⭐️Scoring systems round-up⭐️

by LeonardoAlese. Posted on Aug 01, 2020    7    7


One of my favourite games among those with a minimal set of rules is 'No Thanks!'. When it is your turn you have only two options: pay one coin to reject a card or take the card and all the coins that have been paid until then. At the end of the game, in which one tries to score as few points as possible, each player sums up the value on the cards that she has collected with a twist: a sequence of consecutive cards is only worth as many points as the card of lowest value in the sequence. This simple idea is enough to break simmetry among players and make the game interesting.

No Thanks!

I think it would be cool to list as many scoring systems as we can, where cards/tiles collected over the game are scored at its end. A good format could be:

Game. Scoring system. Highlight of how it impacts the game.

Looking forward to reading about spicy scoring systems.


Comments

SuperCoquillette 2

I like how That's Pretty Clever and Twice As Clever are basically a scoring system by itself.

  LeonardoAlese 3

Coloretto. At the end of the game you pick three colors among those you have collected and score points depending on how many cards in that color you have

1: 1 point,
2: 3 points,
3: 6 points,
4: 10 points,
5: 15 points,
6+: 21 points.

Remaining colors are scored the same way but provide negative points.

The scoring system breaks symmetry, sets up a nice push your luck dynamics and allows indirect interaction by offering the possibility of forcing other players to take cards that are harmful to them.

radaar 2

Twilight Struggle

This game simulates the Cold War, and the struggle for dominance between the US and USSR was always in flux. As a result, the victory point track is structured in a way where a point for one is a point against the other. The track starts at 0, and if the US gets 1 point, then the USSR gets 3, the new total is that the USSR is at 2.

The game ends immediately if either side hits 20, but if neither side reaches the 20-point threshold or triggers another victory (or loss) condition by the end of the war, a final scoring is conducted, and the nation with the net positive point total is the winner.

Certain events provide a point or two, but most of the scoring comes from control of geographical regions. Regions are comprised of countries (usually divided by continents), and countries can either be battleground nations, where the two superpowers desperately tried to assert dominance and/or provided tactical advantages, or non-battleground nations, which were not as important to the struggle. Simply being present in a region (controlling at least one country) isn’t worth very much. Dominating a region (controlling more battlegrounds, at least one non-battleground, and more countries total) is pretty valuable. And total control of a region (controlling ALL battlegrounds and more countries total) will earn a TON of points, but is incredibly difficult to pull off.

Thing is, not all regions are equally valuable. Europe is worth the most points in the game because that is where the heart of the conflict was. It’s also the most difficult place to create wild upsets. But if either side ever fully co tools Europe when a scoring card is played, that is an automatic victory. Asia is the next most valuable because of how China, Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan served as the places where the Cold War was “hot”; the actual wars there were largely proxies for the two superpowers to try to forcibly assert their ways of life.

Each region has a corresponding “scoring card,” which triggers a score check of the region. This forces players to continuously ensure that they don’t let a region fall into their enemy’s grasp. At the end of the game, all regions are scored to find the final total and winner.

  LeonardoAlese 1

I love the single track scoring system. If I remember right, also cards playing sticks to the same principle: if US plays a USSR card for action points, then USSR still gets to activate the effect on the card. I can only imagine how much time it took to balance such a mechanic.

Jhonyb 2

The most original score system I saw was Rajas of Ganges.
Where you have 2 points tracks and when they intersect triggers the game end. Also the points it’s the difference after that intersection

Kaflagemeir 5

Arboretum has a devilishly difficult scoring system of set collection in your tableau of trees you have built and making paths, but your ability to score a type of tree is strictly dependent on having the highest total of that type of tree in your hand. So, what do you keep? What do you play? What cards from other people's sets do you hold on to so they can't score theirs? Lots of tough choices in this game.

bgg-uglywalrus 3

Honestly, Arboretum's scoring is such a genius piece of design. I think other games that try this mechanism try to be too nice.