A major event happens, something critical to the story and the main conflict, but then some years pass before the main conflict actually occurs. So it's not just backstory, but more like the inciting incident of the inciting incident because, without it, the story events wouldn't happen. Which is worse: showing the event in real time and then skipping years forward in time, or starting at the main conflict and using flashbacks? Does it depend on how much information there is to convey about the event? On how many scenes the original event would take? On how much time would be skipped? On which part is going to hook readers more? On how many flashbacks it would take? On the POV? On the genre? I would love to know what peoples' opinions on this are.