by marqzen
WhereAreTheBlackDice wrote:
As a compromise between completely open or close objectives, you could also say that any Objective Cards in excess of two Objective cards (say) must be revealed which stops people from stockpiling them in secret but also keeps a certain level of secrecy in the game.
This could also act as a bit of a leveller as people who are amassing more objectives are probably likely to be in better position. If you have more than 2 objectives amassed then other players are now able to strategically play to try to prevent you from attaining those extra objectives (which in turn affects how you strategically play in trying to fulfil your objectives).
This gives some more strategic options/decisions for play (which objective to keep hidden or revealed).
Robert.
This could also act as a bit of a leveller as people who are amassing more objectives are probably likely to be in better position. If you have more than 2 objectives amassed then other players are now able to strategically play to try to prevent you from attaining those extra objectives (which in turn affects how you strategically play in trying to fulfil your objectives).
This gives some more strategic options/decisions for play (which objective to keep hidden or revealed).
Robert.
You could. However I would suggest trying it as is to see if it's a problem :)
Keep in mind that the game has a lot of information and things to think about. If you ALSO have to pay attention to open objectives of the other players, there is a very real chance that your head might explode. Messy. :zombie:
So through many years of design process I have tried strike the perfect balance between open/close, information and making it so different things get introduced at different times (which is why you dont start out having a wonder you can build and dont have to worry about that until you buy "Engineering" etc). What you suggest might be cool, but it makes the game less accesbile, harder to teach, without indisputably making it a better game.
:cool: