Sitting here looking at my book (just arrived today). Wondering if you could fix the disccrepencies/errors. whatever in the rules. And also fix the Russian, German, US, and British  Lists for a rerelease of the books. Then, as the other lists are fixed, simply release them as Too Fat Lardies does as free PDFs. It would drastically cut the size of the print version.

While I loved that BKC came with all the lists, this may be a compromise. 

I have no dog in this fight, so won't be voting.

However, I would say that I hope the purchasers of BLT will be as considerate as possible, and not call for the expensive options. I also hope that this hiccup does not detract from the reputation of Pendraken.

Hopefully, when the 2nd Edition comes out, all these minor niggles* will have disappeared, and the BLT III Ausf A will become as the British Guiana 1c magenta postage stamp - much prized for its minor imperfections.



*Yes they are minor. It's a set of wargames rules, not the constiution for a new democracy. If you don't like a bit - change it. If you're favourite (and little used) vehicle isn't included - add it. If you know that a PzIV should be armour class delta instead of armour class epsilon, then you can work out that a Crusader AA should be armour class Beta.

Hi Leon et al

Happy with whichever route you go down just as long as various issues are addressed.

Of course I would love a new free 'fixed' version of the set but I expect that would be sometime in future and would likely be preceded by PDF fixes in interim anyhow

Cheers

Rules haven't arrived yet, so I can't make a massive/intelligent contribution, but I'm leaning towards a combination of 1 and 2 (voted 2).

My copy of BKC II has all the errata written into it, as I'm not too worried about scribbling on rules, but if the list os going to be a long one, then a new book would be nice in the long term.

I'd also like to thank Leon for his post.  A lot of companies would just walk away saying nothing about the issues (hmm, I'm thinking of one game in particular).  I think the easiest thing is to release a set of errata and revised lists in PDF.  These revisions can then be incorporated into new print runs and the PDF at Wargame Vault.

Leon, thank you for your candid views and honesty.

I've not voted yet, but I think it's a 2 or a 4.

2 - I can cope with scribbles and a new set of lists that I'll print as I need them.

4 - as a product BKCIII will really stand out if it's sold as a book, plus a downloadable book of corrections and clarifications, or anything similar. I think longer term option 4 will have to be the route otherwise BKCIII will die and potentially take the series with it.

Thanks Leon for the honest & frank staement, it will get better.  I picked my copy up at Salute and had no intention of jumping straight into playing it.  I realised that there would be problems, there always are.  I can wait for the corrections.  My lead pile awaits application of paint.

Firstly I would like to thank Leon and the Pendraken team for their honesty and openess- many manufacturers would have just issued a 'we'll publish errata soon' notice and left it at that.  I think the wealth of opinions and comment comes from a genuine love of BKC2 and an expectation for BKC3.  I agree completely with the comments from Pendraken that some changes are bona fide changes and not errors.  I myself like the indirect fire change to hit on a 6, still undecided on the FO/FAC point but that's something we work out within our gaming group, try it, work out a house rule etc.  The main point is that the rule change is set out correctly.  
But, the army lists and the other contradictions/omissions throughout the rulebook are very significant and will take a lot of work to fix.  I've tried to look at this from different perspectives to make my decision on how to vote.  The army lists account for 97 pages out of 175 (55%) of the rule book.  To issue a corrected version means over half the rulebook is wasted publication.  From the other comments clearly many other sections need significant rewrites; opportunity fire, scenarios, engineering and field defences to name just 4.  I also considered this from a product viewpoint - I myself could not go on marketing and selling a product where over half the content has to replaced with a second version via pdf because its wrong.  I don' t want to speak for others but I would be happy to volunteer to sense check further drafts or lists - I am as puzzled as many are that obvious errors and omissions are so common in the lists. Perhaps it's the wealth of knowledge in the WW2 wargaming community that make these stand out as glaring errors?  
For me there comes a cut off point between a document that requires errata to correct a few typos, mistakes and omissions but that is essentially a correct document and one that isn't.  
Unfortunately for these reasons I came down on the side of a redraft and reprint of the whole rulebook.  I know others will disgree and I respect their views as much as I hope they do mine.
Finally I would add my support to the Pendraken team to get this right and to continue to make the commander series the most popular ruleset for the periods they cover.  These things just happen sometimes...

First, I realise I should have been involved into the process of testing : But I was away from gaming for personal reasons, and lazy, hoping some good people would have done the work for me.

I'll speak of my personal experience : BKCII was my entry point into WWII gaming. It has a lot to offer but mainly, for me it was that all the lists were concentrated into one book. And with the limitations, I could somehow build a "plausible" force, without having to check actual ORBATs. It was a huge help for a beginner.

Second thing I liked was : one double page for movement, one for combat, one for arty...

After playing it for a while but mainly with new players, the rules had flaws (personal opinions) : Units really hard to suppress (I always had the view that suppression should be the first throw and not the second, but maybe my view is biased by 1 on 1 interpretation, when in reality it is a lot harder to suppress a platoon as a whole as opposed to one tank or one squad taking fire), the hidden rules were a bit of a mess, actually doing something with the Soviets Mid-war was really hard, the scenarii were interesting once you could actually understand them, in general the games were too long, couldn't understand the assault rules...

My expectations for BKCIII were a somehow more simple game.

To summarise, I had pleasure going through the lists, thinking, "My next buy will be 6 T-70, or 3 KV-1..." and doing scenery (or buying some of the resin scenery from Pendraken) more than actually playing the game.

To explain a bit of what I like, I much prefer Kings of war than any other Fantasy rule now. Every lists available, some kind of a streamlined game. I feel Warlords games (Hail caesar, Black Powder but not Bolt Action) are doing this well (strangely enough, due to the influence of Priestley /sarcasm) : Historical wargaming streamlined for a general audience.

In my view, BKCIII should really aim for simplicity and elegancy to follow the top-down approach inherited from Warmaster. BKC series should be the antithesis of other systems and the player should really be able to focus on Commanders decisions : in the end it should go down to " Should I order these to move ? To fire ? Maybe it is a risky to try to get 3 move orders to cross this field of terrain..."

Again, my fault for not getting involved into it when I could have give feedbacks.

Thanks for the frank and honest statement Leon

I voted for Option 2 - New PDF Army Lists, easier to modify/update as required.

If your planing another print run of BKC 3,  I would print the rules with all the corrections etc but without the army lists, keep the army lists as a free download PDF and maybe offer the new rule book at cost to people who bought the original just an idea, that would hopefully keep your costs to a minimum. There maybe should have been a "starter scenario" in the book with two small forces listed that beginners could purchase to get them started, just my two cents.

People who have spotted mistakes etc should email you the page number and what the error is then you could collate all of the information in one place which would make it easier to correct again just my two cents.

Leon - thanks for the honest and prompt feedback.

Gone for PDF army lists as the errata in the main rules is minor and some of the comments on FO for examples are really down to house rules for me.

I have never played BKC so I am in the dark but just put the corrected stuff on a separate post and I will download them to quote a Meer cat "Simples"

Having bought these at Salute but only having skimmed through them since then I was pretty surprised by this announcement!
I have the previous BKC1 and 2 so I am keen to support BKC3.

Like others I would like to thank Leon for his post, that can not have been easy.
Its a shame that some things went wrong with the testing, etc but its now important for Pendraken to move forward with how they eventually deal with the issues and this thread is a good start.

I voted for pdf army lists and would also be ok with online errata as I never have a problem writing any changes in my rules books.

If a reprint happens I would agree with others that the book only contains the rules + a couple of test scenarios, with the army lists kept online and therefore easier to update.
I only use the NW Europe lists, adjusted to historical orbats, and I would guess most people only use a selected few out of so many so downloading and printing is not really an issue.

Either way good luck going forward whatever way you decide.

Quote from: fsn on 02 May 2017, 07:03:30 AM
*Yes they are minor. It's a set of wargames rules, not the constiution for a new democracy. If you don't like a bit - change it. If you're favourite (and little used) vehicle isn't included - add it. If you know that a PzIV should be armour class delta instead of armour class epsilon, then you can work out that a Crusader AA should be armour class Beta.
[/size]

I could.

I guarantee that the three guys I regularly play BKC with would be playing Bolt Action or Flames of War within a fortnight if that was their only option. I remember the time, early on, when they disliked the removal of hits at turn end I suggested we keep hits from turn to turn but reduce them gradually over time - they were a heartbeat away from screaming "Burn the witch!" and fleeing the house at such heresy. Won them over eventually, to be fair!

Quote from: Grimheart on 02 May 2017, 01:31:35 PM
If a reprint happens I would agree with others that the book only contains the rules + a couple of test scenarios, with the army lists kept online and therefore easier to update.

I only use the NW Europe lists, adjusted to historical orbats, and I would guess most people only use a selected few out of so many so downloading and printing is not really an issue.

One of the big selling points of BKC for me was "everything you need in one book."

I struggle to get the guys I play with regularly to check their emails in a timely fashion. Just download the latest pdf armylists .... aye, right!

PDF armylists might be a short term fix but not really a long term one, I think.

I should say that I am coming back into miniatures wargaming after many years (decades) out of it, although I have had a few board based wargames.  So I am looking for a fairly straightforward set of rules that give the flavour of WW2 wargaming without excessive complexity.  I am not worried about totally accurate simulations of exact weapons and infantry capabilities and composition, just a reasonable approximation thereof providing that there are no glaring errors.  Consequently I am fairly happy to go with the rules and lists pretty much as they stand provided the rules are reasonably easy to understand and make sufficient sense to be playable.  Of course, I would expect any errata should be easily accessible and posted promptly but beyond that I am happy to implement them myself.  A separate set of downloadable pdfs for corrected army lists might be helpful though, and in fact I bought the pdf version of the rules as well as the printed version precisely so that I could print off and laminate those in which I am particularly interested.

I would say that scrapping the current rulebooks and reprinting them does seem to me to be an overreaction though, while I can see that the producer and possibly some purchasers might feel that the current state of things is undesirable (the producer is obviously a perfectionist) I don't really see the need for such a 'nuclear' response.  There are some downsides to this course, as well as the implicit cost I imagine there would be a considerable delay before a new set could be made available particularly if further extensive play testing is required.  Furthermore there is no guarantee that even after a new set is produced there might not still be problems, in something as complex as this set of rules covering so many WW2 theatres it is not possible to cover all possible combinations of organisations and weapons in testing.  If some people feel that the rules as they stand are totally unplayable to their standard then perhaps they could return them for a full refund.

I think at this stage it would be better to accept the rules (with errata) as they stand and work with Pendraken to develop them into an even better set as BKC-IV, with the provisos that I have suggested above.  This is an increasing trend in board (war)games where several pages of errata are not uncommon and the producer maintains a set of 'living rules' online for people who have bought into the system.

Hi there

One reason I bought BKC3 was so I could have a book with everything together in one place.  Army lists are important for me as I rarely have a lot of time to prepare a game so points matches are the way to go. Another reason for buying BKC3 was to have the start of a family of rules for me to play games from WW2 up to moderns (and possibly sci-fi with epic figures) for when CWC and FWC new editions are released, to save me having to learn more sets of rules.

If the rules are as broken as people say (and I am not convinced they are - perhaps people are not liking the changes made) then that is one matter as it is always thus in rulesets.  You may or may not like all the rules, no one forces you to play them, they are not gospel truth.  You bought a set of rules to try out, if you like them great, if not then they look good on the bookshelf (and BKC is a good looking book).

However, if there are many contradictions in the text, mistakes in explanations etc then that is another problem - are the rules fit for purpose?  Can they be used as stands to play a game of toy soldiers?  I don't mind the odd mistake (which can be corrected in an errata and penciled into the book).  As a consumer then I don't buy things that don't work on purpose! I also don't spend £20 lightly!  If the rules are not fit for purpose then perhaps those so inclined could get a refund?

I really want these rules to survive and be a success but (as we will find out on Thursday when we have a game with the new rules) if they are broken then they need to be fixed.

I really would not be happy with PDF army lists.  That is not the reason I bought the book.  If I wanted PDF army lists I would have bought a PDF copy of the rules!

It is great of Pendraken to own up and say they are not pleased with their product, and this stance is to be applauded.  How they deal with it now is up to them but I do feel a free revised copy of the rulebook for all the people who purchased a set would go a long way to helping out regaining the trust of consumers (and would perhaps generate more sales in the future of the other rules in the family).

Anyway, that is my 2p-worth.

Mark

Oh dear, where to start?

Firstly many thanks to Leon for his comments above, and perhaps I should say that I'm coming from the point of view of a long term supporter and advocate of Pendraken figures.

'Hopes' for BKC 3rd Edition:

I started using BKC not long after the 2nd edition came out and always thought that they were a good set of WWII rules and in particular had a good balance between playability and realism (in my opinion what any good set of wargame rules should aim for). I would also like to emphasise that I thought the 'core' mechanics were pretty 'sound' and the only problem that I have had with BKC-II is my understanding of certain aspects of the rules around visibility, concealed troops and fighting in built-up areas. Regarding BKC-III, I was not looking for or expecting any changes to these rules as such, just a clearer explanation within the rule book of how they were meant to work. Unfortunately there have been fairly major changes (IMHO, and you might want to refer to my two recent posts in the BKC-III Rules Queries section) which in my opinion are poor and do not seem to have been thought through (and in fact as I said in my other posts are for me at least 'show stoppers').

I do wonder after reading through the new rule book (twice), then re-reading sections again to try to understand them better and the comments in the various posts since the publication of BKC- III; whether there has been some misunderstanding or a 'mix up' somewhere down the line regarding some peoples wish for 'simpler' rules and a clearer explanation in the rule book of some of the rules as they were (which is what I was looking for, and with all due respect to Pete Jones).  Some rules do really seemed to have 'changed for change sake'. e.g. the combination of FAO's and FAC's into one for instance, the rules regarding these in BKC-II were hardly complex or difficult to understand, as someone else has commented, a poosible case of "dumbing down"?

The Way Forward:

There seem to me to be three main issues that are of course all connected. The mistakes, missing units etc in the army lists, the mistakes, omissions etc in the text of the new rules as written, and the changes to the 'core' rules.

Firstly (and I'm suggesting this as being heavily involved with 'Managing Change' in my professional life) I believe Pendraken should not rush into any 'quick fixes' to the issues raised by myself and others without thinking them through. That said I do think 'Old Smokie's idea above, regarding a reprint of the main rules only and a PDF of the revised army lists (which would presumably save on costs?) sounds like a possible way forward.

Regarding the 'poll', I do think which option people pick rather depends on what they think of the new rules and I think people do need time to understand them and think them through (and I mean the 'core' mechanics here not just changes to the stats) before deciding where to vote.

To summarise, for me at least (and not just me judging by the number of people commenting that they intend to carry on using BKC-II), the main issue is the changes to some of the core rules which I think have been poorly thought through (IMHO). So I will only be using BKC-III in the future and recommending them to others if these are changed in any reprint (as I said above all I was looking for was a clearer explanation of the rules as written). Therefore options 1, 2 and 3 in the poll do not work for me.

Apologies for the rather long response.

Cheers Paul

Its certainly good to have admitted that there are issues, and to be looking into those issues. I'd suggest not rushing to fix stuff, it can be too easy to roll in 'fixes' that break stuff further. Also make sure you are only fixing errors, not things that people merely don't like.

I would suggest going for PDF errata + corrected army lists in the short term. Once you have collated these you will have a try picture of the scope of the problem.

Then for a second print run, look to fix the issues in the hard copy. If the fixes are extensive, then it will be necessary to make sure that this is marked as revised edition or something similar.

I do think that you will need a hard copy that is largely correct, many gamers don't spend much time online, and it is always hard work with a gaming group when some have all the latest online updates, and some just have the book they bought on day 1.

I'd definitely avoid option 3 - this will be expensive and not that helpful.

Quote from: paulr on 01 May 2017, 11:07:46 PM
Leon, thank you for your honesty. I know the great team, small as it is, at Pendraken will put this right.

AJ, as I don't play BKC I will not be voting. I suspect others will be considering the options and have a few days yet to vote.

Well that pretty much speaks for me! Never go near the modern stuff so can't really vote in the poll.
In general terms, however, I think in these times everything should be done in PDF (watermarked if you like) and the rules, FAQ's and lists supported by a collection of "living" documents. Once in a great while print a glitzy hard copy as a commemorative, limited edition sort of thing. But, hey, that just me.

I have now added a copy of BKC3 to the celebration order I'm preparing to send when the new website is up (May 6th?)
Once all this is sorted out, as I'm sure it will be, I suspect the first edition will become a valuable collector's item.