again, we can set it public and see if that changes the feeling of the game.

3 Likes

I have found that multiplayer gaming, for me, is more about spending time with people than it is about winning. I don’t care if scores are open or closed. But if them being opened or closed bothers someone else at the table, I’m amenable to changing the rules-as-written to better suit the players.

And if I can look and see that it is mathematically impossible for me to win, I don’t care. But if someone else sees that and it bothers them, then I’m willing to concede the game and end it early.

I have some friends who play, as much as possible, with house rules that hide as much scoring as possible to the very end; they are also cutthroat, especially against each other, and they have developed convoluted strategies and tactics to throw each other off of any hidden scoring they may have accrued. They’re a fun couple to play with for sure, and I’m happy to play with their house rules since they strongly prefer them.

But, ultimately, if someone at the table just isn’t as good at remembering things as others, then I would prefer to expose any “hidden trackable” information and keep it open information. Yes; memory is a talent and/or skill, but we’re not gathered around a table to make someone feel inferior because of how their brain does or doesn’t work.


In solo gaming, I prefer open scoring because bots cheat and I need to know by how much I should cursing the bot on how much it’s cheating.

5 Likes

The split scoring in Hansa Teutonica doesn’t have a hidden component per se – everything is open information (save for your opponents’ intentions :). Parts of the scores won’t be confirmed/finalised/totted up until the end of the game (and some elements will remain subject to change until that point), but you can get a pretty good idea of where people are at relatively without attempting to calculate their score in detail. Numbers of bonus tokens are probably the hardest thing to identify (but if anyone had been going hard for that strategy, then you’d probably at least know that much and again have a rough idea). So if you’re paying attention, while you may not know whether you’re winning, you can have an accurate impression of whether you’re doing well or poorly…

I like how the score that is tracked explicitly during the game acts as the game timer; so if someone is pushing their in-game scoring to try to finish the game quickly to negate other players’ longer-term plans, you can see it happening and respond.

4 Likes

When we play Ticket To Ride we tend to do all the scoring ata the end, first the (intentionally) hidden ticket scores, then the (normally scored openly during play) points for tracks. This is not due to a particular preference for hidden scoring, but because otherwise the game is constantly punctuated by cries of “hang on, did I get my points for the track I built last turn”, so it is easier to just count it allup at the end…

7 Likes

During our game of Cascadia—which scores at the end, if you are good at counting it is all out in the open—my dad actually complained that he didn‘t know his score. At the end when I won, I asked him if he didn‘t have more fun feeling good about his landscape (he was doing well for a first game, I have played 50+. Animal scores were pretty close across the board, I just won more landscapes than the rest which comes with practice) instead of constantly knowing that I was ahead? I am not sure what exactly he mumbled in answer… something along the lines of „you always win“.

5 Likes