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.

There's an old saw about a boat* gradually having parts replaced over the years, and how sooner or later it reaches a point where you have to stop and ask if it's still the same boat. After a number of years of getting steadily more fed up with 40K, I realised that this was where the game was at. I started playing in 2nd edition. I stuck with the game through 3rd and 4th (despite rather disliking the state of the game by the end of 4th edition), had a blast through 5th, and then along came 6th edition. This edition introduced some new stuff that I liked, some other stuff that I liked in theory but disliked in implementation, and other things that, for me, kind of ruined the game. It took a while for me to notice, but eventually I realised (halfway through a Combat Patrol tournament at Adepticon, in which I won the game entirely because of the terrain eating my opponent's army) that playing the game just wasn't fun any more. But I stuck around anyway. I wasn't playing, but I tried to keep up with the rules, in the hope that at some point the game would click back into line again, as had happened with 4th/5th edition.

It didn't. 7th edition took the things I disliked about 6th edition and made them worse. And then 8th edition came along, and I finally realised that this was no longer even remotely the same boat that I climbed aboard way back in 1994. It still had the same name on the prow, and it still had some of the same fittings here and there, but overall, design-wise, and performance-wise, it was a very different entity.

But here's the thing - unlike the metaphorical boat, the previous versions of the game still exist. And once I accepted that the current game was actually a different game that just happens to share the same name, and that it was extremely unlikely that it was going to turn back into a game that I was remotely interested in playing, I realised that instead of sitting here in this boat that I hate, complaining about seat trims, I could simply go back to a version of the boat that I liked.

And that's what I did. I had a chat to a mate who I used to play 2nd edition with, and it turned out he was interested in getting back into the game, and had a similar lack of interest in the current rules as well. I've spent what little free time I've had available for it over the last 6 months or so digging out all of my 2nd edition cards and templates, looking for resources online, retrofitting my armies back to 2nd edition status, with some modifications here and there... I'm working on a revised Necron army list, for example, incorporating Wargear cards like the other factions had, and adding in some units and options that were introduced in 3rd edition and later. And once we can actually start getting together and gaming again, that's what we'll be playing.

40K, but our way.


If you're unhappy with the current state of the game, why not give it a try? Think back to the last version of the game were you were actually having fun, and play that. The best part is that once you're no longer being driven by the release schedule, you're also free to modify the game to suit yourself. Think 4th edition was the best, but really hated the transport rules? Modify them. Borrow the vehicle rules from a different edition, or write your own.

Obviously, if you're reliant on pick-up games in a store for your gaming fix, this is complicated a bit, and may take some work. You might need to seek out some like-minded gamers and pre-arrange some games. You might need to find a different venue. Maybe there will be some local tournament or campaign organisers who can be talked into organising some retro events. And, of course, if you don't want to have to put any effort in, and just want a game that you can pick up and play, then this approach probably isn't going to be for you... but it might still be better than not playing at all, or playing but not enjoying it, because you hate the current rules.

Just some food for thought. A hobby is supposed to be fun. If you're not having fun, change it. Don't wait for someone else to fix it... who knows when (or if) that will happen?





(*or a broom, or an axe, or a hammer, or probably an array of other implements, take your pick)

I'm right there with you, friend.

Last year a friend and I started replaying Space Hulk and some 2nd edition. For a while before the whole COVID thing I went back and forth between 2nd and 8th.

2nd ed is great fun. I've got all the codexes, many of the White Dwarfs, and all the cards from the main and Dark Millenium box. Unfortunately I haven't been able to pick it back up since quarantine and he just had his second kid. But while there's not much gaming action, I've been slowly workng on terrain to improve the table for when we can get back to it.

I'd also be down for 3rd-4th Ed (or hybrid/house ruled), but finding people for it would be really tricky atm.

Aww, look at those marines running around in independent units and not bunching up for aura bonusses. How nice!

Nice terrain!

I actually think of all of the versions of 40K to date, 5th edition is the best written for functionality. It wasn't perfect - the vehicle rules needed some tweaking, likewise casualty removal for multi-wound units, and I preferred the 3rd edition area terrain rules. But overall it played well, and had reached (IMO) a good balance point between playability and level of detail.

But the most fun I ever had playing 40K was during 2nd edition, despite all of its flaws.

 insaniak wrote:
Nice terrain!

I actually think of all of the versions of 40K to date, 5th edition is the best written for functionality. It wasn't perfect - the vehicle rules needed some tweaking, likewise casualty removal for multi-wound units, and I preferred the 3rd edition area terrain rules. But overall it played well, and had reached (IMO) a good balance point between playability and level of detail.

But the most fun I ever had playing 40K was during 2nd edition, despite all of its flaws.

Thanks! There's more terrain on the way, including toothpick-spike plants

I think the ideal would be a hybridization of 3rd-4th-5th. I can't personally recall anything I liked in 5th over 3rd/4th, but there's probably something. Imo the 4th ed codexes were the high point of codex functionality. 5th ed started blanderizing, but it did some good things too, like giving Bolt Pistols and Frag+Krak to marines as standard equipment, (I think it gave Guardsmen Frag by default, too. Though I think the game played better prior to the inflation of special weapons (Sternguard, for example) that came with 5th. There's some mix in there which is ideal.

It'd be interesting to try those editions with modern split-fire. That would change things quite a bit too.

Nice Ship of Theseus analogy. Yup, the game is a slowly changing boat. Each new datasheet, each new edition, each new army, each new "ancillary" addition - each one is a new plank or sheet or winch. Each one pushed by GW as making the game better, but even if that were true it would still mean that it's no longer the same.

If you find previous editions speak more to you, then I hope you and your group find success in Oldhammer!

That said, I don't think I could. I hated 7th edition, but my favourite army is Genestealer Cult, and they just didn't exist before that. So 8th and 9th have been quite good to me.

 Yarium wrote:
Nice Ship of Theseus analogy. Yup, the game is a slowly changing boat. Each new datasheet, each new edition, each new army, each new "ancillary" addition - each one is a new plank or sheet or winch. Each one pushed by GW as making the game better, but even if that were true it would still mean that it's no longer the same.

If you find previous editions speak more to you, then I hope you and your group find success in Oldhammer!

That said, I don't think I could. I hated 7th edition, but my favourite army is Genestealer Cult, and they just didn't exist before that. So 8th and 9th have been quite good to me.

Hehehe. Genesstealer Cults existed in 2nd Ed. as part of the Tyranid book.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:
Nice Ship of Theseus analogy. Yup, the game is a slowly changing boat. Each new datasheet, each new edition, each new army, each new "ancillary" addition - each one is a new plank or sheet or winch. Each one pushed by GW as making the game better, but even if that were true it would still mean that it's no longer the same.

If you find previous editions speak more to you, then I hope you and your group find success in Oldhammer!

That said, I don't think I could. I hated 7th edition, but my favourite army is Genestealer Cult, and they just didn't exist before that. So 8th and 9th have been quite good to me.

Hehehe. Genesstealer Cults existed in 2nd Ed. as part of the Tyranid book.

Yes but did they have Atalan Ridgerunners?

(More awesome, they had Cult Limos)

But for real; they didn't have half the stuff they have now. I love a bunch of their new stuff. Plus, I started at the very start of 3rd, so I couldn't OldHammer that if I tried

 Yarium wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:
Nice Ship of Theseus analogy. Yup, the game is a slowly changing boat. Each new datasheet, each new edition, each new army, each new "ancillary" addition - each one is a new plank or sheet or winch. Each one pushed by GW as making the game better, but even if that were true it would still mean that it's no longer the same.

If you find previous editions speak more to you, then I hope you and your group find success in Oldhammer!

That said, I don't think I could. I hated 7th edition, but my favourite army is Genestealer Cult, and they just didn't exist before that. So 8th and 9th have been quite good to me.

Hehehe. Genesstealer Cults existed in 2nd Ed. as part of the Tyranid book.

Yes but did they have Atalan Ridgerunners?

(More awesome, they had Cult Limos)

But for real; they didn't have half the stuff they have now. I love a bunch of their new stuff. Plus, I started at the very start of 3rd, so I couldn't OldHammer that if I tried

That's true. And those biker models are super cool. Given the nature of 2nd Ed and the fact that you could only play now with a friendly crowd, I don't think you'd have an issue converting them over. (You could even use the rules for Squat Bikers).

Actually, you know what? I think I've got a Citadel Journal with the 3rd ed Genestealer Cult list. . .

Edit: Hmm, can't find it. Too bad. Anyways, it's a thing that exists, so there's a chance for the GSC for 3rd-5th if you ever felt the need.

Also worth pointing out that for those who don't find the current 40K rules to their taste, there are a lot of other rulesets out there these days, for which models can be converted. I worked up a bare-bones Space Marine army list for Maelstrom's Edge (for which you can download the core rules for free) a few years back, and I'm currently revising that to add in a bunch of extra stuff. But there are also various 'use whatever miniatures you have' rulesets out there now, many of them free.

While it's often the road of least resistance, you don't actually have to stick with a game if you don't enjoy it anymore.

 insaniak wrote:
Also worth pointing out that for those who don't find the current 40K rules to their taste, there are a lot of other rulesets out there these days, for which models can be converted. I worked up a bare-bones Space Marine army list for Maelstrom's Edge (for which you can download the core rules for free) a few years back, and I'm currently revising that to add in a bunch of extra stuff. But there are also various 'use whatever miniatures you have' rulesets out there now, many of them free.

While it's often the road of least resistance, you don't actually have to stick with a game if you don't enjoy it anymore.

But Can You Get A Game?

That's usually the crux of it. Like, I can play 2nd ed with one person I know. When the shops were open I could usually stroll in on 40K night and get a pick up game with a stranger. That's a biiig, friggin, deal.

And it's not like I won't enjoy the game either. I just don't like what GW is doing to the universe/lore/design-ecosystem.

 Insectum7 wrote:

But Can You Get A Game?

That's usually the crux of it. Like, I can play 2nd ed with one person I know. When the shops were open I could usually stroll in on 40K night and get a pick up game with a stranger. That's a biiig, friggin, deal.

And it's not like I won't enjoy the game either. I just don't like what GW is doing to the universe/lore/design-ecosystem.

That is where I am at now. While I would love to go back to an earlier edition... it would just be myself and one other opponent playing each other.

While I have moved away from 40k (sold all my armies), I have picked up enough neat Oldhammer 40k models to make a few Kill Teams, however their main purpose is to be used for other sci-fi skirmish systems my main opponent and I play.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:

That is where I am at now. While I would love to go back to an earlier edition... it would just be myself and one other opponent playing each other..

Yup, that's likely where I'll be for a while, as well, although I do have one or two other people I can potentially rope in later. But playing against one recurring opponent is, IMO, vastly preferable to playing a game I don't enjoy anymore just because it's easier to find opponents. YMMV, obviously.

 insaniak wrote:
It didn't. 7th edition took the things I disliked about 6th edition and made them worse.

At the risk of opening a can of worms, would you mind elaborating? I never played 6th or 7th (left early 5th, came back in 8th), but I've recently tried out Horus Heresy which I understand is based on 7th, and didn't find it as unpleasant as I'd been braced for. Just curious as to whether it's a YMMV thing or if HH is significantly different from 7th.

I haven't played Horus Heresy, but I understand that it has all the benefits of the edition with none of all the INSANITY of poor releases that made it horrible. It doesn't have:

- D-strength weapons
- Knights (in 7th they encouraged really bad game-play with how they interacted with the rules)
- 2+ FnP
- Invisibility psychic power

Take those things and the awful gameplay they encouraged, and I'm sure 7th edition would be fine.

Yup, the big issues for me were the inclusion of superheavies and D-weapons as a part of the standard game, and formations resulting in seemingly identical units within an army having different rules on the table. But beyond that, there were a lot of little mechanical things that bugged me. Mostly not big problems in isolation, but that all combined made for a less enjoyable experience overall.

Taking a break from the hobby or just playing a different edition is excellent advice!

I, for one, really enjoyed 8th and a good chunk of the lore around it, so much more than I did 6th and 7th, but I largely ignored anything that wasn't "core" - so Psychic Awakening, and vast swathes of my codex, I just didn't use. I liked the simpler experience of basic datasheets, and still do.

And with what seem to be a focus on more verbose "watertight" rules and more "balanced" missions with secondary objectives and all that, I'm not sure I'll be sitting down much for 9th. Feels a bit too complex and bloaty for my taste. I'll be quite content in 8th, and retrofitting "9th" units like Eradicators and Bladeguard into my standard Primaris army.

But yeah - I really do encourage people, if they're not enjoying the current game, to play older editions or gamemodes that they prefer, rather than complaining.

 insaniak wrote:
Think back to the last version of the game were you were actually having fun, and play that.

It wouldn't be overly complicated to convert newer units or rules for use with older editions, just tedious. In terms of points values in 2nd and 3rd you could tell they were working off of a formula based on statlines/weapon stats, at least for troops. For me there were always very distinct pros and cons with each edition, but I'd have to agree that 5th was the closest to polished 40k ever got. Close enough to invest the effort into adapting, anyway. You'd probably need nothing more than a little chloroform to get people to try it.

I'm right there with ya OP. I started with the hobby at the beginning of 2nd edition, took a break after college, came back briefly with 4th edition, took a long break, and recently came back at the beginning of 8th edition. I actually really liked 8th edition with just the core rules and Indexes, before it got bogged down with too many supplements and CP/stratagem shenanigans - it makes for a simple and fun beer and pretzels game. I also enjoy the new versions of Apocalypse (with standard 2000 point sized armies) and Kill Team.

However, I am finding 9th edition to be needlessly more complex, especially the matched play missions, objectives, and scoring, with GW's obvious intent of taking over the tournament scene. Like many others, I don't care for the relentless pushing of Space Marines the last year or so, at the expense of attention for other factions. With 20+ types of bolt weapons, faction abilities, subfaction abilities, warlord traits, doctrines, protocols, on top of the growing card game nonsense of strategems, the staggered release of army, unit, and weapon updates, coupled with the lack of games due to COVID, I'm at the point where I don't care about the new edition anymore.

I recently picked up a bunch of used rulebooks and codexes from older editions and found I like the 4th edition books the most, including rules, fluff, and art, with some 5th edition rules and codex tweaks thrown in. While I also had fun during 2nd edition, I prefer a less complex game these days and don't miss all of the cards, datafaxes, tables, and D&D dice necessary to play that game. So I think for the time being, I'm going to stick to playing at home (and teaching my sons eventually when they get a little older), 8th Index-only, 4th/5th edition, Apocalypse, and Kill Team. Once things return to normal I may try a few games of the current edition at the local game shop after all codex arms race has settled down a bit, but I'd much rather find some like-minded folks who enjoy earlier editions if possible.

One of the issues is deciding which edition to go back to. Each edition has some critical flaw that makes other people not want to go back to it, so the generality of the present edition keeps it more attractive.

I personally would go back to 5th edition, but you know, the whole deal with Wound Allocation.


Though really, I would say I was pretty happy with pre-SM2.0 8th edition. I could stay there, and it honestly felt like the best it had been in a long time. And then SM2.0 and supplements happened.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
One of the issues is deciding which edition to go back to. Each edition has some critical flaw that makes other people not want to go back to it, so the generality of the present edition keeps it more attractive.

I personally would go back to 5th edition, but you know, the whole deal with Wound Allocation.


Though really, I would say I was pretty happy with pre-SM2.0 8th edition. I could stay there, and it honestly felt like the best it had been in a long time. And then SM2.0 and supplements happened.

I agree about each edition having at least one critical flaw. Fortunately, many of those flaws can be fixed with a few simple house rules, including replacing the offending flaw with the rule(s) from an earlier or later edition (ex. I happen to much prefer 4th edition's wound allocation rules, but prefer 5th edition's rending rules).

I agree about the SM 2.0 supplements. The 8th SM 2.0 codex was actually not too bad by itself, but the supplements (as well as all the rules bloat from Vigilus and Psychic Awakening books IMO) really destroyed the solid game 8th had become.

 insaniak wrote:
Yup, the big issues for me were the inclusion of superheavies and D-weapons as a part of the standard game, and formations resulting in seemingly identical units within an army having different rules on the table. But beyond that, there were a lot of little mechanical things that bugged me. Mostly not big problems in isolation, but that all combined made for a less enjoyable experience overall.

I was ok with the theory of D weapons, after all, the Vortex Grenade and Wraithcannon were proto D weapons. Formations as an idea I thought were pretty cool. . . but they got bonkers.

Then the supplemental books, and the 2nd round of psychic powers was just out of this world insane. A power that lets you move whole pieces of terrain with models on them . . . some really bonkers stuff.

 Yarium wrote:
I haven't played Horus Heresy, but I understand that it has all the benefits of the edition with none of all the INSANITY of poor releases that made it horrible. It doesn't have:

- D-strength weapons
- Knights (in 7th they encouraged really bad game-play with how they interacted with the rules)
- 2+ FnP
- Invisibility psychic power

Take those things and the awful gameplay they encouraged, and I'm sure 7th edition would be fine.

That's really interesting. 2+ FNP and Invisibility sound like awful mechanics to deal with, and I can understand how they would sour people on the ruleset. My usual opponent is a Horus Heresy player through and through, with only tangential interest in 9th, and has expressed that he'd be open to me fielding my Tyranids within the Heresy ruleset. Since getting to play HH for myself, I've become more open to the idea- as a couple of topics have already discussed ad nauseam, it feels to me more like a traditional wargame, and I find has actually gone faster than 9th due to the lack of stratagems and far fewer rerolls. Most of all, it's 'late' enough that there's rules support for all the stuff I have, which wouldn't be the case if we played using 4th or 5th.

From what I can tell, there are Knights in HH; but I believe they're subject to a 25% points limit as with other LoWs, so can't comprise the entirety of an army.

I have to agree with the sentiment that 8th right before SM2.0 was pretty good. I felt that Bolter Discipline and points adjustments did a lot to bring Marines in line with other armies, before we really kicked off this death spiral of increasing lethality.

 Gnarlly wrote:

I agree about each edition having at least one critical flaw. Fortunately, many of those flaws can be fixed with a few simple house rules, including replacing the offending flaw with the rule(s) from an earlier or later edition (ex. I happen to much prefer 4th edition's wound allocation rules, but prefer 5th edition's rending rules).

Yup, the ability to patch rules flaws yourself without having to worry about how that patch may interact with future releases is one of the big bonuses of playing a previous edition.

And I would agree that inserting 4th edition's wound allocation into 5th edition is the way to go.

I started at the very end of 5th, only had one game in that Edition which felt pretty fiddly because of wound allocation. But I played quite a lot in 6th and even more in 7th and I can say, for me the rules have only gotten better since then and I consider the 6th / 7th Edition to be pretty aweful. 8th was a great refresh and even though I think 9th didn't have to be a new Edition and could have been done in a CA, for me it feels like the best Edition I witnessed so far. Whenever people bring up HH, I'm like, nah, it works despite 7th edition because Alan Bligh was great, but if they had moved to 8th the game wouldn't be in the dying state where it's today.
40K still needs Alternative activations or phases and once they introduce that it'll be the Edition I'll stick to.

The difficulty with trying to rewind is that you still need people to play with. I suspect that most of the people complaining endlessly on Dakka are people who dislike 9e but whose playgroup is happy with it and can't convince anyone to play anything else. The fixation on "GW needs to fix the current official rules" probably springs from dealing mostly with people who insist on playing only the current official rules.

Everyone at my flgs knows that anytime anyone wants to play RT/2ND I'm down. smaller games on big tables with flying rodent gak insane stuff going on will always appeal to me...unfortunately the minute I go on about vortex grenades/psyker powers moving around the table all game the younger guys all of the sudden no longer seem interested. well that and the rolling to see which chart you roll on....

Racerguy180 wrote:
unfortunately the minute I go on about vortex grenades/psyker powers moving around the table all game the younger guys all of the sudden no longer seem interested.

So... don't do that...?

I mean, it's definitely possible to build a 2nd edition army without taking Vortex Grenades. Also, Vortex Detonators are a thing.

but it's fun

How?

Sure, Vortex Grenades are awesome, but unless your 'fun' is 'having people refuse to play against you', they're not going to be particularly exciting if people simply refuse to play you as a result of you threatening to use them.

^True story. My buddy was all good for cheesing out his list until I Chaplain-jumping-off-bike-throwing-Vortex-Grenade-killing-Warphead-and-Blinding-half-the-army-with-his-Rosarius-save.* Then he stopped playing, lol.

*Combined with fusillade of Plasma Missiles with some expansions breaking his gunline and forcing models to move so they couldn't use their heavy weapons.

I was extra mean in 2nd ed.