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.

2nd edition was a horrible rules set from an adjudication point of view. And the balance was even worse. Raise your hand if you've lost to the genestealer cult army with 12 pulsa rokkits.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
You want lack of rules to be less fun? ok, I run Dark Angels, my rule is I win. Your rules? you don't get any, because I won. This is why games have rules, otherwise it's like pkaying checkers with a 5 year old.

Oh, you're right, because obviously there's no nuanced spectrum of in between, but only two polar opposites!

Thanks for clearing that up.

In my opinion the rules are overly complex without adding extra depth, tactics, or choice.
I also hate how they mix fluff with the actual rule. Why must they take a paragraph or two to explain everything? At least with 6th they started somewhat bolding the important parts.

I like all the rules, but then again I want to see a partial return to 2nd edition's rules.

I've only ever played 3rd and 6th edition so I can't speak to the strengths and weaknesses of the other editions. I gotta admit though, I love 6th. Yes there are certainly a lot of rules but I personally feel it adds a lot of depth to the game.

I think 4th edition was perfect.

5th edition brought some annoying new changes (like how every army could suddenly run now, making transports less mandatory to get people around), but was bearable.


6th edition just made things a lot more complex. Cant comment on older editions.

IF you have only played 40k rules, its possible you have become conditioned to over complicated rules writing.

I can not think of ANY version of the 40k rule set that was not over complicated to some degree.
But the rules bloat IS getting steadily worse...(When you compare it to actual game complexity.)

I know some people like a ton of special rules .But I like core rules that cover ALL the in game interaction.And then some special abilities that add flavor .

EG special abilities that ignore ONE condition, like Amphibious units ignore penalties for water feature terrain.
Special abilities that modify the dice score,like a poisoned weapon adds +2 to the damage roll vs organic units.
Special abilities that allow a limited dice re roll, like .a range finder allows misses that roll a natural 1 ,to be re re rolled.

40k battle games from 3rd to 6th ed are simply over complicated because the core rules are not appropriate for the intended game play.
(They were written for WHFB game play , NOT 40k game play!)



Having played games of 40k using other rule sets, I can not imagine going back to GWs version , unless I want to spend ages arguing about the rules , and cheating on the roll of a 4+.