Your favorite edition of WFB rules

[Blustorm]

The Age of Sigmar is upon us. No one knows if a 9th edition is coming (ever), so this could be the end of WFB (as we know it). Bearing that in mind, what is your favorite edition of the WFB rules?  Did you like the HeroHammer of 4th? The tactical geometry of 6th? The D1000 Chaos mutation tables for 3rd?

 

 

I've played  the 3rd, 4th, 6th, and 7th editions of Fantasy. I have to say though, I loved 6th edition. That is the time when I played the most Warhammer ever. In fact, one of the great things (I found) about learning that edition was all the friendly games I played with Burk, as he was learning the rules at the same time. Separately or together with our sensei Jollyork, we played almost a game a week for about 6 months. After that, I think we started to focus more on multiple GW games (40k, WFB, Bloodbowl), but it was great fun to hang out with those guys. It was also great hanging out with the Shop of Chop crew and picking up lots of rules insight. Awesome memories.

[Burk]

Which ever had guess range

[indytims]

For pretty much nostalgic reasons, 3rd will probably always be my favorite. That's when I started out. Think I still have my 'Armies' book around here somewhere with its busted spine and all the pages loose. LOL.

[rudra34]

I was late to the game.  When I was a wee lad I played maybe one game of...5th?  4th?   Either way, it seemed un-fun at the time. 

 

 

Having jumped back in with 8th edition, I have loved every game.  Everything I've heard about seventh sounds like a chore, and editions before that sounded either unbalanced, unfair, or gimmicky.  I would take 8th all day long.

[Don't Panic]

I was late to the game.  When I was a wee lad I played maybe one game of...5th?  4th?   Either way, it seemed un-fun at the time. 

 

 

Having jumped back in with 8th edition, I have loved every game.  Everything I've heard about seventh sounds like a chore, and editions before that sounded either unbalanced, unfair, or gimmicky.  I would take 8th all day long.

ditto here.  i started during hero hammer but heck i was a kid and understood very little.  i returned in 8th when i legitimately played.  even with a few nuisances 8th is exactly the type of game system i enjoy.  you can play beer and pretzels OR you can play competitively and there's a ton of strategy involved. 

 

i do wish the guess system was still in play, as stated by someone else. 

[Swan-of-War]

6th and 7th - much more tactical and outmaneuvering meant something.

[fluger]

7th for me.

[Onayr]

6th,  7th was decent too but 6th was my favorite.   Playing Wood elves and Brettonians might have some influence on that though.

[JMGraham]

Hey, Ryan!

 

I played 4th through 8th, and read the hell out of 3rd (never played, though). I'm pretty sure 6th was my favorite, though I liked 7th just fine as well. In both of those editions, I didn't care to play folks who were new and didn't know the game well nearly as much as I liked playing veterans. 6th and 7th were editions where, if both players really understood the rules, there could be games with incredible tactical depth, while still maintaining the narrative that Warhammer does so well.

 

Siege rules and the General's Compendium also really scratched my fun narrative game itch during 6th. So much awesome from the time period.

 

Edit: damn, was Storm of Chaos 6th, as well? So much good in that edition. Loved the slaaneshi elves, Eshin armies, and the like.

[Kremmet]

I started in 6th ed, but I've played a lot of 5th and a few games of 3rd.  My favorite edition in terms of the base rules has to be 7th as it was just 6th with some clean up.  That said 6th ed was the one that holds the best place in my heart as it was a strong, tactical game with tons of interesting army comps thrown in through supplements like WD and campaign books.  I could play battle line forever in 6th due to the sheer number of army lists they made rules for.  It really was a shame that 7th wasn't treated as a flagship product by GW like 40k was in terms of kit quality as we probably wouldn't be in the same situation had they done that.  Can you imagine 8th ed kits with 7th ed rules with 6th ed army variation?  Mmmmmmmm....

[Burk]

Edit: damn, was Storm of Chaos 6th, as well? So much good in that edition. Loved the slaaneshi elves, Eshin armies, and the like.

 

SOC was the best...still have my Tzeentch army of super fast doom in a case somewhere...love that army and that style of play.

[Brother Glacius]

I really enjoyed 5th edition. That was when I really got into the game. I loved the card system for magic. Sure, it was unpredictable, but it never felt too game changing. I liked the smaller armies and the hidden setups. That was where I learned warhammer. I think I still have all my 5th ed stuff too.

[savion47]

The 6th -7th was when I started and I loved it. I was disappointed on a number of things in 8th and many of those revolved around movement changes.

[nathonicus]

6th was definitely my favorite, though I still had frustrations with it. With some tweaks from later editions added retroactively, I think homebrew Sixth+ would be a fantastic game.

[fluger]

I started in 6th ed, but I've played a lot of 5th and a few games of 3rd.  My favorite edition in terms of the base rules has to be 7th as it was just 6th with some clean up.  That said 6th ed was the one that holds the best place in my heart as it was a strong, tactical game with tons of interesting army comps thrown in through supplements like WD and campaign books.  I could play battle line forever in 6th due to the sheer number of army lists they made rules for.  It really was a shame that 7th wasn't treated as a flagship product by GW like 40k was in terms of kit quality as we probably wouldn't be in the same situation had they done that.  Can you imagine 8th ed kits with 7th ed rules with 6th ed army variation?  Mmmmmmmm....

 

I guess I agree with this in it's entirety.  7th was better base rules (the cleanup for pursuing fleeing units was MUCH better), but 6th had better army books and supplements.  

[generalripphook]

Ah man I can use a different Bretonnian codex....Oh wait.

[ClassicFlava]

I started right when 6th came out and loved it. The in game tactics had so much depth. 7th was pretty much the same game with minor differences so I loved it too. 8th is a lot of fun but I find that it lacks the tactical depth of 6th and 7th.

[Kremmet]

I guess I agree with this in it's entirety.  7th was better base rules (the cleanup for pursuing fleeing units was MUCH better), but 6th had better army books and supplements.  

 

Yep, the pursuit rules are always what I remember of the 6th rules that made me go "wait what happens?"

[MexicanNinja]

I liked 7th the best.  7th was a much more tactical game and war machines weren't as powerful and frenzy, fear, and terror were real threats.  I really liked how the magic phase worked in 7th as well.  The charge phase was much easier and there were not nearly as many arguements about front, flank, or rear arcs.  The double flee [big bad swear word] in 8th is just stupid.  I use to my advantage because it works but I hate how it works and basically one model dictates how a unit of 30+ models will operate.  War machines are OP in 8th.  GW tried to nerf ridden monsters but made cannons, and other template weapons to destructive to these models.  It's a shame because ridden monsters are some of the best looking monsters but people don't want to bring them because they are shot down in a turn or 2.

 

Magic is just flat out stupid in 8th.  A level 1 wizard can destroy a unit worth 4 times their point value and the miscast table is a joke.  There's not much repricution to 6 dicing spells because it will normally take 2+ miscasts to kill a level 1 or 2 wizard.

 

The only thing I didn't like about 7th was how close combat worked.  I didn't like that if you charge and kill the front rank this meant you couldn't be hit back.  If that were changed, I believe 7th ed would have been close to flawless.

 

Skirmishers had more vaule.  When you killed stuff with cannons and/or stone throwers it felt more rewarding.  You could actually build armies for magic offense and/or defense.  I think list building in 7th was much more engaging as well.

[splinx]

2nd edition! Nice old smelling rule book. Pretty simple rules but the start of my love affair with fantasy and I can remember reading the book as a kid going into my teens and it brings back so many awesome memories of painting old chaos dwarves, wood elves, fimir and the like. :)

[indytims]

2nd edition! Nice old smelling rule book. Pretty simple rules but the start of my love affair with fantasy and I can remember reading the book as a kid going into my teens and it brings back so many awesome memories of painting old chaos dwarves, wood elves, fimir and the like. :)

 

Ahhhh. Fimir... Zoats.... the good 'ole days! :P

[Iraf]

I played 4th/5th/8th, missing 6th/7th while I was in the Navy.  I enjoyed 8th the most, out of the editions I played.  I never missed Character Hammer, and felt 8th was a good equalizer to the army books.

[NakedPanda]

8th

[mojoslayer]

1. 8th

2. 3rd 

 

7th sucked, I played dwarfs and it was all about static res.  Whoever thinks there was more tactics in 7th started the July 1st celebrations early, yeah I'm talking to you Burk.  I once faced a vampire lord with a unit of 6 blood knights who failed a charge by 1 inch. I was set up perfectly, I charged him with a unit of clansmen with great weapons in the front along with longbeards with greatweapons.  I charged a unit of miners on one flank and a another unit of warriors with great weapons as well on the other flank, basically my entire army sanse an organ gun and a unit of minors and an anvil.  He won the combat, broke every unit and ran down my longbeards over running into my anvil.  That was the typical game for me in 7th, I use tactics I loose.  But whenever I build my army to have a ton of static res with my runes of battle, I would do well.  Boring, boring boring.  

[Swan-of-War]

And what did 8th do to balance that Mojo?

 

It just swung to the other extreme.  No matter how crafty the blood knights were and if they maneuvered to charge you in the flank or rear, combat just boils down to whether or not you can make your (rerollable) Steadfast.  You can blunder those dwarfs forward and into any situation you want - the order of attack, the number of models that can attack, the combat resolution is almost the same.

 

Random charges made dwarfs more viable, which is good, but too many other new rules sucked the tactics dry