Edition Wars: 40k Edition

I started with 3e but 4e was far better and it was the best

worst lore: the earlier versions, though only in the way that there was very little. I started with 5th and a huge selling point to me was that there were already a bazillion different factions and subfactions with well fleshed out lore.

worst edition was 7th, it was even more unbalanced than 6th and the whole formation thing got out of hand. if I wanted to use some of the more unique ways to put together an army in 7th (for example by using admech and guard together in the gathering storm detachment) I had to bring four different codexes/campaign books plus faqs for those four plus rulebook plus faq for the rulebook. it was quite the opposite of being player friendly in any way.

that said, 40k is still the game I like to play and that's because of the actual minis. I literally like 90% of the whole gw range and regularly have to restrain myself from starting another army every other month. Needless to say, I have high hopes for 8th and from what I've seen so far, I probably won't be disappointed.

I did too until they threw the baby out with the bathwater.

8th ed isn't quite as bad for 40k as AOS was for Fantasy, but still, our local GW hasn't been this quiet in over a decade.

Games dead.

I didn't know people like you browsed Veeky Forums
me too

Assuming no nostalgia goggles?

3/4 edition probably had the best lore, more cohesive than the early stuff but still some self awareness and sense of fun.

Conversely I genuinely think those two editions had the worst rules of the whole set. They achieved balance by massively limiting the scope of choices players had. And even then that "balance" was dubious with very little actual diversity of play. No one won games playing Doctrine Guard with Rough Riders and Ogryns. Tau had one memorable strategy. Most Marine options were traps. Most options for Eldar were op, or trash with very little in between. Of the whole lot the only Codexes I think back on with much fondness are Chaos Marines and Daemon/Witch Hunters for at least trying to bring variety even if it didn't nail execution on 100% of everything. The floor and the ceiling may have been closer to each other than 7th edition, but were no less well defined and came at the expense of choice.

>another retard who thinks a single anecdote counts as actual evidence

Is this why we've been having 800+ response generals all day long for a week?

Once the Codexes for 8th edition have launched I think we'll mostly agree it's the best edition in terms of everything but lore.

Best lore was 3rd/4th but that's never coming back, those writers are gone now.

>Or which one was it that you picked up when you were twelve and never really could bring yourself to put back down?
3rd edition is when I first got into the game at the age of 10. Obviously I didn't have much money, so I mostly just read the rulebook over and over and picked up a few models on birthdays and Christmas, and painted a few of them like ass.
I actually did manage to get a couple friends into it, and by the time I was 12 there were 4-5 of us who all had enough models that we could at least kind of play.
I continued to be into it until I was 15 or so, right around the time 4th edition was releasing, and then finally lost interest completely in favor of trying to get laid.
I only have real memories of 3rd, and that was mostly as a child, so I guess I don't really have much authority on the question.
I'm told that I'm lucky I missed out, that most of the "revised 3rd edition" editions (4-7) were kinda bullshit.
Now I'm getting back into the game for 8th edition, so it's like I skipped all the horrible imbalance and rules bloat leading up to this, and now it's like I get to start fresh with a new game system all over again, except now I'm an adult with money and the ability to appreciate the modeling/painting aspect much more, and probably be able to do well in tournaments, too.
I was a kid during 40k's first golden age, and now I'm back as an adult to enjoy 40k's second golden age, and I never had to endure a second of the "shit" years, so it all seems golden to me.

>I think everyone unanimously agree on 7th being worst

7th was easily the least balanced, but I'd rather play it than 8th. They stripped out too much - it's just boring now. No real options, very few genuinely interesting special rules or abilities, and the core rules are a joke. I can houserule codexes to be more balanced, but trying to inject some life into 8th would require a complete ground-up rewrite.

Our group is probably just going to move away from 40k in general.

There's nothing to fucking buy there until the game comes out, and nobody plays AoS because it's complete shit.

Do you get your brain medicines on the NARSHUNAL ELF?

Our store is the 2nd largest in the UK. I work here. My manager told me to look for another job.

The dream is dead guys, trust me.

>0 days without historical wargamer tricks

My favourite edition is 3rd, because the rules felt like they actually had some tactical depth to them rather than being wildly dumbed down in order to make larger battles more practical

(and therefore more plastic crack shekels for GW)

On the other hand, the 3rd/4th ed period was the worst for most of the models. Everything was cartoony, all the Studio models were painted in hideous neon-bright colours, nothing actually looked remotely grimdark, not even Chaos. When the snapfits from the basic box look better than the metal minis, you know someone is fucking up hard.

4/5th edition minis got very good very fast. Recent stuff has been kinda shite, way too busy, overly detailed.

I'm liking the Truscale Primaris models though. The 8E rules look satisfyingly 3rdish too.

Yeah well my Dad is the CEO of Games Workshop and he said it's getting bought out by Nintendo

He also said that your mum is frankly disappointing in the sack and that your dad was better

>On the other hand, the 3rd/4th ed period was the worst for most of the models. Everything was cartoony, all the Studio models were painted in hideous neon-bright colours, nothing actually looked remotely grimdark, not even Chaos.

Are you sure you don't mean 2nd edition? That was when the dreaded Red Period had its hold over the 'Eavy Metal team.

in the same vein, why not 3.5?

... yes, now I think of it. It wasn't that much better in 3rd though. The models stayed basically trash-tier for most of the late 90s/early 00s.

You're pretty dumb. If anything, there's gonna be more options now because balance has returned at some level. And 7th edition having many more rules is a retarded argument. What would you rather have, a rulebook of 100 pages that are polished or 500 pages of rules in which only a select amount of them matter. That's basically what 7th was anyways, just tournament players abusing the few overpowered rules they could to win matches quickly.

And now you're all upset that they reset the playing field. That they've not only made the game viable again but easier for players of any level to get into and enjoy.

It's not even that

dumbshits are inexplicably comparing 7th + Codexes with 8th plus Ravening Hordes

"It's got less rules!" they squeal, before the rules have been released

>If anything, there's gonna be more options now because balance has returned at some level.

I'm talking about wargear/squad level options, the ability to personalise and kit out your characters with various little odds and ends, that sort of thing.

>because balance has returned at some level

It's not going to be as broken as 7th, because that would be almost impossible, but you're kidding yourself if you don't think within six months you'll see clear power levels and a list of garbage units emerging. It'll be even worse when actual, full codexes start getting released, and the poor souls stuck using the get-you-by lists have to go up against them. I'm old enough to remember the Ravening Hordes lists from Warhammer Fantasy, and it wasn't a lot of fun trying to play against newer armies with them.

> What would you rather have

Given the choice between 200 pages of interesting but grossly unbalanced rules and 8 pages of balanced but terminally dull rules, I'd pick an entirely different game. It's obvious that I'm not GW's target audience any more - and that's fine, but I'm not going to keep buying out of brand loyalty or sunk costs.

5th was not without its own problem, but i think it is the edition where fluff and mechanics cross the most.
Also has the best army special rules.

1st&2nd are their own thing.

7th was the worst due to the rules team not giving a shit anymore, in theory it could've easily been the best.
Then again, people complain about "having to" use mutliple books for optional and alternative ways to play, so i one can disregard like half the worst votes due to user stupidity.

Fair enough, I'm just not fond of this sudden love for 7th when it's pretty clear 8th is trying to fix these core issues. But you make good points too, I know some people are mentioning how OP flamers will be in 8th cause of their abilities against flyers as well. But that's what this new system is for, so GW can actually fix these issues this time before they ruin the playerbase (hopefully). I just like to be optimistic about this, but it's a fact that it took 8 editions to get to this point which is pretty ridiculous.

Apologies for my rudeness.

>and nobody plays AoS because it's complete shi

Conversely our AoS tournaments here get packed, at least 50 players for a small city is pretty good.

>The 8E rules look satisfyingly 3rdish too.
This is what I'm thinking too. 8e rules are less cinematic and """realistic,""" but it does appear to be a better and more inherently balanced as a game.

8e is best edition

3.5 and 4th were the peak, an apex that will never again be reached. That's just gameplay. Lore has been steadily rotting on the vine since the closing of 4th.

Enjoy your 3 wraithknights in 1500 points.

>3 wraithknights in 1500 points
literally a garbage-tier list in the new edition, try to keep up

There wasn't really one.

40K had no Fantasy 6th edition that a lot of people look back on fondly. Maybe it will be 8th with it's ravening hordes.

oldfags think of 3rd and 4th with fondness.

I started with 3rd ed.

Best rules. I think 2nd or 6th. Will see how 8th actually plays.

Best balance. I guess it was 4th or early 5th.

Best lore and aesthetics. Early Rogue Trader.

Best models. Around 3rd edition. Technology was good enough for quality, but models weren't overdesigned.

Probably 8th.

5th was great, but only b/c I played Imperial Guard

Nah, 6th was the absolute worst. Nothing but helldrake and necron flyer cheese.

7th at least had cool psyker stuff, and the flyers weren't quite as broken.

The worst part about 7e for me was the squandered opportunity of formations. It could have been used like a patch, push out formations for underpowered and under-selling units that bring them up to parity and move product at the same time. You could balance the game up instead of having to wait for a new edition. Instead we got the ability to make OP things more OP (Riptide Wings, OSC, Decurion) or give free points in a game nominally balanced around points (Gladius, WarConvo). What a fucking waste.

Honestly nothing will top the 3.5e Chaos Space Marines codex. The lore, the art, and the options were all amazing. Those four full page arts of each the Chaos Gods and their champions are still amazing, rules for each Legion, an entire packed double-column page for wargear.

5th. Best balance between good rules, good codexes and good models.
3/3.5 were much less variegated, 4th was getting there and dialed back some of the ott builds of 3E but left some armies with monobuilds. 6th was pretty good but the psychic phase was a stupid fucking idea, 7th added formation retardation for maximum derpshitism.

As a note, 3 was BAngles, 3.5/4E were the Chaos/Eldar editions, 5th was Grey Knights/Guard, 6th Eldar again and 7th Eldar/Tau for most bitched about (and WAACest) armies. If you started one of those armies in these editions, you probably did it for the power instead of the fluff. You fuckin falcon-whoring bitch.

2nd-3rd edition were amazing. If I remember correctly Necrons came out as an army in 4th edition along with tau. If it wasn't for the taucucks I'd have named 4th edition the height of 40k, but I'll settle with 3rd as best. I first got into 40k during 2nd edition.

I miss the old art and atmosphere the most. I honestly prefer most of the old models from this era vs. the modern ones.

>Which one had the worst lore, the shittiest models, etc.?
40k just went downhill from 4th. I didn't mind it that much until age of girlymen came around. 40k is fucking done. I'll give it some time to see if there's a schism on Veeky Forums like what happened with separate Fantasy and AoS threads. If not, I'm out sometime soon. rip 40k.

3rd edition was the best (Just like D&D), closely followed by 4th.

Tyranids were great fun at the time, Carnifexes weren't irrelevant and in 4th had a wide range of modifications too.

fpbp

1 ~ 5 > 6 > 7 > 3
never played 4E and 8E but 8E might be up there with 1E and 5E.

more options will probably come in the codices. i expect chapter-specific rules for marines at the very least. only thing i really dislike is vehicles having no facing now.

>My favourite edition is 3rd, because the rules felt like they actually had some tactical depth to them rather than being wildly dumbed down in order to make larger battles more practical
bwahahahaha, confirmed for never having played 1E/2E. 3rd Ed made me drop 40K for 10 years, kiddo, because it was so fucking dumbed down from what was before.

4e was the one with the best fluff
The best core mechanics were probably 7e, but formations and just codices in general shat the bed far too much for it be good for mechanics overall. Maybe early 5e, middle 5e was where the slide into the ludicrous codices of 7e began but at the beggining of the edition there were only a few really unbalanced things, most of which were rules exploits (nob wound allocations I'm looking at you) rather than something you'd have to go out of your way to not be broken (for instance, Ynnari lists, which still look pretty OP in 8th).

>GW is dying
>AOS doesn't sell

Obligatory link to GW's share price:

>google.co.uk/search?q=gaw.l&noj=1&biw=1191&bih=916&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigspjOqZfUAhVKJMAKHSV4AZwQ_AUICSgA

And to their latest trading update:

>investor.games-workshop.com/2017/06/02/trading-update-on-close-of-financial-year-ended-28-may-2017/

In the last year their revenues have increased by 33%, profits have increased by 245%, and the share price has gone up by 140%.

Never mind all that though, go on, tell us all about how the company is in trouble.

Holy shot this is goving nostalgia pretty bad user. Basically the exact same thing as me, 8th looks good, i can feel it in my venom sacs

This. Still kicking myself that I didn't buy stock when 8e was first announced, I'd have more than doubled my money by now.
GW is the king once more.

>mfw I bought £2500 at 500 and another £4500 at 700

Don't forget the very healthy dividends either, those on their own have funded my hobby this year.

Word that was a dope book

Ngggg... feels

>I'd pick an entirely different game.
im trying to imagine what game you could be talking about. Shadowrun isn't a tabletop minitures wargame, and most tabletop wargames that aren't boardgame based (like the GMT or ASL stuff) trend towards what 8th is - simple rules to get into and play - more complex rules and systems the further in you go

>the worst one is always the latest
8th seems to be getting good reviews overall tho. Ruleswise, anyway.

Trying to get laid over 40k.....this is why I hate people.
3ed Is when I started, Sisters, DE and than the glory of CHAOS 3,5. That is the best codex made for 40k I have seen. Never played smae list more that 3 times, and we could play every single day.

>Honestly nothing will top the 3.5e Chaos Space Marines codex.

Give that man a demonhood.

>Trying to get laid over 40k.....this is why I hate people.

Are you jealous user?

I've been playing since Rogue Trader, and I'd have to say that 4th had the greatest range of options. If you weren't a total WAAC tool, you and your opponent could field a multitude of different lists that were fun to play with and play against.

8th edition a shit

kys

>I started with 5th and a huge selling point to me was that there were already a bazillion different factions and subfactions with well fleshed out lore.
...with 0 rules and representation in game. 5ed was shit.

3rd is pretty much the best.

yeah, I literally only browse Veeky Forums most of the times because while I enjoy memes, I also feel above contributing to circlejerking and doomsaying.

if my interest in 40k dies sometime in the future I won't dedicate my freetime to raging about it on Veeky Forums, that's for sure.

Necrons and Tau both came out in 3rd edition.

New edition is made of maney it seems

while you might be right in your conclusion, I was caught by the fluff nevertheless and the representations available to me at that point were far more than enough.

in this aspect the game has been steadily improving, but i enjoyed actual gaming more in 5th ed than nowadays where my army is almost always either completely worthless vs a given enemy or completely overpowered.

most of my thoughts about the game nowadays are during army composition and revolve around the playing level of my opponent and their most likely army composition so that I neither curbstomp them nor get completely curbstomped myself. I long for a time when I can put together the list I actually want to play and just go to town with it with no precautions.