Jacob's posts are ... not always as clear and consistent as they could be. Since this discussion of real-time scoring seems to be a hot topic, it might be worthwhile to examine exactly what was said in that post (my thoughts follow in brackets):
Jacob: "TM is not a memory game, and all trackable information is in theory open, so you could ask a player what events he/she has played, or how many VPs are on his/her cards."
[Makes sense. I typically do not think of games like Terraforming Mars as memory games.]
Jacob: "BUT such information is semi-hidden exactly to prevent AP and kingmaking, and players taking AP time to survey every card of every opponent should be called out."
[I am not sure I agree it is "semi-hidden". Very few face-down event cards have VPs, and the ones of much significance are big cards that are not difficult to remember who played. Additionally, as has been discussed, an experienced player can look at a tableau and fairly quickly come to a good estimate of a player's VPs without needing to look at the VP icon on each card. Either way - calculating the current score in a given situation is not an example of AP. Someone who has AP takes minutes trying to decide what to do. Someone trying to calculate the score knows exactly what he is trying to do- he is trying to calculate the score, since knowing the score is a highly relevant factor in games that ... keep score. I am not sure what Kingmaking has to do with this. If the Oceans are at 9, oxygen is at 14%, and temperature is at 6 degrees, am I really expected to perform the final heat raise with no clue whether I will win or lose the game by doing so? Why would I do that? If I call for a score tally at that point, it is neither AP nor kingmaking. It's trying to find out whether a specific move wins or loses the game for me, so I can decide whether to make that move or not.]
Jacob: Asking: "Didn't you play that card before? How many VPs was on it?" is a very reasonable question, as is "How many Pets/played events/space tags do you have now?".
But asking "How many VPs do you have?" is not, because it requires some time to answer.
[So, the main objection to calculating the score is that it takes time? When playing over-the-board, sure, it might take one minute. Which really is not much time, in my opinion, though opinions on that might vary
But, when playing a digital implementation, it takes no time at all. And when playing turn-based, any player can obviously do the calculation. Even in real-time games, the turn timer is sufficiently long to do the calculation. Hiding the real-time score likely gives an advantage to experienced players who can more easily calculate the real-time score than less experienced players. ]
Jacob: "TM is best when played intuition and judgement, not calculations."
[Seems to somewhat contradict the earlier statement on TM not being a memory game. I personally would argue that knowing which player will win if the game were to end right now is exactly a matter of calculation, or in the absence of a calculation, a matter of memory. Intuition and judgment comes into play when deciding which strategic line to pursue, when trying to figure out what strategic line an opponent is likely to take, when trying to gauge how many generations the game is likely to go, when deciding which awards to fund, etc. The moment someone performs the final Terraforming parameter, the game-end triggers, and after players finish taking their actions, a calculation need to be performed to determine the outcome of the game. Personally, I would find it rather odd if I asked a player, "Can I please have a quick count of your VPs, I'm trying to decide whether to end the game," and the player said, "Sorry, no, use your intuition." I understand that opinions vary on this.
]
Jacob: "For tournaments I guess there'd have to be guidelines for this though."
[In any game setting - Tournament, home game, online game, there is (or probably should be) an agreement before the game starts regarding this question. As long as everyone is on the same page, I see no problem. Issues are only likely to arise if people have different understandings of what is allowed and what is not allowed.]
Jacob: "Difficult subject. It works as long as players don't ask too many questions."
[Seems like an easy subject to me. Each group should decide whether it thinks knowing the score is a good idea, and then play accordingly. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer; it depends on the wishes of each gaming group. The second part of that sentence is very vague. Who defines "too many questions"? To me, asking, "Can I please have a count of your VPs" is one question, and therefore cannot possibly be "too many" questions. I understand opinions may vary on this.
]
Jacob: “All played cards are open information; everyone is entitled to know what has been played/done in the game, even cards that are face down or covered.”
[To me, that statement seems unequivocal. Though, earlier, he referred to played cards as "semi-hidden". Also worth noting - in the rulebook, in the one picture that shows the stacking of green cards, the cost, tag(s), AND the name of the card are shown. I realize that BGA shows only the cost and the tag(s), but that is likely to spare people on an iPhone or tablet the frustration of having the game information take up any more space than it already does. Sliding each stacked card down just a tiny bit, such that the name of the card is visible, makes a lot more sense to me, since, as Jacob explained, "all played cards re open information". And, if the names of the cards are visible, I and some other experienced players could very quickly calculate the VP with 100% accuracy. Even with only the cost and the tag(s), some of us could perform this calculation with close to 100% accuracy. There are a very small number of instances in which a card's cost and tag(s) are insufficient to know the VP value of the card. And in those rare instanced, memory would likely close the gap. I will remember whether my opponent played Nuclear Zone or Acquired Company. Business Contacts or Bribed Committee. ]
Jacob: “Even if I would say that you are not entitled to repeatedly go through all cards of an opponent to see and analyze hidden information, it is indeed open, especially at the end game scoring.”
[This statement requires scrutiny. He did
not say “you are not entitled to …” He posed a hypothetical. “
even if I would say…”. I will admit I am not exactly sure what the intent of this specific statement was. But I will add, there is a difference between “asking for a VP count” and “repeatedly going through all cards of an opponent.” Also – what “hidden information"? In the first part of the statement, he clearly says all played cards are open information. There only hidden information in TFM are the cards in a player’s hand and the cards a player has discarded to the discard pile.]
MY CONCLUSIONS:
1) Someone with a strong memory and/or knowledge of the deck would have an unintended advantage in an over the-board IRL game if players are not permitted to ask for a VP count at a crucial moment.
2) Digital implementations remove the "time-wasting" issue of real-time scoring.
3) All played cards are open information. The digital implementation adheres to this - even the face-down event cards are viewable. This is because it is not supposed to be a secret which events were played. They are "hidden" to avoid having the TAGS visible, so new players do not get confused about their tag count. Note, as I said, the events are not actually "hidden". Any player can click on the event cards pile of any player and expand them to grid or synthetic layout.
4) Most important: Here on BGA, it is permitted to play with real-time scoring, and it is permitted to play without it. Whichever any one player prefers, everyone should be respectful of other players' preferences, and no one should feel pressured or bullied into playing a specific way. There's enough of that poor behavior in other threads pertaining to Terraforming Mars. If someone wanted to play a game against me without real-time scoring, I would ask, "since we are playing turn-based and could just calculate the score anyway, wouldn't it be okay if we just enable the real-time scoring to save ourselves the trouble?"
