Game: Battle of the Bulge

Thread: Re: Missing Rules

badinfo — 2008-10-02T19:47:17+00:00

I'll see if I can find mine. Hopefully someone already has it scanned

Thread: Missing Rules

Windopaene — 2008-10-02T18:16:57+00:00

Just thrifted this, and it's missing the rules booklet. Checked all the usual places to no avail. Anyone have a scan they can send me?

Thread: Re: Just started playing this...

Tom Jensen — 2008-08-13T22:12:41+00:00

Don't forget:

9. The attacker may not divide combat into more than one battle against defending Units on the same square.

(Ain't it quaint how hex terminology has yet to make an appearance?)

So the attacker can divide combat against different hexes but cannot divide combat against units within the same hex. That was always a tactic used in Afrika Korps, soaking off against one unit in a hex in an attempt to destroy another. InBattle of the Bulge you're attacking hexes, not individual units.

Lately, I've been thinking that Battle of the Bulge is probably my second favorite "hex game"... The Russian Campaign, of course, being everyone's absolute favorite. (At least among the Classics.)

Thread: Re: Just started playing this...

Hawaiiirish — 2008-08-12T03:54:16+00:00

Again, thanks Hoop.

I'm going to get a game in and post a session in the next couple of days. Look back for that, if you are at all interested.

I might try and do a chess-notation type of record (since the board does have letters and numbers). It could be mind-numbingly boring or fun to read. I did a similar type of session for "Duel in the Dark".

Aloha,
Jon
Hawaiiirish

Thread: Re: Just started playing this...

hoop — 2008-08-12T01:09:58+00:00

I'm guessing that combat results apply equally to all affected participants? So, if I rolled a DB2, all three blues would retreat 2 spaces? Am I playing that right? Same with Attacker Elim, Defender Elim, etc.?

You got it!

I remember when I first started playing Avalon Hill games (D-Day was my first) I had a tough time getting a handle on the concept of stacking. It becomes second nature pretty quickly though.

Enjoy!

John

Thread: Re: Just started playing this...

Hawaiiirish — 2008-08-12T01:01:52+00:00

Thank you so much. For such an old game, it's nice to see some people out there taking some interest in it!

That really clears it up for me. I think I was getting stuck on the idea that a battle was hex to hex and it's really unit(s) -vs- unit(s), irrespective of hex (or hexes).

I'm guessing that combat results apply equally to all affected participants? So, if I rolled a DB2, all three blues would retreat 2 spaces? Am I playing that right? Same with Attacker Elim, Defender Elim, etc.?

again, thanks and aloha!

Thread: Re: Just started playing this...

hoop — 2008-08-12T00:05:53+00:00

Jon-

A single unit may attack any number of adjacent hexes in one combat. Just add up all the combat factors of the defending units into one combined number and roll the die once on the combat table.

Stacked units attacking adjacent hexes can each attack different adjacent units if desired. This would be mulitple combat dice rolls. Use each attacking unit's combat factor vs. the defenders it is designated to attack. The key rules are:

- The attacker must battle every defending unit in whose controlled zone he has attacking units; and

- An attacking unit(s) must be in the controlled zone of every defending unit it is attacking.

In your example, yes, the 3 blue units defending against 2 red units would have their combat factors combined.

Hope this helps!

John

Thread: Just started playing this...

Hawaiiirish — 2008-08-10T23:57:52+00:00

So, I bought this about a year ago (looked at it and then stashed it) and, in getting it back out, I'm having a hard time understanding a couple of rules. Overall, it seems pretty easy. But, I'm confused about attacking. A single piece can only attack a single hex? Right?

In the "Tourney" booklet, there is a diagram that shows two red pieces stacked attacking three blue pieces each in different hexes. How? Are the combat factors for the three blue COMBINED?

I'm really missing something here, I think. Can someone help out?

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

JimM — 2008-07-08T22:38:11+00:00

I too just picked this up at a yard sale recently for only $3, along with Guadalcanal and a few other old AH games. The box is torn on all 4 corners, but the game looked complete (this is the worst condition game of the bunch all the others look in good condition). Having never played it, I think it could be fun. However, I always look at these games as just what they are... games, never being historically accurate or anything like that. So, I may keep this and play it, as this game is not a collectors item.

Jim

Thread: Bulge '40: The Sedan Breakthrough

Tom Jensen — 2008-07-01T20:26:48+00:00

This is a review of the scenario introduced in The General Jul-Aug 1975 Vol. 12 No. 2. It's the one with the Tobruk cover.

For 15 cents I Xeroxed a copy of the counters, got out the Elmer's glue and some cardboard, and manufactured some units. Turned out pretty good if I do say so myself; all in shades of grey, the Belgian units were almost the same color as the Germans but they had a "grainier" quality so I could tell them apart. [Two copies in different colors would have been better. Red and Blue?]

Victory: The Germans must 1.) Capture two of the three western fortresses; Sedan, Diniant, or Namur. 2.) Exit 70 Mech. factors and 3.) not lose more than 25 Mech. factors. Let the scenario begin:

First of all, a wave of German infantry enters the map. What was kinda neat was that the infantry's road bonus is 2 X, cavalry 3 X, and Mechanized is 5 X; very different from Bulge '65's infantry zipping around as fast as the Mechs. Soon, the panzers were passing through the infantry headed for the forts. This was met by Belgian and French "speedbumps", numerous 1-5s and 1-3s that got pushed back into new defensive positions. This was the pattern for the first 7 outta 10 turns. Luckily, the Germans lost only one 4-5 Mech unit due to the almost unavoidable Exchange results of the high odds CRT. Lose two 16-5s and it's GAME OVER, dude.

One problem I found was that one French unit, the 10-3, had no NATO symbology on it. Was it inf? cavalry? an art. unit? or a garrison unit with a 3 MF misprint? Wikipedia soon set me straight: it's an Infantry unit.

One thing different from the normal Bulge was that very few Allied units enter from the far north and south map edges. There's no need to protect the sides of the bulge and plenty of newly arrived reinforcements to guard the supply line. One less worry. Around the VP forts, I was entrenching like crazy. Finally, on Turn 9, a 1:1 assault takes Sedan; a one-in-six chance! From there, 75 Mech factors exit fulfilling one of the three victory conditions. Meanwahile, the drives toward Namur and Diniant had stalled; just too many blocking units made it impossible to attack the forts at the inevitable low odds. As in Afrika Korps, the game came down to taking 2 of 3 Tobruchs in the final turns; a few die rolls settle the game.

Final thoughts: It was short and fun; something that would fit nicely into an evening. Perhaps it needs an overrun rule to eliminate all those pesky, ahistorical, suicidal Allies. Or perhaps the German Mechs should have by-passed the speedbumps and left them for the infantry to clean up. They need multiple assaults on the forts to have a chance at victory.

Worth the effort? Yes, but if I had the time, I'd rather play Bulge '65.

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

bob_santafe — 2008-06-23T00:47:42+00:00

I have found it well balanced -- but more difficult for the American than the German to play. The Americans are on the strategic defensive throughout the game, but must play aggressively (at the right moments!) and cannily to win.

Between unequal opponents it's easy to achieve play balance without sacrificing the enjoyment for either side, by (a) adjusting the German supply, or (b) adjusting the air strength. It's a truly great game, in my opinion.

Thread: Re: Historical Accuracy

bob_santafe — 2008-06-23T00:29:53+00:00

The game has been considered 'historically inaccurate' because the German units are too strong. The Americans have no chance to mount a serious counter attack -- the Third Army reinforcements will be desperately needed at the front to stem the German advance. Hence, throughout the game the Germans are on the strategic offensive and the Americans on the strategic defensive.

The game is well-balanced, however, and in my view is one of the greatest war games ever made. A well-played game will invariably end with the Germans in strength at or near the Meuse, perhaps without enough supply or time left to force the Meuse and win; perhaps not.

Between competent opponents the game is a nail-biter, with each side having to make some gut wrenching decisions. If, for instance, the Germans play safe and operate a steam roller, they will push everything before them on a broad front -- but will fall far short of the Meuse. In order to win they must take risks by moving advanced units into exposed positions, forcing the Americans to counter attack at unfavorable odds or withdraw more rapidly than they should. The Germans must play in such a way as to eventually punch holes in the American line & race ahead, leaving American units in their rear -- at the risk of having their increasingly narrow supply channels cut.

If the Americans try to execute a safe, technical withdrawal, they will be overwhelmed. They must selectively attack at unfavorable odds, risking having their units surrounded and eliminated on the next turn, as against slowing the German attack and, at times, eliminating German units which have advanced into exposed positions.

I've played games in which the Germans have managed to engage & tie up just too many American units, with their forward Panzers finding a hole in the line and racing ahead & eventually forcing the Meuse. I've also played games in which the Americans have snatched victory at the very end by eliminating key German panzers in unfavorable attacks by units which had been left well behind the German advance. In one game I played, the Germans had crossed the Meuse with just enough units to win and were desperately trying to contain the American units which had been by-passed in their advance. They lost two key panzer units in a 1-2 attack against them, which denied them the ability to plug all the gaps, and on the last turn of the game -- their fourth turn across the Meuse -- a single American unit found the gap he needed and went galloping from Dinant to Huy, cutting the German supply & winning the game for the Americans.

Thread: The Lost Isolation Rule

Tom Jensen — 2008-06-05T20:38:09+00:00

I've been playing this Classic lately and discovered that one rule seems to be missing from the Tournament rulebook. Under the section about Isolation, it lists all the effects of being out of supply (mainly a reduction of German movement by two MPs). However, according to the errata printed in an early General Q&A, isolated units cannot attack unless another supplied unit joins the battle. This is never mentioned in the Basic rules or the Battle Manual. To me, this seems like a significant omission which is probably why the Germans win 90% of the time! Here's the relevant errata:

Volume 4 / Number 6

Q: In a situation where the US has German units completely surrounded; may these units participate in an attack by units from outside the encirclement?
A: Yes. If any of the units in an attack are supplied, all others engaged in that particular attack are considered to be supplied (as pertains to the supply limitations on attacks).

But this is contradicted in Vol 10/1:

Q: If one unit of an attack is supplied, are all the participating units considered supplied?
A: No – each unit must trace its own supply line.

Add this to the final Q&A question in the Battle Manual about German limited supply (which says that all attacking units without supply are eliminated), it is implied that all attacking units must be supplied!

This interpretation is also supported by a rule from the Sedan Breakthrough scenario which says: "Due to air superiority, German units can attack out of supply range."

So in the Battle Manual under Isolation you should probably add something like this:

6. An isolated unit that attacks (or is forced to attack through Engagement) is eliminated.

In the wild and wooly days of Classic wargaming, the science of rule wrangling had not been perfected. It would be neat to track down the original designers of Bulge '65 to get the inside story of this omission. For five decades this game has been played incorrectly!

Thread: Historical Accuracy

yangtze2000 — 2008-05-25T08:38:37+00:00

This game has been criticised for its lack of historical accuracy, but I can't find anywhere on the net any details backing up that criticism. I checked the opening setup with the US Military History website and everything seems fine, no glaring errors. Admittedly I didn't do any work on the reinforcement schedule, but if people think this game is inaccurate it would be good to hear why.

Image

WatchmanX2000 — 2007-12-31T17:49:31+00:00

Game in progress at CABS meeting, Germans overwhelming Allies.

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

desertfox2004 — 2007-07-13T19:22:07+00:00

It's a fun game and I played a lot of it when I was younger (i.e. back in the 70's). For us (there were three of us who played this back in the day), the only issue was that it seemed like the Germans won 80% of the time. Maybe we didn't understand what we were doing (we were like 12 years old at the time!), but it seemed like the US units were often nothing more than speedbumps. Still, we had a good time with it - have fun!

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

pekin2121 — 2007-07-13T19:11:02+00:00

Hawaiiirish wrote:

I also picked up a copy of B-17 Queen of the Skies at the same store. In fact, the owner of the store has a lot of OOP games available.

Where is this magical store located?

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

Sprydle — 2007-07-13T19:01:10+00:00

In fact, many wargamers would argue the M44 and A&A are not even wargames. This game is definitely a wargame by any standard--just not one that is particularly well researched (although it was at the time!) compared with more current BotB offerings.

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:20:15+00:00

Game Map

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:18:53+00:00

Nuts!

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:17:26+00:00

Tournament Game Battle Results Table

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:15:36+00:00

Basic Game Combat Results Table

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:14:02+00:00

Game introduction

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:11:09+00:00

German order of appearance

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:09:54+00:00

U. S. order of appearance

Image

randywilburn — 2007-04-08T17:07:12+00:00

Image

WatchmanX2000 — 2007-01-17T23:12:55+00:00

Game in Progress

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

Hawaiiirish — 2006-01-13T22:58:52+00:00

I never said that the classic AH game (in this case, Battle of the Bulge - 1965) was abstract when compared to M44 or Axis and Allies. This particular game abstracts elements for gameplay...later verisons provided more detail.

M44 and A&A are by far VERY abstract.

I think that's a result of this game originally being published in 1965...you're correct - it's a light game. Drive on Metz, anyone?

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

mvonahnen — 2006-01-13T09:07:00+00:00

Interesting that the AH classics are considered abstract versus games like Memior '44 and Axis and Allies. This is a easy to learn simple wargame. I have enjoyed it.

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

Hawaiiirish — 2006-01-13T08:38:43+00:00

Okay, slight bargain. However, I can live with that. It is indeed the 1965 version...the interesting thing is reading the rule book. It's so funny, it refers to the pieces as "chessmen". I got a real kick out of it.

You're right, after looking at the rules, it's very abstracted and not "realistic". Light game.

I also picked up a copy of B-17 Queen of the Skies at the same store. In fact, the owner of the store has a lot of OOP games available.

Thread: Re: Picked up a Copy of this...

kemosabe — 2006-01-12T18:36:56+00:00

If it's the 1965 Avalon Hill version, it's fun, but nowhere near realistic as far as what happened in the battle. A good game with light
rules to break someone into the hobby with though. It usually goes for
around $12 to $15 on Ebay, so you got a slight deal.

Thread: Picked up a Copy of this...

Hawaiiirish — 2006-01-12T18:21:46+00:00

I had a day off of work and while snooping at my favorite store - found a copy of this in pretty good shape...the outside box was a little banged...but, the counters were unpunched and the map board in excellent condition.

I'll post up some pictures of the board and counters later - but, for $10 I thought it was a steal. Thoughts?