You have to try FAB: Bulge

So I've been playing FAB: Bulge since I got it last week... and I just wanted to open up by saying to everyone on the Fortress here that it is thus far the best fucking game I've played in 6 months to a year. It is an amazing game.

First of all production is pretty outstanding for a wargame and a GMT production (which have been getting better anyway). Color series rulebook and playbook. Full suite of playeraids. The developer has been *painstaking* about having introduction material in the game including a 30 minute (like an actual 30 minute) intro scenario and full walkthroughs of an entire player turn to illustrate all significant aspects of the game in the playbook. Also plenty of the necessary chits for everything you'll be doing, so no bookkeeping or anything. The map looks great as well. Only problem is the blocks are not painted as well as I would like (american green specifically; they can have some distinctive gold lines on them).

The general way I would describe gameplay is mostly by comparing it to another game that I have. A Victory Lost, which got a lot of acclaim last year. AVL is a great game, incredibly tightly designed, almost euro in its stripped downness (I put a review up on BGG of it). But it is, to me, *BORING*. I don't feel like playing it--there's almost an abstract quality to the game to me. By contrast, FAB: Bulge is awesome because it's only slightly more complex ruleswise than AVL, in the same operational scale, but has a ton of color along with the important decisions. At its heart it's a introductory complexity block game (hidden units) but the units have different quality levels--so poorly trained units can become more veteran as they get shot up but more commonly elite units lose their quality as they lose the forward elements. Overall, I think the design makes AVL look like a dry eurogame by comparison, even though I respect AVLs design. This is intro wargaming done right: it shows off all the cool color of wargaming without being overwhelming like many of the other games I play which I would never try to foist on someone who wasn't as crazy as me in terms of wargaming.

The glue that holds the whole thing together though is the asset system. These are smaller units, artillery and events that are not on blocks but rather on cardboard chits. Basically at the beginning of each turn you add new assets into your old pool of assets you used in the previous turn and you draw a certain number determined by the turn. They represent high command assigning you whatever resources they can. So early in the Bulge the Germans have a huge amount of artillery and combat assets as German high command had everything ready for their final big offensive. As time goes by the Allies start to draw more assets and become more dangerous, especially in later turns as air units are finally added to the mix (in real life weather was horrible until late in the game, grounding air units for a long period, which is why the Germans chose to attack). Anyway, assets and where you use them really matter and there are just never enough of them--blown bridges and engineers are critical for the allies while for the Germans the only way to blast really strong units out of tough terrain is by using your max 2 artillery chits for every attack. The Germans never get the numbers of engineers they so desperately need to repair bridges, tear down enemy fortifications and build roadblocks.

But by far the best part of this assets system is that it basically sucks the chrome out of the game while still leaving all the good elements of it. What would normally need endless timed rules and bullet points that you have to keep track of by memory instead get event and asset chits you draw--so you can just look up the correct rule when you draw the chit if it's something exotic. And they are generally not terribly complex rules. Need to simulate German infiltration teams redirecting US units on the battlefield? As the Germans you may draw the Grief team interdiction chit to simulate it--then you just look up the rule, decide where to deploy it and roll a die to see its final effect and that's that.

The bottom line is that for you ATers out there, I highly, highly recommend this game as an intro to wargaming. It is more complex than jumping in at CC: Ancients or Battlelore, or even AVL or something like that. But it's so much more colorful for only a handful more rules. I think it'd be manageable for a newcomer to pick up given all the effort that was made in the finished product to accommodate newbies. I think a problem for many people who get recommended wargames is that they are recommended intro wargames that are highly stripped down and mechanical--I know if I had started with AVL I'm not sure how far I would have gone into wargames from boredom. It doesn't show off what's cool about wargames. By contrast, if you pick this game up IMHO you'll get a good taste of exactly why wargamers play their games and what makes them different from other games, with only a slightly steeper complexity level.

Anyway, that was a mouthful. Has anyone else been playing this? And if you have, are you enjoying it as much as I am? I'm actually enjoying it more than Asia Engulfed which I'm PBEMing (and is made by the same designer, and was much more anticipated).

Believe it or not I'm not paid by the developer or something, I just haven't been this excited about a game, even just soloing on the table, as I have about this one in quite some time.

Good review, you should have submitted this as an article! I playtested this game once and it's great to finally have the real deal. I can't wait for my first game.

Thanks for your review Gary. I'm always on the lookout for a wargame that is light but doesn't completely blow away historical realism and there's already talk of a FAB Bulge tournament in my area. Having all the chrome on chits sounds like a great way to go. I've played Bitter Woods 4 and Iron Tide: Panzers in the Ardennes (Iron Tide being the better one) and even though IT:pitA strips the rules down it's still a game with rule xx.x.xx on 18 am, rule xx.xx.x on 18 pm, ect. Like I said the chits sound good.

2 questions:

Am I correct in assuming that a few chits beign in play on the first turn and rest are drawn 100% randomly?

How much set up time are we looking at for FAB Bulge? I've played exactly 1 block game before.

Thanks for the compliment hacksword. It's funny how I really want people on F:AT to play the game but haven't been motivated to whore it on BGG... I feel like people might actually be convinced to try something out of their element here, I guess.

Harkonnen: Yeah--so basically the way it shakes out in the first turn is that in addition to their strong units on the board, the Germans start with a ton of chits sitting in their available pool--like 11 or 12, maybe more, which means a *lot* of firepower to be expended in the first turn. Though you can always save chits turn to turn as well but there is no time like the present for the Germans. The Allies start with 0 chits available. So the first turn the German offensive starts with a bang, but they do have to try to get over bridges which is a pain and slows them down (and a lot of them get blown). The chits you use go to the "used" box.

Then the chit draw starts (it's printed on the map, right on the turn markers). Every turn you draw a certain amount twice, once in your round and once in the other players round. The amount of which is dictated by the map and scenario. The chit pool you draw from is the chits you used already, which recycle if they aren't destroyed, plus new chits which are introduced every turn. So as I said by the time turn 7 or 8 rolls around the Americans get a ton of air chits added to the draw mix to represent improving weather and devastating air sorties late in the Bulge. But you can't totally count on them--you still have to draw them to use them. So for example on the 2nd turn the Germans draw like 9 chits in their round and 4 or 5 chits in the Allies' round--meanwhile the Allies draw like 2 or 3 chits IIRC (almost all engineers to help blow those bridges strategically). The balance changes as the game goes on as your assets are eliminated and as new assets are added to the pool. They aren't just assets either--they also dictate when you receive some of your reinforcements (though not many). Also included in the assets chits are events--replacements, bridge teams, some other stuff.

Setup time is fairly low to extreme, depending on your level of preparedness. Since reinforcements and chits come out in different turns you have to organize them as such. All the chits and units have a number in the corner of them to let you know when they come in. So if you bag them according to turn of entry, setup is not bad at all. And the placement of starting units is all put directly on the map a la A Victory Lost. So if you had all your chits, units and everything in a big pile, you'd be in for a huge setup time. But if it's properly organized it isn't bad at all. Additionally there are two nice color reinforcement cards you can set up all your chits on by turn so you don't forget any. Unit density (blocks) is pretty low so it isn't too bad in that sense.

Also the Bulge is not my cup of tea in terms of wars or campaigns, so the fact I like it so much is sort of extra remarkable.

Excellent, sounds like this game does everything a Bulge game should. I don't want to see the look on my wife's face when she finds out I've bought yet another game (bringing the total since the beginning of the year to around 15), I think I can deal with it. Sounds like I gotta have it, I like good Bulge games, and the locals will be playing it.

Since my friends prefer AT (yay!), I play wargames mostly solitaire (duh!).

Therefore I ever since passed on blockgames altogether. Though this sounds like a good one.

If people like FAB:Bulge, they need to take a serious look at Leaping Lemmings, which Rick designed. It's in the P500 list so far, and if you dig into it, you realize that it's a wargame at heart. It's like wargame crack to get kids into wargaming.

Make sure you drop Rick a line, Gary. He's always a good man to talk to.

--Mike L.

Damn it Gary, submit stuff like this to us! You coulda had your name in lights!

I hadn't really paid much attention to FAB: BULGE since ASL is kind of supplying my WWII needs right now...but damn, this sounds _great_.

I had the same feeling you did about AVL...it's a good game, but it is boring. It's too "classical"...for all the talk of how stripped down it is, it's not any more innovative than something like AFRIKA KORPS. It feels like a very dated design to me.

Michael Barnes wrote:

I had the same feeling you did about AVL...it's a good game, but it is boring. It's too "classical"...for all the talk of how stripped down it is, it's not any more innovative than something like AFRIKA KORPS. It feels like a very dated design to me.

AVL didn't do much for me either. It's a solid set of wargame rules but nothing gave me the "feel" of an Eastern Front campaign. A couple of turns in I didn't want to play any more and honestly it was a little dull.

I didn't submit it to the content submission because I've only played once briefly ftf and besides that it's all solo games. Don't really feel comfortable reviewing it since I haven't played it much. First impressions are very, very good though.

I will admit it is more complicated than AVL but not all that much more IMHO. The rules are easy but slightly unconventional, especially the hit distribution rules. But it's so much more engaging and interesting than that game that the marginal rules complexity increase is worth it, even as an intro game.

Gary Sax wrote:

I will admit it is more complicated than AVL but not all that much more IMHO. The rules are easy but slightly unconventional, especially the hit distribution rules. But it's so much more engaging and interesting than that game that the marginal rules complexity increase is worth it, even as an intro game.

I think it's fair to say that if a player can understand and teach others Marvel Heroes he could understand and play AVL. From what you've described about FAB Bulge it's just a little more than AVL . Maybe FAB's game weight could be compared to TI3? Completely different implementation of rules and basic conventions, of course.

Great review ! I wasn't interested in the game. Bought AVL last year and was really disapointed. The game is overhyped. But this "assets" system sounds great.

I think I should retitle this the FAB: Bulge brain dump...

Anyway, I was playing solo today after work and one thing that I really, really like about this is that even once the units are committed you have a ton of choices. Here's what I mean. In most wargames, a couple turns in, it has become clear where all your resources are being put. Even in a block game with fog of war you can see the blocks and have a general idea of where the enemy is going to hit. And once you see his units you know where his strength lies and that is that, all that is left is to roll the dice.

This is fine. It is even realistic. But one thing I really like is that with this assets system I still have choices once my units are committed. So I may have two main thrusts with one of my armies, where you can see on the board where my best units from a certain division are piled up... or even already in combat with the enemy in a contested space. I may have 3 or 4 of these spots on the board.

In most games, from here, the die is cast besides the decision which sector to bring in extra reserve units and the particulars of the battle. But in FAB, I still have choices. That is to say, I am sitting on 4 chits of artillery. I can still choose which one of those flash points on the board I am going to distribute the heavy artillery to and prioritize. Or I can spread it evenly. And artillery in particular makes a huge difference in battles. So even though they know where my units are, and they will fight there, I can still make choices about where my assets are going to be committed. And those decisions don't have to be made until the battle itself, so there's no "Decisions are mostly made, let's see how this plays out in general terms" part. You're still making maneuver decisions that you make in other games but you also get to make really important decisions about where your other resources are going--where are my engineers committed? How much artillery does this battle get vs. another? Should I keep my assets in reserve and see how things play out first? Etc.

I'll probably post some criticisms soon, but one of my criticisms is that I wonder how much of the game is simply determined by terrain modifiers. They have a huge influence on the battle, as they should, but I wonder if the the terrain modifiers are assigned to sectors that actually had bad terrain or if they are just assigned in such a way as to make the game play correctly. I don't know the historical terrain well enough to really say for sure but I have a little suspicion that a lot of the modifiers exist just to make the game play properly.

Michael Barnes wrote:

It's too "classical"...for all the talk of how stripped down it is, it's not any more innovative than something like AFRIKA KORPS. It feels like a very dated design to me.

I don't see anything wrong with going back to basics. I played Leningrad for the first time the other day, which is 30 years old and it's a bloody good game. I love the heavy handed chrome of a game like WWII: Barbarossa to Berlin, but there is a lot of charm in the more simple hex and counter war games, I feel.

Gary Sax wrote:

I wonder if the the terrain modifiers are assigned to sectors that actually had bad terrain or if they are just assigned in such a way as to make the game play correctly. I don't know the historical terrain well enough to really say for sure but I have a little suspicion that a lot of the modifiers exist just to make the game play properly.

I know the region pretty well (150 km distance from my home). I can confirm you that the bad terrain modifiers on the map are pretty accurate. By the way, thanks again for your excellent review, I ordered the game.