Game: One-Page Bulge

Image

sauceybugger — 2008-11-05T02:06:53+00:00

Back of box.

Thread: reproducing the game?

craniac — 2008-10-08T20:08:50+00:00

Just wondering if someone could send me a scan of the game. I'd like to make a set of alternate counters and an alternate map for my own use. Thanks.

Thread: Re: Game at CABS using Gary's Home Made Components

WatchmanX2000 — 2008-05-12T02:02:43+00:00

This one won't bother me. They're too generic to make much claim to. But I haven't the time just now to pdf them so they don't get too distorted by whatever.

Thread: Re: Game at CABS using Gary's Home Made Components

cratex — 2008-05-11T15:47:23+00:00

Gary is generally a stickler for copyright issues, so I don't think he'll make his stuff available.

Thread: Re: Game at CABS using Gary's Home Made Components

GeorgeHa — 2008-05-09T00:15:28+00:00

Any chance of getting the files from Gary? NATO symbols are so 1970s.

Thread: Re: Game at CABS using Gary's Home Made Components

WatchmanX2000 — 2008-04-28T17:31:44+00:00

I found it an enjoyable game which had some unique aspects with regards to the traditional problems in Bulge games.

First off, discard the idea this is a historical title. It is and it isn't. The fact the 7th Armored starts on the board and the 9th (or is it the 10th? my memory fails me just this moment) is all together in one place not to mention the complete absence of several other aspects of the OOB, terrain (road net in particular) and a few other tidbits (cookie cutter units to bring up the OOB again, absence of historic values, the set-up assured security of the 2 rgts of the 106th div and so on...), really make this a strongly themed game but not actual history. The resemblance to history for this game is like the resemblance the Henry Fonda Battle of the Bulge movie had to history. On the face of it, there's a great look and feel, but it's really only skin deep.

Steve and I had a good time in my somewhat jaundiced opinion. I think the game was a great little play for what it is, and was that much the better for not using the somewhat decrepit copy I picked up off Ebay, but the cleaned up self improved components I put together (the seams on the map of the original were falling apart, the counters incomplete and too thin to handle).

REALLY GOOD THING: this title alone does what few others have. By rendering the sole victory condition dependent on crossing the Muese in the correct place in quantity of force the southern shoulder is pointless for the Germans to pursue (without German Army boundary limitations). The bad thing about that is that it means it's also pointless for the US to defend the south. Maybe not pointless, but not terribly necessary and he can yank units much more freely from there to create roadblocks for the Germans than he might in other titles.

It was an interesting experience to discover that I had to keep making as many somewhat higher odds attacks as possible and throwing additional units not quite making the odds one level higher but sufficient to prevent the air points from bringing me down one level.

Quirky points and points overlooked. We would have had a whole different game if we'd realized earlier on that you don't have to attack units that are adjacent but across a river hex side. We also would have had a whole different game if we'd realized the 7-1 auto victory combat result sooner. We were trying to play this quick and dirty, I admit.

I'm not in agreement with Steve on the 1-1 AE-DE combat results. I do understand his point though. There were only two times in the game that a low odds AE or DE result took out a lot of units that could have a dramatic impact on operations. One was when I tried to take out some units of his in Bastogne where a huge number of troops were required on both sides. ERK!! AE took out almost 2 pz divs. Actually, 1 pz div and a pzgrenadier div. Fortunately I had him flanked and he still felt he needed to withdraw, though I myself would have taken that as a launching point for a counter offensive. I'm one aggressive puppy though.

The other instance cleared almost an entire US armored division from the flat lands before the Muese. That still didn't give me clear rein to dash to the river crossings. And his liberal bridge blowing practice was very inhibitive. That 5mp cost for crossing rivers is a huge pain.

But both of us had to keep reminding ourselves (and each other) that the objective for victory was not in the middle or south part of the board. That really does cause some interesting game behavior.

I'm not convinced tho that the Germans can win without those low odds AE/DE CRT results. You need to be able to move up and end up adjacent in the end to the US forces so they MUST counter attack or back off.

I can see this being a great game for replay value, and a lot of Bulge fun if you are not one of those people who must have history more closely modeled. I think it works very well as is, even with it's warts and blemishes. I liked it. If I wanted a better Bulge title, I'd pull out one that's much more serious.

Thread: Re: Game at CABS using Gary's Home Made Components

cratex — 2008-04-27T19:52:22+00:00

However, I would play it first with the way it was designed to see if the Germans actually stomp the Americans that much (which they are supposed to do).

Erm, that's the way we played it...my thoughts are after the fact.

Thread: Re: Game at CABS using Gary's Home Made Components

caltexn — 2008-04-27T17:54:22+00:00

It has been about 7 years since I last played this! Actually have been thinking about it lately, since it is not too lengthy a game.

You might be right about the CRT issue. However, I would play it first with the way it was designed to see if the Germans actually stomp the Americans that much (which they are supposed to do). Thanks for the report.

Steve S.

Thread: Game at CABS using Gary's Home Made Components

cratex — 2008-04-27T03:24:20+00:00

Here are some shots of the game of One Page Bulge between Gary and myself at CABS today. I think Gary liked it better than I did. I walked away with a win as the Allies but it didn't feel right. Something about the CRT made me feel that I was always taking chances since a couple of good die rolls for the German on the 2-1 and even the 1-1 column could have collapsed my front at any time, yet luck didn't favor Gary this game and I eeked out a win by a thin margin. It was for this reason that I tended not to defend in strength at any one point unless I had to, and yet we only realized near the end of the game that if the attacker had 7-1 or better odds it was an automatic DE, so a lot of the weak stacks he simply pushed back earlier should have been kills.

(My immediate thoughts are that the DE results on the 2-1 and 1-1 columns should be converted to Defender Lose One Unit and rest retreat, while the AE result on the 1-1 column be converted to Attacker Lose One Unit and the rest retreat.)

Anyway, here are some shots. Notice Gary made new counters and a map for this, so we're playing the game using his home made components.

Also note, we used the all the optional rules, which include the depots and the bridge demolitions.

]]>

The next shot is from about mid game from the German point of view. Note Gary has pushed me back all along the line, even in the normally well defended northern section.

]]>

Here is a detail of my line attempting to hold Bastogne. I must note that he took a BIG hit here when he made a 2-1 odds attack just after this shot was taken. The town provides a -2drm, and he rolled an adjusted -1 which was AE. Big ouch for him. However, I had to abandon the town because it was being flanked and in this game isolated units just don't hold out.

Note the destroyed depot -- worth 2 vp to him destroyed, and the blown bridges to the north of Bastogne. I made it a point to destroy every bridge I could.

]]>

I gave ground much faster than I would have in other games on this topic because I was afraid to hold the line in any strength at any point. Unfortunately my camera ran out of space and this is the last picture I have. This shot shows my position just before I pulled back from Bastogne. The game ended with the Germans pressing the Muese hard. He had a small bridgehead near the bottom of the map, Between vp for captured or destroyed depots (20) and attack factors across the river he had about 55 victory points, short of the 70 needed for a win.

]]>

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

swandive78 — 2008-04-16T01:44:51+00:00

ctalbot wrote:
Ogre is also finally getting a reprint.

Chris

And, since this is one of my all-time favorites, I'm glad to see it coming back; however, it's coming back in an upgraded format (which I'm also glad to see). It's going to cost you a bit more to enter the world of the Ogre soon.

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

ctalbot — 2008-04-15T12:50:34+00:00

swandive78 wrote:
Anyone else? Something else good out there?
I suppose ATO's postcard games might count:

Stand at Mortain
Some Poles Apart: the Battle of the Westerplatte

Ogre is also finally getting a reprint.

Chris

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

swandive78 — 2008-04-15T12:37:51+00:00

Jeffrey Henning wrote:
dave_dentel wrote:
So is there anyone today publishing micro-wargames a la One-Page Bulge? I mean, can the market support it?
I don't think anyone was at the time you asked this, but Victory Point Games now is.

I got "Waterloo 20" from VP Games, and enjoyed it. They hand-produce every game, but the quality is very nice, with die-cut counters, color-illustrated rulebooks, and full-color color maps. Waterloo 20 is the first in a series, and I will be looking forward to playing others of this type and others in this series. I hope the company does well, as I'm a big fan of the microgame format.

moss_icon wrote:
Target Arnhem: Across 6 Bridges is pretty close. Two page Arnhem
Yes, it's pretty cool. As a free giveaway (you pay for shipping) with a good paper map and nice heavy die-cut counters, it's an outstanding intro to wargaming. I understand that MMP will be releasing a second game of this sort in the (near) future.

Several people have also suggested the "Sergeants" series from Lost Battalion Games, and I tried that as well. Nicely produced, at a price point between Arnhem and Waterloo 20. It's sort of an expandable series of "mini-Squad-Leader" games. Great idea.

Anyone else? Something else good out there?

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

moss_icon — 2008-02-28T20:07:40+00:00

Target Arnhem: Across 6 Bridges is pretty close. Two page Arnhem

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

Jeffrey Henning — 2008-02-28T03:20:14+00:00

dave_dentel wrote:
So is there anyone today publishing micro-wargames a la One-Page Bulge? I mean, can the market support it?
I don't think anyone was at the time you asked this, but Victory Point Games now is.

Thread: One-Page Bulge strategy analysis

wargamer55 — 2008-02-27T19:07:14+00:00

Players sitting down for a game of One-Page Bulge know what to expect in a Battle of the Bulge game. The Germans will be starting off with overwhelming force, but face a very tight time schedule and difficult terrain.
Compared to many Bulge games, OPB is pretty friendly to the Germans in its allocation of combat strength. Not counting the Allied air points, which are highly variable, the Americans never actually catch up to the Germans in strength points, even after taking into account all the reinforcements.

The Germans start on turn 1 with 202 strength points on map plus 31 more in turn 1 reinforcements for a total of 233. The Americans have just 108.

By fifth turn the Germans get another 94 SPs, while the Americans only get 80 more. Given probable combat losses it's quite possible for the Germans to have a bigger strength differential on Dec. 20 than at the start.
The last five turns see the ratio change in the American favor, as the Germans get just one more pulse of 27 SPs on turn 8, while the U.S. player sees another 132 points become available during turns 6-10.While the Germans have a strength advantage, the Americans have a significant mobility edge. All the U.S. units are faster than all the German units. In addition, the U.S. units have better access to the road net, while the Germans will often be forced into cross-country moves. Zones of control are not locking in this game, so American units can easily and quickly disengage. About the only factor keeping the Americans from freely trading space for time are the presence of 11 supply dumps behind their lines which are worth victory points for the Germans. Fortunately for the Americans, they have the ability to evacuate and/or destroy those dumps, so they can prevent the Germans from scoping those points, or reduce the amount gained.

As always in Bulge games, the German player has to push ahead ruthlessly in order to have any chance of victory. Compared to most Battle of the Bulge games the Germans seem to have a somewhat better chance of getting something across the Meuse River. This is reflected in the victory conditions, which require them to get 50 strength points over the river for a marginal victory -- the equivalent of two Panzer divisions.

The usual solution is to make the big push is the Fifth Panzer Army sector, basically along the axis of Clerf-Bastogne-Marche-Namur. This was the sector that saw the largest territorial gains in the historical battle. Most German players will ensure they capture Bastogne, rather than bypass it, so supply will be available. The drawback to this approach is that it's the longest way, with an exposed southern flank. It misses all but one small supply dump which is easily evacuated or burned. It relies on getting troops across the Meuse.

An alternative approach is to make the main effort in the Sixth SS Panzer Army sector, which was the historical plan. This requires taking on the strong part of the U.S. line from the get-go and is much more of a do-or-die plan. The drawback is that the terrain is very unfavorable and the American line pretty strong.
On the other hand, there are 42 VPs of supply dumps in the area. Getting one supplied Panzer Division into Liege can be enough to tip into the win column. If the Allied player attempts to burn the dumps and they get captured anyway, they're worth even more points to the Germans, making it worthwhile to even threaten captures. In order for this plan to work, however, the German player has to keep up the pressure elsewhere along the front in order to disguise his aim.

Draws are very possible in One-Page Bulge. In order to win, not just prevent a German victory, the U.S. player has to keep the German total to 19 or less victory points, which means that they cannot afford to let any major supply dump fall into German hands, especially the 1st Army POL dump near Malmedy. The worst case is to start burning the dump and then have it captured anyway, giving the Germans 15 Vps. If the Germans also capture the adjacent ASP then they are almost guaranteed the draw.

It's a very close game, with no "perfect plans" available, but the Germans do have options in OPB they rarely have in Bulge games to try a somewhat different approach than typical.

From my blog at http://pawnderings.blogspot.com

Image

ltdusky — 2008-02-15T19:32:26+00:00

Counter Manifest - Belived to be complete

Image

barteus — 2007-12-31T20:50:05+00:00

Map, rules, turn record track and sample of counters

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

ANDY WILSON07000 — 2007-07-08T21:38:14+00:00

HI THERE, I FOUND THIS GAME IN MY DADS LOFT TODAY... I BOUGHT IT WHEN I WAS IN MY TEENS, MUST BE OVER TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO, IVE THE INSTRUCTIONS AND PIECES BUT HAVE NOT GOT THE MAP/BOARD,,,,
WOULD LIKE TO TRY IT WITH MY KIDS IF ANYONE COULD SEND A PICTURE OF THE MAP TO ME andrew.wilson90@gmail.com
I PAID £2.50 AT A HOBBY SHOP IN STEVENAGE HERTFORDSHIRE UK.....
PLEASE CAN ANYONE HELP ME OUT...
OTHERWISE ITS NOT REALLY WORTH KEEPING THE REST OF THE GAME...

THANKS

ANDY

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

GeorgeHa — 2007-05-12T01:30:29+00:00

I should start hunting ebay for this, small game are very easy to fit into my life.

Image

bill_andel — 2007-01-21T21:24:53+00:00

Pocket box opened, showing contents

Image

bill_andel — 2007-01-21T21:23:31+00:00

Rules sheet - front side

Image

bill_andel — 2007-01-21T21:22:08+00:00

Rules sheet - reverse side

Image

bill_andel — 2007-01-21T21:20:38+00:00

Initial setup - close-up on Eastern map edge

Image

bill_andel — 2007-01-21T20:32:50+00:00

Map sheet with initial setup

Image

bill_andel — 2007-01-21T20:30:54+00:00

Reverse side of map sheet

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Is the Micro-Wargame Dead?

dave_dentel — 2006-04-03T15:12:37+00:00

So is there anyone today publishing micro-wargames a la One-Page Bulge? I mean, can the market support it?

I've seen titles on some pretty esoteric topics (go ahead, laugh -- I was intrigued by one on Polynesian tribal warfare but I wasn't willing to fork over nearly thirty bucks for it.) And I recall some designers who were selling zipper-bagged stuff for about ten bucks apiece, but I think they went out of business. And even GMT (the antithesis of microgaming) wants at least 500 customers to sign on before they'll actually print a title.

Any thoughts out there?

Thread: Re: User Review

GROGnads — 2006-04-01T17:21:51+00:00

I would also like to heap upon the "sordid tales" concerning ole "Howie Thompson", according to none other than the esteemed "Rich Berg" within an issue of some 'gaming magazine' from "days of yon". It was WHEN 'Meta-Gaming' was going around and denying to any others the "use" of the 'term' for "Micro-Game", upon theirs in any form or manner. It was quite good upon this 'topic', and was just an early 'sign' of the kind of litigious "crap" that MANY are attempting for themselves now-a-days, it would seem. For those who happened to have READ over this, then you got a GREAT "laugh" from that. . ."Good times!. . ."

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

swandive78 — 2006-03-21T15:09:07+00:00
I just blew up the map to 125% of original size and laminated it, blew up the pieces to the same size, and it's a much easier game to handle that way. Now the pieces are pretty much the size of PanzerBlitz pieces.
Looks great. I think a lot of the microgames could benefit from this kind of treatment. Who else has done this with their favorite microgames?

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

swandive78 — 2006-03-16T14:02:22+00:00
MarkEJohnson wrote:
What did you think about how artillery units were abstracted out?

For the scale of this game, it worked. It would have been nice to have artillery for "softening up" the enemy, but I felt it was SJ's intention to consider them integrated into the armor units. At this scale, it's not a fine-grained tactical game, so you're just looking for the overall effects.

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

MarkEJohnson — 2006-03-16T04:45:02+00:00
Yeah, I understand it was a bet or challenge from Redmond Simonsen (sp?) to Steve Jackson about the impossibility of designing a decent Bulge game with just one page of rules.

I only played it once a couple years ago, but have been meaning to get back to it. Actually, I wondered about trying it again with a component upgrade by making my own counters, using the Bulge '91 map. That'll probably never happen, though. I should just try the original again.

What did you think about how artillery units were abstracted out?

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

Barry Kendall — 2006-03-14T22:03:08+00:00
Actually, the designer was not responding to a dare, but to a challenge issued, as I recall, by someone at SPI to the hobby generally: design a playable Bulge game with not more than one page of rules. Hence the game title.

Thread: Re: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

Herr Niemand — 2006-03-14T19:15:42+00:00
Very good review!

I have something to add, maybe only a rumor, but still... I believe I read in an ancient gaming magazine (SpaceGamer?) that this game was designed on a bet (or a dare). In a conversation about inherent complexities within certain gaming situations, someone told Steve Jackson that nobody could make a good Bulge game with only one page of rules. Basically, Steve Jackson's response was, "Oh yeah?" That's why this game has such an odd title, referring as it does to its rules layout.

TT

Thread: One-Page Bulge: Twenty-five years of being ignored.

swandive78 — 2006-03-14T04:25:30+00:00
The Backstory:

I remember the first time I ever saw this game. It was hanging on a peg in a hobby shop. I don't think I even touched it.

I had been a fan of Metagaming Microgames for several years, and my second and third microgame purchases (two of my favorites, Ogre and Melee) were Steve Jackson designs.

So this should have been a shoe-in, but I passed it by with a wave of dismissal. As a Steve Jackson Games microgame, it should have piqued my interest, but there was nothing flashy about it. Yeah, so someone made a Battle of the Bulge game with one page of rules. So what?

So I never got it, and years later the collector in me forced me to eventually get a copy from an eBay auction. I got a copy that was not in very good condition, from a ham-fisted klutz who apparently tried to separate various parts of the game rules and map by tearing it on the edge of a table. I was still ready for this to be a poor purchase, twenty years after I didn't buy it the first time.

Being a crafty kind of gamer, I pieced together the torn parts of the game and made a color-copied, laminated copy of the gameboard and a couple of good copies of the rules (one for me and one for my opponent), and a laminated CRT. A cheap microgame upgrade.

I read the rules through, put the map on my game table at home, set up both German and American forces on their starting positions, and sat back and just looked at the game for a few minutes. I like to do this to contemplate the aesthetics of games, before giving it a solo play to get the rules and tempo down.

And I found myself oddly attracted to this plain little game. It was pretty much a standard kind of microgame. The map was not overly complex or an artistic classic, but it had a lot of the things I'd come to expect from this type of game: roads and bridges, woods, swamp and clear hexes, town hexes, and even a few military objective hexes (ammo and supply depots). And, of course, rivers, especially the Meuse, the goal of the German forces. The pieces for both sides were printed in different combinations of red, white, and blue, and no-frills: undistinguished tank silhouettes and infantry symbols. Two stats: attack/defense strength and movement. Not a lot of pieces (about 120). Pretty much a standard sheet of microgame counters.

But when I set it all up and stepped back, I felt my fingers beginning to twitch. I wanted to play it. The rules were simple enough to begin quickly. Unfortunately, I had to leave the house right then, and put it away (so pieces didn't go wherever they go when you leave them out alone and unattended).

Several weeks later, my wargamer friend met me for our regular game night at the local game store, and we decided to forgo one of the quicker block games in order to play One-Page Bulge. We set it up, I explained the rules briefly, we both scanned the rules briefly, and we started the battle.

The Session:

It turned out to be a much deeper game than I had expected. The Germans start off with a powerful force that runs with some inertia into the waiting American forces. Rivers and woods present charge-slowing impediments to the Germans, and it becomes a meatgrinder as they attempt to cross rivers from bank-to-bank, or fight their way across American-held bridges. The Germans have more powerful units than the Americans, and get reinforcements early in the game, but as the game progresses, the Americans get more reinforcements that come in at critical times and from critical directions. Germans also have to keep in supply by having a continuous line of supply back to the German end of the map or to a captured supply depot.

The German advance was slow and bloody, and it took some time to get a breakthrough, right in the center of the map. By the time that the breakthrough came, there was not much time left to exploit the breakthrough, as the game is timed (as was the original military plan). It became a nerve-wracking race between the German exploitation and race for the Meuse, and the American effort to reinforce and barricade roads to slow the race. American air support harried the Germans at critical points throughout the crawl.

After about two and a half hours, the Allies won, but not overwhelmingly. A few units made it through while staying in supply, but not enough for a German victory. Not the exact historical result, but reasonably so, and it could have turned out non-historically with a few twists in the game. It gave a surprisingly satisfying feel of versimilitude for such a small game.

Why did I like this game?

Simple, but well-designed components that gave a good visual impact and sufficient information to the players.

Simple rules that offer the basics and advanced add-on rules. There were a few small points that we got wrong in the first few moves, but they did not materially affect the gameplay or outcome.

A good feeling of the nature of the battle, and a fairly sizable game in such a small package. I've played larger games that gave me less play, less challenge, or less fun. I felt it had good replayability, and was eager for another shot at the Meuse, as well as wanting to stop the German advance while playing the American forces.

A good gaming experience.

It was inexpensive in its time, and was still inexpensive for me, even buying it from eBay twenty-five years later.

Why might you not like this game?

Inexpensive components: you have to cut out the counters (if you are lucky enough to have a set with uncut counters), and you also have to separate several parts of the sheets containing the map and rules (with blade or scissors, or as we have seen, the edge of a table). Basically, about what you'd expect from a microgame from the eighties. If you're looking for a mounted mapboard and thick gardboard counters, and an actual rulebook, this is not the game for you.

It is a small game as wargames go. If you want a physically big game, lots and lots of varied pieces, or a complex game, this is not the game for you.

It is a wargame, in the classic mold. If you don't enjoy rules that have section titles like "1.02.03," this is not the game for you.

CONCLUSION:

I liked it. I liked the format of these games in their day, and I liked the price, and I liked being able to get a game, learn it, and play it the same day.

This is a game I'd like to see reprinted. It could still be made with better components and sold at an affordable price. I think with better map and counter art and construction, even without updating the rules, this would be a well-received game today.

Image

The Maverick — 2005-02-21T03:17:45+00:00
Pocket Box edition, improved cover scan

Thread: User Review

The Maverick — 2005-01-01T16:22:17+00:00
One-Page Bulge
Steve Jackson Games (1980, $3.00)
Designed by Steve Jackson

Players: 2
Playing Time: 1 to 2 hours
Period: World War II
Scale: Operational
. Turn: 1 day
. Map: not stated
. Unit: regiments

Box: ziplock

Components: Foldout sheet (containing rules, 16x13" unmounted mapsheet, and CRT/turn record track), 120 un-cut cardstock counters, Steve Jackson Games catalog folder.

Counter Manifest: 61 German units, 51 American units.

Steve Jackson Games says: "A regimental-level game of the Battle of the Bulge - with complete, detailed rules - including weather and Allied air superiority, German supply and isolation, and optional sections for bridge destruction and capture of Allied supplies. With only ONE PAGE of rules!"

The designer says: "One-Page Bulge owes its whole existence to a challenge. About a year ago, SPI's Redmond Simonsen, writing in Moves magazine, was discussing game rules - long rules and short ones. He posed a question: Would it be possible to get all the rules for a wargame - charts and tables included - onto both sides of an 8-1/2x11" piece of paper? When I read that, my immediate reaction was, 'Sure! Why not?' But then it took research, writing, and lots of rewriting."

The reviewers say: "Sequence of play includes Reinforcement Phase, Isolation, Movement, and Combat. You've seen the rest before . . . What makes it different is that the game can be taught in an extremely short period of time to any moderately experienced gamer (and in somewhat more time to a novice) . . . Considering the length of the rules, they are surprisingly (albeit not totally) complete. Plays fast and smooth." James A. Lambrinos in Strategy & Tactics #84.

"Compactness, simplicity and cheapness are the essence of Mr. Jackson's game . . . Not surprisingly, the game is easy to learn and quick to play, although the claimed time of 1-2 hours is something of an underestimate . . . The German technique of the powerful, concentrated thrust will come as no surprise to anyone who knows anything about the battle or has played other games on the subject, and it is remarkably effective . . . The game does not claim to be an accurate simulation, and believe me, it isn't . . . I'm afraid I found the game unoriginal and unexciting." Andy Bagley in The Wargamer #16.

"This is a mini-game remarkably similar in format to those of another Austin business (Metagaming)." State of the Art column in The Grenadier #12.

Comments: One of the first four releases from Steve Jackson Games (SJG). It also sparked a brief court battle between Jackson and his former boss, Metagaming owner Howard Thompson.

As reported in Jackson's editorial column in The Space Gamer, issue number 35, on the game's scheduled release date of October 15, 1980, Thompson's attorney demanded that the game not be published, alleging that it was the property of Metagaming. Thompson also obtained a temporary restraining order (TRO) which prohibited Jackson from selling or advertising One-Page Bulge.

A court hearing was held on November 26, at which time a judge dissolved the TRO and denied the request for a permanent injunction. The ruling was based on the fact that Thompson had rejected an early draft of One-Page Bulge the previous December, and in May he had signed a contract with Jackson which explicitly disposed of all game-design matters pending between them. See Howard Thompson v. Steve Jackson, Cause No. 314,286 in the District Court of Travis County, Texas.

Thompson continued to treat Jackson like he was responsible for the mutiny on the Bounty. A few months after the court hearing over One-Page Bulge, Thompson published a parody naval game called One Tub Bilge in issue number 2 of Interplay, Metagaming's house organ. Thompson also produced and distributed a parody game at conventions called A Fistful of Turkeys. The game mimicked the format of the early SJG releases, except that it purported to be from STG (Some Turkey Games).

Collector's Notes: One-Page Bulge was initially released as a ziplock game, but it would also later be packaged in the plastic Pocket Box format. There were two variations of the Pocket Box cover art, one featuring the ugly American "battle map" art as used on the ziplock version, and the other showing a tank.

Boone's Internet Wargames Catalog (4th Ed.) lists low/high/average auction prices of $2/$13/$7. In Boone 3rd, auction prices were $1/$2/$1.50 and sale listings were $1/$10/$6. A second edition has been listed as "in production" on the SJG website since early this year, with a list price $19.95. A rerelease of Raid on Iran is also announced on the SJG site, both games being listed as Short War series games.

(This article was originally published in issue 21 of Simulacrum, July 2004.)