Pendraken Miniatures Forum

Pendraken Rules! => Blitzkrieg Commander => Topic started by: Leon on 08 May 2017, 11:15:01 PM



Title: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 08 May 2017, 11:15:01 PM
The previous BKC poll has now ended and the result was quite clearly in favour of a full reprint with 50% of the vote.  A pdf of the army lists was 2nd choice with 37%.

As a business, this was the preferred choice for ourselves as well.  We've thought long and hard about it over this past week, crunching the numbers repeatedly, and weighing up some other options, but this is the best decision for the long-term reputation and viability of the whole BKC family of rules.  Had it been just the army lists with issues and the rules were fine, or the lists were spot on but there were some errors in the text, then I think we could have sorted that out with an errata sheet for people to refer to.  With both lists and text having issues, then the whole rulebook isn't up to standard and we couldn't continue to sell them to people knowing those problems were there.

It's been mentioned in one or two threads but we're extremely disappointed that there still hasn't been any input from our author.  As the first few queries started to come in, some insight into his thinking or some information on his research into the army lists might have helped ease some of the initial concerns and alleviate the eventual surge of negative feeling towards the new rules.  As some people have said, there are some good ideas in this new edition, some of which might need some fine-tuning, but it's not all bad.  Our job now is to make those new bits work properly with the old.

So, what happens next?

The immediate job is to get to work on revising BKC-III into the rulebook we were all hoping for.  The army lists will be our starting point, reverting those back to BKC-II and then tweaking and editing them where necessary based on previous BKC feedback.  Second will be the scenarios which will also largely revert to BKC-II, unless anything comes up from our new team that requires a change/tweak.  And then from there we'll go through the actual rules of the book, page by page, doing one of three things:

- Leaving as is.
- Clarifying/amending to make it work better/properly.
- Reverting back to BKC-II.

I've mentioned the new team already, so I'll explain a bit more on that.  First off I want to thank everyone who has emailed, callled or messaged us offering their help and support with this, your response was overwhelming and we can't thank you all enough.  There were so many offers that there were simply too many to bring in to a 'rewrite' group but we will still need your help at some point.  

We've got a core group of people from the original BKC playtesting and feedback team, plus a couple of other people who were recommended by them.  This group will help us work through the editing process and put together our 'BKC-3.1', as it were.  Along the way though we will need more feedback and information on all of the points that have been discussed on the Forum here, so that's where the wider community comes in.  Some of the discussions have got a bit sidelined or distracted as further points come up, so it would be good to try and make those threads more concise where we can.  So if there's something that doesn't work, or you think needs fixing, then start a new thread in this main BKC section, with a thread title naming the area of the rules you're going to address, so that could be Visibility, or Special Abilities, or Movement.  Once you've got the thread started, we need the following points:

- What is the issue?
- What would be the fix?
- What other areas of the rules would this fix impact on?
- What questions does this issue/fix raise?

Now it's obviously going to be more complicated than that once we get into the discussion of each point, but it gives a good starting point for us to refer to at each stage of the rewrite to see what potentially needs doing.  We can't guarantee that every point/fix will be implemented but every one will be looked at and assessed by the rewrite team.

What does that mean for people who bought the rules?

Everyone who has bought a set of the rules will get a revised set of the rules.  If you bought online then we'll ship you a new copy, if you bought through Wargame Vault then you'll receive an automatic update by email.  For those who bought at Salute (we've got the numbers and some of the names) you will need to send us your copy and we will swap it for a new one.  I know this is a bit of extra hassle, but it's the only way to ensure that we're sending copies to people who definitely bought them.  Once this is done, it's important that any old copies are thrown away/destroyed, as we don't want to end up with two versions circulating around the wargames community and causing arguments and confusion.

How long will this take?

We want to get this done as quickly as possible, so we're setting ourselves a timescale of 2-3 months to fix everything.  Working with the BKC-III file will be the quickest method as all of the formatting and design work is already done.  Reverting the army lists is time-consuming but not too difficult to do.  It'll be the rules themselves where time and care will need to be taken to ensure we do this properly.

We know that people have spent good money on BKC and we want you to have the rules you paid for quickly.  We also don't want to lose too much momentum for BKC and get everything back on track.

We'll keep everyone updated as we progress and we'll get this sorted for you all as soon as we can.  I personally want to thank everyone who contacted me with their support and encouragement, it provided a real lift over these past couple of weeks.

 8)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: williamb on 08 May 2017, 11:49:57 PM
Leon,  thank you for taking the time and effort for this.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: old smokie on 09 May 2017, 12:11:43 AM
seconded   :-bd


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: mungosoton on 09 May 2017, 12:18:59 AM
Hi Leon

I bought my copy at Salute so if I have read this correct all I need do is to send it back to yourselves, with just my name and address on a piece of paper and you will send new rules once done.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Tarty on 09 May 2017, 12:25:23 AM
This is how it's done folks...take note ! Top shelf response to the problem. Everything I've heard about Pendraken is right here on show.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: T-Square on 09 May 2017, 02:37:53 AM
Good decision.  Now on to the hard work.  Wish you all the best in your efforts.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: paulr on 09 May 2017, 03:59:12 AM
Very well done that man =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 09 May 2017, 05:02:03 AM
Good luck on the rewrite! Will have a crunch through the book this afternoon, and see what I can cone up with in terms of spotted issues.

Here's to hoping this one turns out well for pendraken!!!

Just a  minor question, will the rules seek a middle ground or will we revert more to bkc II ? Just a case of knowing what issues  we should bring up. No use working out the details on some things if the whole section is reverted back to bkcII ;)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Fenton on 09 May 2017, 06:09:15 AM
Good luck with this Leon and take your time. I am positive a great  set of rules will appear when all is completed


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: SteveTheWargamer on 09 May 2017, 08:05:39 AM
Bravo! Customer service and responsiveness of the highest order I'd say..   :)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 09 May 2017, 08:12:47 AM
Good luck all :)



Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: sediment on 09 May 2017, 08:21:40 AM
Good news, thanks for the update and good luck with the revision/

Cheers, Andy


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Zbigniew on 09 May 2017, 08:40:57 AM
Good decision. Good luck!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: mad lemmey on 09 May 2017, 08:48:21 AM
Hugs all.  m/


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: slugbalancer on 09 May 2017, 08:52:20 AM
Well done for coming to a speedy decision and probably the correct one.  I think naming them as BKC 3.1 may be an error as v3 is so badly tarnished.  Wouldn't it be good to skip straight to BKC4?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 09 May 2017, 09:04:36 AM
Well done. A tough decision, but the right one.  :D


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: barbarian on 09 May 2017, 10:45:46 AM
I quote myself from another thread :

"On a more general note, special rules named with no mention in the lists is really GWish to me : you need to go through the book to look at the abilities.

I'd rather have the special rules :
a) be the consequence of the type of unit ( i.e. All AT gun behave this way)
b) Be factored into the profile (i.e. this tank is good at busting other tanks so get one more die in his AT value)
c) be a special rule of this specific list (i.e. Commonwealth in North Africa are good at coordinating Arty fire so get a bonus doing so)
d) exceptionally be added as note on the profile of the unit. (i.e. the Katyushka sound is terrifying : the infantry unit targeted are automatically suppressed)

But case d) should be exceptional.

If you cannot characterise a unit other than using special rules, your basic rules are poorly designed."

I really think the focus should be on cutting the fat, trying to simplify (keeping the flavour of WWII obviously)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: ronan on 09 May 2017, 10:50:45 AM
Thank you Leon and all the Pendraken team !
 :)


Well done for coming to a speedy decision and probably the correct one.  I think naming them as BKC 3.1 may be an error as v3 is so badly tarnished.  Wouldn't it be good to skip straight to BKC4?

IMHO I like the name BKC 3.1
It shows the good work that'll be done, it's not just "another upgrade".


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Orcs on 09 May 2017, 11:03:47 AM
I would go with BKC4. Just to avoid confusion and also a completely different cover.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Smoking gun on 09 May 2017, 11:19:58 AM
It's great that Leon has made this brave decision and we'll all benefit from this, lets hope the new / revised version sells wells and restores the confidence in the Commander brand.

I do think it's important that whatever the new rules are called there's a completely new and distinctive cover so people are aware they're buying the new version.

Thank you and regards,

Martin


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: barbarian on 09 May 2017, 12:07:26 PM
Agree about the cover.
What I really liked in the BKCII book too was the pictures of the full armies inside : Gave me the will to purchase miniatures.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: sunjester on 09 May 2017, 12:53:58 PM
A brave decision, but one that seems to be popular. Good luck with the re-write.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: PFuentes on 09 May 2017, 01:16:32 PM
Thank you. You are great and honest.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: KeithS on 09 May 2017, 01:32:47 PM
I just wanted to wish you well in your re-working of the rules.  It is a great pity that you should need to do so, particularly after your optimism when you launched the rules.  I sincerely hope that the reworking is not too great a strain on yourselves and your company.  I also hope that the end result is that an even better set of rules than any of the predecessors incorporating the best features of all of them.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 09 May 2017, 02:12:50 PM
Thanks for the replies so far.

Just a  minor question, will the rules seek a middle ground or will we revert more to bkc II ? Just a case of knowing what issues  we should bring up. No use working out the details on some things if the whole section is reverted back to bkcII ;)

At this point I don't know, it'll depend on what the issues are for each section really.  As for the new threads, if people can point out anything/everything, then we can look at it.  If we change something as a result, great, but if we don't we'll have the thread open for people to look at and discuss further when the revised edition is done.

Well done for coming to a speedy decision and probably the correct one.  I think naming them as BKC 3.1 may be an error as v3 is so badly tarnished.  Wouldn't it be good to skip straight to BKC4?

I would go with BKC4. Just to avoid confusion and also a completely different cover.

I do think it's important that whatever the new rules are called there's a completely new and distinctive cover so people are aware they're buying the new version.

We don't have any plans on skipping to BKC-4 at this point, I think III is still fine.  We also won't be changing the cover massively as that will mean more expense on graphic design and we're already facing a £7000 bill for reprinting and shipping the replacements.  There will be some type of note on the cover to show that it's a revised version though.  That could be '3rd Edition+' or '3rd Edition - Revised' something along those lines.



Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: d_Guy on 09 May 2017, 03:04:02 PM
If only Microsoft were as responsive to users. Very well done!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: quasar42 on 09 May 2017, 03:08:44 PM
Your decision is a testament to your high standards of quality and service.  All the best with the rewrite.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Itinerant Hobbyist on 09 May 2017, 03:18:30 PM
Bravo Leon and Team.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Sunray on 09 May 2017, 04:49:59 PM
Pendraken ?   +1 !!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Orcs on 09 May 2017, 05:29:35 PM
  We also won't be changing the cover massively as that will mean more expense on graphic design and we're already facing a £7000 bill for reprinting and shipping the replacements. 

Well I certainly don't want to add to your costs. Could you change the colour of the typeface or spine without adding to the cost, just to differentiate it?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: smallchild139 on 09 May 2017, 05:47:58 PM
Wow, great service.  If only all companies looked after their customers this way.


Mark


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: terry68 on 09 May 2017, 05:58:26 PM
Leon and all at Pendraken have shown how companies should respond! Bravo!

Hard work to come, but with good humour, steady resolve and a fanatical support base, easily done!!! ;)

As posted at the very beginning............KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON.

All the best.

Terry.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: neilpcegerton on 09 May 2017, 07:58:20 PM
Excellent customer service, just sorry you have all this hassle.

I bought copy at Salute, when do we send these back, now or closer to the time whn the replacement may be ready?

Neil


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 09 May 2017, 08:57:50 PM
Thank you Leon

I will endeavour to post rule issues as requested -
Note though - these may not always have suggested fixes.
Some simple issues will be easy to suggest a fix - E.g. re-do Hills).
Others will require playtesting to determine correct fix(es). E.g. Target priorities.
Nevertheless - I think it's important to post all issues in a hope that others suggest the best fix.

Adam


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 09 May 2017, 09:45:23 PM
I bought copy at Salute, when do we send these back, now or closer to the time whn the replacement may be ready?

Once the new printrun is ready we'll announce it here and then we can work out all of the logistics.  Some folks might prefer to pick up their new copies at a show somewhere as well, so we'll deal with that closer to the time.



Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Hastati on 10 May 2017, 08:18:05 AM
Leon,
I'm sure this has been a very difficult decision to take, and one that will adversely affect Pendraken financially.  I know of few, or any, other companies that would have decided to take this course of action.  You and the team should be commended, but above all, supported for having done so.  I will certainly be doing my part to ensure that I continue to buy your products to show that I support your decision and future endeavours.
Regards,
David


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: GW844 on 14 May 2017, 10:18:27 PM
Leon,

A hard but worthwhile decision I believe as your reputation will justifiably remain high.  I look forward to swapping over in due course.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Norm on 14 May 2017, 11:29:59 PM
Superb and responsive support - though it is obviously a regret that you are exposed to such a cost. 


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: abikapi2 on 16 May 2017, 11:25:54 PM
Bought at Wargamevault

I'll wait for the update.

Thank You
Stefano


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: henryhyde on 31 May 2017, 07:17:10 PM
A brave and bold response, Leon. But then, I would have expected nothing less. I'll pop my copy in the post to you.  =D>


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 31 May 2017, 07:52:02 PM
Are folks returning their copies now, or waiting until BKC3+ is out.

What do we do?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: paulr on 31 May 2017, 09:32:48 PM
Are folks returning their copies now, or waiting until BKC3+ is out.

What do we do?

Hi Dr Dave, Leon answered a similar question above

Once the new printrun is ready we'll announce it here and then we can work out all of the logistics.  Some folks might prefer to pick up their new copies at a show somewhere as well, so we'll deal with that closer to the time.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 01 June 2017, 02:25:26 PM
Missed that

Ta  :)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dave Fielder on 03 June 2017, 06:40:34 PM
If politicians behaved in this manner then we'd have an amazing democracy; admission of errors and an immediate plan to rectify! Customer service above and beyond, I trust it does not break Pendraken.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: nheather on 27 June 2017, 12:25:20 AM
Hi,

I already have BKII and I did look at BKIII but never got round to ordering.

I can see that there were some problems and it looks like Pendraken are being very responsible about it.

However, I see that a lot of the actions are "drop back to BKII" so I wonder how different BKIII will from BKII.

Is the upgrade worthwhile - can anyone summarise the differences that will remain?

Cheers,

Nigel


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Techno on 27 June 2017, 07:08:04 AM
Can't personally answer that, Nigel......But welcome to the forum.

Cheers - Phil.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: fsn on 27 June 2017, 07:58:16 AM
Dear Nigel, or may I call you Mr Heather?

Do you ever watch University Challenge? Do you ever hear one of those biochemical questions and think "well I didn't understand the question, let alone have any method of beginning to formulate an answer?" Me neither. However, what I know about BKC could be inscribed on the head of a pin and still leave plenty room for evangelical debate about angelic terpsichore.

 Techno and I function here merely as the warm up stooges. Techno has other worthy functions. He provides much merriment with his tales of self mutilation, he chides the wayward poster, and he occassionally makes a few wee men. I have no useful functions other than as the imperfection which makes the perfect truely wonderful - Marilyn Monroe's beauty spot, the disparity of leg length in de Vernette's Oedipus as he converses with the sphinx, Pendraken's insistence on kneeling and prone figures in every range.

So welcome, enjoy, and I'm sure someone will be along with a sensible answer.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: ianrs54 on 27 June 2017, 09:08:39 AM
FSN is a TOTAL OIK, ignore anything it writes.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: nheather on 27 June 2017, 10:06:52 AM
Okay ... bit weird.

So when BKCIII was announced I looked into buying it but could find little information about what had changed.  Particularly, the big question for me was

"Sure if you are new to BKC then clearly get BKCIII, but if you already have BKCII are the changes significant enough to warrant the outlay".

I couldn't find the answers then, couldn't find very much information about BKCIII at all, so I didn't buy.

So a few months have passed and I'm thinking "maybe there are some reviews out now" but what I actually find is that the BKCIII release hasn't gone well at all.

The goid news is that Pendraken seem to doing the responsible thing and addressing the problems with a new version.

So I read through the history, and I note that around many of the problems the resolution is to revert back to BKCII.

So now I'm wondering "still none the wiser about what is new in BKCIII but there do seem to be a number of changes that are going to be undone".

So more than ever my question is "if I have BKCII then what will the new BKCIII offer, is it significant improvements or just minor tweaks".

Cheers,

Nigel


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Nick the Lemming on 27 June 2017, 12:38:05 PM
Since a revised third edition is in the works, I don;t think anyone can answer that yet. Changes are being made in BKC3.5, so no-one knows what the finished product will be like compared to BKC2 or BKC3 until the process of revision has been completed.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: nheather on 27 June 2017, 05:39:30 PM
Since a revised third edition is in the works, I don;t think anyone can answer that yet. Changes are being made in BKC3.5, so no-one knows what the finished product will be like compared to BKC2 or BKC3 until the process of revision has been completed.

Thanks, appreciate that.  The thing for me is that I was never able to find what changes BKCIII made.  I am now aware of a number of problems BKCIII but still none of the good stuff.  And reading how the shortcomings the decision seems to be to revert back to BKCII - for example the armies and the scenarios.  I didn't get the impressions that there was much fundamentally wrong with the BKCIII rules, mostly the army lists and rules. 

So is there a comparison between the BKCII and BKCIII rules anywhere - just trying to find out whether they were significant or just little tweaks.

When Pendraken took over BKCII I asked whether they would be doing any army packs - was told not because they were working on BKCIII and they would do army packs for that.  Now that they say that the BKCIII army lists are going to revert back to BKCII does that mean we are going to see some army packs very soon because they will work with both BKCII and BKCIII.

Cheers,

Nigel


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: ronan on 27 June 2017, 06:54:36 PM

Hello and welcome,


(...) mostly the army lists and rules. 
(...)

You said it.
 ;)

( I think you should wait for the 3.5 or whatever new name. I was very happy to got the rules, but after several games, most of the things went bad. BUT there were good ideas sometimes. ie. new recce capacities.
With many "bad choices" ( planes, off board artillery, etc. )

As I wrote somewhere : the main system was too good to let it down with a bad release, and we know Pendraken's the best !
 :)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: nheather on 27 June 2017, 08:31:14 PM
Hello and welcome,


You said it.
 ;)

( I think you should wait for the 3.5 or whatever new name. I was very happy to got the rules, but after several games, most of the things went bad. BUT there were good ideas sometimes. ie. new recce capacities.
With many "bad choices" ( planes, off board artillery, etc. )

As I wrote somewhere : the main system was too good to let it down with a bad release, and we know Pendraken's the best !
 :)

Of course I'll wait, hopefully when 3.1, or 3.5 or 4 (can't be 3.1 though because fractions in Roman Numerals are duodecimal - so BKCIIIS or BKCIV) comes out there will be a decent description so the benefits of BKCII can be understood.

Cheers,

Nigel


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: walburgrif on 01 August 2017, 01:35:28 PM
So, we've been waiting now for just on 3 months for the fixed version of BKC.  From what I can see, there's been nothing much on the topic for best part of two months, despite the promise to keep us all posted.  What's up? I can only assume it has been more problematic than first thought.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Wulf on 01 August 2017, 01:40:02 PM
I can only assume it has been more problematic than first thought.
Or, more thorough and more carefully tested...


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: FierceKitty on 01 August 2017, 02:35:18 PM
Dear Nigel, or may I call you Mr Heather?

Do you ever watch University Challenge? Do you ever hear one of those biochemical questions and think "well I didn't understand the question, let alone have any method of beginning to formulate an answer?" Me neither. However, what I know about BKC could be inscribed on the head of a pin and still leave plenty room for evangelical debate about angelic terpsichore.

 Techno and I function here merely as the warm up stooges. Techno has other worthy functions. He provides much merriment with his tales of self mutilation, he chides the wayward poster, and he occassionally makes a few wee men. I have no useful functions other than as the imperfection which makes the perfect truely wonderful - Marilyn Monroe's beauty spot, the disparity of leg length in de Vernette's Oedipus as he converses with the sphinx, Pendraken's insistence on kneeling and prone figures in every range.

So welcome, enjoy, and I'm sure someone will be along with a sensible answer.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 01 August 2017, 02:35:52 PM
So, we've been waiting now for just on 3 months for the fixed version of BKC.  From what I can see, there's been nothing much on the topic for best part of two months, despite the promise to keep us all posted.  What's up? I can only assume it has been more problematic than first thought.

There was an update last week in the newsletter: http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,16381.0.html (http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,16381.0.html)

Blitzkrieg Commander III

We're continuing to work on the revisions to BKC-III and we're aiming to have it all done soon.  The majority of the army lists have been done, so we'll get those finished off in the next week or two and then we can work through the revisions to the rules themselves.  We know a lot of people are waiting on this but we want to get it done right.


The work so far has been hit on two fronts.  Firstly we've had a busy couple of months with some staff off on holiday (and one getting married) so my time has had to be spent casting and packaging orders instead.  Secondly the army lists have proven to be a lot more work than I hoped, checking each unit line in every army list and then cross checking it to the BKC-II version is a slow process, plus making notes on anomalies, missing units, etc to come back to / raise with our feedback group.  There are only two Russian lists left to be done, plus the Japanese ones, then the bulk of that job is done.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: paulr on 02 August 2017, 03:00:27 AM
Thanks for the more detailed update Leon

Keep calm and Carry On ;)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: FierceKitty on 02 August 2017, 03:05:03 AM
Here they go. Everything is under control.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: lowlylowlycook on 02 August 2017, 04:36:14 AM
Those kittens better be about to install an SSD or I'm going to be forced to doubt their professionalism.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: walburgrif on 04 August 2017, 08:50:15 PM
Thanks for the update. I don't get the newsletter. Keep at it. 


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 05 August 2017, 11:57:48 PM
Thanks for the update. I don't get the newsletter. Keep at it. 

Thanks for the reply, the newsletter is sent through the Forum and goes out to all our members, but it might have gone into your spam folder?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 30 August 2017, 07:50:09 PM
Just to update everyone, the army lists are all done and just need some checking/tweaking to make sure we've not missed anything.  We've brought in some people to help us with that, so I'll probably be driving over to have a face-to-face with them and make sure everything's sorted there.

I've also finished reverting the scenarios back today so that's another job ticked off.

Lastly we'll be going through the rules and making any changes based on the feedback we had on launch.  


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 30 August 2017, 08:18:23 PM
Well done Pendraken!

No easy decision or task, but gallantly done.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: paulr on 30 August 2017, 09:36:32 PM
Well done, those men =D>

Keep up the good work


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 30 August 2017, 11:38:21 PM
Don't forget the crusader AA in the british NW europe list now. It wasn't in BKC II so if you reverted back to those lists that little one might have tried to slip away again  ;)

Good work!

Will post a message on BGG as wel.

edit: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/26789969#26789969


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 04 September 2017, 10:51:42 PM
We'll get that checked and sort it out if need be.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 04 September 2017, 11:35:56 PM
If not, the stats are in the Online tool. Pete added them To the builder after the book was printer 😉


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: rival on 19 September 2017, 08:35:03 AM
Pendraken - Glad to hear that the BKC-III rules are being overhauled.  I bought two copies from you and we struggled with them, and when checking for errata recently I found this thread.  When you are revising the rules, please can you ensure that there are no rules that appear only in the examples text.  Perhaps I've missed it elsewhere but I think the last para on page 29 is the only place that says you start afresh with the command value when you issue orders to successive groups.  Thanks.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Techno on 19 September 2017, 01:33:09 PM
Welcome to the forum, rival.

Cheers - Phil


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: d_Guy on 19 September 2017, 03:06:17 PM
Welcome to the forum also, rival.  A great screen name - although nemesis would have been even better. :)
Wait...maybe I can change mine   :-\


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 19 September 2017, 03:22:49 PM
Does he belong to one of you?

Is he... YOUR rival?!

*boom~tisch*


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: ianrs54 on 19 September 2017, 04:01:57 PM
Hi rival


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 10 November 2017, 11:03:08 PM
Just to update everyone, I travelled over to Burnley on Tuesday night and spent Wednesday with Forum member sultanbev, who writes the MicroMark army lists.  With the help of his extensive library, we worked through all of the lists and tidied up any queries, so we can draw a line under those now.

Next up is the rules queries themselves.  So far we've not been able to assemble a group of people to work through these with, so currently we're going to have to do it online unfortunately.  This method will still work, but it drags out the timescales as we'll need to wait for people to reply and respond to each point raised.  I'm still exploring the options for a group session, so I'll update if we manage to sort that out.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: paulr on 11 November 2017, 04:23:36 AM
Well done Leon, good to hear you are making progress =D>


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 11 November 2017, 10:09:45 AM
Stirring stuff, lay on MacDuff!

Likely to be out for Xmas?

Also, I hope you cover FAO’s flank marching ;)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: hakejumble on 11 November 2017, 10:36:14 AM
REALLY looking forward to having a go at this!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 11 November 2017, 04:43:52 PM
Likely to be out for Xmas?

Unlikely, the rules queries are going to take some time to work through online, plus it's a 3 week turnaround at the printers.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Ithoriel on 11 November 2017, 11:53:12 PM
So what you're saying, Leon, is that they WILL be ready for Christmas .... just not this coming one :-D


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: T13A on 12 November 2017, 09:35:43 AM
Hi Leon

Many thanks for the update and all the work involved in getting the army lists straight. As far as getting the rules sorted, as far as I am concerned take as much time as is required.

However that said I do have one concern and that is, if I remember correctly from previous posts, you are starting from a base line of BKC-III rather than BKC-II.

Now I am one of those who thought that there was not much wrong with BKC-II in the first place that some very minor tweaking and some slightly clearer explanations of some of the mechanics (e.g. visibility and concealment) wouldn't fairly easily put right. I thought that the most of the 'changes' to the rules that appeared in BKC-III were either unnecessary or simply poor (e.g. the change from 'built-up-areas' to defining them as Cities, Towns, Villages, and ruins and where villages are classified as "predominantly wooden structures with a few stone buildings". Try telling that to one of the veterans marking armistice day today that fought in Normandy or Italy).

Hence my worry that by using BKC-III as a starting point rather than BKC-II we will still end up with a set of rules that I for one will be reluctant to use.

Just my tuppence worth.

Cheers Paul


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 12 November 2017, 09:45:35 AM
Cheers Leon, I might look out for them at WMMS in March then :)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: smallchild139 on 12 November 2017, 07:59:17 PM
Add one to previous sentiment, what I feel is really needed is BKC 2 updated rather than BKC 3 fixed up.  I think that will give a better set of rules.  There was not too much wrong with BKC2.

Mark


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Ithoriel on 12 November 2017, 08:53:35 PM
I'd have to admit to a preference for a revised BKC2 rather than a fixed BKC3 but if Pendraken have an electronic version of BKC3 and not of BKC2 then I'd be OK with a fixed BKC3 in light of the likely extra time and expense required to generate a clean copy of BKC2 to edit.

If that all makes sense!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 12 November 2017, 09:13:38 PM
We've got both versions in electronic formats, but putting the BKC-II text into the BKC-III document will mean a lot of time in formatting and layout changes.  Likewise, editing the BKC-II document will be just as time consuming to make it look like BKC-III.

Hence my worry that by using BKC-III as a starting point rather than BKC-II we will still end up with a set of rules that I for one will be reluctant to use.

Add one to previous sentiment, what I feel is really needed is BKC 2 updated rather than BKC 3 fixed up.  I think that will give a better set of rules.  There was not too much wrong with BKC2.

One of the main problems we've got at this stage is that we're between a rock and a hard place when it comes to the revision.  If we don't change enough back to BKC-II, then folks like yourselves won't be getting the set of rules you were wanting.  But if we move most of it back to BKC-II then that'll be great for you guys but those who liked some of the BKC-III changes won't be happy.  And making a BKC-II+ version will result in people asking why they should buy a set of rules that's not that different to BKC-II. 

At this point, no matter what we do with the revision work, people aren't going to be happy with the result.  I do think it's worth mentioning again though, despite all of the vocal feedback we saw online, there are still a large number of people out there who liked some of the changes.  It's too easy to just write the whole thing off as a bad job based on the initial response we saw, but we've got to look at it objectively and decide whether each change was good or bad on its own merit.

It's not going to be easy, but we're going to do the best we can to give as many people as possible what they want.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: BeeKiller on 13 November 2017, 10:44:31 AM
Can you consider releasing the electronic PDF version of the (now finished) lists for those who already bought them (or for those wanting to buy them as an electronic format) ?

It will act as a stop-gap for those who liked (most of the new additions) of BKC-3

Thx


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 13 November 2017, 03:13:50 PM
Can you consider releasing the electronic PDF version of the (now finished) lists for those who already bought them (or for those wanting to buy them as an electronic format) ?

It will act as a stop-gap for those who liked (most of the new additions) of BKC-3

It's certainly something we can look at, although we've not ironed out the special abilities yet so there might be some clashes with the rules.  I'll see what we can work out on that for you.

You mention liking some of the new additions, have you got any more info on that and have you played any games with BKC-III?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: walburgrif on 15 November 2017, 09:37:59 AM
I'm also plugging for BKC2 as the base.   Please don't choose an option just because its easy for editing and a consistent look & feel.   We don't play games for those reasons.  Listen to those who have been playing BKC a lot. Their experience about playability and historical accuracy is not to be underestimated. 


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: BeeKiller on 15 November 2017, 09:53:40 AM
You mention liking some of the new additions, have you got any more info on that and have you played any games with BKC-III?

Hello,

I have played some BKC-3 games but using BKC-2 lists because of the inaccuracy of the newest. However it is a bit puzzling because you need some adjustments like new off board arty being cheap because you don't need to buy ammunition assets for the prescheluded fire. So in this case we also use the bkc2 need to purchase ammunition assets.

We liked from Bkc3 the Recce simplification calculations, the terrain chart, the simplification in visibility in cities (but we need to break big settlements in small areas), and above all the unit perks except the limbering (which make some vehicles useless in an attack role), and (good armour which doesn't allow to take profit of flanking). We also like form BKC-3 lists the need to include core units per 1000points and the re-arrangemnt of unit types. But we don't like the loss of historicity that BKC2 did have about the specific number of units you may deploy,even less the loss of the entry month a unit was available from/to. Now it is simplified in just 3 categories. In fact we loved the game because of the accuracy of the army lists and we even played other game rules using that lists.

We like from BKC-3 being able to initially deploy hidden units and fire templates from Arty and Air look less generic than in BKC-2

We don't like the oversimplification of battle scenarios and the fact that you don't need to buy Defensive terrain. We use BKC-2 rules for seting up scenarios. Also the way the minerollers remove mines was more accurate in BKC2 (cleaning the width of the vehicle rather than cleaning the whole mine field)

To sum up I personally don't like simplification in the "preparation of the game" (lists, scenarios) because you usually have enough time at home to prepare whatever, but I welcome any aid / automation during the game play (LOS, less recce measurements)

I agree with many that tweaking a game with some complexity like BKC is time consuming and must be really play tested. These are bad ingredients for hard copy books and I think you should consider releasing several beta versions of BKC-3 in electronic format to betatesters until the final version.  

I also think the army lists + perks explanations should have an entity on their own (although it may also be included  if the future book) because they can appeal to both BKC-2 die hard fans as well as BKC-3 or even gamers from other rules.

Finally, I also agree with Pendraken that rules "needs news, updates". Not because the earlier were bad, but because human mind like new things (ok maybe it depends on the age of the subject...). And new means curiosity and appeal, and that in turn, means need to buy, and that means new money for the owner, and finalla that means invest and support to the subject that allows to earn money:  the game (in any of its forms), thus closing the circle of the product life.

Game aids are always welcome. Electronic army builders are very appealing (be them Excel or (web) applications). Our world is trending to a service model based business. Miniatures are physic but the gaming experience with them could benefit from some sort of electronic aid. Be it in the game preparation or in the way rules are updated or available for local service printing.

Count with us if you're considering beta testing. We usually play one game per week / 2 weeks at 15mm (we multiply x1.5 all measurements on the rules if we are lucky to be able to play on two "standard tables") and 1000 or 2000 points per side (BKC-2 costs). We even can promote the game in public events just for the sake of gaming (we had already done that in a local hobby shop, but the BKC-2 / BKC-3 impasse is really hindering our efforts). People in Barcelona have a lot of 15mm miniatures because of FOW, and they like to diversify and test "something new" to play with. Overall everyone enjoys the game, but we need an starting point (the hobby shop needs to know what to sell about BKC) to promote the game, to go further and even make tournaments (they are willing to hold so, but with an stable, soldable and brand new version)

(Sorry for beating about the bush, and the not so good English)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 15 November 2017, 10:30:35 AM
 It's too easy to just write the whole thing off as a bad job based on the initial response we saw, but we've got to look at it objectively and decide whether each change was good or bad on its own merit.


One thing to note, if you only keep some changes and revert others, be wary of the consistency of the rules.

No matter how good a new rule is/works, if it doesn't fit the overall 'feel' of the rules it will stand out.

also a little care will be needed when reverting some rules, as in the bkc III book there seems to be a lot of cross-referencing. when reverting rules it should be reverted everywhere to further enhance the consistency.

Good luck on the revision! Been a while since i have used the bkc III rules, but i must admit a few changes have found their place in our bkc II games so there are some things that could be used!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Leon on 15 November 2017, 01:30:11 PM
Count with us if you're considering beta testing. We usually play one game per week / 2 weeks at 15mm (we multiply x1.5 all measurements on the rules if we are lucky to be able to play on two "standard tables") and 1000 or 2000 points per side (BKC-2 costs). We even can promote the game in public events just for the sake of gaming (we had already done that in a local hobby shop, but the BKC-2 / BKC-3 impasse is really hindering our efforts). People in Barcelona have a lot of 15mm miniatures because of FOW, and they like to diversify and test "something new" to play with. Overall everyone enjoys the game, but we need an starting point (the hobby shop needs to know what to sell about BKC) to promote the game, to go further and even make tournaments (they are willing to hold so, but with an stable, soldable and brand new version)

Thanks for all of the info, that is very helpful.  We will take all of this onboard as we work through the revisions.

Good luck on the revision! Been a while since i have used the bkc III rules, but i must admit a few changes have found their place in our bkc II games so there are some things that could be used!

Thanks Peter, which of the changes did you guys find useful?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 15 November 2017, 02:38:37 PM
One of the major things we like is the ,remote' special rule/keyword.

Allowing things like mg platoons to provide suppressing fire while the rest advances just feels more accurate than having them tag along in an assault because they would get out of command range.

The new recce is a good concept. (except for the range)

And personally i like the area terrain approach.

The rule allowingsmall arms fire against armoured transports at close range was also something we have tried a few times.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 15 November 2017, 06:16:46 PM
The vulnerable rule was at best very odd: Rifles and LMGs easily KO'ing PzIs at long (30cm) range was the result. Any light armour became a death trap. Suppression sure, but a full KO was a tad extreme.

The reversion to BKC1 suppressive fire was good to have back in. But from memory it didn't cover guns with no HE firing against soft targets, only those with no AP firing at armour?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 15 November 2017, 10:11:00 PM
That's. Why I explicitly said "armored transports" and not armour as a whole. Don't know about you, but I woul not like to be in a been carrier when an mg42 starts spraying lead at it!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Sunray on 16 November 2017, 03:15:35 AM
That's. Why I explicitly said "armored transports" and not armour as a whole. Don't know about you, but I woul not like to be in a been carrier when an mg42 starts spraying lead at it!

Indeed not ! The Bren was never an APC as we know it.  The frontal armour plate was however 12mm.  So a lot depends on (1) the type of 7.92x57 that the MG42 is feeding on and (2) the range.

If the GPMG is sustained fire mode, using the s.m.K.H tungsten core, yes, it will penetrate the Bren  at 100 meters. The Bren armour has no slope to deflect the round.  I  say SF because I believe the early 34/42s had a higher RoF and wandered on the bipod.  It would still however be worth a dice.

The 7.62mm black tip will cause similar contemporary problems for a lot of first generation WP APCs

In other circumstances there is  perhaps a +1 chance that suppressive fire within battle range (300 meters) will cause casualties.   A lot depends on the reaction of the crew, and the terrain.  Is the GPMG firing from elevation?   I have had a ride in a Bren at Vintage Show.  You are in a cramped seat. Not a lot of room for a grown man to "hunker down"

How does this translate into BKC rules ? 
Do we allow elite and veteran units the savvy to change belt to the hot s.m.K.H ?

MG42 aside, we also have to factor the most effective WW2 German tool in the Killing Ground. The humble mortar. Lethal to any open top "armoured transports" , not withstanding how thick their frontal armour.   


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 16 November 2017, 09:06:38 AM
I agree with all that, Sunray - but that's all great detail in a skirmish game, but not a lot of use at BKC's level/abstraction.

It just boils down to - The possibility of rendering the BGC unit combat ineffective is there, so they get a dice - if they roll a success, they get the hit. Evidently the MG crews had a belt of AP & switched to it. Or the BGC crews didn't have space or time to hunker down. Or the crews panicked and some one drove into a ditch and bailed and the other drivers reversed out "recovering the casualties" back past the start line.

Mortars... mmmm lovely mortars... far more dangerous than direct fire for everyone on the receiving end :D


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: ianrs54 on 16 November 2017, 09:10:54 AM
The standard rules writer fudge, mortars cant hurt tanks. If so why did the squadron commander at Admin box say that the greatest threat to his Lee's were the Japanese 81mm mortars. I also think that on table mortars should be treated exactly the same as off board arty, with maybe less scatter dice, except the British 3".

IanS


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 16 November 2017, 09:16:28 AM
Doesn't BKC allow them to score hits on sixes on enclosed AFVs? It's actually been so long I can't remember, but I thought BKC2 allowed that, with 5's for open topped AFVs, just like any indirect fire arty... that may have slipped in as a house rule if it's not in the actual rule book :D


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: ianrs54 on 16 November 2017, 09:29:53 AM
May well be, I'm too lazy to walk the 20 ft and look it up !


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 16 November 2017, 09:41:26 AM
Heck, mines not just 20ft away horizontally, but about forty feet up as it's in the loft so buggered if me checking is likely :D


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 16 November 2017, 10:06:30 AM
Luckily mine was only 19.8 ft away!

p. 68 "vulnerable - count as a soft target as well as a hard target when attacked from within 30cm. .... These armoured vehicles have very thin plating, or are open topped."

So they have 3 hits and still save on a 6 (?) Infantry have 6 hits and no save. So it means that carriers, ACs (even fully closed), some SP AT guns (even Archer on the Valentine hull), 1/2 tracks etc can be KO'd by rifle / MG fire at 600m? In BKCIII it's better for infantry to be in the open than in the vehicle. I know people THINK the MG42 was deadly - that's a different topic - but this covers rifle fire as well. Armoured transport is a death trap against small arms fire at MAXIMUM range, so 2 German infantry platoons should be able to destroy a carrier platoon without recourse to any AT weapons?    :o

And as I've said before "lumbering" needs to go as well. Matildas (at 12 mph) can't keep up with the infantry!    :o


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 16 November 2017, 10:11:11 AM
Not having actually got a copy of III I can't comment on it's specifics like that - but yeah, I know the drive was to enclose both APCs and TDs, but that seems a little overly deadly to be sure :D

Mind, save 6, three hit APC/IFVs are a liability most of the time in both BKC II and CWC.


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Orcs on 16 November 2017, 07:59:36 PM
The standard rules writer fudge, mortars cant hurt tanks. If so why did the squadron commander at Admin box say that the greatest threat to his Lee's were the Japanese 81mm mortars. I also think that on table mortars should be treated exactly the same as off board arty, with maybe less scatter dice, except the British 3".

IanS

I went to Bovinton a long while ago on one of the open days (Before Tank Fest). I was looking at the Lee on display and got talking to a veteran who had served in them in the far east.

He said that due to the heat and particularly the humidity the tank got so hot crew members would faint. the only way to stop this was to open the hatches especially the side ones as it allowed a breeze to pass through.   I said what about in action, and  he  said it was almost impossible to function with them closed so they went into action with them open.  He also said some crew removed the hatches all together,

Now I have looked and never been able to find written or pictorial evidence of this, but when a veteran volunteers this storey and points the hatches out they left open it is rather compelling to believe him,

The lack of side hatches would definitely make tanks more vulnerable to mortar fire.



Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 16 November 2017, 08:09:03 PM
I know people THINK the MG42 was deadly - that's a different topic - but this covers rifle fire as well. Armoured transport is a death trap against small arms fire at MAXIMUM range, so 2 German infantry platoons should be able to destroy a carrier platoon without recourse to any AT weapons?    :o

And as I've said before "lumbering" needs to go as well. Matildas (at 12 mph) can't keep up with the infantry!    :o

It was deadly. weapons always are :)

Now about it knocking out a carrier: being knocked out in the game doesn't necessarily mean destroyed. they could pull out in the face of stiff resistance, the crew may bail etc...

With you on lumbering, it needs to join the dodo!


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: paulr on 16 November 2017, 08:18:45 PM
I recall reading at least one account of a boarding action being fought in a Lee, they just managed to overcome the Japanese who had entered via the side hatch


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Sunray on 16 November 2017, 11:51:57 PM
I went to Bovinton a long while ago on one of the open days (Before Tank Fest). I was looking at the Lee on display and got talking to a veteran who had served in them in the far east.

He said that due to the heat and particularly the humidity the tank got so hot crew members would faint. the only way to stop this was to open the hatches especially the side ones as it allowed a breeze to pass through.   I said what about in action, and  he  said it was almost impossible to function with them closed so they went into action with them open.  He also said some crew removed the hatches all together,

Now I have looked and never been able to find written or pictorial evidence of this, but when a veteran volunteers this storey and points the hatches out they left open it is rather compelling to believe him,

The lack of side hatches would definitely make tanks more vulnerable to mortar fire.
 


Intriguing discussion.  The only mortar I have any experience of was the 81mm British  with two main offensive bomb types - HE (about 9lb and Phosphorus)  The 81mm HE mortar bomb is NOT compatible with a 25lb or 105mm (33lb) artillery shell .  

The SOP - if caught in the open  when subject to being mortared was to mount APCs and bug out of the killing zone.  This would have  included Saracens and Humber Pigs with not a lot of roof armour (8mm plate?)  Even Rovers clad in Makralon offered protection from mortar attack. As proved in Operation Banner.
I would speculate the Japs had 1940s era percussion fuse and the HE of around 9lb would have thrown the bomb case fragments about 25-30 meters.
Would that amount of blast have ruptured the 12mm roof plate of a Lee with gravity providing the only velocity?

The open/removed side hatch theory gives a viable explanation.  I would give APC/AFV room armour the benefit of the doubt against mortars in my own games. (1)

As to incorporating a GPMG belt feed into BKC rules- its already set up for such an assumption with your existing troop type AP. Vets and elite will have enough chill pills in them change belt feed from ball to the black tips (or WW2 AP belt). Green and Conscripts won't.   ;)  

Footnote
(1) There was a special 81mm mortar round  called a Merlin developed in the early 1980s. Was it ever issued? Rumour was it could mallet a T-62  =D>
  



Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 17 November 2017, 08:08:33 AM
It was deadly. weapons always are :)

Now about it knocking out a carrier: being knocked out in the game doesn't necessarily mean destroyed. they could pull out in the face of stiff resistance, the crew may bail etc...

With you on lumbering, it needs to join the dodo!

Deadly - yes, good point!  ;D

With the carrier being ko'd by rifle/MG fire, don't forget that it's at 600m and the suppression rule is back in there as well. And the same applies to a sdkfz 232 the big 8 wheelers AND an Archer. If the distance was 5cm I'd be fine with it I think, but only vs open topped?


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: petercooman on 17 November 2017, 08:23:49 AM
Well that is how we play it, only vs apc's like the carriers, m3 halftrack etc...

I do admit it's a keyword that should not be lightly distributed among the vehicles, and really feel it should never be given to a tank (like a pzI)


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: ianrs54 on 17 November 2017, 09:47:38 AM
Intriguing discussion.  The only mortar I have any experience of was the 81mm British  with two main offensive bomb types - HE (about 9lb and Phosphorus)  The 81mm HE mortar bomb is NOT compatible with a 25lb or 105mm (33lb) artillery shell . 

The SOP - if caught in the open  when subject to being mortared was to mount APCs and bug out of the killing zone.  This would have  included Saracens and Humber Pigs with not a lot of roof armour (8mm plate?)  Even Rovers clad in Makralon offered protection from mortar attack. As proved in Operation Banner.
I would speculate the Japs had 1940s era percussion fuse and the HE of around 9lb would have thrown the bomb case fragments about 25-30 meters.
Would that amount of blast have ruptured the 12mm roof plate of a Lee with gravity providing the only velocity?

The open/removed side hatch theory gives a viable explanation.  I would give APC/AFV room armour the benefit of the doubt against mortars in my own games. (1)

As to incorporating a GPMG belt feed into BKC rules- its already set up for such an assumption with your existing troop type AP. Vets and elite will have enough chill pills in them change belt feed from ball to the black tips (or WW2 AP belt). Green and Conscripts won't.   ;)   

Footnote
(1) There was a special 81mm mortar round  called a Merlin developed in the early 1980s. Was it ever issued? Rumour was it could mallet a T-62  =D>
   



a) the mortar bomb has an equivalent HE filling, as the shell/bomb walls are much thinner, due to lower firing stress, most of the shell weight in a 25pdr is metal. Also the 25pdr shells were not steel but cast iron, cost reasons.

b) Late mark lees had the side hatches welded closed, or (very late) made without em. 

c) Merlin, not issued as it was I) expensive, ii) havled the range. iii) was huge and cumbersome.


IanS


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Sunray on 17 November 2017, 10:54:51 AM
Thanks for this Ian.  Your point on artillery shell structure is well made. The weight is indeed the total weight of the round. I would  stress however - from personal experience - that's its not HE "blast" that does the damage - its that very shrapnel of the casing.  ( Otherwise bits of me would have been plastered over Corporation Street Belfast back in 72  :)) .  Hence the higher potential  damage from artillery with more and heavier hot metal flying, than the relatively thin casing of a mortar bomb- despite similar charge of HE filling.


Can't comment on the Lee- I suspect these might have been ex-USA with cupola turret removed ? Did they come direct or were they passed on from  Middle East units after Torch ?

Yes, the Merlin was big - but rumour was it was "smart"  ?  Might have been cost - not liked by men in suits.   


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 17 November 2017, 11:35:19 AM
On a side note, as it's modern - the Merlin concept came good about ten years back. Look at the Swedes, and Strix launched from their really high numbers of 120mm mortars. Their armoured infantry effectively has dozens of non-LoS top attack smart homing launchers with a really high rate of fire. Should go through even a modern Russian Tank Regiment in minutes. Some massively armoured Leo's to pin them a few minutes, then hundreds of smart munitions plastered all over the top of them.

Rinse, repeat, then unless the Leo's to roll back over the border.

Now, whether it works in practise, and they could afford enough Strix's, and they work as advertised, and...


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Sunray on 17 November 2017, 04:19:42 PM
 Given the choice between open topped APC and one with overhead armour (8mm ),  only those with a death wish would go with the open topped.  At the BKC level of abstraction I would give some credit to overhead protection-  History is on the side of this argument.  Any open topped should be classed as  "vunerable". 


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: toxicpixie on 17 November 2017, 04:28:09 PM
Even the US TD's started to get extra top armour in WW2 didn't they? Like a parasol of steel with a gap around the sides to keep visibility high...

Not sure on level of abstraction needed - you could use "Vulnerable" to refer to both open topped vehicles AND lightly built, early war stuff like Tankettes, or you could have both "Vulnerable" AND "Open Topped" but they're tending to the same thing so on simplicities sake I might drop one or the other. If small arms/MGs etc can now get suppressive hits versus AFVs again then tankettes etc on three hits and six save are pretty duff already and might not need further vulnerability :D


Title: Re: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
Post by: Dr Dave on 17 November 2017, 07:11:33 PM
I'd always considered a "vulnerable" aspect to be already there with the bonus for close assaulting OT and the 5+ for arty and mortar hits.

I think allowing infantry at their maximum range to do anything more than suppress is a bit far fetched. OT or not, no one chucks a grenade more than 20m, definitely not 600m!  :o

And that was what was missing from BKC2: suppressive fire. It's back in BKC3, but only for troops with no AT attacks. It needs to cover troops with no AP as well. 2pdr solid shot passing through a truck does have an effect.  ;)