Different Decks For Different Player Counts of Twin Suns Games
Is it wrong that I've already categorized some leaders into 3-player, 4-player, 5+ player? I'll only play them in the correct player count. Darth Revan for 3 player only, Kylo Ren I will never play again in a 5+ game. Iden Verso on the other hand only gets better as the player count increases. Those are some of the most obvious examples, but you get the idea.
There are probably some leaders that scale from 2+ players that are probably trash in premiere and for each player count it increases in value to a point that it's finally worth playing. And I suppose the reverse could also be true. Is there value in creating such a scale and then cataloguing the leaders on this scale to show their relative worth across the various formats? Well, Twin Suns vs Other since all other formats currently are 2 player.
I'm interested in the data so I'm going to define this sliding scale as Gregarious Scale (GS). A low GS value (or zero) means the leader works best solo (Premiere) whereas a high GS value (1.0 max) indicates the leader works better as you add more players. 0.5 will be where 4 players is ideal.
Another way of looking at it, is that a 0.1 GS leader is Premiere biased and a 1.0 GS leader is Twin Suns biased towards large player counts. A 4 player game is roughly 0.5 and a 3-player game is 0.3. This is all handwavy with no math to back it up. I'm spitballing. But it does sound good on paper right?
Using this scale I would place Darth Revan at 0.2 and Kylo Ren at 0.4. Iden Verso would be a 1.0. I threw some other leaders on the graphic without too much research to provide better context. Does any of this help with choosing leaders to pair together? Does creating a curated list of GS for leaders seem helpful? I'm including a link to the sheet where I'm collecting this data if anyone else is interested.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PQCArsE3TVI6IKJczxrEHieibq7_sfBpuJzjWTMdUII/edit?usp=sharing

