BKC III First Game

[Stratoq]

Played my first game of the new edition last night. I was really pleased with it, especially the concealment and recce rules which added a nice dynamic to the game. Also, the simplification of some of the mechanic such as close assault works really well.

The unit special rules/abililities add a nice touch, allowing for greater customisation for specific historical scenarios and although I imagine house rules could have worked in previous additions, I am pleased  that an official list has been included in the game.

Looking forward to playing some games over the near future. 

[Steve J]

Welcome on board and glad you enjoyed the game

[Leon]

Welcome to the Forum, good to hear you enjoyed it!

[Itinerant Hobbyist]

Congrats on getting a game in. I won't get my first for a couple more weeks.

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Hello and welcome, glad you enjoyed it.

[Stratoq]

Thanks all for the welcome.

I have written a battle report of the game played with pictures for anyone interested at:
https://stratoqswargames.wordpress.com/2017/05/01/battle-for-the-crossroads/

[Steve J]

Nice AAR and positive feedback on BKCIII

[Itinerant Hobbyist]

Awesome. Hate to ask for you to repost, but you should post your link in the battle reports section and you'll be the first one there!

[sjb1001]

Love the German command stand with the PZ-IV turret and Kubelwagen, off to do some surgery later on spare models....

I have done a couple of Eastern front solo playtests and with the corrected data from the various threads really like the rules themselves - will house rule which FO can do which batteries or planes but other than that no problem with the game. Lumbering is good for KV-1s on defence as they just sit there being difficult to kill and causing all sorts of grief, the feel suitably implacable.

[Ithoriel]

Lumbering is good for KV-1s on defence as they just sit there being difficult to kill and causing all sorts of grief, the feel suitably implacable.

... and that's the problem with army lists

I see no evidence that KV1's were "lumbering". They were too heavy for many Russian bridges, were more affected by soft going than the much lighter T-34 and had problems with the gear shift that was often solved by hitting it with a hammer (which seems to have worked). Very early on KV's in particular seem to have become "roadblocks" because they were unable to flee across a bridge or boggy ground and therefore stood and fought, with some success due to their tough armour.

If lumbering were a minus to the target number required to order a group containing a "lumbering" unit I'd be far happier than with the concept - that seems more BKC than a blanket ban on more than a single move.

... and that's the problem with army lists - there's nothing to say my view is any more accurate than sjb's or the original author of BKCIII. It needs a consensus view from the experts in the field ... If we're allowed experts in this day and age

tl:dr - army lists are tricky!

[Dr Dave]

Lumbering was caught in BKCII where "lumbering" meant that unlimbered guns could only move once per turn. There were no lumbering vehicles as there are in BKCIII, that was already captured in II, as it is again in III, by low movement rates. Big, heavy, slow vehicles are now caught twice: slow movement and they can only move once. I could understand it if everything moved the same, then you could split it into lumbering, normal, fast and very fast - perhaps? But the double-whammy of lumbering and move=15 makes Arras a non-game. Coupled with low CVs the Matildas are part of the terrain. 

[sjb1001]

... and that's the problem with army lists

I see no evidence that KV1's were "lumbering". They were too heavy for many Russian bridges, were more affected by soft going than the much lighter T-34 and had problems with the gear shift that was often solved by hitting it with a hammer (which seems to have worked). Very early on KV's in particular seem to have become "roadblocks" because they were unable to flee across a bridge or boggy ground and therefore stood and fought, with some success due to their tough armour.

If lumbering were a minus to the target number required to order a group containing a "lumbering" unit I'd be far happier than with the concept - that seems more BKC than a blanket ban on more than a single move.

... and that's the problem with army lists - there's nothing to say my view is any more accurate than sjb's or the original author of BKCIII. It needs a consensus view from the experts in the field ... If we're allowed experts in this day and age

tl:dr - army lists are tricky!

In consideration with other comments on the Panther - perhaps 'unreliable' would be better where a passed command roll on the modified CV number is the last move they can make.

[toxicpixie]

I'd be tempted by "Unreliable" or "Cumbersome" or similar and give a -1 on the command roll if ordered to move.

Anyway, glad the original poster enjoyed the game! Am sure you'd linked to your blog about it - Yanks narrowly failing to evict Germans from a key cross roads?