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.

Put simply, what's your favorite edition of 40k and why?

I love the inevitable forward progression of 40k. I like that the rules get better with each passing edition. 6th edition is, in my opinion, the best so far. I started in 3rd edition, if it matters.

I started playing in 5th, and while there are a number of things I dislike about the 6th edition ruleset, they're a definite improvement form 5th.

Started in 3rd, skipped 4th (by accident), played 5th and I'm sort of familiar with 2nd on a basic level thanks to some of the old books I've seen.

In short 6th is my preferred because it goes back to the more narrative based game and for the most part I enjoy playing it a lot.

The times I don't enjoy it has had more to do with players than the game.

I swear we had this thread a month ago. I started in 5th and between the two it's definitely my favourite. 6th didn't actually improve anything for me, and slowed the game down a whole lot with warlord tables, mysterious terrain, rolling for psyker powers and all that other crap. I do prefer 6th edition codex design, they appear to be far better in terms of internal balance. As a ruleset though, 5th was superior to 6th for me.

That's interesting to hear the people who said they played 3rd edition but still like 6th more, everyone I talked with in person that played 3rd said 3rd was their favorite. I have got to say some of my most memorable moments have been in 4th edition, tieing a game when my last anti vehicle missile launcher rolled double 6's against a necron monolith to glance and then cause it to explode was amazing. I have to say though I like the over all chemistry with 6th but I can't stand the damn wording issues.

I have only played 6th and 5th, and I would have to say my favorite is 5th because it isn't 6th.

I still greatly miss my 2nd, but 6th is the best I've seen since those lost days of yore.

I played only in 5th and 6th . I liked 5th better , my army was good and I have fun playing it , the whole edition which was years after my codex came out . On the other hand as soon as 6th hit , my army took it hard first with necrons , then with the helldrake . After that it didn't realy matter , as it is impossible to build an army that works against demons, tau , eldar and all other armies with the stuff I own . I also dislike the new scoring rules , not being able to score in transport or take two objectives with 1 unit , more or less killed the only two viable options to take and hold objectives without using ally.

Makumba wrote:
not being able to score in transport or take two objectives with 1 unit

I personally consider this one of the best changes, opponents parking nearly indestructible tanks on objectives with a few dudes inside was the worst in 5th. It was the edition of razorback spam and parking lots.

Played all editions until about 6 months ago, when some of us decided to go back to 2nd as the standard game.

6th is far from perfect but it is still my fav, melee weapons with profiles is great.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

Makumba wrote:
not being able to score in transport or take two objectives with 1 unit

I personally consider this one of the best changes, opponents parking nearly indestructible tanks on objectives with a few dudes inside was the worst in 5th. It was the edition of razorback spam and parking lots.

Well I would agree with you , if transports didn't so fast in this edition , at least as far as my army goes . Maybe if I had night scyths or wave serpents as transport , I would have a different view on that. My troops die to a slight breeze outside of their transport , both from melee and shoting and when my opponent knows that around turn 4 he just has to clean some GEQ to take an objective or make it non scoring for me , it makes the game rather un fun.

I miss some of the rules from 4th, for example roads had better rules, yet overall 6ths is the eaisest to play, although the game did slow down the narrative got better.

I voted 3rd, simply because that's the system I had the most games with, and truthfully, the most fun. Granted, that could have been because I was a lot younger and went at the hobby with much greater enthusiasm and naivety. I started with 2nd edition, and the transition to 3rd made everything so much easier.

I do like 6th though, it has it's flaws, but don't they all?

Started with 3rd then went to 4th skipped 5th and landed on 6th. I like a lot of things about 6th but there are a few things that I hate, random charge distance and random psychic powers. I like vehicle hullpoints but they could do with some improvements, over a good edition

6th would be my favorite if they would have handled the introduction of flyers better at the beginning.

Since that was handled so poorly, my vote is for 4th Edition.

I started with third. It was fun. 4th was a massive improvement. I think it brought in a lot of tactical choices and removed some of the more silly stuff from third. Then fifth took everything that was tactical away and made the game streamlined. In some ways that was good, it did make the game easier to play, but in others it went too far (like not being able to turn off your powerfists). And IMO, 6th edition just rather sucks. They over nerfed HTH (my favorite part), the way allies are handled is a complete joke and IMO game breaking. I too am one of those people who does not think random = fun. Nor does random = balance.

So after all of that, 4th edition was probably my favorite.

I played alot of 2nd and took a looooong break. I started playing again in May. I played Eldar then and now. So second tried to be a war simulation game of sorts. Charts for everything. Took 4 hours to play a game with 30% of the models. It was so annoying after playing for 3 years I sold my army and walked away. 6th is awesome in comparison. I can play a 1750 game in under 2 hours and enjoy myself. I like almost all of 6th edition rules with the exception of random charge ranges. Overall I dig it.
I don't get the GW/6th hate at all. Its a good version. Most people I know think its the best edition. The ones who don't are the ones who remember some other editions glory days. I'd bet my left foot they bitched about how terrible that edition was at the time. Its a fun edition of the game. Sure a few armies are OP but that HAS ALWAYS been the case. It cannot be helped. I dig this edition. Its fun I get to play with alot of models and it doesn't take FOREVER to play a game.
I'm 37 and remember when it was cheap to play this game. Now it isn't cheap but its FUN. I'll take that trade off.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

Makumba wrote:
not being able to score in transport or take two objectives with 1 unit

I personally consider this one of the best changes, opponents parking nearly indestructible tanks on objectives with a few dudes inside was the worst in 5th. It was the edition of razorback spam and parking lots.

While I agree that logically a unit should be able to take an objective in a tank...I believe this needed to be sacrificed for the sake of gameplay and largely like the change.

I grew up on 5th but really only got used to the hobby and really started to take a look at the rulebook around 6th. At that point, I only really saw improvements, even if some of the improvements were weird ones in my view (buying Imperium fortifications for xenos armies) and the bad points I'd gotten used to quickly because of 6th being the edition where I played and understood most of the rules.

I prefer 6th - I have good memories of 4th edition, but that is just nostalgia. The previous editions all had things that annoyed the hell out of me. I feel as though 6th brought some character back to 40k and although I'm not fan of flyers, allies really opened up many fluffy options (which is great for the majority of players who just wanted rules to run their two favourite races in one list, ignore the minority who try to make broken combos).

I just wish someone would be done to boost walker survivability - units such as a dreadnoughts are so iconic, it is such a shame that they are not a staple.

 gossipmeng wrote:
I prefer 6th - I have good memories of 4th edition, but that is just nostalgia. The previous editions all had things that annoyed the hell out of me. I feel as though 6th brought some character back to 40k and although I'm not fan of flyers, allies really opened up many fluffy options (which is great for the majority of players who just wanted rules to run their two favourite races in one list, ignore the minority who try to make broken combos).

I just wish someone would be done to boost walker survivability - units such as a dreadnoughts are so iconic, it is such a shame that they are not a staple.

I had my fingers crossed for Codex Marines to give the Dread a 5+ invuln like War Walkers got.

It would have given them some balance.

As of right now, having played 4th-6th, I will say that I'm having the most fun with 6th. That's not to say that it is a flawless system, but for the most part, I'm enjoying my games, even against tough opponents and people who try to cheese it.

I don't really have one; all the editions have been three steps forward, 3 steps back.

 Maenus_Rajhana wrote:
I still greatly miss my 2nd, but 6th is the best I've seen since those lost days of yore.

I haven't played a ton of games under 6th Edition Rules, but it seems like it is at least inching back towards the greatness of 40K's best edition (2nd), while avoiding some of the balance and play-flow issues that the early days had.

I'd still take 2nd Edition though. While it wasn't perfect, the rules were far better suited to a sci-fi wargame than anything since then. If they'd kept 2nd's mechanics for movement, shooting, overwatch, etc, and worked in 3rd Edition's hand to hand and psychics, we'd have a much better game. Instead, 3rd Edition tried to be "Wargaming For Dummies", and focused on quick game resolution via giant melees, and artificially increasing the number of models you could play with by lowering the points. And 40K has never recovered, lol.

I played Rogue Trader, 2nd, 4th, 5th and 6th.

I think that the later editions are a huge improvement on the earlier ones. For the main rules, I'd say it's a tie between 5th and 6th edition. 5th was more elegant, but 6th has more character. The 6th edition codexes are the best so far. Even the 'failures' like Dark Angels and Chaos Marines are only a little dull in comparison with the other 6th ed. books. Only the old RT hardbacks (Ere We Go, Realms of Chaos) had such good background material.

If the miniature design over the last few years had been up to the standard of the books, then I'd be really poor.

6th.

5th was just such a pain with 4th ed Tau against 5th ed necrons. I never won a game in 5th.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Maenus_Rajhana wrote:
I still greatly miss my 2nd, but 6th is the best I've seen since those lost days of yore.

I haven't played a ton of games under 6th Edition Rules, but it seems like it is at least inching back towards the greatness of 40K's best edition (2nd), while avoiding some of the balance and play-flow issues that the early days had.

I'd still take 2nd Edition though. While it wasn't perfect, the rules were far better suited to a sci-fi wargame than anything since then. If they'd kept 2nd's mechanics for movement, shooting, overwatch, etc, and worked in 3rd Edition's hand to hand and psychics, we'd have a much better game. Instead, 3rd Edition tried to be "Wargaming For Dummies", and focused on quick game resolution via giant melees, and artificially increasing the number of models you could play with by lowering the points. And 40K has never recovered, lol.

I agree with you so much!

The part in bold I have been saying since 1999. 2ed had some great gameplay mechanics but HTH and the psychic phase needed a major revision. I really didn't think GW really needed to do such a huge change with 3rd. With that said 6ed has been the best edition since 2ed for sure.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Maenus_Rajhana wrote:
I still greatly miss my 2nd, but 6th is the best I've seen since those lost days of yore.

I haven't played a ton of games under 6th Edition Rules, but it seems like it is at least inching back towards the greatness of 40K's best edition (2nd), while avoiding some of the balance and play-flow issues that the early days had.

I'd still take 2nd Edition though. While it wasn't perfect, the rules were far better suited to a sci-fi wargame than anything since then. If they'd kept 2nd's mechanics for movement, shooting, overwatch, etc, and worked in 3rd Edition's hand to hand and psychics, we'd have a much better game. Instead, 3rd Edition tried to be "Wargaming For Dummies", and focused on quick game resolution via giant melees, and artificially increasing the number of models you could play with by lowering the points. And 40K has never recovered, lol.

The only thing great about 2nd was the amount of fighting and model throwing it generated. By far the worst of all the editions.