The Commander Series Forum

Not got my hands on the book as yet, but have seen over at the Pendraken forums mention of the MG's being dropped from the Jeeps, as a British Airborne player, can anyone tell me of any other significant changes to their list?

You're right: the recce jeeps no longer have MG, but are also listed as "rear line" - in the rules this means that they have to stay 30cm away from visible enemy. BUT the recce ability to "spot" the enemy in 60 in BKCII is now reduced. The NEW distance is the doctrine distance, so 25cm for the Airborne. This clearly means that they can't perform the old recce task, if they see an enemy in 30 they have to move away, but have to be within 20 to perform "recce". This MUST be a typo.

The 3" mortar has 2/80 attacks max of 1
was 3/120 1[3]

6 pdr is AT 2/60 AP 3/60
was AT 4/60 AP 2/60
2 pdr is AT 2/50 AP 2/60 in other lists - so very odd considering all the 6pdrs at Arnhem took APDS.

17pdr is AT 5/80 AP 1/80 and is a "tank buster" - reduces target save by 1 IIRC
was AT 5/80 AP 3/80

Carriers Bren - unlimited
was 1[3]
Carriers PIAT - max 3

Carriers scout - up to 1

jeeps - unlimited
trucks - unlimited, these also have a capacity of 2 infantry units
horses - unlimited!

There are others as well...

I fear that the rules are full of typos, contradictions, and errors of omission and addition of fictitious units.

thanks Dr Dave, this is indeed grim reading one plus though, I finally get to have my all (horse)mounted airborne battalion

Do parachutes come in horse sizes?!

Didn't the US try dropping mules, which promptly broke all their legs on landing? Springs on their hooves perhaps?

Cheers, Andy

Yes... Fielding a parachute bttn mounted on mules would certainly get them into Arnhem town quicker. However, I think that you're missing the point.

Got the point OK. Was playing along a little. ?

... so was I

I guess sometimes I'm just too funny, and at this difficult time perhaps we should all take a moment to reflect. I hear the Duke of Edinburgh is stepping aside after he saw the Airborne lists.

Are you sure he just doesn't want to get hit by a falling mule?

Also no Tetrarch or locust in the list now, back to BKC-II for me.

Quite

You don't want something as historical as a Tetrarch, what with the parachute cords tangling up the tracks and the puny 2pdr with HE (there you go IanS). You want the famous para mule teams that held the bridge at Arnhem, led by Prince Phillip when he took time off from the Royal Navy.

anyone know who does Mules or even Donkeys( I figure you wont be able to tell the difference at this scale) in 6mm? Oh and a Prince Phil? My next Arnhem game is certainly going to be interesting with these new changes in place

I don't know of any mules or donkeys, but there's an ASS mentioned on p1 of BKC3!

Tadahhhhh - I am sooooo fast, so fast!!!!

Like greased lightning!

For some reason Olivia Neutron Bomb has just danced through my imagination in skin tight lycra. Now trying to bleach out images of John Travolta!

Baccus do some nice pack mules, not sure they have parachutes though

Leon has announced that they are going to do a full reprint
http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/...

H&R, Irregular, and maybe Baccus have pack mules in their ancient ranges.

Yes, but using BKC3 as the start point I think.

It's easier to start with BKC-III and work backwards as all of the design work and formatting is already done. If folks read the text in both BKC-II and BKC-III there's a lot of it exactly the same as I used the BKC-II file as our base and brought in text from the authors revised version as I went along.

If it works best for you to edit the BKC III text then that's what you must do. Unfortunately, looking at the muddled changes to terrain, additional complexity of height of terrain and vehicles, contradictory nature of at least some special rules, issues over observers, etc, etc., you would be far better returning to BKCII text, systems and, in particular, lists, to get a game that can be played. At our club, all of the players I've spoken to are discarding III in favour of II (that's 5 out of 5 regular players).

As an aside, I was interested to note the special rule for mechanised infantry, which lets panzergrenadiers advance in their transports to within 10cm of an enemy, then dismount and assault in one move. Then the standard transport for Gepanzert PZgren is the 251/1, which is classed as vulnerable, so when it gets to within 30cm of enemy infantry can be shot up at full AP stats. So, there are two special abilities that are contradictory. In real life, the 251s carried infantry in bullet proof cover and allowed them to dismount almost on top of the enemy spraying suppressive MG32 fire as they advanced - they only came a cropper when faced with effective IAT weapons like bazookas, piats and captured Pzfausts and Pzshrecks. All these special rules need to be so carefully considered in the bigger picture of the gameplay.

Sorry to witter on, but these are good reasons why III is so flawed. Happy to help in any way I can, as I rate the rules system really highly.

Cheers, Andy

Good luck Leon.

Andy, normal German doctrine with armoured half tracks was actually to dismount when at about 1000metres from the enemy - the half tracks were too vulnerable to use up close when filled with troops!

The "Boys Own Commando Comic" armoured overrun was done but it wasn't encouraged

I suspect it's easier to edit the changes bits in the new file than start from scratch, but I don't have the files so can't really say

Perhaps III is the best start point for the RULES, but to make the lists right is surely has to start at II?

I've no idea what the plan is, but a rules book and then a lists section as a download would be fine by me.

That sounds like a plan as from a rules point of view it makes no difference where we start from II or III. But the lists should really use II as a start point.

@TP
I agree with you, but then the mechanised option is even more redundant, as dismounted troops only get a 10cm move, which is what, 200m in scale, so they should be dismounting and plodding the last 5 activations into close assault. If they are dismounting at 1000m it is because they are more concerned about AT rounds from tanks, guns and such if they get much closer mounted, they obviously thought casualties would be reduced if they take the small arms fire rather than the AT fire (really want to say AP rounds, but AP means anti-personnel here rather that armour piercing).

Vulnerable means these same 251s, which are AFAIK bullet proof are now vulnerable to small arms fire out to 30cm, 600m in game terms. Basic infantry don't have anything else capable of reaching out that far except rifles and lmgs, which 251s are pretty much impervious to, excluding possible minor spalling from the interior. So, at 30cm, vulnerable means they can be are attacked using AP factor by infantry at 600m - doesn't add up. Yes they are vulnerable to plunging fire from indirect HE and grenades in close assault, but even Hollywood actors can't throw 600m. Vulnerable also applies to M10s, Achilles and the like, so the crewmen wouldn't be taking cover behind the armour plate at 600m range, they'd be standing up in the turret and vulnerable to AP fire? I really doubt it. Vulnerable to indirect fire and in close assault, but not out to 30cm/600m.

The Boys Own stuff is precisely why I hate FoW. Many's the time I've had some grinning spotty youth charge up in indestructible 251s, with no opportunity fire of any kind, only to be cut to shreds and pinned by their LMGs and wiped out with no response. It's why BKC was so good.

I agree, if Leon has the rules already in an editable file format, they make a useable starting point, which is pretty much what I suggested previously, but the text may as well be replaced with the original from BKCII, and then tweaked. The flaws are too fundamental in the way LOS and visibility, FOs, etc. have been changed to make them a starting point IMHO.

Cheers, Andy