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.

It occurred to me that since tournaments have no interest for me and I play exclusively at home, that I ought to be less concerned about being 'up to date' and more concerned with using the rules set that is 'best' (whatever that may be or however that is measured), especially since the latest iteration is not necessarily an improvement upon the preceding rules. I freely admit having a fondness for 3rd/4th ed but that may well be due in part to coinciding with my return to wargaming after a hiatus. So with all that said, which is your favourite edition of 40K and why? If possible, please explain your reasoning. What is the best version to use for casual play and why?

My favorite would have to be 3rd., probably because it was what I started with.

A close second would be 4th.

I don't necessarily think that the rules had a huge impact on my edition preference, but mainly the gaming group I was with.

We had a great set of people, a few FLGS, and a GW within driving distance, and a gaming club at my school.

A bit too early.

I voted 6th, however I think elements of 5th were good - for instance Night Fighting isn't great now and Fleet has been nerfed, in my opinion.

So far, 3rd. While I started in 2nd edition, I was quite young didn't take it too seriously. While that's a good thing, it also meant I didn't play often and never had a really competant army.

3rd edition was when I seriously gave one army a try, and played the gak out of the game. My friend and I would play a couple of days a week, and generally 2-3 games each day, and had a blast every game.

Unfortunately, only one friend played at the time. At least now I can give a new edition a proper go - I quit just before 4th, and got back into the game about a year ago, so missed most of 5th. Now I have a couple of friends and my brother playing, so I can give 6th a good seeing to.

Can't really vote yet, as I haven't had a game of 6th yet... don't want to get myself too confused before my last 5th ed tournie next weekend.

5th has been my favourite so far, though, with 2nd running a close second. Given that 6th seems to be just a mash-up of those two, I'm expecting greatness.

4th is by far my least favourite, and was in fact the edition that saw me stop playing for several years (on account of it being a confusing mess, and not worth the hassle of spending 20 minutes before each game determining if my opponent and I were likely to be trying to play the same game...), only coming back when 5th showed up and seemed to be heading in the right direction.

So far, well, none of them really. There are bits I like from various editions, but none of the ones I've played (2nd-6th) have really felt superior to the others. I should play some kind of Frankenstein's monster edition, really.

RT, didn't play.

2nd, with the old overwatch rules, percentage FOC etc. was really clunky. Brilliant Codexes though. Codex ultramarines for example was about six times as thick as its 3rd ed succesor.

3rd ed was a major change, the major parts of which is still in 6th. Tons of supplementary rules and background. Worldwide campaigns. Most of the codexes (excluding the later ones like deamonhunters) were just pamphlets though.

Never played 4th.

5th was a rules improvement but fairly boring in other regards when compared to 3rd.

6th looks brilliant. I think the allies rules will make this a really colourful edition and the potential for supplementary rules looks really promising.

I want to say third but with great hopes for 6th.

I went with 2nd. There was just loads going on with the game then. It was too much for large games but as I always play small points values, it was ideal for me.

Wish they would bring back "Jones is acting strangely..." for Tyranids

Least favourite is 3rd. Far too simplistic IMHO.

6th has to be my favorit, finaly the game is fun again. And its also much more well balanced me thinks

Rules - 5th but I'd love bits from 2nd and 4th there.
Arwork - 6th, it's a little piece of art that book.

RT, I was too young to play that, before my time.

2nd was the edition I started with and it will always hold a very special place in my heart. It was that edition that my beloved Guard got their first Codex. When you could hold insanely powerfully weapons in the palm of your hand (o'how I miss you vortex grenades ). The days when every gun battle, every hand to hand combat was a role play game in its self... ah those were the days.

3rd I didn't get on with as all the fun and good stuff had been ripped from the games beating heart (slim lined they called it, dumbed down by others, raped by me). Its from here you can see the trend in the choppy army's overpowering shooty army's (which I always thought was stoopid in a western sci-fi game).

4th I missed as I sort of went MIA from the 40k scene.

5th, I was like "hmmmm....more of the same..." but then I played my Guard and I was like "...WOW! We're good again..." Yes there are bits that I didn't like but it was a vast improvement over the last edition I played, 3rd.

6th, only having played 2 games in 6th (and being beaten horribly in both games) I quite like it. Granted my Guard tanks have taken a hit with these stoopid hull points (oh and who thought that the most reliable, most resilient and most recognisable tank in the 40k-verse have just 3 HP? I bet that was Matt fracking Ward just because his beloved SM's couldn't have it ). But from reading my just bought, still has that new smell, over bloated rule/advertising book (,I mean come on they could have just made a core rules book and saved on trees, it would have been nice to have that option for say £20). I'm impressed. You have some of the good stuff from 2nd and alot of the balance of 5th (before you rant 5th if you think about it rules wise wasn't that bad) plus some new stuff (like fortifications and flyers).
But saying all that I voted for 2nd

I'm only familiar with 5th edition, as that was when I started playing and I haven't bought the 6th edition rulebook yet. However, in terms of lore, I think 3rd edition was the best. I am probably in a minority here, but I like unrelenting grimdarkness.

4th. And I play guard.

Though I think that it has more to do with the codex that was out for guard then than the actual rule book.

A close second is 6th

4th by far and yes I used transports that were not Eldar or not skimmers.

I totally hated 5th. I felt they took a lot of choices away from the player and the game became very point and click. 4+ cover everywhere, run, fearless wounds, and no area terrain destroyed most of my armies. Add to it the abomination that is the Chaos codex and it was just no fun at all.

6th ed could be fun, but I haven't played a single game of it yet. I however, do not look forward to playing against Necrons until some FAQ updating for older codexs actually happen.