View Full Version : Favourite Editions

26-10-2008, 03:11
Ok, so I would like to know what everyone's favourite edition of Warhammer has been and with what edition you started. Tell me why it is your favourite edition: were the rules better? Something about other editions you don't like? Also, what are/were the favourite editions of your army or armies?

For me, 7th Edition is my favourite, although I started with 4th Edition. There are some aspects of 4th I like that would make 7th better (using the cards for magic is one).

For my armies, I played Wood Elves during 4th-7th, but the current version is my favourite (though the inclusion of more special characters would of been nice, and I would of liked to see Beastmasters remain).

26-10-2008, 03:33
Started playing back at the start of 4th edition. Dark Elves, of course. At the tail end of 5th, I started collecting Lizardmen, and later, a themed Estalian army using all Pirazzo's Lost Legion minis. About a year and a half ago, I also started collecting Ogre Kingdoms.

6th edition was my least favorite (probably because as mainly a Dark Elf player, I had to make lemonade with a poorly put together book). I lost my beloved Witch Elf characters, Assassins at 125 points couldn't reliably kill anybody, our magic item selection was atrocious, Cold Ones lost their 2nd attack, sorceresses were only useful as scroll caddies, corsairs and CoKs lost their repeater crossbows, and Dark Elf Scouts were now just vanilla dark elves (BS4) that could scout.

The 7th edition DE book has gone a long way to correct what was wrong with the army, and I love it dearly. More so than the 5th edition book, as a matter of fact. (Though I still miss my repeater xbows on my corsairs and CoKs. And don't get me started on the brain-fart that are repeater handbows...)

Combined with clearer, more concise general rules, 7th edition is easily my favorite so far, though I still have issues with how the magic phase pans out. It's very given to min/maxing, as middle-of-the-road magic almost never pays off. While I prefer using dice to using cards, I think the whole systems needs a significant rethink.

26-10-2008, 04:28
I started lizard men in 6th ed. The army book has not bean updated yet, and so far I prefer the 6th ed rules.

4 models a rank seamed decent to me.

Jungle swarms have bean useless for the past few years... (Why couldn't the crumble just be included in every army book?!?)

6th ed had almost no ASF. That was awesome. You charge, you strike first.

I also liked how heroes were much safer from bolt thrower fire.

26-10-2008, 07:08
I started playing just as they released 5th ed.

My favourite is 6th ed. The rulebook was much better, with only original artwork and better fluff IMO. The thing that went farthest to make it a better book, though, is the huge impact it had on the game, both rules-vise and in the feel of the fluff and artwork. 7th ed. was a bit of an anticlimax, ant though the sculpts have gotten a lot better, I don`t like the feel on most of the releases in fantasy the last years. Too much giganto feathers, skulls enormous weapons and a general old-scool feel.

26-10-2008, 08:10
I liked 6E's presentation a lot. With the woodcarving of Sigmar on the front and the use of historical battles to introduce the scenarios. The missing scenarios are probably my big sore spot with 7E.

That and the terrain. We used to roll once on the terrain generators for each 2 x 2 square and roll the scatter dice to spread out the pieces a bit, at the club. Now, I can drop whatever piece I want wherever I want? And choose to halt the placement after only 4 pieces are down? And no battlefield will ever have obstructions near the center of the field? Ugh.

26-10-2008, 09:22
I liked 6th better. I dislike the armybook powercreep of 7th and I miss lapping round.

26-10-2008, 09:36
i forget what number edition it was i started with, i think 4th though(took a long hiatus & only recently getting back into warhammer in 6th edition). it was the one with the box set that came with the card board cut outs of eltharion, and grom, and the HE, and goblin armies. the most games i played would be in 6th edition, so that was what i was most comfortable with.
i play HE and i kinda liked the idea that everyone thought my army was underpowered(in 6th) and the only was to win was with an all cav army. i would bust out my blocks of spearmen and archers and people would scoff. i always liked a challenge.that said i dont dislike 7th at all, but i still get mixed up with some rules from 6th sometimes.

26-10-2008, 10:29
I started playing back in 5th edition, but I definately think that 6th was the best.

In 7th edition GW decided to wreck at least two of my favorite armies. My beloved Orcs are even more hopeless than ever, and I lost my Vampire Counts Necromancer Lords. I won't be forgetting that omission for a long time.

Still 7th edition has a lot to recommend it. The models being an obvious example.

26-10-2008, 11:48
Armybooks and magic fom 7th edition (though i like to see dispel scrolls modified).
3rd edition for the rules (with the removal of the reserve phase replacing withthe current march rule). We use a combination of these versions (+ 6th edition lapping rules) to play the type of warhammer we like - a fastish pace but with more detail then is currently given.

27-10-2008, 00:12
Started playing with the 5th edition.


7th edition for the rules

7th edition for the models

5th for the balance between armies

27-10-2008, 02:34
I think 6th edition is the closest warhammer will ever get to balance but I like 7th the most.

To be honest I didn't really enjoy the 6th edition skaven book, trying to get a game with it was near impossible and every win was simply shrugged off as "well you're using skaven, what do you expect".

7Th edition appears to be the best time to get some dark elves up and running although I still have to give the army a good proxying.

27-10-2008, 09:11
2nd because it was the edition I really got into and it had a cool John Blanche box cover and introduced me to the concepts of balanced army lists

Desert Rain
27-10-2008, 09:21
I started to play with the 6th edition with the lizardmen. There were more balance between the armies back then, but other than that I don't think that the 6th ed. gets any more major points over the 7th.

27-10-2008, 14:50
Gven enough free time 3rd edition is great, my favourite. The rules were more complex, and battles took ages, but I by far enjoyed it the most.

27-10-2008, 16:21
3rd and 6th editions have been my favorite so far.

Didn't we have a poll on this topic a little while ago?

Gven enough free time 3rd edition is great, my favourite. The rules were more complex, and battles took ages, but I by far enjoyed it the most.

We used to play 3000 point games in about 3 hours, compared with 2250 point games in 7th edition in about 2 hours. Not a huge difference once you know the rules, IMHO.

I think the complexity of the current rules is in all the army books, while the core rules are simpler. In 3rd ed., the core rules had the complexity, but the army lists were more simple (or referenced their special rules in the core rules.)

27-10-2008, 16:31
Agreed the core rules in 3rd were basically all of the rules you needed (in fact you could play games perfectly well just with those).

The armies were all condensed into 1 book, which was great as you could reference all of them in 1 go.

Guess we just took ages to play games in 3rd edition then! To be true I was a lot younger so that is probably why.

Ghal Maraz
27-10-2008, 18:46
Double post.

Ghal Maraz
27-10-2008, 18:46
5th for the balance between armies

I really have to ask you if you are serious about that. The power creep of 5th edition armies above 4th ones (and they should have been equal) is something long gone and best forgotten: Lizardmen, Bretonnia, High Elves... Yughh!

27-10-2008, 20:31
Started way back in 3rd. I know many will scowl at me for this but i did enjoy 4th. I was still a kid and herohammer was great at that age. Also the first army books appeared then.
5th basically passed me by as i took a break from GW around then and only got back into it the tail end of 6th.
7th is not going down to bad with me but my poor beasts army desperatly need an update, but hey thats a moan for another thread. :angel:

Magos Explorator
28-10-2008, 00:20
I think I liked 4th best, as later lists in 5th had a bit of power creep--a shame that certain armies didn't get listed in 4th! So perhaps I'll vote for just after the release of 5th Edition, so we've got books for Lizardmen and Bretonnians, but the others were sane.

28-10-2008, 00:56
I liked 6th ed generally, however the new army books are far better than their 6th Ed equivalents... I think that in 7th ed, the army books give you lists that are far more customizable, and in general more attention is given to the fluff and artwork. however some of the rules in 7th such as ASF are very annoying...

Also is it just me, or do 7th ed armies seem to focus on MSU? not just because the boxes only come with 10 models, but just that small units suit many armies?

28-10-2008, 01:10

7th edition for sure.

although the power creep in the armybooks is starting to make me emo :eyebrows: