Got into a discussion online with a few players about the whole Red vs Blue Player aspect of Legion...
... and decided to write down my thoughts on the decision.
Red vs Blue... Player!
Thanks for writing that up, was s good read
Thanks for the kind words!
Always good to know that it might be helpful to someone other than me.
TLDR: Always pick to be Red Player!
But if you have time, this is a very good article explaining the reasons. I came to this assessment after the first few games of playing. Making your opponent deploy the first unit and letting you be the final player to make decisions regarding the 'obj cards' is just to good to pass up.
It will be interesting to see if it's worth it to shave off points just so you can be the Red Player.
That was a good read, very thoughtful approach. The only minor quibble from a pro for the blue player side is the tie breaker. If objective points are tied, if kills are tied, blue player wins. The odds of that actually happening seem small, but it is a pro.
juat a thought, if we see a lot of standing orders on turn 1 because people are out of range, does that also make an advantage for blue because the start with the round marker or a disadvantage? Or does it maybe matter based on side, Imperial Player maybe gets to launch some mortars at the top of round 1 possiblely surpressing untis to start the game.
anyways thanks for the write up, enjoyed it
@azavander you have a point about tie breakers, and maybe I should have included it... but like you said, it is so remote of a chance that I left it out due to my usual long winded-ness with the article as is! ?
As far as the round turner, I think that is another almost negligible advantage for the Red Player.
Because if everyone defaults to Standing Orders, sure you get to do the tie breaker roll on round 1... but if not much is happening anyway, who really cares? I mean that’s why you default to Standing Orders anyways right?
So that means that Red player gets the chance to roll 3 meaningful tie breaker rolls (turns 2, 4, & 6), to the Blue Players only 2 meaningful tie breaker rolls (rounds 3 & 5).
I’m confused about the ‘choosing which side of the board is theirs’ by the blue player. This comes before the battle conditions are chosen? But after the deployment of terrain. How can the blue player know which side of the board they are meant to be choosing from without the battle conditions yet being chosen?
@Kojib that’s kind of the rub... isn’t it?
They pick a side of the board, and then the Battle Cards are dealt facing the Blue Player... so when a deployment card is chosen they know which corner is theirs for Major Offensive, etc.
because the deployment card has the Blue Players corner deployment zone in their right hand side per the diagram.
Red vs Blue? Now that just sounds silly and stupid. It is obviously Blue vs Red.
But while initiative make make it or break it in x wing or armada i am still not entirely sure that is the case here. But i have seen a few cases where it does really help.
2 hours ago, Palomarus said:@Kojib that’s kind of the rub... isn’t it?
They pick a side of the board, and then the Battle Cards are dealt facing the Blue Player... so when a deployment card is chosen they know which corner is theirs for Major Offensive, etc.
because the deployment card has the Blue Players corner deployment zone in their right hand side per the diagram.
Completely agree. It's so odd that they did it like this.
@jbiondo it’s a bit odd... compared to how other games do it for sure.
But it makes the Battle Card elimination part of set up that much more interesting if you ask me.
And turns it into a sort of mini game in itself. With each player trying to position for advantage while avoiding what they see as traps for them.
Makes for a very unique Turn Zero! ?
Edited by Palomarus14 hours ago, Palomarus said:As far as the round turner, I think that is another almost negligible advantage for the Red Player.
Because if everyone defaults to Standing Orders, sure you get to do the tie breaker roll on round 1... but if not much is happening anyway, who really cares? I mean that’s why you default to Standing Orders anyways right?
So that means that Red player gets the chance to roll 3 meaningful tie breaker rolls (turns 2, 4, & 6), to the Blue Players only 2 meaningful tie breaker rolls (rounds 3 & 5).
This reads like you think having the tie breaker roll is some kind of (albeit negligible) advantage. It isn't. It is an exact 50/50 no matter who does the roll. There really is no such thing as a "meaningful" tie breaker roll because your odds of winning the roll is the same whether you are rolling the die or your opponent is.
14 hours ago, Palomarus said:Because if everyone defaults to Standing Orders, sure you get to do the tie breaker roll on round 1... but if not much is happening anyway, who really cares? I mean that’s why you default to Standing Orders anyways right?
That's not the only reason why people will be playing Standing Orders on turn 1. Since turn 1 is usually about getting into position, not about picking an objective and running or killing stuff it is beneficial to react to your opponent movements. So one might play SO to intentionally push for not having initiative - just give the order to the one unit that benefits most from moving last and wait out your opponent. In that case, the roll-off might actually matter. I believe that lists led by Leia will be using Standing Orders the least, as both of her spoiled command cards are actually really good on turn 1. Also, Standing Orders might be less popular with more units with Scout X popping out.
16 hours ago, azavander said:juat a thought, if we see a lot of standing orders on turn 1 because people are out of range, does that also make an advantage for blue because the start with the round marker or a disadvantage? Or does it maybe matter based on side, Imperial Player maybe gets to launch some mortars at the top of round 1 possiblely surpressing untis to start the game.
15 hours ago, Palomarus said:Because if everyone defaults to Standing Orders, sure you get to do the tie breaker roll on round 1... but if not much is happening anyway, who really cares? I mean that’s why you default to Standing Orders anyways right?
So that means that Red player gets the chance to roll 3 meaningful tie breaker rolls (turns 2, 4, & 6), to the Blue Players only 2 meaningful tie breaker rolls (rounds 3 & 5).
Command card ties are straight 50/50 odds, it doesn't matter who rolls them.
When it comes to red or blue it is hand down always red.
The red player is the only one who has the last word on the missions. Deployment zone and first deployment are not this important (first deployment is even bad). But being able to say (or to influence the most) what mission/deploy zone/condition is being used is way more important.
59 minutes ago, shivore said:This reads like you think having the tie breaker roll is some kind of (albeit negligible) advantage. It isn't. It is an exact 50/50 no matter who does the roll. There really is no such thing as a "meaningful" tie breaker roll because your odds of winning the roll is the same whether you are rolling the die or your opponent is.
But... I went through all that trouble to weight my “tie breaker” die in my favor... clearly that’s got to account for something, right? ?
But of course you are right! But I’ll be damned if my opponents don’t ALWAYS roll what they need to win the tie breakers.
It might just be a mental thing... but I would always rather roll the die when it matters. The math averages be damned!
In my games thus far, whoever rolls the tiebreaker loses the roll. We've gotten to aggressively "letting" our opponents have a chance to roll it.
Well written article, I was thinking red player would be advantageous for me and my choice