If you want to revert back to old editions, it's an all-or-nothing deal if you do not want to eliminate entire archetypes from the game.
Kinds of a odd statement in a forum on house rules--if you change one rule, you may as well play the old edition? Since..well, RPG's have existed, GM's and players have tinkered with systems.
And if the system changes, what felt right before may no longer be balanced. If it's a risk you're willing to take, that's fine, but it's not good to turn a blind eye to the consequences of a houserule, unless you live in Egypt.
Certainly--if the rule adaptation isn't working well for the game, then we go back, or revise it.
Besides, why did you houserule this change?
Like every other house rule-I (and my players) didn't like the change between editions. We understood the intent, but didn't agree with the implementation.
Did the players really feel it was limiting them too much, did they dislike having to make tactical choices
I'd be happy to discuss the subject, but could you refrain from insulting my players?
Because let's face it, everyone knows "it was no problem in the previous editions" isn't a proper argument
,
Really? "If its not broke, don't fix it" isn't a idea worth discussing? As I said, my group didn't not find a problem with the number of possible attacks per action for characters to be a problem before, and feel there's more than enough reasons for players to choose to do other actions as well without a straight out rule.
Were they perhaps turned off by the increased lethality in play, resulting in their characters being in too much danger even against weak opponents?
Actually, they enjoy the gritty nature of combat, and have been very appreciative that, unless you are really designed to soak damage like the tank archetype, its far better to never be shot at in the first place, and its far better to make successful defense tests than hope to resist damage. And even with the change, take aim actions were very common in our last game, or other actions to take cover, ready items, or do helpful things--heck, the way recoil works in this game is going to do a great deal in making the gun bunnies take a pause on its own.
Players realized that attacking twice has consequences--strict rules play, they can't even take cover without using a simple action. There was lots of 'getup from behind object, fire, free action to drop prone) type actions going on. Firing anything automatic means significant penalties build up rather quickly when double-firing. As I'm very strict on just how much you can communicate with a free action, lots of simple actions are used for an additional free action to communicate, or observe in detail, then communicate. But as a group, we like the option existing for a player to really go on the offensive if they feel it is worth it.