Black Prince, The (Four Great Medieval Battles Quad)
Robert Mosca
"This is one of the Four Great Medieval Battles Quad, which
I liked. Played it only once (so many games, so little time) a long while
ago, so I don't recall much about it. May yet pull it out again for a Tuesday
night session here in Richmond." GG
"Okay - a middling game that never really imparts any feel for the
period." RM
Blitzkreig Module System
James F. Dunnigan
"Played this one a ton and had lots of fun as I have always liked production
systems. Some of the forces were not balanced like the side that just
builds inf. I still have my hand made counters." PA
"Oooh, I liked this A LOT! It really transforms AH's Blitzkrieg into a game
worth having. I thought that Blitz with the module was much better than
SPI's later offering, the similar and equally generic Strategy I. Basically
the BMS gives you small power armies, guerillas, 2-2 infantry divisions
(for those Chinese horde type armies you've always wanted), AAA, naval
units, air transport units, rail movement, realistic production and
optional rules for ZOCs and a move/fight/mech move turn system. also
included are a ton of optional scenarios. With the BMS and Blitz, you can
recreate (in a generic way) any campaign you'd like from 1930 to 1950. It's
inspired me to do my own home-made Blitz update, which I'd be glad to share
with anyone once it's done." TB
"The Bliztkrieg Module System was essentially a play test kit for the
forthcoming Strategy I by SPI. It took an existing commercially
available wargame and provided an enhanced counter mix and rule
extensions which were meant to move Blitzkrieg from a mere game to
something approaching a simulation.
The most fundamental change to the game as published was the
introduction of naval units and rules (M11) , along with units for
the "minor" countries on the board (M18). The addition of large
quantities of low value infantry units for the "original" two
sides allowed players to explore the dynamics of conflict between
balanced mechanized forces and basic large infantry armies (M8).
In addition to the items mentioned above, the modules added:
Units and rules for guerilla forces. M15
Units and rules for Railroad movement. M7
Rules for fluid ZOC for motor/mech units. M1 M2 M3
Rules and counters for unit production and production costs. M9
Rules and counters for air bases and flak. M12 M13
Rules for weather. M14
Rules for variable victory conditions and scenarios. M17
Rules for variable stacking limits by unit class. M5
Rules for modified combat results. M4
Rules for advanced supply and supply expenditure. M10
Rules for specific artillery effects and limitations. M16
As any or all of the modules could be added to or substituted for the
basic Blitzkrieg rules a play analysis is pointless. However,
without question the module added considerable play value to the
original game. For an example, the provision of the minor country
units permitted one to play out "brush fire" wars. The major
players (Big Blue - renamed Azurnerreich and Great Red - renamed
Krasnynorad [I wonder if the boys in Colorado ever heard that one])
feed their clients with just enough support to prevent collapse but
never enough to kick in the door.
The Naval rules were remarkable for their simplicity and their
dramatic effect on play. Naval units consisted of Task Force (TF)
units, LST units and MST units. TF could carry up to three (3)
factors of TAC or FTR air and one (1) factor of ranger ground units.
MST could lift ground units whose combat factors did not exceed the
lift limit displayed on the counter. LST's could not provide sea
lift but could provide shore assault landing facilities up to the
limits printed on their counters.
The air rules and missions were extensively enhanced.
An interesting option was presented under the production
module was a rule requiring players to pay their opponent the
production point cost of any friendly units lost in combat in cents
( I guess that today's equivalent would be dimes). The idea being to
make one feel the "cost" of a failed campaign in terms that one could
relate to.
The Blitzkrieg Module System is old and long out of print. It is
based on a game that is itself even older but only comparatively
recently out of print. There are without doubt more innovative and
graphically pleasing offerings for conflict board gamers. However,
the BMS holds a special place in my collection for both historical
and sentimental reasons. If you own Blitzkrieg then the BMS is well
worth owning in its own right.
Oh, by the way, I paid the princely sum of $8.50 CAD at Wolco for
Blitzkrieg (the price sticker is still on the box) and another $4.00
USD directly to SPI for the S&T issue with the Blitzkrieg module
system. The only other board wargame that I played nearly as much in
my life is SPI's War in Europe, and that set me back $40.00 USD at a
time when I was earning the sum of $6.27 CAD per day in the Navy.
All in all, it was a really good deal." JB
Bloody April
Richard Berg
"After a number of times just pushing the counters around, one summers
weekend in the UK 4 of us got together to do the whole thing. The scene was
set when Dean turned up in full Confederate Uniform ! I'm sure he was a
Reb in a previous life!
We had a storming game with a Union victory on the first day - the Rebs
were too exhausted to carry on. With fresh Union troops arriving they
felt they would have to withdraw the army. highlights were a massive melee around
the Sunken Road (a Civil War battle with a sunken road - fancy that :). Eventually
the Rebs prevailed but this is what I think cost them the game. Also a massive
firefight around Chambers field and the field to the west of it. Great
stuff. But our group loves the TSS system.
Downside was marking fatigue for each unit and it's stragglers. These
rules are neccessary for the game as a simulation but are a drag on
play.
I LIKE this game !" SC
"Bookkeeping makes an otherwise good game into a drag to play. I
played it last year after 7 or 8 years of not playing it. I will need
another decade before I can round up enough people to play this again." RM
Bloody Ridge (Island War Quad)
Kevin Zucker
"Quad game, any Guadalcanal game is better than this one." SF
"I liked this game, coming out a fair set of Quads, but if I remember
correctly, the Japanese can win if they play one specific strategy,
charging the open ground nort of Henderson. All most foool proof, and
any other approach loses badly." JCM
"Played once. Didn't see much point in playing it again." RM
Blue and Gray Quadrigame
Antietam, Cemetary Hill, Chickamauga, Shiloh
Allen, Curran, Walczyk, Hardy
"Lots of fun, loved them. Chickamauga the best of the bunch. Owned this set
in its three version (SPI,TSR,DG) Had the privilege of playtesting the
latter revision (the new Bull Run sceanrios)." WS
"Worth getting for Chickamauga. Shiloh isn't bad either." SF
"Blue & Gray I & II. A total of eight games, some of which worked better than
others. Chickamauga finds lots of tournament play even today. Unfortunately,
to establish play-balance, Federal forces in most folios get handicapped by
artificial "only n units may move in one turn" rules. Still, they're tense
games and fair history--players at least get the strategic concerns of the
commanders. Good stuff for novices and to introduce people to gaming." GG
"I always loved this set, and I really wish I could figure out what I did
with the damn thing. I finally just sprung for the DG version (as you
should know, Danny). Chickamauga and Shiloh were, IMO, the best of the
package. Chickamauga always struck me as the most fun. Both of these
games played pretty well solitare. Antietam only plays well solitare
because of the "McClellan" rules - if you're not as stupid as him, it's a
Union free-for-all (except for that outragoug AP Hill unit). Two player,
it's nowhere near as good as the first two games. Cemetary Hill just
seemed crammed into this format to me. Overall, however, a great bargin
quad game." JB
"One excellent game - Chickamauga, two good games, and one stinker -
Cemetary Hill." RM
"I think only Chickamauga is worth playing." PA
"I only played two of these and can't add anything to others' comments:
Chickamauga is the star of the group, and Cemetery Hill is one of the
worst Gettysburg games ever made (though I did use it to indoctrinate a
newbie back when B&G was new)." DSB
Blue and Gray II Quadrigame
Chattanooga, Fredericksburg, Hooker & Lee, Battle of the Wilderness
Irad Hardy,John Young, Ed Curran, Kip Allen
"Blue & Gray I & II. A total of eight games, some of which worked better than
others. Chickamauga finds lots of tournament play even today. Unfortunately,
to establish play-balance, Federal forces in most folios get handicapped by
artificial "only n units may move in one turn" rules. Still, they're tense
games and fair history--players at least get the strategic concerns of the
commanders. Good stuff for novices and to introduce people to gaming." GG
"Not a great one in the bunch, no real terrible ones either." RM
"I think only Wilderness is worth playing." PA
Borodino
John Young
"Okay, it has an ugly map and is outdated. It is still one of the best
intro- style games around. For the Grognard it is an intense, tournament
quality struggle." WS
"Wish I still had a copy of this one. Fun." SF
"Another introductory classic long on game and little on actual
battle. A good game nonetheless; tends to be bloody. A recent one here, last
month, ended when the remaining two Russian pieces surrendered to the last
four French." GG
"This game is a flat out fun night of gaming. I play it about twice a
year. Great introduction to wargaming." RM
"Played this even more than bms and used it to get a bunch of newbies to
play wargames back in Raleigh, N.C. in the early 70's." PA
"Lots of fun. The best of SPI's early Napoleonic offerings, IMHO. Balanced
and a nail biter until the end." TB
Breakout & Pursuit
James F. Dunnigan
"Okay, but must be very dated by now. I still have a copy but its
current job is dust gathering." RM
"The breakout scenario is merely OK, but the pursuit scenario has major
problems. The biggest problem is that units can move through zones of
control with modest MP costs, and Commonwealth infantry divisions have
huge movement allowances. So once the Germans' continuous line in
Normandy is broken, the Allies can surround and destroy most of the enemy
forces before they can run away." DSB
Breitenfeld (Thiry Years War Quad)
J.A. Nelson
"Anybody want to sell their's? Nuff said..." WS
"An issue game to coincide with the release of Thirty Years War
quad. I played it once, can't remember which side. Rocroi from the quad
itself is much better." GG
"Played this once or twice solitare. I only seem to recall it being a
rather dull, set-piece affair for one side - they get their artillary
overrun by cavalry. Of course, knowing little about the era and only
playing myself, I may have missed an important point or strategy that makes
this game better." JB
"Great game. I have worn out my first and am working on my second
copy." RM
"Kind-of boring." PA
Brusilov Offensive (Great War in the East Quad)
Jim Dunnigan
"An interesting system (Great War in the East) but the games were
hopelessly one-sided." MP
"Actually, "Brusilov" was not one-sided at all. The Russians are, for the
kost part, going up against the KuK Army (Austro-Hungarians). Because of
this, the troop quality ratings (or whatever they were called) are more
equal. You can duplicate the historical breakthrough readily enough. This
was, IMO, the best game in the Quad." RS
"I played only once, ftf (believe it or not), back when I was playing
wargames weekly with a guy. I don't remember much about this game, except
it was such fun. It was one of those games that I think I might try to buy
sometime." JB
Bulge (aka 'The Big Red One')
James F. Dunnigan
"Yet another Bulge remake. Renamed in the version I have (BRO) to link
to the Sam Fuller movie of that name. All I recall is a pretty complicated
sequence of play (I think 14 steps) for a 100 counter game." DM
"Not bad, not great. A little too small for me considering the campaign." MP
"Ray [Freeman] and I have been back-channeling about Bulge games and we disagree to
some extent on this game. Divisional level combat doesn't work for this
battle, not large enough. It solos OK as a game, not enough movement to
surprise oneself but does play better ftf. Strange combat, move, combat
format with the first combat optional. It's good for a time killer but
there are enough games out there that show how the battle actually went.
This game is fine for tournament play since the possibilities are
smaller, it is quick to play and not complicated. Good game to fill out
the Bulgenard shelf and for microgame collectors." SF
"Not a bad little game, but certainly not a great sim of the Bulge either.
However, it's certainly better than at least half of the Bulge games out
there. Division level, which removes some "flavor" for players who like a
lot of stuff to push around. I like it as a game. It's reasonably quick
playing, sets up very fast and takes up little space (map is 11 x 17). I
only bothered to replace 3 of my SPI games after my collection went up in a
fire in 1991 and this was one of them." RF
"I thought it was a cute, almost mindless game. Fun to play around with. One
interesting rule: victory conditions were examined at the end of each turn,
as I recall. Too few units for my personal taste, which generally results in
too little action." RW
Bull Run, Battles of
James F. Dunnigan
Bundeswehr (Modern Battles 2 Quad)
Virginia Mulhulland
"A classic. Part of the Mod Batt 2 quad. I consider it an "answer" to
Wurzburg. The only SPI wargame designed by a woman." DM
"A quad game from the rather bland Modern Battles series. Better than most,
but that is not saying much." JM
"Fun game, fun series. This system seems to favor the attacker
regardless of which game you play." MP
"This game was fair (note the lack of dud/gem rating). It didn't seem to
have the balance of scenario as Wurzburg and the counters were not
standarized either. The counters were of unknown strength till combat
and had a range of values. I would have preferred the fixed strength
unit version like Modern Battles I. One of the scenarios was
interesting but memory escapes...what was I talking about?" SF
"I had a lot of fun with this game too--don't ask me why. I thought it was a
good use of the N@W system as it appeared in these Modern Battles Quad. The
situation was interesting too--Soviet juggernaut and all that. I played
this sometime in the last few years and had a good time with it again." JB
"As I recall, one of the quad games. Always fun to play... you could play a
couple of times in one night, and the unknown strengths (do I have the right
game? I no longer have my copy.) made it sort of interesting. Typical S&T
WWIII game... Nato starts out with not enough forces, has to conduct a
holding action, overwhelming reinforcements arrive (althought the French came
in really, really late in the game, as I recall.) However,seem to recall that
it was skewed in favor of the Nato forces." RW
