Pendraken Miniatures Forum

Pendraken Rules! => BKC-III => Topic started by: Leon on 01 May 2017, 09:10:41 PM



Title: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 01 May 2017, 09:10:41 PM
Well it's been an interesting week here at Pendraken HQ.  From the highs of Salute just 9 days ago, with all the excitement and anticipation for the new rules, down to the lowest days in our 25 year history as we've watched the negative feedback build.  I think it's important to say from the start that a huge amount of work went into this new edition, from the author, from myself, and from the feedback group.  I've seen comments about it being 'rushed' or similar but that's simply not the case.  There were some last minute tweaks and edits which have caused a niggle here and there, but that's the same with any publication.

So what's gone wrong?  The obvious starting point is the army lists and at the moment I don't have an answer to that question.  The author spent hundreds of hours on the stats to put together the new army lists.  When we received them we checked the basics, do the correct nations have the right kit, do the obvious vehicles/guns appear in the right areas, etc.  We checked a bunch of units with their BKC-II equivalents and then put together some matching battlegroups using both old/new lists to see how much they differed points wise.  Nothing glaring jumped out during that process.  Other people went through them and brought back a few queries which were then discussed further and we made some edits.  Clearly we didn't do enough though.  I've asked the author to send us the info/research he did on the army lists so that we can address some of the queries but I've not heard back from him yet.

Elsewhere there's an annoying number of errors that have managed to get through the extensive checking process, some a result of the last minute tweaks, others a lag over from the merging of BKC-II and the first BKC-III draft.  Some simply mistakes.  There must have been twenty sets of eyes that looked over the book, which shows how easy it is for a sentence or word to get through and change the context of a particular rule. 

One thing worth mentioning at this point is that not every change is automatically a mistake.  It's easy with all of the negative feedback for this to become an 'All pile on' mentality and put every change down to errors and bad judgement.  We knew from day one that not everyone would like BKC-III, which isn't being defeatist, it's being realistic.  Over the past two years we've had every opinion from 'Don't touch them, they're perfect' through to 'They're awful and we won't use them' so there was no way we could ever have produced a new edition that everyone loved.  We tried to make common sense changes that either made a process clearer to do, or simpler to execute.  The FAO/FAC query that's been mentioned is a good example, that was a deliberate change that some people won't like, but it was done on purpose to simplify the off-table support process.

However, the end result of all of this is that we've not done a good enough job and BKC-III is not up to the standard that everyone wanted it to be.  And while I know it's frustrating for those who've bought a copy and been disappointed, I can guarantee it hurts a lot more here.  Just for me personally it was nearly 4 months working solidly on this, not to mention the £10,000+ invested so far, and to have this response and damage to our reputation is about as bad as I've felt in the 8 years I've been running the family business.

So what happens next then?  Well that is entirely up to you as our customers.  We've not spent 25 years building this business up on a solid base of quality products and excellent customer service for us to allow BKC-III to damage that.  We will fix this and you can decide how we do that:

Option 1 - Errata
We simply continue to address each and every issue in the Errata list, discussing the points raised and coming to a conclusion on each one.  New purchasers would be directed here to find solutions to any queries.

Option 2 - New PDF Army Lists
We work with some new people to redo all of the army lists and then we offer those up on the forum here for people to download.  The downside is that we'd have to direct everyone to this revised pdf when buying a new rulebook, or throw away the remaining stock and only sell hardcopies through Lulu in the short term.  Anyone who bought a pdf would get a revised set of the army lists sent through to them.

Option 3 - New Printed Army Lists
As with the above option, we work with new people to redo the army lists and then get them printed into a hardcopy, which would be sent to everyone who bought a copy of the rules.  Folks who bought a pdf version would get sent a revised version through Wargame Vault.  Each new purchaser would get the original book and a copy of the revised army lists.

Option 4 - Full Reprint of BKC-III
We would again revise all of the army lists and also address every piece of feedback and errata brought up so far, fixing the whole lot and getting the book reprinted.  Those who bought a hardcopy would get a new version sent out, those who bought pdf's would get a new pdf sent through to them.  The remaining stock we've got here would be thrown away and we'd have new stock going forward.


So that's where we are.  After all the time and effort that went into this we were looking forward to seeing the new interest in the rules, new armies being bought and more people enjoying the game.  Instead we've let you down and now we need to put that right.  Please be honest about what you would prefer us to do and make your vote at the top of the page.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Wulf on 01 May 2017, 09:37:50 PM
I haven't bought a copy yet, although I intend to. Thing is, knowing there are errors & problems, how long will it take to shift existing stock? Who'll buy it? Scrapping & reprinting may be the expensive option, but it may be the best way to get your money back...


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Steve J on 01 May 2017, 10:20:39 PM
Well, firstly may I say what a frank and honest statement from you Leon, which is to be applauded. I don't think you could have put it any better.

So where do I stand with regards to BKCIII? Over the past few days I've been reading the new rulebook an awful lot, given the various posts on the forum, to try and get a handle on the issues raised. As one of the feedback group, I share some of your pain that this release hasn't gone as well as planned. I will try and put down my thoughts in a number of points below:

I think it would be a good starting point to clarify some things that were deliberately changed (such as the FAO/FAC merger) so that we, as players, can understand the authors thoughts processes. We would also know that these were intentional, rather than mistakes/typos. Neil Thomas of One Hour Wargames etc is great at setting out his stall at the start of his books, so you know exactly where he is coming from. You may disagree, but at least he has told you.

Some of the issues raised on the forum are down to the odd poorly worded phrase, or lack of clarity, or a simple typo. The point raised with regards to Opportunity fire is one that springs to mind, IMHO. Re-reading of the book tends to help, but it is frustrating none the less. It is worth noting that when BKCII was released, it was not perfect and there were some cut and paste errors from BKCI. For these issues an ongoing errata would be the best way to solve them.

Areas that need more attention IMHO are the scenarios in terms of points per side, costs for field defences etc. As they stand at the minute you can't really play them. Experience as a BKCII player allows me to figure out what might work, but for a newbie I think this is a tall order.

Now onto the Army Lists. I voted for new PDF lists as the easiest, and to be honest, the most cost effective way of sorting these out. Personally I've mainly used the British, Russian, German and Italian lists for my games. So for me updated versions would suit me fine.

The fact that the book is not perfect is not too big an issue for me, but that maybe down to the fact that I'm an experienced BKC player and can sort most of these things out for myself via BKCII. Whatever people vote for, I hope this can be sorted out to most people's satisfaction. You will never be able to please everyone, but then that's life. I look forward to others thoughts on this.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Shedman on 01 May 2017, 10:25:13 PM
Well done Leon et al

I've played very few games of BKC1 & 2 but I've played many many games of FWC & CWC so for me it's more the engine than the stats so I will leave that to others.  

Reading through BKC3 I've been looking at it from the point of view of the engine and how it will work when you address CWC & FWC

In general the rule changes all get thumbs up - grouping all of the attributes into a list is excellent as there were vagaries in the previous rulesets

However reading thorough the rules I've found a  lot of inconsistencies and contradictions - my overriding gripe was the fact that green and veteran troops cost the same  even though they are markedly different

So my view would be to go for a general playtest of the rules over a given period - say a month - and then collate all of the issues  and address them

At the end of the day you, and I having bought both the book and the pdf, may well have to write BKC3 off as a loss.

The Commander series far surpasses any other ruleset on the market and I'm prepared to invest money in a revised version of BKC

Alan





Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 01 May 2017, 10:32:20 PM
Leon

First - Let me congratulate you on a very honest, clear and considerate response to the comments/points being raised by customers, yourselves and others since launch.
This must have been an incredibly hard note to write ...and you should be supported in both trying to do the right thing....and not just sticking your head down.
Thank you.

Personally - Its Option 4 - But given your note - I feel compelled to explain.

I think the 3 areas you focus on (Subjectivity : Army Lists : Rule Errors & Mechanics) all boil down to one thing ....do the rules hang together, are balanced and work well as an improvement over the previous version (recognising this is a new edition of an existing game)?

Let me sum up with my own experience-
My long-standing gaming buddy and I have played WWII games with BKC2 exclusively since it's launch - and love the rules (including Errata and a few house rules).
We have contributed to the debates and clarifications on the previous forum over the years ...and have been v excited in looking forwards to playing BKC3.
Got our copies last week - and met up on Sunday to play our first game.
We wanted to do this as a tester for the new rules - and knowing that it is all too easy to remember old rules - put away all old sets - and went with going from scratch with BKC3...and started with the Set Up & Scenarios.
We didn't get to play a game at all I'm afraid....and ended up instead with a 12 hour session on working out if the rules hung together enough, with an immaterial number of errors in the book alone, to make them workable.

Personal conclusion :
BKC3 has a lot of good ideas in it - and that is to be applauded. So thank you for those.
but...BKC2 was a pretty well played/ refined set of rules & lists once you take into account all the work on the Errata, rule decisions/clarifications/good optional house rules in the Forum ..and updates to published army lists.
The problem was that it was all too spread out and needed putting into one place with some simplification and embedding the best house rules.
However -
(1) I don't know who proof read & edited BKC3 for you - But there appear to be too many errors in the book it would seem - to not end up with the need to refer to a serious errata.
I'm only talking about errors here (not subjective issues) and have raised a few myself on this forum already - as have others - but they seem mostly to relate to changes made to the previous version. This is going to make the book quite hard to use as it is and as a standalone from BKC2.

(2) I'm not confident BKC3 will produce a balanced and play-tested game I'm afraid (and I SO didn't want to say that!).
We got as far as the Set-up and Scenarios ...and as experienced players, it just doesn't appear to have been thought through / play tested enough. E.g. (a) No instructions on forces balances in different scenarios (vital relying on playtesting) ...example - Should Attackers have more points / units in Deliberate Attack vs Assault...(b) De-linking amount of defensive terrain from scale of game (c) Unlimited flanking ...(d) Unit relative values and ability issues (although have not really checked to see if these are only minor issues).... I could list more fundamentals - quite a few unfortunately - but wont.
Adjustments that are made to any ruleset - or publication of new ruleset  (errors in books aside) need all (well nearly all) rules to (a) work stand alone and together (b) produce a well balanced game / outcomes.

It would appear that as it stands, BKC3 simply has not had enough rigour in either editing or playtesting to serve as a standalone game.
I hope I'm wrong - but personally - Although happy to help point out and suggest corrections for simple errors (proof reading/editing)....
I simply don't have the time (or will really) to go through the whole thing and use up my valuable (limited) gaming time to see if it all plays properly together. That's the job of the author and play-testers.
For me BKC3 is exactly that ....edition 3 ....and I personally would like it to be a build on the prior version - rather than a brand new ruleset that needs me to test it out, materially adjust etc.

The thing I really want to know is - does it work (as an improvement or stand-alone) well as a set of rules? I'd like that confidence.

So for me - It needs more editing and playtesting - unless it is possible to explain / answer the fundamental challenges on whether BKC3 works already.

Finally -
This and other replies will be hard to read I'm sure. Please keep positive and know that the gaming community are (in the vast majority) good and supportive people and wish you well.
Thanks
Adam
 
   


 
 


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 01 May 2017, 10:47:40 PM
What's happening here ...


Over 300 views .....but only a handful of votes to help Leon and team work out next moves?

Either the clock is counting wrong - or people are not voting.

C'mon VOTE .....it's one of the best votes you will make in the next 6 weeks!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sediment on 01 May 2017, 10:50:06 PM
Thanks for the clarifications Leon.

Interesting to have your understanding of what are deliberate changes and what appear to be errors/lack of clarification in BKCIII.  The latter is really a matter between you, the author, play testers and proof readers.  However, it might be worthwhile actually deriving statistics and army lists from people who know WW2 well, rather than derive a "formula" for calculating points based on a FWC model - what works for Sci-Fi (fantasy) isn't portable to actual WW2 situations, where FW190s simply weren't available in 1939, as anyone able to pick up a text book will know.

Unfortunately, your stated aim of simplifying the rules is interesting.  If by simplifying, you meant clarifying some of the basic concepts in the 2nd version and maybe making them more elegant, then more power to you.  However, by treating FACs and FAOs as a single type able to call in anything, to name but one issue, you lose the basic WW2 aspects of the game and make everything as flexible as 1990's NATO.  It appears that simplifying has become dumbing down.  If I wanted special abilities and a simple mechanism for play, I'd pick up FoW 4th edition or Team Yankee (for moderns).  BKC was, quite simply, about the best WW2 game providing the "feel" of actually commanding a brigade or division in WW2 that I've ever played.  It beat the opposition into a cocked hat.  Sure there were some clunky mechanisms, but the rules worked beautifully in so many ways.  I fear you have now thrown the baby out with the bathwater.  The new version is, to say the least, a real disappointment for me.  Perhaps I had too high a level of expectation, but I did still expect it to provide the right feel for WW2 regimental and divisional level combat.

What you now choose to do as a business with your copies of the rule book is a decision for you and the management team, rather than us as purchasers.  Personally, I'd recommend a pdf download of the revised lists, simply because they will be editable and you can issue upgrades as and when changes are identified.  In a set of lists covering the troubled and highly innovative years of WW2, there are bound to be vehicle stats that need to be added/corrected as the lists are poured over by people who love their particular corner of that war.  That will limit the expense of a new print run.  Clarification of wording in the rulebook can be fixed with an errata/clarification - I'm sure the level of actual errors are minimal.  Most of the comments relate to "changes" which you've already said are by design.  If this makes BKC III sell more copies for you then great - good job.  For me, it's lost a lot and I will probably stick with BKCII as long as I can.

I hope this helps and genuinely want the Commander series to continue to offer the hours of gaming fun I've been fortunate enough to enjoy, more with CWC than BKC it must be said.  It would be interesting to know whether you have won over enough new players at the expense of the existing players of the original versions.

Cheers and good luck,

Andy  PS I'm voting


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Itinerant Hobbyist on 01 May 2017, 11:17:46 PM
As one of the proofers, I'm feeling pretty crappy about this. I pride myself and doing good work and I've not done that. I spent my time primarily in the rules (vs the lists) and sent maybe 2-3 pages of questions and changes. And yet some of the inconsistencies  AJ has pointed out in posts, I didn't see in my reading. I found some, but not those.

As to the playtesting of the changes, I was late in the process and saw my role more for clarity and typos. Reference my first two sentences on how I feel I did there.

But most I feel sick for Leon and team. I'm confident you want to produce good work and your whole life goes into this business and I'm sorry that you're going through this.

I voted #4 because I don't want some newbie to come into the hobby and have to find or figure out wher to get corrections. They should get the rules and play as is...or at least close to it. BKCII was my 2nd ruleset and the one that cemented my jump into minis. I want another person like me to have that same experience.

Thabk you Leon for your honesty.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: mad lemmey on 01 May 2017, 11:26:45 PM
For ease of life, option 2.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Astronomican on 01 May 2017, 11:46:37 PM
Firstly, a big thumbs up for your post - honesty always gains favour! It must have taken quite a bit of courage to hold your hands up and say what you said. Bravo! You need to start wearing your underpants on the outside because it takes a super-type of person to fall on his sword like this!

My two favourite genres are WW2 and sci-fi - both of which are catered for by BKC and FWC. I want these rulesets to grow and under Pendraken's ownership, I'm sure they will.

I've voted for a new PDF of the army lists - it's the easiest way to rectify things! But I'm also in favour of an errata PDF to resolve the rules issues that have cropped up.

Once the new army lists and errata are in circulation then you can think about a new printing, IMHO. There's not much wrong with the rules that requires the destruction of so many rulebooks when an errata can clarify things.

The biggest issue, for me, is the army lists. You've mentioned several times "author", and I take this to mean one person doing all the lists. That is where the problem lies, IMHO. Several people should have put their heads together for that big task!

Well, enough of the finger-pointing, let's get down to sorting it out!

I've been wargaming over 45 years, and whilst I will never claim to being an expert in any particular era, I do have a lot of knowledge and info about WW2 armies. And to that end I am offering my help, in what ever capacity required, to resolve the BKC army lists. The info from all the books, pdfs, and snippets of information I have are at your disposal.

Onwards and upwards! 👍


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Jefthro2 on 01 May 2017, 11:48:29 PM
Thanks Leon

That was a very honest annoncement.

Since our group tends to play scenarios based on 1:1 ratio we try  to use actual organisations as far as possible so numbers of vehicles allowed in a list is not an issue.  Also this tended not to deviate too far from the lists However we do use the point system and the statistics.
Clarifications around this would be a great help.




Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Jammybee on 01 May 2017, 11:53:53 PM
My preference would be a combination of 2 & 4.

Any reprint could be a slim, maybe a5 sized copy of just the rules. Maybe 2 opposing lists to get new people started.

An online library of army lists that can be corrected and revised easily at no cost.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Tarty on 01 May 2017, 11:59:42 PM
Very much looking forward to receiving my copy....nothing has changed here.

I've also voted for a pdf of the lists for those needing them. Mind you in the past if there's something I don't agree with (particularly army lists) I've just changed them myself ...can't see what all the drama is about.
Great job on posting this up though....serious brownie points!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: paulr on 02 May 2017, 12:07:46 AM
Leon, thank you for your honesty. I know the great team, small as it is, at Pendraken will put this right.

AJ, as I don't play BKC I will not be voting. I suspect others will be considering the options and have a few days yet to vote.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: petercooman on 02 May 2017, 12:11:31 AM
AJ, as I don't play BKC I will not be voting. I suspect others will be considering the options and have a few days yet to vote.

I'm still awaiting my copy. Had a bank holiday today, so no mailman.

Would be harsh to vote without having seen it!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Ithoriel on 02 May 2017, 12:47:43 AM
I haven't voted yet because I want a bit of time to consider the options.

My overall concern is to wind up with a solution that gives us a playable version of BKC but also leaves Pendraken still standing and able to move forward as a business ... as per my earlier, plagiarised, tag line, "nice people, cool toys!" :)

Have to say my main beef is with the armylists and with the lack of guidance on points values for both field defences and for scenarios. I'm sufficiently used to tinkering with rules to deal with most of the rest.

At the moment I'm tempted to suggest an errata pdf and an armylist one. But I'll sleep on that for a night or two.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: cardophillipo on 02 May 2017, 01:37:10 AM
Like everyone else has said, fair play Leon for holding your hands up.  I also agree with the sentiment that the last thing any of us want is to cause any more problems for Pendraken so for now I have voted for the Army list PDF option and I will quite happily buy a new improved edition once it is all sorted. We must support our hobby in every way we can. Like others BKC is the one of the three I play the least, mainly CWC and anything that can be learnt from BKC can only be a positive for CWC ans FWC.

If we can help in any way just say the word  :)

Cheers

Richard P


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: FierceKitty on 02 May 2017, 01:44:16 AM
Not a personal stakeholder in this one, but respect for being so open about it, bro'.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: williamb on 02 May 2017, 03:28:02 AM
First, thank you for posting this Leon.  At the moment I can't really respond to the poll as both errata for rules errors, typos, etc... is needed, but also revised army lists.   I mainly use army lists for the stats and don't run points based games.  Obviously a printed army list book would be nice, but a pdf would also work.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Nick the Lemming on 02 May 2017, 03:30:51 AM
Not a personal stakeholder in this one, but respect for being so open about it, bro'.

Same here. I'd go for the pdf army list myself - less hassle and wasted money for Pendraken, who've been pretty good about this so far, and the people playing BKC get proper army lists out of it. My vote would be for a hybrid - second printing to incorporate the proper army lists, but pdf for those affected right now who have the first printing.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Itinerant Hobbyist on 02 May 2017, 06:20:11 AM
Sitting here looking at my book (just arrived today). Wondering if you could fix the disccrepencies/errors. whatever in the rules. And also fix the Russian, German, US, and British  Lists for a rerelease of the books. Then, as the other lists are fixed, simply release them as Too Fat Lardies does as free PDFs. It would drastically cut the size of the print version.

While I loved that BKC came with all the lists, this may be a compromise. 


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: fsn on 02 May 2017, 08:03:30 AM
I have no dog in this fight, so won't be voting.

However, I would say that I hope the purchasers of BLT will be as considerate as possible, and not call for the expensive options. I also hope that this hiccup does not detract from the reputation of Pendraken.

Hopefully, when the 2nd Edition comes out, all these minor niggles* will have disappeared, and the BLT III Ausf A will become as the British Guiana 1c magenta postage stamp - much prized for its minor imperfections.



*Yes they are minor. It's a set of wargames rules, not the constiution for a new democracy. If you don't like a bit - change it. If you're favourite (and little used) vehicle isn't included - add it. If you know that a PzIV should be armour class delta instead of armour class epsilon, then you can work out that a Crusader AA should be armour class Beta.

 



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Rolf Steiner on 02 May 2017, 08:12:41 AM
Hi Leon et al

Happy with whichever route you go down just as long as various issues are addressed.

Of course I would love a new free 'fixed' version of the set but I expect that would be sometime in future and would likely be preceded by PDF fixes in interim anyhow

Cheers


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Kiwidave on 02 May 2017, 08:18:00 AM
Rules haven't arrived yet, so I can't make a massive/intelligent contribution, but I'm leaning towards a combination of 1 and 2 (voted 2).

My copy of BKC II has all the errata written into it, as I'm not too worried about scribbling on rules, but if the list os going to be a long one, then a new book would be nice in the long term.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Hastati on 02 May 2017, 08:27:50 AM
I'd also like to thank Leon for his post.  A lot of companies would just walk away saying nothing about the issues (hmm, I'm thinking of one game in particular).  I think the easiest thing is to release a set of errata and revised lists in PDF.  These revisions can then be incorporated into new print runs and the PDF at Wargame Vault.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Dr Dave on 02 May 2017, 08:32:35 AM
Leon, thank you for your candid views and honesty.

I've not voted yet, but I think it's a 2 or a 4.

2 - I can cope with scribbles and a new set of lists that I'll print as I need them.

4 - as a product BKCIII will really stand out if it's sold as a book, plus a downloadable book of corrections and clarifications, or anything similar. I think longer term option 4 will have to be the route otherwise BKCIII will die and potentially take the series with it.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: slugbalancer on 02 May 2017, 08:57:42 AM
Thanks Leon for the honest & frank staement, it will get better.  I picked my copy up at Salute and had no intention of jumping straight into playing it.  I realised that there would be problems, there always are.  I can wait for the corrections.  My lead pile awaits application of paint.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: weredoomed2003 on 02 May 2017, 09:11:30 AM
Firstly I would like to thank Leon and the Pendraken team for their honesty and openess- many manufacturers would have just issued a 'we'll publish errata soon' notice and left it at that.  I think the wealth of opinions and comment comes from a genuine love of BKC2 and an expectation for BKC3.  I agree completely with the comments from Pendraken that some changes are bona fide changes and not errors.  I myself like the indirect fire change to hit on a 6, still undecided on the FO/FAC point but that's something we work out within our gaming group, try it, work out a house rule etc.  The main point is that the rule change is set out correctly.  
But, the army lists and the other contradictions/omissions throughout the rulebook are very significant and will take a lot of work to fix.  I've tried to look at this from different perspectives to make my decision on how to vote.  The army lists account for 97 pages out of 175 (55%) of the rule book.  To issue a corrected version means over half the rulebook is wasted publication.  From the other comments clearly many other sections need significant rewrites; opportunity fire, scenarios, engineering and field defences to name just 4.  I also considered this from a product viewpoint - I myself could not go on marketing and selling a product where over half the content has to replaced with a second version via pdf because its wrong.  I don' t want to speak for others but I would be happy to volunteer to sense check further drafts or lists - I am as puzzled as many are that obvious errors and omissions are so common in the lists. Perhaps it's the wealth of knowledge in the WW2 wargaming community that make these stand out as glaring errors?  
For me there comes a cut off point between a document that requires errata to correct a few typos, mistakes and omissions but that is essentially a correct document and one that isn't.  
Unfortunately for these reasons I came down on the side of a redraft and reprint of the whole rulebook.  I know others will disgree and I respect their views as much as I hope they do mine.
Finally I would add my support to the Pendraken team to get this right and to continue to make the commander series the most popular ruleset for the periods they cover.  These things just happen sometimes...



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: barbarian on 02 May 2017, 09:44:45 AM
First, I realise I should have been involved into the process of testing : But I was away from gaming for personal reasons, and lazy, hoping some good people would have done the work for me.

I'll speak of my personal experience : BKCII was my entry point into WWII gaming. It has a lot to offer but mainly, for me it was that all the lists were concentrated into one book. And with the limitations, I could somehow build a "plausible" force, without having to check actual ORBATs. It was a huge help for a beginner.

Second thing I liked was : one double page for movement, one for combat, one for arty...

After playing it for a while but mainly with new players, the rules had flaws (personal opinions) : Units really hard to suppress (I always had the view that suppression should be the first throw and not the second, but maybe my view is biased by 1 on 1 interpretation, when in reality it is a lot harder to suppress a platoon as a whole as opposed to one tank or one squad taking fire), the hidden rules were a bit of a mess, actually doing something with the Soviets Mid-war was really hard, the scenarii were interesting once you could actually understand them, in general the games were too long, couldn't understand the assault rules...

My expectations for BKCIII were a somehow more simple game.

To summarise, I had pleasure going through the lists, thinking, "My next buy will be 6 T-70, or 3 KV-1..." and doing scenery (or buying some of the resin scenery from Pendraken) more than actually playing the game.

To explain a bit of what I like, I much prefer Kings of war than any other Fantasy rule now. Every lists available, some kind of a streamlined game. I feel Warlords games (Hail caesar, Black Powder but not Bolt Action) are doing this well (strangely enough, due to the influence of Priestley /sarcasm) : Historical wargaming streamlined for a general audience.

In my view, BKCIII should really aim for simplicity and elegancy to follow the top-down approach inherited from Warmaster. BKC series should be the antithesis of other systems and the player should really be able to focus on Commanders decisions : in the end it should go down to " Should I order these to move ? To fire ? Maybe it is a risky to try to get 3 move orders to cross this field of terrain..."

Again, my fault for not getting involved into it when I could have give feedbacks.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: old smokie on 02 May 2017, 09:49:54 AM
Thanks for the frank and honest statement Leon

I voted for Option 2 - New PDF Army Lists, easier to modify/update as required.

If your planing another print run of BKC 3,  I would print the rules with all the corrections etc but without the army lists, keep the army lists as a free download PDF and maybe offer the new rule book at cost to people who bought the original just an idea, that would hopefully keep your costs to a minimum. There maybe should have been a "starter scenario" in the book with two small forces listed that beginners could purchase to get them started, just my two cents.

People who have spotted mistakes etc should email you the page number and what the error is then you could collate all of the information in one place which would make it easier to correct again just my two cents.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sjb1001 on 02 May 2017, 10:34:12 AM
Leon - thanks for the honest and prompt feedback.

Gone for PDF army lists as the errata in the main rules is minor and some of the comments on FO for examples are really down to house rules for me.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: mart678 on 02 May 2017, 11:51:02 AM
I have never played BKC so I am in the dark but just put the corrected stuff on a separate post and I will download them to quote a Meer cat "Simples" :D :D


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Grimheart on 02 May 2017, 02:31:35 PM
Having bought these at Salute but only having skimmed through them since then I was pretty surprised by this announcement!
I have the previous BKC1 and 2 so I am keen to support BKC3.

Like others I would like to thank Leon for his post, that can not have been easy.
Its a shame that some things went wrong with the testing, etc but its now important for Pendraken to move forward with how they eventually deal with the issues and this thread is a good start.

I voted for pdf army lists and would also be ok with online errata as I never have a problem writing any changes in my rules books.

If a reprint happens I would agree with others that the book only contains the rules + a couple of test scenarios, with the army lists kept online and therefore easier to update.
I only use the NW Europe lists, adjusted to historical orbats, and I would guess most people only use a selected few out of so many so downloading and printing is not really an issue.

Either way good luck going forward whatever way you decide.
 


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Ithoriel on 02 May 2017, 02:52:36 PM
*Yes they are minor. It's a set of wargames rules, not the constiution for a new democracy. If you don't like a bit - change it. If you're favourite (and little used) vehicle isn't included - add it. If you know that a PzIV should be armour class delta instead of armour class epsilon, then you can work out that a Crusader AA should be armour class Beta.
[/size]

I could.

I guarantee that the three guys I regularly play BKC with would be playing Bolt Action or Flames of War within a fortnight if that was their only option. I remember the time, early on, when they disliked the removal of hits at turn end I suggested we keep hits from turn to turn but reduce them gradually over time - they were a heartbeat away from screaming "Burn the witch!" and fleeing the house at such heresy. Won them over eventually, to be fair!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Ithoriel on 02 May 2017, 03:01:50 PM
If a reprint happens I would agree with others that the book only contains the rules + a couple of test scenarios, with the army lists kept online and therefore easier to update.

I only use the NW Europe lists, adjusted to historical orbats, and I would guess most people only use a selected few out of so many so downloading and printing is not really an issue.

One of the big selling points of BKC for me was "everything you need in one book."

I struggle to get the guys I play with regularly to check their emails in a timely fashion. Just download the latest pdf armylists .... aye, right!

PDF armylists might be a short term fix but not really a long term one, I think.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: KeithS on 02 May 2017, 03:13:06 PM
I should say that I am coming back into miniatures wargaming after many years (decades) out of it, although I have had a few board based wargames.  So I am looking for a fairly straightforward set of rules that give the flavour of WW2 wargaming without excessive complexity.  I am not worried about totally accurate simulations of exact weapons and infantry capabilities and composition, just a reasonable approximation thereof providing that there are no glaring errors.  Consequently I am fairly happy to go with the rules and lists pretty much as they stand provided the rules are reasonably easy to understand and make sufficient sense to be playable.  Of course, I would expect any errata should be easily accessible and posted promptly but beyond that I am happy to implement them myself.  A separate set of downloadable pdfs for corrected army lists might be helpful though, and in fact I bought the pdf version of the rules as well as the printed version precisely so that I could print off and laminate those in which I am particularly interested.

I would say that scrapping the current rulebooks and reprinting them does seem to me to be an overreaction though, while I can see that the producer and possibly some purchasers might feel that the current state of things is undesirable (the producer is obviously a perfectionist) I don't really see the need for such a 'nuclear' response.  There are some downsides to this course, as well as the implicit cost I imagine there would be a considerable delay before a new set could be made available particularly if further extensive play testing is required.  Furthermore there is no guarantee that even after a new set is produced there might not still be problems, in something as complex as this set of rules covering so many WW2 theatres it is not possible to cover all possible combinations of organisations and weapons in testing.  If some people feel that the rules as they stand are totally unplayable to their standard then perhaps they could return them for a full refund.

I think at this stage it would be better to accept the rules (with errata) as they stand and work with Pendraken to develop them into an even better set as BKC-IV, with the provisos that I have suggested above.  This is an increasing trend in board (war)games where several pages of errata are not uncommon and the producer maintains a set of 'living rules' online for people who have bought into the system.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: smallchild139 on 02 May 2017, 04:21:31 PM
Hi there

One reason I bought BKC3 was so I could have a book with everything together in one place.  Army lists are important for me as I rarely have a lot of time to prepare a game so points matches are the way to go. Another reason for buying BKC3 was to have the start of a family of rules for me to play games from WW2 up to moderns (and possibly sci-fi with epic figures) for when CWC and FWC new editions are released, to save me having to learn more sets of rules.

If the rules are as broken as people say (and I am not convinced they are - perhaps people are not liking the changes made) then that is one matter as it is always thus in rulesets.  You may or may not like all the rules, no one forces you to play them, they are not gospel truth.  You bought a set of rules to try out, if you like them great, if not then they look good on the bookshelf (and BKC is a good looking book).

However, if there are many contradictions in the text, mistakes in explanations etc then that is another problem - are the rules fit for purpose?  Can they be used as stands to play a game of toy soldiers?  I don't mind the odd mistake (which can be corrected in an errata and penciled into the book).  As a consumer then I don't buy things that don't work on purpose! I also don't spend £20 lightly!  If the rules are not fit for purpose then perhaps those so inclined could get a refund?

I really want these rules to survive and be a success but (as we will find out on Thursday when we have a game with the new rules) if they are broken then they need to be fixed.

I really would not be happy with PDF army lists.  That is not the reason I bought the book.  If I wanted PDF army lists I would have bought a PDF copy of the rules!

It is great of Pendraken to own up and say they are not pleased with their product, and this stance is to be applauded.  How they deal with it now is up to them but I do feel a free revised copy of the rulebook for all the people who purchased a set would go a long way to helping out regaining the trust of consumers (and would perhaps generate more sales in the future of the other rules in the family).

Anyway, that is my 2p-worth.

Mark


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: T13A on 02 May 2017, 04:30:07 PM
Oh dear, where to start?

Firstly many thanks to Leon for his comments above, and perhaps I should say that I'm coming from the point of view of a long term supporter and advocate of Pendraken figures.

'Hopes' for BKC 3rd Edition:

I started using BKC not long after the 2nd edition came out and always thought that they were a good set of WWII rules and in particular had a good balance between playability and realism (in my opinion what any good set of wargame rules should aim for). I would also like to emphasise that I thought the 'core' mechanics were pretty 'sound' and the only problem that I have had with BKC-II is my understanding of certain aspects of the rules around visibility, concealed troops and fighting in built-up areas. Regarding BKC-III, I was not looking for or expecting any changes to these rules as such, just a clearer explanation within the rule book of how they were meant to work. Unfortunately there have been fairly major changes (IMHO, and you might want to refer to my two recent posts in the BKC-III Rules Queries section) which in my opinion are poor and do not seem to have been thought through (and in fact as I said in my other posts are for me at least 'show stoppers').

I do wonder after reading through the new rule book (twice), then re-reading sections again to try to understand them better and the comments in the various posts since the publication of BKC- III; whether there has been some misunderstanding or a 'mix up' somewhere down the line regarding some peoples wish for 'simpler' rules and a clearer explanation in the rule book of some of the rules as they were (which is what I was looking for, and with all due respect to Pete Jones).  Some rules do really seemed to have 'changed for change sake'. e.g. the combination of FAO's and FAC's into one for instance, the rules regarding these in BKC-II were hardly complex or difficult to understand, as someone else has commented, a poosible case of "dumbing down"?

The Way Forward:

There seem to me to be three main issues that are of course all connected. The mistakes, missing units etc in the army lists, the mistakes, omissions etc in the text of the new rules as written, and the changes to the 'core' rules.

Firstly (and I'm suggesting this as being heavily involved with 'Managing Change' in my professional life) I believe Pendraken should not rush into any 'quick fixes' to the issues raised by myself and others without thinking them through. That said I do think 'Old Smokie's idea above, regarding a reprint of the main rules only and a PDF of the revised army lists (which would presumably save on costs?) sounds like a possible way forward.

Regarding the 'poll', I do think which option people pick rather depends on what they think of the new rules and I think people do need time to understand them and think them through (and I mean the 'core' mechanics here not just changes to the stats) before deciding where to vote.

To summarise, for me at least (and not just me judging by the number of people commenting that they intend to carry on using BKC-II), the main issue is the changes to some of the core rules which I think have been poorly thought through (IMHO). So I will only be using BKC-III in the future and recommending them to others if these are changed in any reprint (as I said above all I was looking for was a clearer explanation of the rules as written). Therefore options 1, 2 and 3 in the poll do not work for me.

Apologies for the rather long response.

Cheers Paul


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: fred. on 02 May 2017, 06:27:37 PM
Its certainly good to have admitted that there are issues, and to be looking into those issues. I'd suggest not rushing to fix stuff, it can be too easy to roll in 'fixes' that break stuff further. Also make sure you are only fixing errors, not things that people merely don't like.

I would suggest going for PDF errata + corrected army lists in the short term. Once you have collated these you will have a try picture of the scope of the problem.

Then for a second print run, look to fix the issues in the hard copy. If the fixes are extensive, then it will be necessary to make sure that this is marked as revised edition or something similar.

I do think that you will need a hard copy that is largely correct, many gamers don't spend much time online, and it is always hard work with a gaming group when some have all the latest online updates, and some just have the book they bought on day 1.

I'd definitely avoid option 3 - this will be expensive and not that helpful.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: d_Guy on 02 May 2017, 06:28:46 PM
Leon, thank you for your honesty. I know the great team, small as it is, at Pendraken will put this right.

AJ, as I don't play BKC I will not be voting. I suspect others will be considering the options and have a few days yet to vote.

Well that pretty much speaks for me! Never go near the modern stuff so can't really vote in the poll.
In general terms, however, I think in these times everything should be done in PDF (watermarked if you like) and the rules, FAQ's and lists supported by a collection of "living" documents. Once in a great while print a glitzy hard copy as a commemorative, limited edition sort of thing. But, hey, that just me.

I have now added a copy of BKC3 to the celebration order I'm preparing to send when the new website is up (May 6th?)
Once all this is sorted out, as I'm sure it will be, I suspect the first edition will become a valuable collector's item.  :)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: terry68 on 02 May 2017, 07:21:26 PM
Just voted after reading all the posts!

Thanks to Leon for a full and very honest answer and I'm sure that the Pendraken name will not suffer.

I voted for option 4, as in the long run, a concise and complete rulebook was the aim of BKCIII.

PDF errata and lists will help with the current print, and help with ironing out the current issues etc. but eventually a 'new' book will most likely be the end result.

To Leon and all at Pendraken, " Keep Calm & Carry On"

All the best

Terry.

 


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Norm on 02 May 2017, 08:05:49 PM
Leon / Dave, this must be an emotionally and financially fraught time for your team, so my thoughts are with you in that regard.

If I could put a slightly different perspective on what has been posted so far. Generally the forum voice has come from those who bought BKC-III.

I am left wondering what potential future customers will make of all this and whether the damage caused so far to the reputational integrity of the ruleset will have its greatest impact on units yet to be sold. I obviously have no idea of what your break even figure would be, but it strikes me that your biggest obstacle to recovering the situation is further sales. I have not previously bought into BKC, but having recently enjoyed similar rule systems, I had been following the BKC story with the intention of buying, but if I am to be honest, I would not want to buy against the present background.

Taking that as a line of thought, taking the set out of circulation, developing for a further 6 months or so, with the help from a small group who are willing to offer their services and then re-printing does have its merits, though whether the financial implications are simply too punishing may be the paramount factor in deciding a way forward.

Anyway, just a thought and in some respects I imagine the one that you would want to avoid the most. Since my money is not involved (yet) I have not voted. Whatever path is chosen, I have been buying from Pendraken since the early days of Dave acquiring sculpts from other companies and so I sincerely hope that this has a satisfactory outcome for you.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: paulr on 02 May 2017, 08:49:52 PM
Leon / Dave, this must be an emotionally and financially fraught time for your team, so my thoughts are with you in that regard.

+1

Thanks Norm, I have been struggling to find the words to express those thoughts

To Leon and all at Pendraken, " Keep Calm & Carry On"

+1


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: smallchild139 on 02 May 2017, 09:24:45 PM
Can I also give my support to the guys at Pendraken.  Having spoken to them a few times at local shows they have always been pleasant, knowledgeable and helpful, and they produce brilliant miniatures (I wish I had started out in 10mm not 20mm so that I could buy lots of their stuff).

It is a shame this has happened and I truly applaud their initial statement - it takes a lot of courage to own up to mistakes like this.

I wish them well for whatever they decide to do and hope this does not put them off developing rules in the future (I really am looking forward to CWC!)

Mark


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Jasper on 02 May 2017, 09:29:51 PM
Hi Leon,

Thanks for the honest summary, it is greatly appreciated, honesty like this is always going to help good customers stay with you through thick and thin.

Until I read your post I was not going to mention anything, but I feel your honesty deserves my silent feedback. I am not a previous BKC player and neither is my gaming buddy, but we have been playing for over 30 years each nearly every rule set in most periods every imagined and we have done lots of WW2 gaming. We were both looking forward to the release of the new rules for months as we both have been chomping at the bit to do 10mm WW2 since the last time we did 1/200 WW2 was with Command Decision a number of years back now.

I pre-ordered the BKC rules and when they arrived had an evening reading them before spending a second evening with my buddy discussing and reviewing. In summary, we were both very disappointed in a lot of what we saw and it has probably killed us doing any 10mm figure purchases of the WW2 range until we find an acceptable rule set. What turned us off can be summarised as:
- Despite the nice paper and use of full colour which we appreciated, a lot of the internal graphics and especially things like the LOS we thought were well below par for a modern printed rule set.
- Various game mechanics we felt were not up to scratch - this really turned us off.
- The scenarios for newcomers like us were a big let down, though we like building our own forces, the scenarios might as well say design your own scenario.
- The army lists were a major let down with things like the obvious Tiger 1 and Tiger 2 having the same stats(!) and the in service dates on the Tiger 1 a full year out - looks like an obvious copying mistake. However, the more we looked through various lists the more we were disappointed and disagreed with what we were reading.

While I accept many might not agree with our views here, they are our honest views which have now sent both of us looking for a decent WW2 rule set for playing mass armour games again. BKC may have its fans but in its current incarnation it left us both cold.

There is no intention to upset anyone with these comments, and we both will continue our support for Pendraken and keep buying the many other great ranges you do which we enjoy and appreciate so much. You do a great job and we always find your service and flexibility a great attraction and asset.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leonardo on 02 May 2017, 09:40:02 PM
Thank Leon. My opinion is PDF.
Vulnerable rule can be good idea but for CA or Indirect fire HE.
Ther is not the automatically suppression for HE hits?


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: T Madvid on 03 May 2017, 01:12:27 AM
Sorry to read of all the problems people are encountering. Happily though, Leon seems more than willing to do whatever is necessary to rectify the situation. For what it's worth, I think the best way to go is to start with an extensive errata for the rules, then rework the army lists and release them on PDF. Finally, once everything has been corrected and tightened up, produce a second edition and offer it at a substantial discount to those who purchased the first edition.
I'm sure I could soldier on just using an errata and revised army lists, but one of BKCII's greatest attractions was the fact that everything was contained in a single book. And I have to agree with previous posters - new players coming to BKC for the first time would undoubtedly think twice when confronted with substantial errata and a book full of army lists that have been superseded by PDF versions.
Regardless, I will support whatever decision Leon makes as I'm sure he'll keep working on it until its done right!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: MiniPatton on 03 May 2017, 05:11:29 AM
I haven't received my copy yet, so I don't know that I feel comfortable chiming in 100% in any direction. I love the Commander franchise and it has been my "go to" option for everything I do WWII and forward for many years. I still have my much loved copy of the original BKC somewhere in storage. I have high hopes based on my previous experiences with Pendraken that the Commander series is in some of the best hands in the business and was excited that the franchise was picked up by you guys.

A few thoughts I have reading through the posts of others.

- I feel like if the corrections/adjustments in the main rules can be reasonably contained on a 1 page sheet, that would be okay.

- I do feel like offering the lists as a PDF is an intelligent solution that allows for corrections now and later, as well as possible additions in the future.

- If a full reprint is necessary, I do like the idea of the basic rules being reprinted with PDF materials available for the army lists. It would also probably be a good idea to have a printed version of the army list available as well - maybe a BKCIII Lite and BKCIII Deluxe like offering - not sure of the logistics of that.

- As a consumer, I do feel a little frustrated by the idea that the BKCIII coming to my mailbox (hopefully soon) has concerns attached to it. I do worry what new players or someone trying the Commander series might think about buying a rule set and immediately having to download errata and army lists to make it playable.

I do reserve the right to edit and adjust the above statements as necessary once I get my eyeballs on my personal copy.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sunjester on 03 May 2017, 07:56:59 AM
I'd like to add to the supportive comments for Leon, Dave and the Pendraken team for taking this open and honest approach.

I have not voted as I did not have any plans to purchase BKCIII, if I did my personal preference would be option 4.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Grimheart on 03 May 2017, 09:43:55 AM
I would also like to address the obvious heart felt post by Leon.

Regarding the rules themselves, and not the factual errors on the army lists which are really a separate thing entirely, I feel we wargamers have quite a reputation for picking holes in rule sets whilst many of us have never actually taken the significant effort to produce a set ourselves for public criticism.

Many rule sets have changed and brought out multiple versions over the years, some successfully, some received with a lot of negative feedback.
In that Pendraken and BKC3 are far from being alone.
A new version, especially by new owners/authors with their own ideas on where the rules should go, always increases that risk factor.

See this typical TMP thread for an example of wargamers debating different rules versions and which were bad or good:
http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=452329

I can understand Leon and Pendrakens disappointment with BKC3 but would strongly suggest they try not to take it too much to heart.

Rules writing is a difficult skill and sometimes it goes wrong.

I sincerely hope they can put this behind them and accept it as a learning experience for the future.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: KeithS on 03 May 2017, 11:32:34 AM
I agree with those who are expressing sympathy for Pendraken about this situation.  There seems to be a considerable amount of support for a reprint and this might seem to be a worthwhile course with no cost and some benefit for people voting but I think that it is worth considering what this entails for Pendraken.  In addition to the considerations I listed in my previous post, discarding the current print run, producing a new one and distributing free copies to those who are unsatisfied with the current set would involve considerable overheads, I would think running into several thousands of pounds, a substantial expense for a small company.  This might be justified if the current ruleset were completely unplayable and not fit for use, however I don't think that this is the case here.  The criticisms that I see here while upsetting to some people perhaps because of disappointed expectations do not seem insurmountable by applying some judicious ruling and use of errata.  The cost of the rule book at £20 (or possibly £25) while not insignificant is not unduly expensive by current standards and is about the same or less than a single supplement to some other systems.  I suspect that there are a number of people here who have paid similar sums for other rulesets, have tried them, not found them to their liking and moved on without too much concern.  Therefore I would ask for people to consider the options carefully and give the rules a good try before deciding on option 4 as opposed to other less draconian approaches.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Fenton on 03 May 2017, 11:44:55 AM
I haven't bought the rules yet but to intend to. I echo the comments above. I have bought many rulesets where the erratta has been pages long and I wonder if a living FAQ might not be a bad thing either. So voted for an army list pdf instead of a full reprint as this to me seems the best way forward and will hopefully not have as big a financial impact on Pendraken as I am sure everyone wants to get over this hurdle and let Pendraken to continue to produce high quality minis in our favourite scale


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Nick the Lemming on 03 May 2017, 11:52:40 AM
Well said Keith.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: pierre the shy on 03 May 2017, 12:10:38 PM
Like some others here I have not bought BKC3 so will not be casting a vote myself, but I do really sympathise with Leon and the Pendraken team given the time, effort and costs that they have put into getting BKC3 published as well as the efforts they are now making to resolve the situation.

I also though that KeithS and Fenton make some very relevant points in their posts below.

Keep calm and may you roll sixes  ;)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: PFuentes on 03 May 2017, 01:28:30 PM
This is a very honest initiative from the company, bigger companies with more economic power would never do that.
 I think that the costumers would answer with the same ethics and honesty.

In my opinion there are bigger problems than the lists, for example the absence of balance nor a point system for the field defences. I think that a full reprint would be the solution, but I fear it can injure Pendraken's health.
Maybe a new full PDF version can be the best solution and this is not in the voting options. A new PDF corrects everything without deadly printing costs.

Often we print specific pages for game purposes, like army lists or tables. We would keep the book and print some useful specific pages.

I would vote for this "fifth option".


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: DFlynSqrl on 03 May 2017, 01:49:13 PM
I haven't picked up the rules YET, but I did vote for option 2.  I have BKCII, CWC, and FWC all in my collection so it is a planned purchase come next payday.  Army lists will be fine with me.  A full reprint sounds nice, but I can only imagine the dent it would make in Pendraken's current plans and I selfishly prefer them to focus on miniatures.  ;)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Matt J on 03 May 2017, 03:21:31 PM
I have bought the rules and I also have BKC2, read both but not played either, I'm not much of a gamer but I like to collect rule books (something to do with stats, go figure....).

For me option 2 would be fine however from a business point of view it has to be option 4. Leon has been honest about this and I'm sure this will get sorted out, but to continue selling any product that you have publicly conceded is not up to scratch is possibly unethical and certainly unwise. Errata, redone army lists and scenarios would constitute about 70%(?) of the original book its too much to change. This isn't a sticking plaster its a full body cast. The majority of us on the forum are understanding, good natured and know Pendraken as a great company so we can be understanding about it all and will continue to buy. However I'm sure Leon and Dave have purchased the commander series rights to expand and grow and I think this rulebook with its issues will not get the broader market and may even damage the brand.

The next bit might be moderated....

I've met Leon and Dave and they are great blokes, I deal with some really sh*tty people in my business and to see how Pendraken is run is so refreshing. I think they have been let down big time on this and I bet if Leon was really honest I bet he is f*ckin' fuming about it all. They aren't games developers, as far as I know Leon isn't a military historian, they do make exceedingly good models though. They have paid other people to spend 100's of hours to work on the rules and army lists and have been let down (A FW-190 in 1939 FFS!) I'm sorry but it doesn't look like 100's of hours of work to me, crikey BKCII already had the stuff in the lists!

where is the author anyway   ???

EDIT: Language censored...!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Ithoriel on 03 May 2017, 03:54:01 PM
The next bit might be moderated....

To save the moderators some time if it is I'll leave out the detail and just register my support of the sentiments ... even if they're no longer visible! :)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Stratoq on 03 May 2017, 04:05:42 PM
First and foremost, my condolences to Leon. It really must be hard to take when you clearly put so much into Pendraken.

Although content with the rules myself, I can only see option 4 being the long term option. To continue selling a book that is going to be so heavily changed is not really an option. However, in the short term it seems a pdf fix will be needed as presumably it would take time to reprint an edited edition.

As a suggestion, why not involve those who have brought the new book already (or even a wider group) in the play testing of the army lists. Possibly even releasing an army list periodically for the Blitzkrieg Commander community to try out and respond to before anything is reprinted. It is just a suggestion but thought it wouldn't hurt to mention.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: grahambeyrout on 03 May 2017, 05:40:52 PM
I think it has to be option 4
To me it is a big ask to expect anybody to spend £25 on a set of rules, which even the seller admits are flawed. however and whatever the additional amendments. Those of us who have dealt with Leon know his integrity and honesty and obviously sympathise with his dilemma, but the forum members are a small minority of the gaming world, and to anyone else it will look like either amateurism, incompetence, or exploitation of the market. Its a hard decision, but I think it is the only way. PDF and printed amendments only compound the sense of incompleteness, especially when the BKC-III launch was so heralded.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: petercooman on 03 May 2017, 05:50:06 PM
crikey BKCII already had the stuff in the lists!



This came to my mind too


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: smallchild139 on 03 May 2017, 05:53:46 PM
Agree with all the above but can I add that I personally am quite happy to wait for as long as it takes to get the rules and lists "right" (if such a thing exists in wargame rules).  Please do not rush anything out and make things worse.  Another 6 months just gives me more time to paint lead!

Good luck

Mark


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sjb1001 on 03 May 2017, 06:06:10 PM
I think that the list fix should come first as a PDF - I will buy the revised set to continue supporting Pendraken as I have over the years by buying figures - once it is firmed up in the fullness of time but think the relatively minor rules issues is the reason we have errata, also some of the 'issues' are based on preference anyway (like me on AT rifles).


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: nikharwood on 03 May 2017, 10:42:52 PM
Thought it was about time I waded into this one - all my comments below are essentially slight edits of email exchanges I've had with Leon in the last few days. For those of you who don't know me, I'm a long-time fan / player of the Commander stable of games - getting into BKC I & Pendraken way back in the day; I helped Pete with the development of CWC, FWC & BKC II - including playtesting, reality-checking, offering daftness and painted figures into the mix (not necessarily in equal measures). I encouraged Leon & Dave to look seriously at the viability of purchasing Specialist Military Publishing when Pete decided to sell - because I saw my favourite set of rules fitting beautifully with my favourite figure producer as they looked to develop their business.

I have a long-standing relationship with Pendraken, including some figure & terrain painting - and previously have spent inordinate amounts of time on this forum - that (unfortunately) has waned in the last couple of years as my personal and professional circumstances evolved (living on Exmoor with no internet access, breakup of marriage, new role in 2014 as CEO of the largest youth work charity in Somerset etc).

All of that is by way of context & background for the following....

First email - ahead of the announcement at the top of this thread:

"Hi Leon
Just had a browse of the forum - there does seem to be a whole load of issues with the lists; really sorry that I didn't get time to have a good look through the lists beforehand. To be honest, I don't quite understand why the lists seem to have been changed so drastically by the author: with BKC II pretty much all the feedback from the forum was included and the lists refined - and I know Pete used some really good knowledge (both his own & others) to get these balanced. If I'd had a chance to spot where the lists were so way-out, I'd have shouted long & hard to you as a caution. I know you had some issues with the author - and (this is probably not for me to say, but I'll say it anyway) I'd advocate a degree of caution in using him for CWC / FWC if he's going to want to rewrite those lists wholesale as well.

It does appear that factual / historical inaccuracy has crept in and this can be such a huge deal-breaker for historical gamers of course. You definitely need to head this off at the pass or you're going to spend a ton of time, effort and resource responding continually to issues etc.

I'm not sure how you're going to respond - essentially you can go with the "this is where we are" and we'll issue errata / updates online; depending on numbers of printed copies, I suspect you're not in any position to redo quickly and reprint.

I think, probably, an upfront and honest acknowledgement of where the lists may be 'off' and that you'll work to correct in time is probably the way forward. It might well be sensible to offer a free PDF of BKCII lists to all purchasers to give options (pretty sure those lists will work fine with the new rules?)

Certainly it's a lesson-learnt and I'd urge absolute caution on changing the CWC lists: there was an absolute *ton* of work that went into those - probably worth gathering info from the forum (and the additional lists on the site) but I'd be very wary of any rewrite of stats and lists I think.

Hope that helps - in my experience of any uncertainty / dissatisfaction being apologetic and honest is the most sensible thing to do."
-----
Second email (yesterday):

"Hi Leon

Thanks for coming back to me - if nothing else, what you're seeing is an out-pouring of support for you guys (in the majority) - which is awesome. I *will* add my voice to that on-forum.

From here - I think the poll is sensible, but also actually reinforcing that you have the final call on anything (business does not equal egalitarian democracy!) - it's worthwhile letting the comments rack up to some volume before you comment I think...

As for the author, I guess my (corporate, business-minded, protect-the-feck-out-of-your-Pendraken-reputation-at-all-costs) opinion would  be based on a binary decision: either you can (will) burn the bridge with him, or you can't (won't).

As I said to you a while ago, I think the author made a load of changes that weren't necessary - and (IMNSHO) has taken a well-tested & respected ruleset backed by a well-tested & respected company (that's you BTW) and used that as a platform to get 'his' rules published. I frankly think that this is f**king disgraceful and that he's taken a serious liberty here - for his own vanity? Who knows... The rules are a long way away from where they were - and the lists (and, again, I am *so* sorry I didn't give these attention) are bonkers going from opinion from folks who are *way* more knowledgeable than I.

I *really* hate the way that he's clearly aware of what's going on - but choosing not to engage, and as you say, keeping his head down. That's shocking - and unacceptable. At the moment, you're (Pendraken collectively) taking the brunt of the feedback - and that's simply wrong.

For me, for what it's worth, I think I'd be tempted at this point (several days passed etc) to call him out and ask him to comment (and f**king apologise, quite frankly). I really don't think there is any merit at this stage in shielding him - unless you want to use him in future (please don't!). I have absolutely no idea whether you've factored him into your on-going rules development, but I would avoid at all costs at the moment. I would even be prepared to offer to find time / capacity to work on CWC / FWC for you - and I'd do it for free. Or some figures ;)

Hope this isn't 'ranty' - but I love you guys, your figures, your service, your company - and I *really* *really* don't want you to suffer because of this."

----
Third email (tonight):

Hi Leon

Don't beat yourself up on this - I think your experience of Warband (massively positive all-round) led you to think that you had the right person to do the job on BKC. You could not have forseen just how this has developed. For my part, I wish I'd been *much* stronger with my initial feedback to you on the changes that were made - I know I talked about change for change sake and not needing to fix something that fundamentally isn't broken - some constructive feedback (I hope - that's the spirit I offer it in) - is that Pete *always* kept a very small, tight, trusted and known group for rules development and playtest; the old adage can apply here: "A camel is a horse designed by committee!"

I think that you had a load of feedback from people who didn't have depth of knowledge of BKC - and therefore you got support to make changes that were simply not needed. The lists are another thing entirely.

As I said before, I'm more than happy to work on CWC - and I know who I'd recruit to help :) Probably worth a call at some point to discuss if you like - or maybe I should scoot up and see you guys for a conversation - about bloody time I did anyway ;)​

Keep smiling, my friend, keep smiling :)

Nik"


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: petercooman on 03 May 2017, 11:09:59 PM
Hi Nik, been a while!

What i don't understand is, nobody spotted the flaws in those list. First thing i did was check the new lists vs the old lists. At least for the armies i have. Although i can't talk about point cost changes before trying them, i can tell that the limits are off and some things are just missing.

Might sound funny, but first thing i did was count the entries in the old list and the entires in the new list (british NWE). When the new list came short a few entries, while i knew the old list even had some additions in the errata that i didn't count, something didn't seem right.

Also if an entry has a 6 limit in the old and a 1 limit in the new, then that's a substantial change. if there are a lot of those around, something should ring a bell.

Lists aside, i'm still going through the book, and will try to get a solo play in this weekend, and see if they still work fine. I'm guessing feedback right now will be valuable as to see where the rules stand.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sediment on 03 May 2017, 11:11:26 PM
Thanks for the additional insight.  It supports a lot of "reading between the lines" visible on the forum.  What a great pity it's turned out this way.

I know the Cold War Commanders group would be more than happy to help in generating the CWCII ruleset.  We've played a lot of big games, testing the CWC ruleset almost to breaking point with entire divisions on the tabletop, and come up with a whole bunch of house rules that we find very playable and again with the right feel for commanding Cold War armies.  We've found CWC such a lot of fun that we're happy to invest time in making any revision a usable product that's fun to play.

Hope it all turns out well in the end.

Cheers, Andy


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: cardophillipo on 03 May 2017, 11:31:53 PM
Thanks Nik for sharing this.

As Andy (Sediment) says the Cold War Commanders would be more than happy to help in any development of CWC. We are all long time Commander series players, not as long as Nik by the sound of it, but we total a few years between us. We have played CWC on a huge scale with over 300 sq ft of terrain and have come up with a very playable set of House Rules that draw from both BKC II and FWC. Among our members are the fine gents who run the annual FWC Boot Camp in Slimbridge so i'm sure any FWC issues we will be more than happy to assist with.

We are happy to help in anyway we can there is a massive amount of play experience, historical knowledge and technical knowledge among us. Most of all an enthusiasm to see Pendraken and the Commander Series be a the success they deserve.

It's late and i'm rambling but you get the message.

Cheers

Richard P
Cold War Commanders


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Sandinista on 04 May 2017, 12:03:29 AM
Errata and pdf lists are fine by me, It's not too big an issue in the scheme of things. Yes, a little disappointing but as others have said I'd rather see Pendraken spending it's money on new figure ranges than an unnecessary reprint.

Cheers
Ian


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Itinerant Hobbyist on 04 May 2017, 06:09:38 AM
Mom - so good to see you here. You've always been an inspiration to my gettingvinto BKCII. I was one of the proofers and I have learned a lot from this experience.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: ianrs54 on 04 May 2017, 07:25:00 AM
Agree with both Andy and Richard - we would like to help....with both.

IanS


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: weredoomed2003 on 04 May 2017, 08:46:07 AM

Well we finally had our first true playtest of BKC3 at our gaming club and this unfortunately reinforced our disappointment with the rule set.  In fact after two moves we abandoned and reverted to BKC2 as we didn't want fo waste an evening.  Previous comments have highlighted all the issues with the army lists and the numerous errors and contradictions with the main body of the text.  What we found after trying to play was perhaps more insidious in that even if 'corrected' the balance of the game has been altered for the worse.  As an example we abandoned after my German opponent called in 2 models of 105mm as off table support on to my Soviet infantry that were stuck in the open (without the +1 for ordering the same action my Cv7 has only a 41% chance of a second order).  The values for the off table support have been doubled or more than doubled from 2,3 and 4 dice (for 75mm, 105mm and 150mm) to 3 dice, 6 dice and 9 dice.  With just 2 105s hitting thats 12 dice hitting on a 4-6, an average of 6 hits per stand -  enough as an average to wipe out all the infantry.  It's totally unbalanced and I can't see how playtesting could have missed this change?  We didn't agree with the ground attack rules and lack of choice between area and concentrsted fire - this seems not in keeping with the choice of say a 109 to bomb an area or go jn to straff a single target.  This is an example of a rule change that is not an error or contradiction but a simplification that doesn't add to the game in our opinion.  Similar issues lie with the spcial abilities so for example a Panther has 6/100 and the tank buster ability that reduces the save kf the opponent by 1,  why have tbis extra complication when each gun has different number of attack dice to represent their effectiveness in any case?? (Why a Panther is rated higher than a King Tiger or Jagdpanther I can't see either but it is amusing to see a Pz35t with same  attack dice as a Tiger....
Unfortunately our conclusion was to put the 3 sets of BKC3 on the floor, write off the £60 spent as a bad loss and get on playing BKC2.  I don't know what the author was thinking in changing the rules, it seems from our point of view a need to make changes for changes sake to justify the rebranding as a Pendraken ruleset.  But the end result is at best a very poor ruleset strewn with errors of which over half is armylists that are a waste of paper, and at worst (especially if you have not played BKC2) an unplayable set that only serves to confuse.
Apologies for being blunt but being experienced wargamers with years of putting on games at shows this is our honest opinion.   I myself will now be very circumspect about future Pendraken rulesets (please please do not make the same awful mistake with our beloved CWC!!!)and certainly won't go near anything by the same author.  I know this may be harsh and I must reiterate that I love Pendraken models and think Leon, Dave and the team are great, but my verdict on BKC3 is that I can't belive it's still being marketed and sold given the acknowledgement that it's such a poor product and if I could return my copy and get a refund I would. 


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: petercooman on 04 May 2017, 08:58:41 AM
It has been marked as unavailable on the main website.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: weredoomed2003 on 04 May 2017, 09:03:18 AM
Sorry -got a bit fired up at the end there and it reads a bit more severe than I intended...


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Orcs on 04 May 2017, 02:00:46 PM
I would like to add my support to Dave, Leon and the team at Pendraken.

Please do not take the negative comments to heart.All of the online comments are not against you as either individuals or  Pendraken the company , but the BKC3 rulebook. 

You have a good company with a formidable reputation for its products and customer service, which in my opinion has only been enhanced by your statement. 




Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Malbork on 04 May 2017, 02:33:19 PM
I would like to second Orcs' comment.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: williamb on 04 May 2017, 02:51:54 PM
Finally read through the rules and decided on number four.   I agree with a lot of what Nick Harwood and weredoomed2003 have posted.  It appears that the person who was given the rewrite of the rules has failed to do what should have been done.   There are some changes that might have been good, but there are too many unnecessary changes.   The scenarios lack force ratios.  Army lists are missing items.  Doctrine and formation are gone.   Field defenses are free!?!?!?  I regret pre-ordering the rules.  If I had seen what has been posted before deciding I would not have bought them.  While I would like to see CWC and FWC redone so that the stats and lists are similar to what is in BKCII I am not going to pre-order them.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sjb1001 on 04 May 2017, 03:23:03 PM
I think we really need to let Leon and the team concentrate on the issue at hand which they are doing admirably and not start putting a cloud of doom over CWC-II before the work has started.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: T13A on 04 May 2017, 03:29:57 PM
Hi

I just wanted to say thank you to Nik for his insight above into what has been going on with regard to BKC-II/BKC-III and just say that I agree with everything he said. In particular:

"As I said to you a while ago, I think the author made a load of changes that weren't necessary - and (IMNSHO) has taken a well-tested & respected ruleset backed by a well-tested & respected company (that's you BTW) and used that as a platform to get 'his' rules published. I frankly think that this is f**king disgraceful and that he's taken a serious liberty here - for his own vanity? Who knows... The rules are a long way away from where they were - and the lists (and, again, I am *so* sorry I didn't give these attention) are bonkers going from opinion from folks who are *way* more knowledgeable than I".

Personally, as I have said elsewhere, I think the problem is more than the mistakes, omissions etc. in the rule book and lists but with the 'new' rules themselves. I would suggest this is backed up by the people saying that they will not use/cannot use BKC-III and will carry on using BKC-II (myself included).

Perhaps a way forward would be to go back to BKC-II and simply check out what really needed changing and starting again. If you agree with Nik (as I do) then this might not be as onerous as it sounds.

For my part, and again as I have said elsewhere, I was just looking for a bit clearer explanation in the new rule book about:

•   visibility and concealed troops (and judging from an answer to a previous post of mine, clearer explanations are readily available somewhere already)

•   Fighting in Built-Up areas

And just to emphasis, I do not think the rules need changing or to be made 'simpler', (I really do not think you could make any worth while set of WWII rules simpler than BKC-II, if you did they would become 'Fantasy' rules (IMHO)), just clearer explanations as to how the rules actually work.

If I was sure that was what was going to happen, I for one would happily put down the money I have spent on BKC-III to 'experience' and pay Pendraken again for BKC-IV or what ever you chose to call it.

Just my tuppence worth (or is it sixpence worth by now)?

Cheers Paul


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Jimbo94 on 04 May 2017, 11:50:07 PM
The publication of BKCIII had really rekindled my interest in WW2 gaming and as I had armies ready to use from BKCII I would be able to get straight on and start playing after a quick read of the new rules.

I was just about to purchase them when I started to read this forum and held off as a result.
Given the general impression created it looks like the author has managed to make a excellent set of core principles largely unworkable.

Given this the only real solution is to carry on with BKCII and wait for a complete re write.

Good news for me is I am getting the Finns and Russians out for the first winter war game for about 5 years so in some ways that is still a positive outcome of all this.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Gwydion on 05 May 2017, 10:42:46 AM
First, I just want to say thanks to Leon for the way he handled this, the options he gave me in his email and the speed with which he resolved my reply.

Secondly, I will continue to support Pendraken and play CWC and BKC II and look forward to revised versions of both.

That is the point though - I want revised versions of sets of rules that work in a unique way amongst WWII and Modern sets. I don't want a new style of rules, I want the (small) errors in BKCII correcting, the clarifications and tweaks from players over the years incorporating in an integrated format and updated lists in accord with those clarifications and changes.

I voted for a new print version because as far as I can see a pdf of the lists isn't going to help the mistakes and unworkable changes in the rules.

If cost is a problem, and I can see it might be under the circumstances, I would rather have a printed book of rules with pdf lists.

My preferred option though is the full package I was looking forward to.

Best wishes


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: OldenBUA on 05 May 2017, 01:36:31 PM
I hadn't played BKC for some time, but after reading some of the first reviews ordered the new version. Then, before I got the new book, the flurry of posts with questions, outcries and shock started. So I was not sure what to expect. Still haven't read the whole book, but my first impressions, for what they are worth.

The book has a good layout and good production values. Most of the basic things are still in there. But a lot of things have been changed. There are many new features, and some old ones that have been rewritten. But the overall impression I get is that little thought has gone into how everything fits together. How many playtest games have been done? By the author? Or by the others that helped out?

And I have no idea what happened to the army lists​. Too many errors, typos and omissions, and point values that make no sense in some cases.

All this doesn't mean the end of the world of course. A few pages of errata and clarifications should sort out most of the problems. For the lists, a comprehensive review, including a cross check to make sure they match across all the lists and make sense needs to be done. So I voted for pdf lists.

And let's be fair, there are some good ideas in the book. But I cannot fathom WHY some things have been changed that did not need changing.

Alex


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: chris stringer on 05 May 2017, 01:41:26 PM
I would be happy with a revised PDF of the army lists and rules errata in due course...I think Pendraken is handling this problem very well!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Techno on 05 May 2017, 02:22:50 PM
Welcome, Chris.....And I think everyone can take it as read, that Leon will be busting a gut to 'sort this out' as fast as is humanly possible.

Cheers - Phil


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: d_Guy on 05 May 2017, 04:14:31 PM
Welcome, Chris.....And I think everyone can take it as read, that Leon will be busting a gut to 'sort this out' as fast as is humanly possible.

Cheers - Phil

Let me second this welcome to Chris and extend it to a bunch of new folks:
Jimbo94, Sjb1001, Smallchild139, Sediment, Leonardo, Grimheart, KeithS, Pfuentes, Stratoq, Grahambeyrout, Rolf Steiner, Jethro2, Tarty and WilliamB (I like your blog, dude!). You have each brought insights to BKCIII (even difficult to hear ones). I hope that you'll stay around and continue to conribute. The Pendraken team (and community) is great and I can only echo Techno's comments about Leon.

If I omitted anyone from the welcome - I apologize,

d_guy
Village Idiot (unofficial)



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: vonlacy on 05 May 2017, 04:56:05 PM
Had time to read through the rules.

Firstly, I would like to say that physically they are well produced, clear and well presented, as I would expect from Pendraken.

I have played Blitzkreig Commander since it was first published, it is elegant and simple.

I was looking forward to Blitzkreig Commander 111, to refine, clarify and hone the system.

Unfortunately, we have change for the sake of change, for example no FAC only a super FOO who can also handle aircraft, even though they would be probably on different nets, even if they had radios! The army lists, as other forum member's have pointed out are not fit for purpose, my Russians can have up to 12 armoured units per 1000 pts, as long as it is only 1 of each type, unless it is a T34, BT5/7 & T26 where we can have 2 of each! Units have disappeared from the lists i.e. KV1E, others are now classed as lumbering, i.e. KV1, making them all but useless in an attacking force.

Well done Pendraken in holding up your hand about these rules, others would cross their fingers and hope it would go under the radar.

Disappointed, so it's a 4 from me.



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: williamb on 05 May 2017, 05:08:56 PM
@ d_Guy
Thanks for the welcome.   Your collection of helmets and weapons is impressive.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sediment on 05 May 2017, 05:19:37 PM
@ dGuy, thanks for the welcome.  I've actually been a pretty inactive member here for some time as most of my efforts have been on the SMP BKC and CWC forum, but emphasis has now switched to Pendraken since the release of BKCIII.  Unfortunately, I'm something of a heretic, playing in 6mm as I have too much time and effort invested in my large little armies.  Does give me a vested interest in seeing the best WW2 and Cold War rule sets get revamped right though.

Cheers, Andy

PS Our local group is based at the Deeside Defenders club near Chester, if anyone fancies a game and, if you suffer megalomania in miniature, there is also the Cold War Commanders Group who play some seriously big games throughout the year.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: d_Guy on 05 May 2017, 05:49:41 PM
Thanks, William! I still have a few to put up and a lot more descriptions to write.

Andy (sediment) oops! misread your sign-up date. You should be welcoming me.  :D


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: toxicpixie on 05 May 2017, 06:02:48 PM
@ d_Guy
Thanks for the welcome.   Your collection of helmets and weapons is impressive.

I'm trying really hard to resist adding a Sid James laughter track to that.

Keeps them well polished, he does.

Yes, welcome to new or de-lurking people, hope you come for the rules & stay for the knowledge and chat!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sediment on 05 May 2017, 06:09:49 PM
@ dGuy LOL, no worries.  My post count defines me as a newbie here pretty well.

@TP Cor wot a carve up!

Cheers, Andy


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Genom on 05 May 2017, 07:38:24 PM
I've been keeping quiet so far because I don't tend to articulate very well when it comes to things like this.

I think the main issue is very much a case of what everyone was expecting vs what actually happened. I think the expectation was that someone was taking BKCII and working through the errata and clarifications from the SMP forum to update the ruleset in one document.  There were probably some minor rewrites required to work through for instance Recce rules.  I don't think anyone was expecting such a wholesale change of stuff that worked perfectly fine.

Now as for the options, I've gone for option 2. I had only ever intended to buy the PDF to check through the expected minor changes between the versions to see what we were going to use in our games as we still play regularly.  I've still not managed to read through it properly, but it seems like the army lists are a bit of a write off and I honestly don't like the idea of Pendraken having to ditch 10K + of investment as that would cripple or bankrupt most wargames companies.  I think Pendraken are probably more financially stable than that but you know what I mean it's still a lot of money and I rather like Pendraken as a company and I'm willing to write it off as I know they will do their best to fix things.



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Nick the Lemming on 05 May 2017, 09:08:49 PM
Trying to salvage what's good, I'd use the opportunity to run an open playtest for those who bought BKC 3; get feedback from them when re-writing it. I presume Pendraken won't use the same author, for BKC3.1 or CWC, and I'd consider not using the existing playtesters either, unless they were routinely ignored by the author despite arguing against the changes he made. As for the editing and proofreading team, I'd get new ones since the previous ones obviously weren't up to the job. I'm sure you could find volunteers here if you didn't want to go the route of professionals.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Steve J on 05 May 2017, 10:11:45 PM
Quote
I'd consider not using the existing playtesters either, unless they were routinely ignored by the author despite arguing against the changes he made. As for the editing and proofreading team, I'd get new ones since the previous ones obviously weren't up to the job.

As one of the feedback team, I'd refer you to Leon's opening post on this topic, which is worth reading in light of the above. I can understand your comments, but believe me when I say that we spent a long time giving feedback on various issues through out the whole process. Whether they were taken on board by the author is another matter entirely.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Zbigniew on 05 May 2017, 10:27:26 PM
I received my copy today. A quick look at army lists that interest me most revealed the problem. I got a notion the author underestimated  difficulty of writing new army lists for the whole war.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: petercooman on 05 May 2017, 11:13:31 PM
Trying to salvage what's good, I'd use the opportunity to run an open playtest for those who bought BKC 3; get feedback from them when re-writing it. I presume Pendraken won't use the same author, for BKC3.1 or CWC, and I'd consider not using the existing playtesters either, unless they were routinely ignored by the author despite arguing against the changes he made. As for the editing and proofreading team, I'd get new ones since the previous ones obviously weren't up to the job. I'm sure you could find volunteers here if you didn't want to go the route of professionals.

As one of the feedback team, I'd refer you to Leon's opening post on this topic, which is worth reading in light of the above. I can understand your comments, but believe me when I say that we spent a long time giving feedback on various issues through out the whole process. Whether they were taken on board by the author is another matter entirely.

To say everyone that worked on it should be replaced is a bit unfair i think. We don't know what people were instructed to look for, or wich feedback was given/ignored or even what were the goals/key objectives in the process.

Also, seeing the way the lead author deals with the comments (so actually ignoring everything), makes me think he didn't care much about feedback from playtesters either!!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: jaunty101 on 05 May 2017, 11:25:15 PM
Can i still get a copy Leon
I personaly think your makeing a rod for your own back, becuase if the next set of rules doesnt fit some ones idea of perfect then you and the wider communaty will be sat here with no rules becuase a few did get the rules or couldnt be assed to read them.

that said haveing played since BKC 1 then 2 editions of BKC2 Id be shocked if you got it right first time, and iam a little supprised that people acted so negtively haveing read what people have put(around the net) i can honestly say that most of these people wouldnt be happy with any thing you put out.

And being a guy that would rather not play then play with flames of war iam a little upset iam not getting my ww2 fix.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: paulr on 05 May 2017, 11:52:18 PM
Trying to salvage what's good, I'd use the opportunity to run an open playtest for those who bought BKC 3; get feedback from them when re-writing it. I presume Pendraken won't use the same author, for BKC3.1 or CWC, and I'd consider not using the existing playtesters either, unless they were routinely ignored by the author despite arguing against the changes he made. As for the editing and proofreading team, I'd get new ones since the previous ones obviously weren't up to the job. I'm sure you could find volunteers here if you didn't want to go the route of professionals.

Disparaging the people who volunteered their time to help provide the warqaming community with a set of rules that was planned to give years of enjoyment is unhelpful at best


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 06 May 2017, 12:29:07 AM
Can i still get a copy Leon.

Send me an email and we'll a copy sorted out for you.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Nick the Lemming on 06 May 2017, 01:51:20 AM
Disparaging the people who volunteered their time to help provide the warqaming community with a set of rules that was planned to give years of enjoyment is unhelpful at best


Read my post again. I specifically said that if they provided input and argued against rules changes, but were ignored, then that's a different matter for the playtesters, but to allow so many errors through on the army lists in particular suggests that either the proofreaders didn't have a clue what they were doing or did a half-arsed job, neither of which should be lauded or allowed to continue. Letting the same people do the same shoddy job is just asking for more trouble, and is more than just "unhelpful."

I've helped playtest other rules, and I've done a lot of proofreading. I haven't always been listened to when I've given feedback, so I know how that goes, but if I saw the mess that the army lists were in, I'd not just be reporting it to the author, I'd be reporting it to Leon too, with detailed examples of why they were a mess. Volunteers can be useful, but if they aren't up to the job, they're just wasting everyone's time (and sadly, in this case, money too).


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: jaunty101 on 06 May 2017, 03:11:58 AM
sorry iam turning the edit filter for this so i hope it makes sense,

What every body as seemed to have forgten is the guys at Pendraken have heald there hands up and said your not happy we will change it.

If this was any other wargames company you wouldnt have got a say you got a faq ect and thats it, your lucky that the guys care  and not just looking to take your money.
haveing talked to friends there are parts that dount seem to make sense (but they do if you look at them propley) and this game is by no means the worse for this 40k is full of contradictry rules and age of sigmar 4 pages of rules and i think its now 14 page faq.
(and you never get the chance to till gw what you think btw)

and before some one asks I dount know any one at Pendraken

rant over.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: paulr on 06 May 2017, 05:01:21 AM
Read my post again. I specifically said that if they provided input and argued against rules changes, but were ignored, then that's a different matter for the playtesters, but to allow so many errors through on the army lists in particular suggests that either the proofreaders didn't have a clue what they were doing or did a half-arsed job, neither of which should be lauded or allowed to continue. Letting the same people do the same shoddy job is just asking for more trouble, and is more than just "unhelpful."

I've helped playtest other rules, and I've done a lot of proofreading. I haven't always been listened to when I've given feedback, so I know how that goes, but if I saw the mess that the army lists were in, I'd not just be reporting it to the author, I'd be reporting it to Leon too, with detailed examples of why they were a mess. Volunteers can be useful, but if they aren't up to the job, they're just wasting everyone's time (and sadly, in this case, money too).

Nick, I read your post carefully, more than once and you have repeated the same assertion, picking your most polite example "... but if they aren't up to the job, they're just wasting everyone's time"

Neither you or I know what was reviewed or what feedback was given and so I would again politely suggest that assuming "they aren't up to the job" is unhelpful.

I will leave that judgement to Leon and co who are in a much better position to judge


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: williamb on 06 May 2017, 06:34:07 AM
I have play tested and helped proof read a number of rule sets over the years.   Rule authors do not always listen to the play testers.   There are times when they have already decided how the rules will be and are unwilling to make changes that are suggested.  Fortunately, that has not been the case with those projects I have worked on.  

Play testers can also be a problem.   I know of at least one who was given a copy of the rules with a number of obvious error who reported back that everything was fine.  The play testers should be fully informed as to the intent of the project by the person who is requesting the project and not an intermediary, such as the author in the case of BKC3.  

In the case of going from BKC2 to BKC3, the play testers should have only included those who had copies of and played BKC2 more than a few times.  If it was to be a minor rewrite with missing items being added to the army lists and clarifying some rules that is what they should have been told.  If it was to be something else then they should have been informed of that.  By doing that, if the author of the revision steps outside of the intended guides, then they would have known, raised objections, and informed Leon about what was happening.  An example of this being what happened to the army lists.

An additional item that I have noted on the forums in the increase in the deadliness of artillery.   While artillery was quite effective, the values in BKC2 were reasonable.  Those in BKC3 seem excessive.  

Scenarios do not have force ratios.  Do both sides get the same amount of points?  Even if one is making a pre-planned attack and the other defending?   Deployment by points?   Why do I need to have a calculator for this and for break point, when previously all I had to do was count the units?

I don’t object to rule revisions, having gone from WRG IV through WRG VII, Empire I through III, etc.   What I do object to is taking a rule set that only needed some clarifications and additions and making whole sale changes that have major effects on game play.  I have seen this have some detrimental effects.   Field of Glory became a very popular set of rules for ancients.   Then Slytherine revised them and released a second edition.  I do not know what the changes were, but the players were extremely upset and FOG has lost most of the people who played it.   Warhammer went through a major change and while there were people who were upset,  Games Workshop was not concerned as their whole purpose is to make changes and get people to keep buying new figures.

There are some changes in BKC 3 that look like they would be good, but there are others that are contradictory and have made me hesitant to even sit down and play it.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Sunray on 06 May 2017, 07:35:12 AM
In these circumstances, the priority is that the course of action taken by Pendraken allows BKC-III to become a playable set of rules with as little hassle and cost as possible.  If it was a car it would be recalled.  

I have voted for Option 2 - the nearest thing to a recall that allows existing rules to become viable.  I have my own list of amendments for BKC-II that I use for post war gaming - like (a) revision of the M4 A3 E8 Sherman against the T-34/85 as vindicated by experience in Korea and the Middle East, and (b) rules that allow intel gathering to shape the operation with role play for special forces/agents.  
It all bows down to the roll of the dice and the + or - factors.

On the longer term, the next edition will rectify the errors, as subsequent editions tend to do.

Can I applaud Leon & Dave on their transparency on this issue and appeal for a bit of solidarity as we get through it.

+1 Pendraken , +1


James aka Sunray



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: sebigboss79 on 06 May 2017, 07:53:25 AM
Phew what a rollercoaster.

First of all I have not played BKC in any edition, I know Leon and the team have been madly busy doing this and being a Pendraken customer for 8 years (ordered my first SciFi sets 2009 iirc) give me some opinion on this matter.

First and foremost welcome to the internet. Besides Entitlement it is generally the case that negative word of mouth travels a lot faster and one bad review outweighs 7 positive ones. That to say, without having had a look at the game itself, I am not implying that there are no issues ever with a new release. I am however arguing a good deal of it is blown out of proportion.


Secondly, Leon and Co. HAVE been busy on this not because he says so, but because we all know they were. Regardless, knowing this insomniac ;) , I doubt he could ever "do something" without committing 100% to it. So effort is certainly not an issue.

However the result seems to be criticised and an initial scan reveals (to me) the general problems as follows.

1. Playtesting: My counterargument to "lack of rigour" is that you simply cannot playtest all potential scenarios. I remember playtesting another ruleset for 6 months after the team had done it for 12 already and we ran into three issues right after release.  Issue one was a non starter. Without detail (which would reveal the game) we decided to leave the issue to resolve itself via tactical gameplay. Second problem was a change in armylists, causing a problem for one army and one specific tactic in another. We allowed a wider interpretation of a special rule and restricted another type of tactic. Resolved.

2. Competitive gamers will always find a way to break the game/ argue that x is broken because. Nothing you can do there, literally. Having been around acouple of years I applaud Geedubs attitude of "we don't care".  My point is no matter what you do there will be some people upset for whatever reason.

3. Typos: Not nice but having to edit a document you have seen a million times simply has this problem. Anyone doing editing saying otherwise should be avoided like the plague.


My vote therefore would be for Errata and armylists in pdf. Rationale is that competitive gamers will always research the latest gamewinning strategies and casual gamers will solve the remaining issues as gentlemen while gaming. It would also free resources in that fashion that instead of reprinting BKC III the errata and potential changes could be the starting point for BKC IV :-

My personal opinion is people should chill out a little and not run the risk of a heart attack OVER A GAME! Agreed the situation could be improved (Leon will be the first to agree me presumes) but pointing, shouting and wardancing for lightning strike in the Pendraken HQ will NOT solve your (perceived/imagined) problems. How about being constructive instead? IF I were a BKC afficiando and unhappy about the status quo, I would have emailed Leon (yes he does read your emails) and politely suggested to change x to y because of z. And going one step further I would have asked if I was welcome to do so and report back on the issue.

My 0.02 €


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Norm on 06 May 2017, 08:49:47 AM
From memory (which could be wrong), some months ago, it was thought that BKC III was ready to go, but feedback at that time was that the rules had departed too far from the previous BKC sets and so another rewrite was embarked upon. If all of that is right, is it a case of the rules still need to move closer to earlier versions or are the new rules themselves OK as a new edition, they just need to be better presented?


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: toxicpixie on 06 May 2017, 09:50:56 AM
Just a minor note, but blind testers who have NOT played BKC (or whatever the game may be) before are vital. Only they will catch the assumptions that experienced players breeze through but first timers stumble into and fall.

Also, this is not "my BKC" revision - it's not my house rules and assumptions, but a new edition for everyone including brand new players AND grognards.

It takes both... same with in depth subject knowledge - the specialist is too narrow, and as BKC is very top down you need someone to sanity check that the fiddly crunchy simulationist bits work in context for the uninitiated and the curious but novice.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 06 May 2017, 03:07:44 PM
Just as a note on the playtesters, the author had a group of people at his end and then we sent the rules off to a further/wider group of people at our side.  Our group was a wide mix of ex-BKC players, current BKC players, non-BKC players and also rules authors of established sets already on the market.  There was a variety of feedback that came back on all sorts of areas and it was all sent on to the author to look at and amend where he felt necessary.  We then had a final face-to-face meeting before we went to print to iron out any outstanding feedback issues and points raised.  As I've said before, I didn't see any problems during this process, our feedback group were all helpful and constructive people and we went to print confident that we'd done everything we needed to do. 

Obviously it hasn't worked out that way, but any blame for that lies with us as the publishers, not with people who gave up their free time to help us out.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: williamb on 06 May 2017, 03:22:02 PM
Leon, you are correct in that you do need to have those who have never seen the rules try them at some point.   I have seen the situation where those who have been involved from the start being used to the rules and missing flaws.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Ithoriel on 06 May 2017, 03:30:57 PM
Now that I've calmed down a little, I think what's frustrated me most with BKCIII is that it's done reasonably well with the difficult bits and then fallen down completely on what should have been the easy bits.

I like the bulk of the recce changes (though abilities you can't get close enough to the enemies to trigger is a slight oops!).

I like the idea of special abilities rather than notes, though some seem a little odd to me and several seem to be being applied rather too liberally.

The Close Assault rules seem better drafted than before.

But then artillery seems to have become equipped self-targeting MIRV rounds and is controlled by anyone with a walkie-talkie (OK, OK slight exaggeration ... but not much!)

The army lists are a nightmare.

However, between BKCII and BKCIII there is clearly a wonderful set of rules struggling to get out. I'm up for assisting in getting the butterfly out of it's cocoon, if I can. Even if that does consist of shutting up, sitting down and waiting patiently! :)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: T-Square on 06 May 2017, 03:34:31 PM
First props to Pendraken for getting out front and accepting responsibility.  This indicates the team is willing to make things right.  Piling on does not help fix the issues.

Having trouble shot a few major projects here are some recommendations on how to get it done. 

1.  Put out errata for the rules to allow wide play testing by all interested parties.  They can provide feedback on the forums.  Provide updated errata regularly to ensure you get feedback during the entire process.
2.  Have a trusted team of play testers provide intimate feedback to the people rewriting the rules.  (This includes people totally unfamiliar with the rules.). These need to be individuals who won't pull punches and you will listen to without rancor entering the equation.  (The authors may hear some things they don't want to hear.)
3.  For army lists right now use BKC2 lists.  Provide errata for command units to use with those lists.  (This should make an initial errata much easier.)
4.  Have a separate team work on the Army lists for future publication.  (As an errata PDF or other.) (play test, play test, play test)
5.  Once you are satisfied with the results, publish BKC 3.1

Hope this helps,

Keep smiling

I've got a bunch of guys coming over Tuesday with the new rules to have a go.  We play BKC2 and FWC regularly.

(First post here.  I've got a few over on the BKC/CWC/FWC forums.)



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: ianrs54 on 06 May 2017, 03:54:38 PM
Its even more insane here - Hi T_square.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: baggagetrain on 06 May 2017, 06:27:48 PM
Hi again all,
Last Thursday we again tried BKCIII, to give them a fair chance since being told that we could opportunity fire in command moves. So, with prearranging the we decided to do Scenario 9.
Well first off, we had to decide the size of each force as there is nothing in the Scenario other than the attacker can have 4 off table support units for free if the defender opts for any defensive terrain, then how many turns there are and the weather options in the end we decided that the attacker would have overwhelming points odds of 2-1 in that the Germans had 2000pts and the British 4000pts. We play at a lower scale in that one infantry stand = 1 section (10men) and 1 AFV or Gun = 1 AFV or gun.

The Germans set up in concealed positions and with the British deploying 20cm in. the first Three moves went okay with the German bringing in mortar fire on one section of infantry and inflicted 2 hits he then tried to fire again but blundered and the whole command had to fall back from their positions in a village that they occupied.  The start of the third move and the Germans decided to open up with opportunity fire on one of the Churchill's (Good Armour) advancing and showed its flank to the concealed Panther (Tank Buster) and dished out 2 hits and the Panther then placed on the table, the rest of the British forces moved up. Two tank troops (two Cromwell’s and one firefly in each Troop) moved up and then opened fire on the now seen Panther, no more Panther! The Germans did not do any more opportunity fire. In the Germans third move he placed one more Panther and a Tiger first firing with the Panther he hit one of the Cromwell’s giving it 3 hits and suppressed it, the British then decided to use opportunity fire with the said two troops minus one Cromwell and a Churchill 95 two Cromwell’s one firefly and the Churchill were under half range, another dead Panther. The Tiger then fired on another Churchill and dished out 2 hits but was unable to suppress it. So, the Churchill then opened up under opportunity fire with 3 25pdr guns brought in by an FO with line of sight of the Tiger gave it 2 hits and suppressed it. This is the point that we stopped, the German player not looking too happy, though I do not know the makeup of his forces I don’t think he had much left. The game felt clunky and did not seem to flow.

First off is, what is the point of Tank Buster? Give them an extra dice or a lower to hit number or even re-roll missed hits. the stats should be where this shown not an extra rule

Good Armour? Give them better armour save rolls or again re-roll unsaved hits again the stats should be where this shown not an extra rule

Vulnerable? This makes no sense at all APC classed as this, really? APC’s were and are designed to fight against small arms fire, okay open topped APC’s should be Vulnerable to mortar and indirect artillery fire but not to small arms, a rethink is needed on this one.

Sighting once the unit is on the table and the enemy has LOS it can be seen, even when it is cammed up! When I was in the army we learnt how to Camouflage, not just one day or even one week a year, it was constant and major part of the job and believe it or not the Germans late in WWII were brilliant at this, as too were the Japanese, but to fire one shot and then to be seen by all troops with LOS is a tad unlikely and this needs to be looked at. Personally, I think there should be a roll for sighting for anything that moves or fires over 15cm away. This can be as simple as rolling 1D6 and if in the open seen on a 3,4,5 or 6 in light cover 5 or 6 in hard cover seen on a 6 if the stand is dug in add +1 to this, if in hard cover and dug in reroll any 6 and must then get 4,5 or 6 to be seen, just a simple addition.

I had hoped that Artillery would have been sorted out in BKCIII but it is still the same only some stats have changed a bit, I do not like that if the templet lands on 10 stands, just for instance Navel guns’ fire, it gets 120 rolls of the dice and if only one stand then 12 dice. I have never agreed with this even under BKCII. I think one way would be that the guns roll no more dice than their stats give so if they have 12 then they can only roll 12 dice but the firer should have the option to say where his dice will hit either one stand or all stands so if the templet covers 6 stands he can choose either one stand to take all 12 hits or all stands to take 2 hits each.

I am sorry Leon but I have voted for option 4, not just for the issues that we have seen, but the layout of some parts of the rules are just completely mind boggling and just doing an errata will take up so much time and to have cross outs and have hand written blocks all over the book is not what I really want so early on with rules. If you want a completely Unbiased play testing group for any revised set please let me know. 


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: ronan on 06 May 2017, 06:52:01 PM
I agree with some points, BUT on others, I feel you didn't like BKCII  :-\ .
I don't think the game should change that much ( new rules for visibility ?...   Or the artillery fire.) (1)

 I wrote on the forum that I was not very happy with some parts in the new rules, But we can't blame everything  ;)


(1) may be it's the scale, that's wrong for you ?


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: baggagetrain on 06 May 2017, 07:11:24 PM
nope nothing wrong with the scale or BKII, I enjoy using them both. so much so I have not used any other WWII rules since BKC came out. I find them very easy to use and get a very good outcome in most of the games I have played, though there are just a few things I find that don't represent what I have read, seen or heard but then again no set of rules will ever represent warfare as it is and all we can hope for is a close proximity. by the way i was not the German player in our last game, and I found it immensely unfair for him.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Dr Dave on 06 May 2017, 07:24:32 PM
"I had hoped that Artillery would have been sorted out in BKCIII but it is still the same only some stats have changed a bit, I do not like that if the templet lands on 10 stands, just for instance Navel guns’ fire, it gets 120 rolls of the dice and if only one stand then 12 dice. I have never agreed with this even under BKCII. I think one way would be that the guns roll no more dice than their stats give so if they have 12 then they can only roll 12 dice but the firer should have the option to say where his dice will hit either one stand or all stands so if the templet covers 6 stands he can choose either one stand to take all 12 hits or all stands to take 2 hits each."

But that's exactly how artillery works. It's an area weapon. If you're in the area then you're potentially affected. What you suggesting would mean that having fewer units - so you're more spread out - would make the off table guns more effective? Arty is now much much better in bkc3 anyway. BUT, we're all discussing what in effect non rules. They're all going back for a swapsey when the new version comes out. It will be like they never existed.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: baggagetrain on 06 May 2017, 08:08:58 PM
yes I agree it is an area weapon, and there are two types of firing, converged where all the rounds land in the same place or within a meter or two and a battery spread where the rounds land as the battery is laid out which normally be in a zigzag pattern with gun having a set distance between each other this would also depend on the calibre of the guns, light guns would be about 4 meter frontage so when the shells landed with an 8 gun battery it would cover an area roughly  32 meters by 12 meters and the 8 rounds will land in this area. so if you have a section in the first 12 meters not all the rounds will hit them but converge fire they would, and that would all depend on the OP and the fire mission he requests, and how many rounds he wants. so if he asks for 5 rounds fire for affect, this would be a standard battery spread with 40 rounds hitting the ground. so how do you purpose it is represented in a set of rules?


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: toxicpixie on 06 May 2017, 08:09:16 PM
What dr Dave said on arty effects. You don't want to get caught clustered, it's an FAOs dream. What was Pattons comment in Tunisia on the panzer grenadiera making even  an armoured assault in close formation? "Murdering good infantry", iirc.

Discussion does seem to be veering from actual rules/lists issues (even if historical based than crunchy how Ro's) and
More into "I don't like it" territory.

From what I read there's definitely a good chassis there to get on the road once the extraneous body work issues are looked at :)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: baggagetrain on 06 May 2017, 11:08:45 PM
They're all going back for a swapsey when the new version comes out. It will be like they never existed.
I think a swapsey as you say, is a little unfair to Leon, he has pulled these at great cost to Pendraken. If they are to be revised and then put out in the same quality as these then I have no problems with a trade in offer, may be like I give back my set of BKCIII and £10 and get the new revamped set. this way Pendraken will not be completely out pocket as much as just doing a straight swap.   


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: williamb on 06 May 2017, 11:20:22 PM
I got the pre-order discount and would be willing to pay the difference.   Most of what is in there is direct copy from BKC2.   I did see that most of the optional rules from page 132 did not make it.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Dr Dave on 07 May 2017, 11:40:20 AM
I think a swapsey as you say, is a little unfair to Leon, he has pulled these at great cost to Pendraken. If they are to be revised and then put out in the same quality as these then I have no problems with a trade in offer, may be like I give back my set of BKCIII and £10 and get the new revamped set. this way Pendraken will not be completely out pocket as much as just doing a straight swap.   

I'm quoting Leon. I'd just like a copy of something that improved on bkc2.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: baggagetrain on 07 May 2017, 11:58:03 AM
I'd just like a copy of something that improved on bkc2.

Agree with that


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Tarty on 08 May 2017, 03:24:23 AM
I'm a newbie to BKC and was really looking forward to these. Having said that I think maybe going back to BKCll for now might be the way to go?? .... don't know? Speaking as a first timer .
I would hate to put more pressure on Leon than what already exists 'Quick fix' might be exactly what's not needed here.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Smoking gun on 08 May 2017, 06:24:23 PM
As one of the people who received my copy of these rules last week, I haven't had time to read the new rules book. I only came to this forum on a whim today so I was surprised to see this announcement and the extensive postings under the errata topics.

I hope Leon can resolve this situation without sacrificing Pendraken Miniatures in the process.

I'm disappointed to hear these rules are flawed as I have enjoyed BK2 and was hoping these rules would help to increase the number of BKC players at my local club.

Regards,

Martin


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: ronan on 08 May 2017, 08:29:27 PM
Hello and welcome Smoking Gun !


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: ianrs54 on 09 May 2017, 06:43:32 AM
Olla Martin


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Smoking gun on 09 May 2017, 11:23:26 AM
Thank you for the welcomes guys,

Martin


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Techno on 09 May 2017, 12:00:19 PM
A belated 'welcome', Martin.

Cheers - Phil.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Dave Fielder on 03 June 2017, 06:35:20 PM
I've not read my new copy, it's sitting at home in the UK whilst I'm away on some Government Business. I'd hate to see Pendraken sacrificed over this! I missed the vote to choose which option. However, when I get back and assuming I'll get a new copy I will buy some WW2 10mm miniatures to balance it out for Leon and the gang. That way at least I can do my bit to ensure the excellence that is Pendraken. Now ... what do I need/want/like ... :-


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: ronan on 03 June 2017, 08:12:59 PM
That way at least I can do my bit to ensure the excellence that is Pendraken.

I agree.

Now ... what do I need/want/like ... :-

What ?! You don't have a "waiting list" ?  :o
 :P   :D


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: AndyT on 03 June 2017, 09:33:03 PM
...... and assuming I'll get a new copy I will buy some WW2 10mm miniatures to balance it out for Leon and the gang......

Good call. I will do the same.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: nheather on 27 June 2017, 12:20:09 AM
Sorry - wrong thread.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: d_Guy on 27 June 2017, 02:56:35 PM
Welcome to the forum nheather! Thread accuracy is NOT one of the more highly prized traits here (at least not that I've every noticed, anyway) :). Thanks for joining in!


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: DougM on 30 September 2017, 02:41:09 PM
Any word on the reprint?


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 04 October 2017, 07:00:29 PM
Not much news beyond the last update in the newsletter, the army lists are being checked to make sure we've not missed anything and I'll be driving to see those people to work through everything face-to-face.  We're also trying to assemble a group of players to work through the rules tweaks as well.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Sulaco on 03 December 2018, 02:23:41 PM
Hi Leon

Any rough dates for release, so I can give you my hard earned Christmas Spends?  :D


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 03 December 2018, 02:57:22 PM
We've finished all of the checks/formatting and then we've sent a proof copy off to a few people to have a quick read through and check it over for us.  Once we've got their feedback through this week we'll be sending the revised document out to a wider feedback group for more checks.  When we get all of that back we can make any final tweaks necessary and get it off to the printers.

I think at this point we'll be cutting it too fine to have anything before Christmas but delivery in the New Year is definite now. 

It's been a long time coming, but we're so close now.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Sulaco on 03 December 2018, 03:07:05 PM
Thanks for a speedy reply. Yes, for the sake of a couple of weeks you may as well get it spot on.

Cheers


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: shakespear on 04 February 2019, 03:29:30 PM
Really interested this


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Windle Poons on 04 February 2019, 06:58:07 PM
Any indication of a release date?


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 04 February 2019, 07:10:08 PM
The file should be off to the printers before the end of the month so we'd have the books with us by the end of March.  With Salute being early this year we'll probably do a re-launch there.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: arthur on 10 February 2019, 05:12:48 PM
......It is years since I got BKC 3 (I am still using my old BKC2)...... how will the replacement copy be solved?  Will you still have my details on file? Frankly, I have forgotten them.
TTFN
MGM


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 11 February 2019, 12:23:24 AM
......It is years since I got BKC 3 (I am still using my old BKC2)...... how will the replacement copy be solved?  Will you still have my details on file? Frankly, I have forgotten them.

It will depend on how you bought the first version.  If you bought it online through our website then we'll have you on file and you will automatically get a new version sent out.  If you bought it at Salute though, we would need you to send the original cover back to us, with your name and address written on the back of it, and we'll get your new version sent out for you.

We'll let folks know all of the details once we've got the confirmed delivery date from the printer.


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Stratoq on 15 February 2019, 04:34:06 PM
It will depend on how you bought the first version.  If you bought it online through our website then we'll have you on file and you will automatically get a new version sent out.  If you bought it at Salute though, we would need you to send the original cover back to us, with your name and address written on the back of it, and we'll get your new version sent out for you.

We'll let folks know all of the details once we've got the confirmed delivery date from the printer.

I bought it online but have since moved, what is the best way of making sure it isn't sent to my old address?


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Techno on 15 February 2019, 05:07:00 PM
First posters......Arthur & Shakespear....Welcome to the forum.  :-h

Cheers - Phil



Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 15 February 2019, 05:18:51 PM
I bought it online but have since moved, what is the best way of making sure it isn't sent to my old address?

Once we've got the delivery date from the printers, we'll be putting all of the details out on what folks need to do.  In your case, we'd just need you to send us your new address and we'll update the list at this end.

 8)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Stratoq on 19 February 2019, 12:58:43 PM
Perfect, thank you! Looking forward to it  :)


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: ronan on 19 February 2019, 08:31:21 PM
I also moved twice, and I'm going to move once again (to a real house where I can play !   :D )
May be we're not alone ... you should check before sending anything ?  :-\


Title: Re: Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read
Post by: Leon on 20 February 2019, 12:08:28 AM
Yep, once we've got the delivery date from the printers we'll be telling everyone what to do about their replacement copies.  If you've moved house, we'll need you new address, if you bought at Salute, we'll need your address, etc.