2nd ED memories....

[Commissar von Toussaint]

I've tried every edition of 40 since its beginning and I refuse to play anything besides 2nd edition. IMO all editions pale in comparison. They aren't even remotely the same game.

Amen.

All in all, the game our group plays is a nicely tweaked version of 2nd, and we play 2000 point games in just over 2 hours for the most part. It just comes down to knowing the rules.

It also comes down to the kind of game you want to play. My group is a bit rusty (we're just picking things up after a year-long hiatus) and so we are also cross-talking a lot. Gee, it's not a speed competition. If 2nd ed. took twice as long, it is still time well spent.

Your force organization is something other people have talked about, but I prefer the more open-ended nature of the old rules. If anything, I'd like to see them relaxed even more: why not a full platoon of storm troopers?

Basically, we try to make our games scenario-driven. I'd be interested to see your Tau lists. The Necrons of course had a list, but it totally, abjectly and utterly sucked.

[wilsongrahams]

I still play 2nd ed rules now!

The Assault Cannon was obviously over-powerful - same cost as a missile launcher, yet firing 3 D3 of krak missiles? I now use this as S6 D6 damage for same cost or on a dreadnought as same original profile but for 65 pts.

As for complex combat - I agree with one of the above posts - it wasn't that much slower than now, once you memorised the weapon strengths etc, and were quick at just rolling.

One fond memory I have is Mephiston, using Quickening, starting within range of the Red Grail, charging all the way across the board.... And also having a scout with heavy bolter kill a whole brood of tyranid warriors in close combat - what a guy!

The only rule I never found fully explained, was other crew taking over after the driver is killed - was it instantaneous, or did the vehicle move out of control for a turn whilst the gunner kicked his body out the door?

I play 2nd Ed now, becaue I just don't like the way life seems so cheap in the new versions, just so everything dies easier and you have larger armies. 2nd ed played closer to the fluff in my opinion, even if it was a more complex game - certainly too hard for all these modern kids to play anyway, with schools failing to teach how to spell maths let along do it...

[Chiron]

I play 2nd Ed now, becaue I just don't like the way life seems so cheap in the new versions, just so everything dies easier and you have larger armies. 2nd ed played closer to the fluff in my opinion, even if it was a more complex game.

This is exactly my problem with current 40k, it seems to be a mix of marketing and fan expectations, bigger battles, more models, profit but at the expence of a lot of fun.

Having said that if you choose your opponents properly, modern 40k can be a laugh to

[BigRob]

Amen.

The Necrons of course had a list, but it totally, abjectly and utterly sucked.

Well they only had the 4 models but they had some great rules that didn't make it into 3rd edition and beyond. The quite incredible stats on the basic warrior, the fact that enemy within 6 inches would find all thier equipment started to malfunction and thier weapons didnt work and those T8 scarabs zipping down the field to chow down on the armour of the enemy tanks (reduce armour by 3 for each scarab hehe).

Imagine the potential if they had been given a full army book!

[Commissar von Toussaint]

I still play 2nd ed rules now!

The Assault Cannon was obviously over-powerful - same cost as a missile launcher, yet firing 3 D3 of krak missiles? I now use this as S6 D6 damage for same cost or on a dreadnought as same original profile but for 65 pts.

Actually, they got it about right. Ever see what real assault cannons do? They make mere missiles look like bottle rockets.

The only rule I never found fully explained, was other crew taking over after the driver is killed - was it instantaneous, or did the vehicle move out of control for a turn whilst the gunner kicked his body out the door?

Instant, if you've got a guy in there. The distance is so small and the fighting compartment is designed for that sort of thing.

I play 2nd Ed now, becaue I just don't like the way life seems so cheap in the new versions, just so everything dies easier and you have larger armies. 2nd ed played closer to the fluff in my opinion, even if it was a more complex game - certainly too hard for all these modern kids to play anyway, with schools failing to teach how to spell maths let along do it...

Maybe that's it. I also think that the tactics are so simplified so that everyone feels like they actually know something about warfare.

Really, how hard it is to min-max your heroes and create a hth mosh pit?

If you are a shooty army, you plant on open ground and stay there rolling buckets of dice. Everyone else tricks out their melee monsters and gets stuck in.

Every game is basically the equivalent of 'nids vs squats circa 1997, except the squats don't get bikes.

[Little Kman]

I remember having a lot more fun in 2nd ed over 3rd, as my battles were a little more tactical.

Which was more to do with the abstraction of line of sight and cover,

3rd ed unit movement like a board game

and

3rd ed combat was very polarised with this unit destroys that unit.

4th ed fixed super powered characters wiping out whole units like you could do in 2nd ed,


That being said 5th ed gives alot of this back, and is much better for tounaments, tho alot of armies need a boost.

hmmm

but the thing i miss most was the ability for space marines to have lots of low level characters attached to different units,


like in 2nd ed using 2 apothacaries with a devastator squad was great!

now days we have this stupid command squad, band of brothers fellowship of the marine, were the super best friend (and your not) unit.

so yeah more low level character upgrades for units rather than "seargant"
which is becoming standard.

[Archangel_Ruined]

I miss 2nd ed for it's ability to make a marine army feel 'proper'. You could rock up to a 1000pt battle with 18 models and you'd still go toe to toe with anyone. In 4th ed one of my favourite 1500pt marine lists was the 65 marine horde, it just never felt the same. Marines were tougher in the olden days, no mistake.

[Ramius4]

Amen.



It also comes down to the kind of game you want to play. My group is a bit rusty (we're just picking things up after a year-long hiatus) and so we are also cross-talking a lot. Gee, it's not a speed competition. If 2nd ed. took twice as long, it is still time well spent.

Your force organization is something other people have talked about, but I prefer the more open-ended nature of the old rules. If anything, I'd like to see them relaxed even more: why not a full platoon of storm troopers?

Basically, we try to make our games scenario-driven. I'd be interested to see your Tau lists. The Necrons of course had a list, but it totally, abjectly and utterly sucked.

I completely agree about time spent. I was just making a point about people saying that 2nd ed took so much longer when it really didn't once you knew the rules. I could see where a casual player might have a tough time though since there was a lot more detail to remember about weapons.

The open nature of the rules, while fun, does lend itself to certain abuses as well. We still do some open ended games just to see what kind of craziness people will field. For instance I once brought 10 Techmarines against Imperial Guard all armed with Jump Packs, Haywire Grenades, Refractor Fields and Plasma Grenades... It was fun, but a little over the top you know?

I sent you a private message with my email in case you want me to send the Tau list. I'd be more than happy to email you the Necrons too (that one still needs more playtesting IMO though.) Our Necron player isn't around much unfortunately.

In fact, I have several codexes available, including the main rulebook and psychic rules all typed out in Microsoft Word. There are minor wording changes throughout to incorporate all of the FAQ's, etc. over the years as well as small additions such as Super Heavy Tank rules.

The Assault Cannon was obviously over-powerful - same cost as a missile launcher, yet firing 3 D3 of krak missiles? I now use this as S6 D6 damage for same cost or on a dreadnought as same original profile but for 65 pts.

Had to edit to comment on this. Assault Cannons also had a 50% jam rate when rolling 3 dice, so should miss at least one round, if not two of shooting per game unless mounted on an Imperial Dreadnought (which could ignore the first jam).

Yeah, they were maybe a few points undercosted, but really not by much. Keep in mind that in most instances you had to purchase a 315 point squad just to get one. A Missile Launcher typically had a lot more in the way of options too (ammunition-wise), and could fulfil a variety of roles, not to mention being able to reach pretty much anywhere on the table.

The only rule I never found fully explained, was other crew taking over after the driver is killed - was it instantaneous, or did the vehicle move out of control for a turn whilst the gunner kicked his body out the door?

It takes them their next turn, so yes, if the driver is killed you go out of control for one turn while the other model takes over. Keep in mind that you only go out of control if you moved in the previous turn.

[spaint2k]

Really?
I was really into 40k back in '98 and when the rules changed, I figured I'd give it a fair shot. My win percentage was amazing under the new rules, which is probably why it took so long for me to burn out on it.

Did you play orks when the rules changed? I found my fun army from 2nd edition had become a close-assault monstrosity under the 3rd ed rules. I didn't have to do any thinking, I just pointed the army at the enemy and ripped them to pieces.

[Phyros]

I found that the Tyranids were hamstrung...literally.

Plus, there was just something wrong when a Hive Tyrant goes down to....Swooping Hawks!

[Ramius4]

I found that the Tyranids were hamstrung...literally.

Plus, there was just something wrong when a Hive Tyrant goes down to....Swooping Hawks!

Exactly. Unless of course the Swooping Hawks dropped 5 or 6 Krak Grenades on it, then it makes a little sense. But otherwise it ain't happenin!

The 2nd ed Tyranids were both fun to play and play against. It didn't take a tactical genius to play them, but you knew exactly what your capabilities were.

They were a blast to play against because it was such a challenge. You had to strike a balance between enough sustained fire to thin them out, and still have enough troops to survive when they hit your lines. Because you knew they WOULD hit your lines.

[jubilex]

My favourite memory was (goes all glassy eyed)...

Chenkov, with a displacer field, was charged by Dante.
Biff baff bofffff!

Chenkov's displacer saved him and teleported him on top of a nearby Leman Russ.
Dante consolidated back into the assault...

Next turn the tank moves off, blazing away, with the fight continuing on top!!!

[Tethylis]

Things I would like to see (and have written into the rules for my group):

A force organization chart (similar to what is used in current editions of 40K), but scalable for the size of game you are playing. Essentially built like the Lords and Heroes section of Fantasy, only Mighty Heroes and their equivalents take up Lord slots.

Things such as Terminators, Veteran Squads, etc. are classed as Elites and are also limited by the size of game.

Troops slots are unlimited, but you must have a minimum amount.

Heavy Support also limited, and this category includes most tanks, dreadnoughts, and even heavy weapon squads.

We've got it broken down by army as well so that choosing a particular type of character (Techmarine for example), might give you one additional Heavy Support choice. Or an Ork Warboss might give you an extra Elite choice, etc.

It took some re-thinking of how the armies work, and tailoring the chart individually for each of them, but it works really well and we see much more balance armies from people.

Oh, and I've written codexes for Tau, Necrons, Dark Eldar, etc.

I would be very interested to see these, do you plan on posting them in rules development? I can imagine Tau being realy nasty in the shooty war that was 2nd

All this talk of 2nd ed has me longing to play again

[AndrewGPaul]

The reason they ditched the M stat, as far as I can see, was basically because of the random Difficult Terrain rules. IMO, they're a "diamond in the rough" of 3rd ed 40K, but they only work properly if everything moves at 6" normally. At the beginning, everything did, except for the handful of models with Fleet of Foot. As usual, it's not the core rules at fault, but the Codex writers who somehow can't come up with interesting units with statlines alone.

[Poseidal]

The reason they ditched the M stat, as far as I can see, was basically because of the random Difficult Terrain rules. IMO, they're a "diamond in the rough" of 3rd ed 40K, but they only work properly if everything moves at 6" normally. At the beginning, everything did, except for the handful of models with Fleet of Foot. As usual, it's not the core rules at fault, but the Codex writers who somehow can't come up with interesting units with statlines alone.

If the core rules are too limited though (for example, removing the movement stat), you will need to start adding more and more special rules because there's only so much you can do with statlines. The source of all of these extra special rules lies entirely with the cut down 3rd edition; in 2nd there were far less of them.

That said, the 3rd ed statlines became so flat compared with Fantasy.

Is the random difficult terrain a product of the removal of the M stat or the reason?

[IJW]

As far as I can see, random difficult terrain combined with rapid-fire ranges was the reason for dropping the M stat.

Imagine the situation with Squats v. Marines with Bolters.
S: I march forwards 6", prepare to be chopped!
M: Fine, I move back to just under 12" and shoot you (once in 3rd, twice in 4th).
S: I can't charge or march*, so I move forwards 3" and shoot.
M: You're still not in charge range, I stand still and shoot you twice (or move back and shoot twice in 4th).
S: I can't charge or march, so I move forwards 3" and shoot.
M: I move back up to 4" and shoot you (once in 3rd, twice in 4th).

Make it Squats v. Eldar with their M5 and it would be even worse.

That gives me another reason for thinking that it's strongly base on rapid-fire - with standardised movement, you always have the trade-off about moving into range to shoot twice, but knowing that doing so will put you in charge range of the other unit. With variable M stats it's quite possible that you will end up being able to rapid-fire but guarantee that you are still out of charge range.

*Note - it's been long enough since playing 2nd ed. that I can't remember the minimum distance from enemy units for being able to march - was it 6" or 12"?

[Poseidal]

Marchblocking was 8", same as Fantasy.

[IJW]

OK, so it would only work that extremely against M3 models. On the other hand that still leaves rapid-fire as a big reason unless you bumped up the average M stat to 6 as assault units with anything lower would face multiple rounds of double-tapping.

EDIT - M3 models, or almost anything else moving through difficult terrain, let alone very difficult terrain. As much as I liked half and quarter moves for terrain, it's one of the things that made 2nd ed. so much more shooty than later editions - stand 2" into woods and you know that M4 enemy models have to get within 6" to be able to charge you (and that it also put them in your charge range). The random difficult terrain move of 3rd and later makes it much more of a gamble.

[DarkstarSabre]

I have to confess my greatest love of 2nd ed is the thing that is one of my greatest Bugbear of 4th and 5th edition, especially with the Imperial codexes.

The Wargear Book.

This thing was beautiful. It came with the core rules and covered all the weapons in the game with any additional army specific ones cropping up in their own Codex. The weapons were the same across the board. A boltgun was a boltgun, regardless of whether wielded by Space Marine, Ork or Sister of Battle. Vehicles had the same constant profile - no one person's land raider was better than another.

Compare that today where the Marine codexes are a mess for consistency, with SM, SW, DA, BA, BTs and Daemonhunters all having different weapons and vehicles...that are intended to be exactly the same.

[Styx]

Hell yeah. The 2nd edition is my favorite 40k game!
I'm really trying to like the later editions but to tell you the truth they feel too oversimplified. Thats is why fantasy has become my main game these days.
I sold my 40k stuff after 3rd edition had been released.
Will get back into 40k soon though because of the great models and the fluff.
In the local club we have really considerd going back to 2nd edition again. Putting limits on characters.