Cool. I agree that some level of "vagueness" in determining end-game VPs is good to keep people guessing towards the end-game. Again like most things, as long as it isn't overdone.
A good player normally tries to down-play the strength of their position until the end (so that the other players are more likely to go after other people). This obviously leads to a temptation to throw down as many objectives in the last couple of turns (assuming that the risk of losing a particular objective before then the end is gauged to be small).
Have you seen this much in playtesting? Is there a limit on the number of objectives which can be fulfilled in a round/turn?
A good player normally tries to down-play the strength of their position until the end (so that the other players are more likely to go after other people). This obviously leads to a temptation to throw down as many objectives in the last couple of turns (assuming that the risk of losing a particular objective before then the end is gauged to be small).
Have you seen this much in playtesting? Is there a limit on the number of objectives which can be fulfilled in a round/turn?