Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read

[Leonardo]

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?

[T Madvid]

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time would undoubtedly think twice when confronted with substantial errata and a book full of army lists that have been superseded by PDF versions.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!

[MiniPatton]

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.

[sunjester]

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.

[Grimheart]

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.

[KeithS]

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.

[Fenton]

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

[Nick the Lemming]

Well said Keith.

[pierre the shy]

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 

[PFuentes]

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".

[DFlynSqrl]

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. 

[Matt J]

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...!

[Ithoriel]

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!

[Stratoq]

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.

[grahambeyrout]

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.