Why I love the ‘Bulge’… and hesitate about the rest
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:50 am
Firstly, I am probably a bit nostalgic. ‘Battle of the Bulge’ relates a lot to personal experiences of many years ago. I can almost feel the cold again when looking at that map and empathize with my playing pieces. Lumbering a heavy machine gun over icy roads without falling over every other step is no mean feat, never mind actually achieving something way beyond that.
Secondly, it feels like a proper tactical scenario. Most wargames overly stress micro-management, where the player literally has to look after zillions of troops on a huge map, nearly down to the last machine gun emplacement in Western Europe. This is not what modern tactics is about at all, which stresses individual initiative and clearly defined responsibilities in the chain of command. As a general, you assign your army corps to an area, as corps commander you look after your divisions, and each subordinate commander what he/she is responsible for, down to brigade, battalion, company, platoon and squad level. Each level only looks after a very limited amount of units and space – and that is with the support of staff at the upper echelons. ‘Bulge’ neatly approximates that, keeping numbers of units to a manageable level, which greatly helps playability, and a straightforward combat system that leaves your 'in silico' subordinate commanders to sort out the actual combat on the ground. Maybe I am getting too old or too silly, but I can’t see the fun in assigning 50+ pieces on the map their individual objectives and keeping track of everything. I tried several of those type of wargames but eventually got bored with all of them.
Thirdly, the importance of the terrain to any sort of warfare is again nicely replicated. There are no hexes, and fields on the map have realistic boundaries, like already sketched out prospective areas of operation. Understand the terrain, and you understand what it needs to win – classic military philosophy.
Finally, the design of the game is just classy, a bold departure from established concepts. There are no toy panzers shuttling about here, instead we use stylish icons, just about what the next generation of tactical symbols might look like. The screen of your iPad starts feeling like the situation map that the commander would carry about with him all the time. It gets dirty with fingerprints and smudges all over it. You stare at it trying to see a way through, all the while the icy wind blows about you with airplanes and small arms fire menacingly sounding in the background. Brilliant.
This is why I love the ‘Bulge’. Thoughts anyone?
Secondly, it feels like a proper tactical scenario. Most wargames overly stress micro-management, where the player literally has to look after zillions of troops on a huge map, nearly down to the last machine gun emplacement in Western Europe. This is not what modern tactics is about at all, which stresses individual initiative and clearly defined responsibilities in the chain of command. As a general, you assign your army corps to an area, as corps commander you look after your divisions, and each subordinate commander what he/she is responsible for, down to brigade, battalion, company, platoon and squad level. Each level only looks after a very limited amount of units and space – and that is with the support of staff at the upper echelons. ‘Bulge’ neatly approximates that, keeping numbers of units to a manageable level, which greatly helps playability, and a straightforward combat system that leaves your 'in silico' subordinate commanders to sort out the actual combat on the ground. Maybe I am getting too old or too silly, but I can’t see the fun in assigning 50+ pieces on the map their individual objectives and keeping track of everything. I tried several of those type of wargames but eventually got bored with all of them.
Thirdly, the importance of the terrain to any sort of warfare is again nicely replicated. There are no hexes, and fields on the map have realistic boundaries, like already sketched out prospective areas of operation. Understand the terrain, and you understand what it needs to win – classic military philosophy.
Finally, the design of the game is just classy, a bold departure from established concepts. There are no toy panzers shuttling about here, instead we use stylish icons, just about what the next generation of tactical symbols might look like. The screen of your iPad starts feeling like the situation map that the commander would carry about with him all the time. It gets dirty with fingerprints and smudges all over it. You stare at it trying to see a way through, all the while the icy wind blows about you with airplanes and small arms fire menacingly sounding in the background. Brilliant.
This is why I love the ‘Bulge’. Thoughts anyone?
