Line of Sight Scenario Guides

Thank you very much for this. This is very helpful information.

Glad you guys liked it! Hope you're ready for part 2!

Following yesterday's article on Scenario 1, I tackle Scenario 2: Standoff with my ideas about going first vs. second, and a bit of a general game plan for each.

www.loswarmachine.com/losgeneral/2017/9/26/sr-2017-scenario-guide-2-standoff

I'm really enjoying these! Thank you again!

That's a fantastic idea, when I get back to my computer at home I'll do that

In the meantime, here's the fourth Scenario guide of the set: Breakdown!

www.loswarmachine.com/losgeneral/2017/10/7/sr-2017-scenario-guide-4-breakdown

Interesting, yeah please give some thoughts on that when you have time, I am very intrigued. 


5 down, 1 to go! I'm actually going to have to think of topics again after this O.o Come check out my thoughts on Outlast!



www.loswarmachine.com/losgeneral/2017/10/9/sr-2017-scenario-guide-5-outlast

Ummm...we do not outside of Patreon at the moment. Looking to do a one time thing? I'll talk with the other guys about maybe implementing something on the website. 

LoS Jaden This latest summary and overview comes across a bit vaguely since you seem undecided about the strengths and weaknesses between first and second player. I can understand the reasons but it does weaken the piece a little because most of the factors you list to help decide whether to take first or second turn are overlapping and/or not mutually exclusive. For example, it's quite easy to recognise that your list is very well suited to this scenario but also notice that your opponents army is not. These fall on different sides of the justifications segment and there is no weighting to the different factors. I don't think I agree that having ambushing units in your is a good reason to want first turn. Knowing the opponent has ambush units is to my mind a good reason for going second though.

Since going second means getting the first opportunity to score it encourages the 1st player to either deploy their ambush units whatever the situation on turn 2 to ensure they have plenty of contesting models to secure the scenario or accept playing without those units until turn 3 or later to ensure they have something worthwhile to commit against. (If both players have ambush units it's also relevant because the first person to deploy their ambushers will likely have those units ambushed the following turn.)

My most recent experience with outlast pitted a Vindictus Exemplar interdiction force against Calaban minions played out of theme. I made the Protectorate player go first in spite of knowing he had a very fast army, being aware he had a very fast list that could mitigate terrain along with a timewalk feat that could blunt my own opportunities. According to your list, if given the choice my opponent would probably want first turn. My own (which featured a pair of wrastlers, spitter, brigands, Blythe & Bull and Lynus & Edrea plus some solos) only slightly favoured going second because I did need to mitigate any terrain issues (whereas he has true path).

Going second in this instance was the right call because it encouraged my opponent to feat top of 1. This still caused me a lot of problems because having a massive mob of weapon masters in my face that I can't attack directly kind of screws with most plans. However it meant that on turn 2 my opponent had to under-commit so that he would still score the zones and thus force me to move up or lose on scenario. On my turn 1 I ran a feralgeist up to his errants and started shooting it in the back with the spitter to get corrosion onto as many things as possible. (Targ is such a sweetie with the ironback spitter...) It managed to kill 4-5 models in the end which definitely counts as a success in my view. The ironback spitter was easily MVP of the game throwing out acidic AOEs all game long and corroding many, many exemplar. Because the Protectorate pushed up so aggressively though it meant that I wasn't able to contest his flag on turn 2 and he was able to score a point and then 3 more the following turn as he cleared out the models I had managed to get in to contest. However this sustained heavy commitment meant he was losing the attrition battle quite badly and his scenario advantage stalled before swinging back to me. The game ended with Calaban attaining a scenario win at the top of turn 7. 


Moving past this anecdote I think the main difference I've seen from my games is that, to my eyes, those scenarios with shallow and central scoring elements give the greatest advantage to the second player whereas those more spread-out and distantly placed scoring elements give the first player an advantage if they have a fast army. The Pit and Breakdown are the scenarios where this is most prevalent with Outlast and Recon being similar but not quite as obvious leaving Stand-off & Spread the net as the scenarios that more heavily favour a fast army taking first turn. 

The Pit and Breakdown have a quite shallow footprint for the scoring elements which condenses the line of battle along the centre-line of the table in a lot my games. Going first even with a very fast army doesn't always reward since models have to be left in the zones to score, so even if you can pass them top of one, the appropriate models have to left in the zones to actually threaten to score points at the end of the 2nd players second turn. Most of the time though the first player will have to weigh up how much they wish to commit to contest knowing that the 2nd player will almost certainly be able to threaten the contesting models and focus their efforts to score one or more points. This first exchange has usually meant the first points scored go to the second player and only a significant attrition swing or assassination has turned things around to see the 1st player win. 

I have also found that going first is much more of a disadvantage to jack and/or beast heavy lists unless they have a source of cheap, expendable contesting models (or incorporeal ones) that can commit to contesting/scoring because sacrificing a beast or jack just to contest will more than likely swing the attrition game very quickly. This makes infantry heavy and swarm style armies much more flexible and adaptable for going second or first. A large part of the strength of the Cryx meta at the moment appears to hinge on the fact that they can quite easily and strongly play into any of the scenarios as either 1st or 2nd player without concern.