First Turn Advantage

[DracoNitez]

There are games where going first grant you a significant advantage (52%+ winrate for going first) such as Through the Ages, 7 Wonders Duel and Chess.

Then there are others which try to mitigate first turn advantage (not always successful) by balancing around it, such as Tzolk'in, Tokaido and Hearthstone.

Where do you think Azul sit on this spectrum? Do you feel that going first in the first round grants a sizable advantage?

[pjt33]

Then there are others which try to mitigate first turn advantage (not always successful) by balancing around it, such as Tzolk'in, Tokaido and Hearthstone.

Tokaido? Is there some mechanic I'm unaware of?

[Elarius8]

I think going first often gives an advantage. You get to pick the tiles you want first. If there are three in a factory, you can get them. If you want a color there is only one of, you can get it.

[Zero_Sum]

I agree there is a definite advantage - though you don't always know how much of an advantage it is (whether there is something in a factory that you want and is likely to be taken before you - such as three). But I think the cost (-1 to -3 points after all counted) makes up for it. The game gives every other player an opportunity to take the first player token before the current first player has that choice - though the opportunity get better by feeding the middle each player who choose a factory instead. It is a nice balance.

[Dzman971]

Bumping this because I was thinking through some of this mechanic...

In the 2nd through 5th rounds, there's a cost to going first (the -1 tile, which often becomes -2 or -3 if you have a lot of floor tiles). In the first round, there's no such cost. And in two player games, there's an even bigger benefit in that if both people fight over going first in the next round (ie, take from the center at first opportunity...frequently happens in games between highly ranked players), the first player can (typically) go first in the 1st/3rd/5th rounds.

Going first in the later / last round (often the 5th round) is a big advantage, so getting set up on the 1/3/5 rhythm is massive. It feels like it should be worth a few negative points to balance (or + a few points for your opponent).

I was also thinking it'd be interesting to "bid" for going first in the first round. The randomly chosen first player can bid -1 or pass and let the other go first. Then the second player can bid -2 or pass and let the first player go. This would go back and forth until someone passes and the other gets to go first, but pay the points cost. I could see it going as high as 4-5 pts in a game between people who know what they're doing.

[chiba1i]

If you start early, you are more likely to take the last plate, so I think it is advantageous. In a two-player game, the number of plates is 5, an odd number. This allows you to take the tile from the last plate, assuming you both took the plate. That is, you can either increase your turn or push your turn.

I explain more in my video.

https://youtu.be/lHUWg1pcAhY
(include "English subtitles")

[cigma]

In the 2nd through 5th rounds, there's a cost to going first (the -1 tile, which often becomes -2 or -3 if you have a lot of floor tiles). In the first round, there's no such cost. And in two player games, there's an even bigger benefit in that if both people fight over going first in the next round (ie, take from the center at first opportunity...frequently happens in games between highly ranked players), the first player can (typically) go first in the 1st/3rd/5th rounds.
Going first in the later / last round (often the 5th round) is a big advantage, so getting set up on the 1/3/5 rhythm is massive.

I basically agree with the analysis of Dzman971, but I am not sure if the advantage is that "massive". But I am not such a competitive player, so I don't care that much about this advantage.

It feels like it should be worth a few negative points to balance (or + a few points for your opponent).
I was also thinking it'd be interesting to "bid" for going first in the first round. The randomly chosen first player can bid -1 or pass and let the other go first. Then the second player can bid -2 or pass and let the first player go. This would go back and forth until someone passes and the other gets to go first, but pay the points cost. I could see it going as high as 4-5 pts in a game between people who know what they're doing.

This could be an interesting variant, but BGA doesn't support house rules. So I thought about another solution for competitive players: What about a "best of" series of games equal to the number of players, where each of the players will be first player once? This won't change the rules in themselves and we have several games on BGA with a "best of" series (Cribbage and Lost cities come to my mind).

[nandblock]

It would be easy to answer this question empirically if you have the tech knowhow--just do an analysis of a large sample of games on BGA.

I don't think the issue is cut and dried. Good players will try to take advantage of an opponent's eagerness to take the first tile from the centre, by making the central pool unappealing and threatening to take a better batch of tiles if the opponent grabs the first player marker regardless.

Usually the only time I make a strong play for the first player marker is when I need a specific colour and anticipate a fight for it, especially on the last round.

[CaptainKong]

I think that it is an advantage but much more of an advantage in the later rounds when it often becomes essential to get some needed pieces in the last round. I frequently have games where I give up first move 3 or 4 rounds voluntarily to very good players and still win. I think first round has an advantage but after that first play is very situational. If you aske me how much go first in the first round is really is worth, I think 2 or 3 points.

[Earthboundia]

There are games where going first grant you a significant advantage (52%+ winrate for going first) such as Through the Ages, 7 Wonders Duel and Chess.

Then there are others which try to mitigate first turn advantage (not always successful) by balancing around it, such as Tzolk'in, Tokaido and Hearthstone.

Where do you think Azul sit on this spectrum? Do you feel that going first in the first round grants a sizable advantage?

From my experiences, the advantage is only as much as luck allows. If you go first but don't get anything like 3 of one tile pattern or you only see a handful of a particular colour and you need most of them, then your advantage is wasted. But if you get lucky then the advantage can be huge.