Description
Victory Points (VPs) may be public or private information.
Discussion
The decision of whether to have the number of VPs each player has as public or private information can have a big impact on the play experience. It is particularly dependent on the method for ending the game and the overall amount of hidden and public information. If a game has a set number of turns, so that players know exactly when the end is coming, and most information is public, including VPs, it can lead to over-analysis during the last turn, as players try to optimize that last play. Alternatively, there can be situations where the last turn is meaningless because the leading player cannot be unseated (in which case consider
although certain types of games and players can support this. If the points are hidden or if players are not sure what other players can do, through hidden information, this tendency is alleviated. As an example, the 1999 game, Vinci, had players controlling civilizations that would rise and fall across Europe. Scores were open, and the number of
turns was fixed. Vinci was, in general, positively regarded; however, many reviewers found the final turn very unsatisfying. Players scored points at the end of their turn, and turns were deterministic. Players could calculate exactly how to maximize their score and often spent quite a bit of time doing so to squeeze out one more point. Years later, the game was reworked and re-released as Small World. The main structural change was the introduction of hidden scores and a minor random element. These changes were sufficient to alleviate the last turn issue and give the game a much lighter feel, turning it into one of the staples of the hobby gaming market. Conversely, having too many hidden bonus points at the end of the game can lead to an unsatisfying play experience. See VIC-06 for a full discussion.
Sample Games
Azul (Kiesling, 2017) Small World (Keyaerts, 2009) Suburbia (Alspach, 2012) Tigris & Euphrates (Knizia, 1997) Vinci (Keyaerts, 1999)
描述
胜利点数（VP）可以是公开或私人信息。
讨论
决定将每个玩家拥有的VP数量作为公开还是私人信息可能会对游戏体验产生重大影响。这特别取决于结束游戏的方法以及隐藏和公开信息的总体数量。如果游戏有设定的回合数，这样玩家确切知道何时结束，并且大多数信息是公开的，包括VP，那么由于玩家试图优化最后一次操作，这可能会导致最后一轮的过度分析。或者，可能会出现最后一轮毫无意义的情况，因为领先的玩家无法被撼动（在这种情况下考虑…此处原文可能有缺失，意指考虑提前结束或放弃抵抗）
尽管某些类型的游戏和玩家可以支持这一点。如果积分被隐藏，或者如果通过隐藏信息，玩家不确定其他玩家能做什么，这种倾向就会得到缓解。例如，1999年的游戏《Vinci》让玩家控制在欧洲兴衰的文明。分数是公开的，并且
回合数是固定的。《Vinci》总体上受到好评；然而，许多评论者发现最后一轮非常令人不满意。玩家在其回合结束时得分，并且回合是确定性的。玩家可以精确计算如何最大化他们的分数，并且经常花费大量时间来挤出多一分。多年后，这款游戏被重新制作并重新发布为《Small World》（小世界）。主要的结构变化是引入了隐藏分数和一个小的随机元素。这些变化足以缓解最后一轮的问题，并给游戏带来更轻松的感觉，使其成为业余游戏市场的主要产品之一。相反，在游戏结束时拥有太多隐藏的加分可能会导致不令人满意的游戏体验。有关完整讨论，请参阅VIC-06。
游戏范例
Azul (Kiesling, 2017) - 《花砖物语》 Small World (Keyaerts, 2009) - 《小世界》 Suburbia (Alspach, 2012) - 《Suburbia》 Tigris & Euphrates (Knizia, 1997) - 《底格里斯河与幼发拉底河》 Vinci (Keyaerts, 1999) - 《Vinci》