Raga, firstly, allow me to apologize if I have come off as a "know-it-all." I have got to learn when to keep my mouth shut and learn when situations which apply to UWZ do not, necessarily, apply to 1st ed.
I never played 1st ed. However, I know folks who have and readily admit that it was overpowered, especially concerning individuals.
I will refrain from further discussing close combat in 1st ed. If my comments regarding tactics came off as presumptious, again, I apologize. I did not mean to imply that anyone was playing incorectly; rather, I meant to say that I would love to discuss the differences so that I may be better educated when offering my opinions on the matter.
I also have to learn to convey my humor in a better manner. When I asked "Why charge weapons which will cut down your troops," I was pointing out what I am sure is obvious to everyone, including yourself, that it is akin to a suicidal move. My humor, apparently, missed the mark.
That said, you are obviously satisfied with 1st ed. In fact, you appear to have a great affinity for the game, and I do not wish to dissuade you from it. If, at any time, I appear less than knowledgeable about 1st ed., it is because I am so.
I tend to disagree with your assessment of UWZ as less than advantageous compared to other versions, but, again, that is my opinion which is, admittedly, ingorant to 1st ed. and slightly less so to 2nd ed. I think that UWZ is a great system. As to the "tons of FAQ," I can only say that one of the main reaqsons that there is so much is that so many have interpreted things differently as to warrant clarification. Are there matters of editing which could have been handled better? Probably. But, overall, the game is solid, easy to play, and - most importantly - fun.