Army List concerns

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Answer is YES for RA, NO for Tanks - FOR THE THIRD TIME.

[AndyT]

Should the British Army, North Africa list have an option for including the M4 Sherman? Couldn't see it, but there is a note about giving the Sherman the 'Stabilised' ability.

[sjb1001]

Question was should the AP value be in the list given the lack of historical use data - also, stop shouting in capitals.

I guess the question could be rephrased to 'can anyone show a historical use of 2lb HE that stands up to scrutiny?', this has to be the first ever rule set I've seen in 40 years of this hobby that allows a 2lb to have anti personnel capability.

[Ithoriel]

Waaay too much "bottom up" and not nearly enough "top down" in the new army lists for my taste. I expect to keep using BKC2 and adding a few tweaks from BKC3.

As a random example, why is the KV1, which did to be fair have a problem with bogs, bridges and the occasional need to use a hammer to change gear, "lumbering" while the early Panther, which added a whole new dimension to the term "firefight" by spontaneously combusting in action, is not?

Did the Russians really have the M1 Bazooka in December '41?

Exactly how many BT-2s or T-26's did the Russians have in action in Jun '44?

For much of the mid-war period T-60's and T-70's were just under a third of the standard tank force, were a third of the Russian armoured forces really doing recce?

Perhaps that explains why the large numbers of BA-64s, SU-85s, SU-122's and SU-152 (to name but a few) apparently didn't need to turn up?

Still no 203mm tracked howitzer, despite it's being used in a direct fire role as super anti-tank guns at Kursk, for bunker busting duties in the field and to demolish strong-points in urban warfare.

Why do German units (SS, Fallschirmjager, Luftwaffe and Hitler Jugend) get special rules? Is this WW2 or a Boy's Own Adventure comic?

Why does .... Oh Bleh!!!

[Astronomican]

As the main German player in my BKC group, I am bewildered at the German army lists - too many mistakes and omissions.

My main Russian opponent is gonna have fits going through the Russian lists!

I'm glad I only bought the cheap PDF version of the rules and not the printed book.

[old smokie]

How about offering corrected army lists as a PDF ?  to those that bought the rules

[weredoomed2003]

Support for that.  It's not just a few entries that people have different opinions on (us wargamers are an opinionated lot) and we all have our own house rules and tweaks but when the data lists are so poorly put together and error ridden it means he rule set just isn't fit for purpose.  Even more disappointing guven the comprehensive lists in BKC2-  what went wrong to mangle them so much.  Also not sufficient to say 'just use from another list' -the rule set and lists should go together (especially if you don't have access to BKC2).  Looking forward to a mid war battle using my 1 T34 against a host of PzIVs with worse armour than they had in 1940. 
Trying not to be too negative as until now I've been a real fan of Pendraken but this if anyone asks I'll tell them to hunt out a copy of BKC2 and not to bother with 3.  Sorry.

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Should the British Army, North Africa list have an option for including the M4 Sherman? Couldn't see it, but there is a note about giving the Sherman the 'Stabilised' ability.

I've already raised that one - the 75 version is also missing from Italy. Sherman stabilisation is always a contentious one - I suspect the British didn't use it, and not all US crews did. It wasn't very good, being single plain only.

[Nosher]

Is this a new Napoleonic Ruleset

Don't think I've ever witnessed so much wittering about a WW2 ruleset before Pendraken are nice guys and I'm sure given time and a bit of patience they'll iron things out.

[petercooman]

Still waiting for my copy to arrive, before I pass judgement.

Must admit the discussion is  getting a bit 'heated'.

[Womble67]

Don't think I've ever witnessed so much wittering about a WW2 ruleset before Pendraken are nice guys and I'm sure given time and a bit of patience they'll iron things out.

Totally agree

Take care

Andy

[Dr Dave]

Is this a new Napoleonic Ruleset

Don't think I've ever witnessed so much wittering about a WW2 ruleset before Pendraken are nice guys and I'm sure given time and a bit of patience they'll iron things out.

You know, you might be right...

BUT, I'm still amazed that most of the lists have errors.

If it ain't broke...

[Superscribe]

Please see new post: http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,15931.0.html

[Superscribe]

Please see new post: http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,15931.0.html

[Nosher]

What I find a little worrying (and have done for a few months now on the forum) is that a fair bit of the friendliness the forum used to be noted for has been on a bit of a decline. I'm visiting less and less these days, primarily because I'm fed up of all the negative vibes man....

I've been a member since 2010 and have watched Pendraken become bigger and better. Rules development is a relatively new venture for them and if their customer service track record is anything to go by they'll sort this issue out.

I'm pretty certain that behind the scenes Leon et al are working feverishly to identify the problem - can we cut them a bit of slack and try not to get too agitated when we don't receive an immediate answer to questions posted 30 seconds ago.

It's also not that helpful when members metaphorically stamp their feet by diverting threads to new threads and start demanding action.