Fun game but scoring is weird

[frogstar_A]

I'm enjoying this new game, but the scoring seems odd as it produces very low scores close to zero all the time.

For example:
Game 1 Alice wins, Bob has 3 spaces left. Alice scores +2, Bob scores -3
Game 2 Bob wins, Alice has 2 spaces left. Alice scores -2, Bob scores +2
Match result: Alice wins by 0 to -1

It would be mathematically the same but much easier to say "you score 1 point for each clover covered, plus a bonus 2 if you win."

For example:
Game 1 Alice wins by covering all 16 spaces, Bob has 3 spaces left ie he covered 13. Alice scores 18, Bob scores 13
Game 2 Bob wins, Alice has 2 spaces left. Alice scores 14, Bob scores 18
Match result: Alice wins by 32 points to 31

Still a 1 point victory but now the scores are a bit easier to process?

[Giordano Bruno 1974]

I know what you mean. You can win with a negative score. It doesn't feel like a winning score.

[Cappie]

It would be mathematically the same but much easier to say "you score 1 point for each clover covered, plus a bonus 2 if you win."

I disagree that is any easier.

I also do not get why it is odd to have low scores or even negative winning scores.

[Giordano Bruno 1974]

It would be mathematically the same but much easier to say "you score 1 point for each clover covered, plus a bonus 2 if you win."

I disagree that is any easier.

I also do not get why it is odd to have low scores or even negative winning scores.

I started with 0. Now I have -1. But apparently I did well. Not odd?

It's strange but it works and that's the game as published.

[frogstar_A]

It would be mathematically the same but much easier to say "you score 1 point for each clover covered, plus a bonus 2 if you win."

I also do not get why it is odd to have low scores or even negative winning scores.

Are there ANY other board games where the winner can have a negative score?!

Certainly not many, and certainly winning 36 to 32 feels more natural to most people than -1 to -5

Maybe not to you....but surely you can appreciate most people would find that unusual...?

[aesche]

It‘s totally meaningless whether it‘s the one way or the other.

[nisfornormal]

how would your method work for 3 or 4 players games?

[frogstar_A]

how would your method work for 3 or 4 players games?

Well I just imagined the same : 1 point for every clover you play, plus 2 extra if you're the first player to finish?

[Cappie]

Are there ANY other board games where the winner can have a negative score?!

Certainly not many, and certainly winning 36 to 32 feels more natural to most people than -1 to -5

Maybe not to you....but surely you can appreciate most people would find that unusual...?

Is there ANY other board game where you have to place clovers with numbers on it on a field of grass? I don't think stating that no other game has it is a great argument.

I do agree that some people might find it somewhat unusual, but i don't see why anyone would start a discussion about it. There are a lot of strange things in games. For me this is not even in the top 25.

[Cappie]

I started with 0. Now I have -1. But apparently I did well. Not odd?

It's strange but it works and that's the game as published.

If the other player(s) have -2 you did well. Not odd.

It still is easier to count all the clovers not placed (which most of the time will be 1 or 2, but sometimes a bit more) then counting all the clovers placed. Especially when you only have 12-13 played.