Important Announcement about BKC-III - Please Read

[OldenBUA]

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

[chris stringer]

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!

[Techno]

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

[d_Guy]

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)

[vonlacy]

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.

[williamb]

@ d_Guy
Thanks for the welcome.   Your collection of helmets and weapons is impressive.

[sediment]

@ 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.

[d_Guy]

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. 

[toxicpixie]

@ 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!

[sediment]

@ dGuy LOL, no worries.  My post count defines me as a newbie here pretty well.

@TP Cor wot a carve up!

Cheers, Andy

[Genom]

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.

[Nick the Lemming]

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.

[Steve J]

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.

[Zbigniew]

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.

[petercooman]

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!!

[jaunty101]

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.

[paulr]

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

[Leon]

Can i still get a copy Leon.

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

[Nick the Lemming]

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).

[jaunty101]

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.