Best 40K Edition and why?

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.

**Lanrak**

ALL editions of 40k are over complicated.2nd edition had more 'character' and tactical depth than later editions.

However, games companies have managed to develop much better rules for all scales of games over the last 18 years or so.

Compared to other rule set ALL editions of 40k are awful , in terms of clarity brevity and intuitive functional game play.

**tneva82**

DarknessEternal wrote:
I don't understand the 2nd edition nostalgia. Well, I do; it's nostalgia.

That game was fundamentally terrible though. It was outrageously over-complicated and featured armies that consisted of one-man and his bullet sponges.

Apart from psykers whom? Even biggest nastiest guys have one pretty bad flaw that keeps them from killing much. They can only kill in CC those in BB. Good luck scything through 10 IG troopers. Short of break test failing that will take...10 close combat phase. BTW that's longer than game that has whopping 8 close combats assuming you get 1st turn and can 1st turn charge(ain't happening).

Good luck for your blood thirster one manning IG army. Yes he can bust tanks fast but army isn't tanks only. And even then it's 3 tanks as max pretty much.

(especially vs IG that's going to happen. If chaos player starts there's no tanks available so you CANNOT 1st turn charge any tank no matter what)

And 1st turn wipeouts? Happen lot more in 7th with all the ignore cover, D pie plates etc.

Even worst balance difference in 2nd edition wasn't as horrible as it's now. Good luck for low-tier armies vs wraithknights and scatlasers...

**DarknessEternal**

tneva82 wrote:
DarknessEternal wrote:
I don't understand the 2nd edition nostalgia. Well, I do; it's nostalgia.

That game was fundamentally terrible though. It was outrageously over-complicated and featured armies that consisted of one-man and his bullet sponges.

Apart from psykers whom?

Yes, those guys. It seems like you have it all worked out.

tneva82 wrote:

Even worst balance difference in 2nd edition wasn't as horrible as it's now. Good luck for low-tier armies vs wraithknights and scatlasers...

Who mentioned balance? I didn't, it didn't exist then, just like it doesn't exist now. I mentioned mechanics.

**Elbows**

In this thread...

People who are somehow angry because other people enjoy something they didn't (and obviously played with different players).

**Breng77**

Yup all that "you're having fun wrong" stuff that goes around on forums.

**adamsouza**

DarknessEternal wrote:
I don't understand the 2nd edition nostalgia. Well, I do; it's nostalgia.

That game was fundamentally terrible though. It was outrageously over-complicated and featured armies that consisted of one-man and his bullet sponges.

It was more skirmish level than massive army battle, and if you came from a RPG background it had the right amount of grit. The only thing about 2nd edition that was terribly clunky was the Hand to Hand rules.

Up until recently, 2nd edition was the last time we had Genestealer Cults and Adeptus Mechanicus lists. Oh, and let's not forget Squats fell into the warp after 2nd edition.
Genestealers used to be hardcore in 2nd edition, They've been crap ever since.

**JohnHwangDD**

This thread is kinda worthless without a poll.

For sheer playability, I'd go with 5E rules and 3E rulebook armies.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:
3rd edition was the most streamlined, but really had to be played with the Trial Assault Rules and Trial Vehicle Rules. However, it had the worst imbalance of codexes. That said, the missions were simple, the game plays intuitively, and while wound allocation wasn't really realistic (the owning player simply chose casualties), it was smooth and fair.

Fifth edition had probably the best overall ruleset. There was pretty consistent power creep among the codexes, wound allocation was really dumb, and vehicles were probably a touch overpowered. It centralized a lot of USRs, and the post 3rd edition universe was mature enough that for the most part, units and armies played like they should.

7th edition, for me, is the worst edition I've played (3rd-7th), because the game has become more complicated for no real gain in tactical depth or strategic choice. The amount of randomness in the game now is a bit bizarre, with random psychic powers, warlord traits, mysterious objectives, etc. That all being said, there are plenty of elements I like, such as hull points, overwatch, and the greater freedom to build armies. The psychic phase is a push for me, in that I like the resource allocation aspect, as its one of the few areas in the game where additional rules lead to interesting choices, but in practice psychic powers are either a pleasant bonus, or an engineered effort to secure one of the handful of mega powers.

The best aspects of 7th edition could easily be ported into 3rd or 5th edition, and the game would play faster, be less frustrating, and still allow for tactical choices.

I'm just gonna QFT this.

I would note that 4E is basically 3E + TAR + TVR + FAQ, and 5E is basically 4E + FAQ. The 3E wound allocation is the most sensible of all the editions I've played.

Agree on the 5E rules being the best and the 5E armies suffering from creep.

Agree on 7E being a messy disaster, with randomness for randomness' sake. Of all the 7E innovations, only Formations and Unbound are of any real interest to me.

**theHandofGork**

I've played every edition since 2nd. My preference is for 5th. I see 40K as having three "eras": RT & 2nd; 3rd - 5th; and then 6th - 7th. While I loved the late 80's punk aesthetic of early 40k, and had a lot of fun with 2nd, I think the 3rd - 5th era was 40k at its best. I'm not sure why 6th seemed like such a turning point to me, but it was the beginning of a steady decline until the present. I'm hoping 8th will reinvigorate my interest, but, if it doesn't, there are plenty of other games I enjoy.

**War Kitten**

I personally enjoyed 5th edition the most. Sure Vehicles were almost stupidly durable back then, but the Psychic phase didn't exist (and powers were a fair bit simpler), and my Guard had access to a fair bit more cool vehicles and characters

**Jayden63**

Stormonu wrote:

For those who are playing older editions do you allow units from newer editions (ex., Riptide or Centurions - not that I'd necessarily use them, but as obvious examples) into the older game, and if so, how do you handle the rules?

We play fourth edition and allow all fifth edition.codecs to be used. But all have been hit with the red ink of house rules. For example.elder holofield now only allow a 5+ inv save instead of making you roll two dice and taking the lowest. Psy-ammo of all kinds has had it's cost increased by 10 points across the board in the GK codecs. Grey hunters cost +1 points each and have to buy their second special weapon. Bloodclaws, however cost -1 points. Nobody really complains as we all know what really was the broken gak i n each codec, after all, these have now been playtested for years.

As for new stuff 6th edition or later, anything considered a apoc level before 6th ed dropped is right out. SD Weapons gone. New units each get a look over and points, foc slot, etc. Get adjusted as necessary. Again nothing new here, we know where the cheddar is. All flyers get busted down to fast skimmers, that can't be assaulted except by jump/jet infantry.

**Jancoran**

5th Edition was my favorite. I started at the end of 3rd. By 5th it had become something pretty awesome.

**DarknessEternal**

adamsouza wrote:

Up until recently, 2nd edition was the last time we had Genestealer Cults and Adeptus Mechanicus lists.

Genestealer Cult had an army in 3rd edition. I have an actual copy of the Citadel Journal right here.

**Xathrodox86**

I really liked 7th edition, until they've made it a "formations only, casuals go home" game. Formations aside, it still has the best balance. I think.

**AegisGrimm**

2nd edition is hard to compare with modern editions, as it approached things quite differently.

As for modern editions, it sure was fun when there were less than 25 USR's on 3 pages of the rulebook. I would never try to push the mess that is 7th edition on a new player.

4th/5th editions were by far the best ones for larger battles, and they also didn't have the rules spread piecemeal across so many different formats like now.

**JohnHwangDD**

AegisGrimm wrote:
2nd edition is hard to compare with modern editions, as it approached things quite differently.

True, but the overall complexity, randomness, and fiddliness is essentially similar to 7E.

Or rather, the overall compexity, randomness and fiddliness of 7E has regressed back to the mess we had in 2E.

**Vaktathi**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
AegisGrimm wrote:
2nd edition is hard to compare with modern editions, as it approached things quite differently.

True, but the overall complexity, randomness, and fiddliness is essentially similar to 7E.

Or rather, the overall compexity, randomness and fiddliness of 7E has regressed back to the mess we had in 2E.

In a lot of ways even surpassed it. Stuff like vehicles and CC aren't as complex, but the number of special rules, random tables, and especially army construction, is insane. 2E is starting to look relatively simple by comparison

**JohnHwangDD**

How about just playing a game. Holy crap. We were playing a game of 7E, and the whole process of just setting up to play starts to become painful. 7E is becoming something of a chore to play.

7E CC not complex? random charges? challenges? the whole initiative pile-in and attack stuff? plus casualty removal?

**Vaktathi**

You raise good points...man 7E is just...awful.

**AegisGrimm**

My idea was to try some throwback games of 2e, but with super low (250-500) points, no squad cohesion, and just select a force made from individual fighter purchases that would make a fun skirmish force (so 30pts for a single Space Marine, etc) Try to get that intimate Necromunda feel, but with Orks, Eldar, and Space Marines, etc. Like a 2e version of the BoLS Kill Team.

Then the 2e melee combat is not much worse than Necromunda, because you are not trying to resolve much more than a couple of fighters at a time rather than whole squads, and things like even just a single terminator/mega-Armor/wraithguard in a warband feel suitably tough as the heavy weapon side of things would be quite light. (though psykers would probably get left totally out of such small conflicts, or only show up if there is one on each side of a fight to balance things.).

**adamsouza**

DarknessEternal wrote:
adamsouza wrote:

Up until recently, 2nd edition was the last time we had Genestealer Cults and Adeptus Mechanicus lists.

Genestealer Cult had an army in 3rd edition. I have an actual copy of the Citadel Journal right here.

The magazine with all the unofficial and fan made rules ?

Up until 7th edition, 2nd edition was the last time we had official Genestealer Cults and Adeptus Mechanicus lists.

**tneva82**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
AegisGrimm wrote:
2nd edition is hard to compare with modern editions, as it approached things quite differently.

True, but the overall complexity, randomness, and fiddliness is essentially similar to 7E.

Or rather, the overall compexity, randomness and fiddliness of 7E has regressed back to the mess we had in 2E.

Not really. There's just one house rule needed to make 2nd ed simple: Remove all persistent effects.

Simple and then 2nd ed is darn simple game as far as rule complexity goes.

**adamsouza**

7E is nowhere near as random as 2E was.

Remember Hop-Splat guns ? I had a single hop spat gun take out most of an enemy force than bounce back to my side of the board and kill the crew that launched it.

Sustained Fire dice ? Let roll dice to see how many dice you roll.

Now that I think of it, pretty much every piece of Ork artillery had a random factor to it.

**CrownAxe**

Traditio wrote:
[In fact, it annoys me that you can still do this with swarms.]

You can't do this with swarms. Swarm specifically has a rule that makes all wounds go to a wounded base first regardless of what is closest

**Matt.Kingsley**

CrownAxe wrote:
Traditio wrote:
[In fact, it annoys me that you can still do this with swarms.]

You can't do this with swarms. Swarm specifically has a rule that makes all wounds go to a wounded base first regardless of what is closest

Not quite, that only applies if multiple swarm bases could be considered the closest model. If the most wounded base isn't the closest it won't take the wounds first.

**Pouncey**

Hmm... I was a newb who never won a game during 3rd. I skipped most of 4th due to psychiatric issues. 5th was a lot of fun. 6th had Allies, which I liked since I always wanted to play two different armies, but I started to play less during it so I guess I didn't like it much. And 7th I've barely played at all, so I probably hate it too.

I never played during RT or 2nd.

So I guess my favorite is 5th?

**JohnHwangDD**

Ork stuff has been random for random's sake for about as long as I can remember, so it hardly counts. I look at things like Warp Spiders in 2E and 7E, and miss the simplicity of 3E.

Where 7E gets completely out of control is the sheer variety and keyword overload. Compare the number of entries in C:SM 2E vs 7E. How about the number of Power Weapons available? And don't forget that 7E adds GMCs and Superheavies directly into the game, along with Formations and Allies.

An 7E is almost unplayable from a RAW mechanics stanpoint, what with the whole "closest first" rule. That's some ridiculously ticky-tack gak there that pervades the entire fething game.

**MarsNZ**

Brennonjw wrote:
"The edition that looks best under my rose tinted goggles"

Really, it's the same argument as 'which zelda game is the best' or 'which saturday morning cartoon was the best'. It's far to based in nostalgia to fairly judge.

No, anyone can take off their goggles anytime and pick up the older editions to see if it really was as good as they remember.

I did it 18 months ago with 2nd ed. 20 years of tinting didn't change a thing.

Martel732 wrote:
I guess the 2nd ed nostalgia doesn't include games where you didn't even get a turn. I saw loyalist marine lists tabled one turn 1 by both Eldar and CSM. Great game.

Yeah, I stopped believing your imaginary anecdotes over a year ago

**adamsouza**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
... miss the simplicity of 3E.

Where 7E gets completely out of control is the sheer variety and keyword overload. Compare the number of entries in C:SM 2E vs 7E. How about the number of Power Weapons available? And don't forget that 7E adds GMCs and Superheavies directly into the game, along with Formations and Allies.

You see this is where the crutch of our disagreement is going to be.

I utterly hated how cut down 3E was. I appreciate that it did stream line 40K mechanics into something more suited for larger armies, but it did so at the cost of making everything generic. Psychic powers, Characters, Genestealer Cults, and Super Heavies were all things I used in 2nd edition and they all got punted in 3rd edition. 7E adding all the cool stuff back to the game is why I like it.

You can always agree not to use offical things you don't like in your games.
You can't use things that don't exist in offical rules, in anything other than homebrew games that you've convinced someone to let you use.

It is better to have an option and choose not to use it than to not have the option at all.

**Martel732**

MarsNZ wrote:
Brennonjw wrote:
"The edition that looks best under my rose tinted goggles"

Really, it's the same argument as 'which zelda game is the best' or 'which saturday morning cartoon was the best'. It's far to based in nostalgia to fairly judge.

No, anyone can take off their goggles anytime and pick up the older editions to see if it really was as good as they remember.

I did it 18 months ago with 2nd ed. 20 years of tinting didn't change a thing.

Martel732 wrote:
I guess the 2nd ed nostalgia doesn't include games where you didn't even get a turn. I saw loyalist marine lists tabled one turn 1 by both Eldar and CSM. Great game.

Yeah, I stopped believing your imaginary anecdotes over a year ago

Whatever. I was there. The weaponry available to CSM and Eldar was nuts. Give your marines a lot of gear in 2nd ed, and you have a tiny army with no additional defenses. Do the math.

**adamsouza**

If you take a really small army, and your enemy has lots of guns, and you're evidently playing with insufficient cover, you can get tabled turn 1. Unfortunately for your ancedote, this is possible in every edtion. Do the math.