So I had stopped gaming completely for almost 10 years and just got back into it a lot over the last few months and am really enjoying myself (I play loads since both of my brothers are also in the same boat). We have all of the old rulebooks and since we kept playing the occasional battle here and there know the rules pretty well but from looking around on this forum a while I've noticed that some of the new rules for the Hobbit seem quite different.

The question is, are they actually better/more fun? I don't plan on competing any time soon so it's just for when I play my brothers. I could probably get my hands on a rule book but is it worth the money/hassle of learning all the new rules when we already know the old ones really well?

Welcome back!

There aren't too many changes, the game for the most part plays the same. The biggest changes, I would say, for good or for bad (I have ranted about the merit's of the changes elsewhere on the forums) are minimal. Some of the more noticeable changes include:
-More heroic actions on which to spend might.
-A few new spells. Nothing game shattering, unless your are a spirit
-Weapon special abilities (gone are the days of the big blue rule book's statement of, "a hand weapon is just a hand weapon whether it is a sword or an axe." There is a big difference now).
-Elven blades got a well needed, yet minor and well thought out, boost (especially with the warbands rule of all characters carry hand weapons unless noted otherwise in their profile).
-Monster boost. Monster's got a huge boost. I still think it was too much. However, I admit that it brought monsters into a truly terrifying realm and, frankly, monsters needed something. However, I personally think they got too much. But that is me and I seem to be alone in my opinion. /steps off soap box.

If you have been out for 10 years you probably need an explanation of warbands too. In a nutshell, you can no longer field gil-galad and 100 elven warriors, or a horde of 200 goblin warriors. Your army is made up of a number of warbands. Each warband must possess a hero, and each hero may be supported by up to 12 warriors. Normal archery rules still apply 33% (however, there are exceptions to the bow limit now as well. Certain armies can have up to 50% bows and some legendary forces can possess a 100% bow limit meaning everyone has a bow! Heroes do not count against your bow limit). Your army may contain as many heroes/warriors as you wish provided you do not exceed your agreed upon point total. In sum, most forces include roughly 3 warbands (so three heroes) with up to 36 warriors (up to 12 for each warband) depending on how you spend your points. Yes, you may have a warband made up of a single hero with 0 warriors. No, you may not have a lone warrior by himself with no Hero to follow.

I've been playing for 6 years (almost 7) now so I can only speak for the previous six years. The first four years you were out, you'll have to consult a more veteran chap than I. I am, however, one of the more knowledgeable chaps on the forum. Just kidding, in all honesty I am probably one of the more bothersome chaps as I am always requesting rule page citations in addition to posting rules question clarifications. What can I say, the scientist in me doesn't take much at face value. You have to back it up with evidence, and then I challenge your "evidence" or lack thereof. Now that I think about it, I am probably viewed as one of the more annoying members . I can write a killer story though, just search Unsung Heroes with the forum's search function at the top.