Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I read so much on here about 'your going to give your oponent 1st blood if you take that unit' and about a dozen other similar statements.

First Blood matters nothing to me, if i get it i get it, very few games come down to 1 VP for games in my area

So whats the big deal why are so many people stuck on this first blood thing like its a game changer?

Because it very well can be, playing game modes with little or no other ways of scoring VPS like the Relic or Purge the alien or... W.E the 5th is, Makes it hard to get that drastic lead you need in points to safely confirm your win. First blood really matters in Scouring and big guns because if the first blood is FA (in Scouring) or HS (In big guns) thats 2 victory points for one kill.

Im not saying it is impossible to win without first blood just saying it helps give you that edge because Only one person can get it per game unlike line breaker/Warlord slain.

I run Orks and maybe win First Blood 25% of the time. In a Purge the Alien or objective game with minimal objectives that can really hurt. But if there are more than 3 objectives on the table I don't think it matters as much as long as you make up the points with line breaker.

In an objective based game, where both sides have equal objectives, First Blood can be used to force your opponants hand - If we both have two objectives, then I get first blood, I now win by default at the end of the game.
With a bit of luck, it'll be a transport, which fulfils the dual role of giving me first blood and making your army slower.
My opponant now HAS to come forwards to defeat me and defending is much easier than co-ordinating a coherent, well-supported attack.
All I have to worry about then is destroying the right units in order to prevent linebreaker.

I dislike it. All the games in my group usually are pretty close. It is to easy for some armies to get with no way to balance it out.

My only issue with first blood is that dedicated transports count for it. IMO I dont think dedicated transports should count for kill points or first blood. That however is easy to change with simple house rules or not using them. I however had to just adapt the way I played to try to protect them just a little more or conceed them in my head prior to the game.

Those are some very valid points folks. But it is my belief that first blood is more of a tie-breaker when the game is close. 1 point is the difference between a Draw and a win.

First blood is really important! Being able to force a Tau broadside team to run off the board first turn can make a huge difference in the outcome of a battle!

FB is just a slowed addition to the game. It benefits shooting armies and punishes armies with any sort of low-AV vehicle. It also gives a huge advantage to the player going first, as if the alpha strike off turn 1 wasn't enough. Against certain armies its impossible to get, and others its guaranteed. Not a balanced rule nor a positive addition to this game in any conceivable way.

I see all of your points, however I haven't had that many games where one point is critical, just a mix of good and bad luck I guess.

 namiel wrote:
My only issue with first blood is that dedicated transports count for it. IMO I dont think dedicated transports should count for kill points or first blood. That however is easy to change with simple house rules or not using them. I however had to just adapt the way I played to try to protect them just a little more or conceed them in my head prior to the game.

Imagine what it'd be like if vehicles didn't count (aside from all the complaining we'd be hearing about why Wave Serpents don't give up first blood ). Battlewagons, trukks, rhinos, and land raiders, are nosing up to the deployment line, knowing that doing so is no risk in terms of victory points. If you're intensely aggressive with your transport deployment, risking giving up a victory point is the price you pay for it.

First blood, slay the warlord, linebreaker. Normally worth 1-2 points based on your game/tournament.

Honestly, out of the games I've seen and tourneys I've run, first blood doesn't play as a factor into the overall game. While it can mean you end up 1-2 points behind your opponent, it doesn't mean you are out of the tournament.

I would rather (if I had that many) run 60 chosen in rhinos up the field toward my foe, just so I can get closer. First blood is meaningless if my giving it up furthers my overall goal.

 Portugal Jones wrote:

 namiel wrote:
My only issue with first blood is that dedicated transports count for it. IMO I dont think dedicated transports should count for kill points or first blood. That however is easy to change with simple house rules or not using them. I however had to just adapt the way I played to try to protect them just a little more or conceed them in my head prior to the game.

Imagine what it'd be like if vehicles didn't count (aside from all the complaining we'd be hearing about why Wave Serpents don't give up first blood ). Battlewagons, trukks, rhinos, and land raiders, are nosing up to the deployment line, knowing that doing so is no risk in terms of victory points. If you're intensely aggressive with your transport deployment, risking giving up a victory point is the price you pay for it.

Very true. I just adapted to it and accepted that my rhinos will give up fb and vp

 Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
I read so much on here about 'your going to give your oponent 1st blood if you take that unit' and about a dozen other similar statements.

First Blood matters nothing to me, if i get it i get it, very few games come down to 1 VP for games in my area

So whats the big deal why are so many people stuck on this first blood thing like its a game changer?

Because, especially in tournaments, it can be a decider, and it's absurdly easy to get and to give up, and really is a meaningless victory objective.

Last tourney I played in, I won two games because of first blood. Relic and emperors will. In the emperors will missions, getting first blood meant my opponent had to charge me, while I could play defensively. In the relic mission, my opponent had to get the relic, while I just had to keep him away from it, which is much easier.

First blood is often critical in the missions with few pts up for grabs.

First Blood.... I like it as it gives an easy tie breaker, no more draw-fests that were 5th edition missions. Also, with the increase in ultra objective grabbers ie Eldar Jetbikes, Necrons Warriors in Scythes, etc it allows gives some advantage to the player going first against an army that can secure objectives and linebreaker so easily. Giving up the potential of First Blood to go second makes the decision just a little harder for some to give up 1st turn. Still an easy decision, but just a little bit harder. It also incentivizes a player to tarket an easy kill just to nab it, just a little more risk reward to keep things interesting.


Though, it does hurt when someone gets a nasty first turn, I recently had a 1500 pt game where I nuked my opponents Warlord GUO for First Blood in a KP Primary mission. That was painful.

 Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
I see all of your points, however I haven't had that many games where one point is critical, just a mix of good and bad luck I guess.

Considering the avatar. Your probably playing playing eldar or eldar/tau right now ? with their very hard to kill transports , reserved jetbikes , Out of LoS spyders etc . I can imagine why you think it isn't important . But imagine you play guard . there is not 3 or 5 objectives and your eldar go first , grab 3 and and do first blood and can easily get slay the warlord , unlike me because your seers sit cozy in serpents .
Or when a marine army drops 2 pods turn one , kills 1-2 transports or 1-2 tanks and swarm objectives and now I have to kill 20 sternguard in cover , before I can even start to think about grabing objectives , and If I leave them be they will just charge me tar piting my whole army while some of them kill my command section to get slay the warlord too.

first blood is huge , only armies that can easily start with it and slay the warlord and have super mobility can say it ain't so important .

Actually the interesting thing about first blood is it is most important the more defensive your army is. The more aggressive your army the more likely it is for the game to go 9-0 or end in a tabling.

So it benefits defensive shooty armies whereas it becomes meaningless for very aggressive armies.

 Illumini wrote:
Relic and emperors will.

This is why first blood is so important. Winning the relic by actually capping the relic is so rare. Similarly, Emperor's Will, winning by primary objectives is practically impossible unless one player blows the other off the table.

First Blood matters as others have said. I think it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to make it so important in a turn based game. In particular, First Blood is a gimme in DFO matches, which is one major reason to dislike DFO games.

A solution to this might be an added one time only objective that is triggered at games end. I've often thought a point should bew given for the player with most scoring units within X inches of the objectives at games end. this would affect the meta in a few ways that are positive. More troops would be seen. Less gunlines would be sen 9though they'd still do well in somer cases) in favor of mobility which is by far and away one of the best improvements of 6E: a more mobile warfare is encouraged in general.

It also means that giving up first blood would not advantage the opponent as much as it does now so long as you are decisive and bold near games end.

There are OTHER end of game balancers you could erect for confounding the impotance of First Blood too.

Bottom line though: First Blood is really important. It allows an enemy to play for the tie..which becomes a win. I know because I do it to people.