SON OF BLOCKHEAD

WESTFRONT: The War in Europe, 1943-45, by CRAIG BESINQUE

from COLUMBIA GAMES, INC.

One 22" x 34" cardboard-mounted map, 120 blocks of wood, rules booklet, 1 informational counter sheet, 4 dice, set of stickers. Published by Columbia Games, Box 3457, Blaine, WA 98230. $60.

Reviewed by MARK PITCAVAGE

Serial games are in. From Simulations Canada came West Front out of Lebensraum, two games which cast the shadow of a used toothpick. GRD has the Serial Sumo's of the industry, the entire Europa series. Even Rob Markham has his own little recycling plant out on the west coast. All of this, of course, thanks to the phenomenal success of AH's Advanced Squad Leader. The only wonder is why it took everyone so very long to notice.

Well, it didn't take Craig Besinque and the guys at Columbia Games too long. Craig, along with originator, Tom Dagleish, have had some moderate success over the years with their block-system specials. But they didn't hit the big time until they released EastFront almost a year ago.

For those of you who haven't played the game - or failed to read my incisive, award-winning review of it in BROG (Ed. Heel, Pitbull… heel.) - EastFront is a big block, big buck wargame covering the Russian front from 1941-45. It uses wooden blocks instead of counters, a concept that Columbia has probably developed to its natural limits. EF uses a deceptively simple game system that has several layers of ramifications. Headquarters can activate corps or armies for movement and/or combat, but with each activation they grow weaker in ability. The combat units are step-based, and players roll for "hits" against opponents when involved in combat. Unit type, terrain, air support, and other factors can modify dierolls or step losses. Combat tends to be attritional, and emphasis is placed on "managing" combat … feeding units into battle, knowing when and where to strike, conserving valuable HQ's, etc. Though the system aspires to be more realistic than it actually is, it nevertheless captures the flavor of the campaign pretty well for all its abstractness. It is also fun to play.

WestFront, though, is like the younger brother who never quite measures up to his sibling's accomplishments. Not as good-looking, not as athletic, never managing to do as well in school, the younger brother lurches along in his sibling's shadow. In much the same manner, WF, though not a bad game, never seems to quite match either the playability or historicity of its predecessor.

While EastFront had some unsightly, facial blemishes in the form of the Carpathian and Caucasus Mountain ranges, WestFront sports a mighty case of terminal acne - rather peculiar versions of the mountains in France, Switzerland, Italy, and the Balkans. Moreover, the hues in WF tend to be brown, compared to EF's greens. The map is not only ugly, but it is also not exactly user friendly. The hexes have no numbering system, and virtually every informational line on the map is black, which makes it hard to distinguish front lines from international boundaries from sea areas. It does, however, mate well with EastFront.

The units are little pieces of wood colored black and blue, to which you must spend a couple of hours affixing stickers with the appropriate unit information. Units are ostensibly corps for the Germans and Allies, and armies for the Italians. They are divided into numerous unit types, including armor, mechanized infantry, cavalry (one lonely unit), static, fortress, and HQ's. There are also SS units, which are far too powerful. There is a 54-page rule booklet that includes many gratuitous illustrations, a few gratuitous comments, and six scenarios. One of these scenarios is an introductory scenario,which is always useful (especially as there is a complete example of play given for the scenario), but one of the other scenarios is a 1940 "Fall of France", in which virtually every unit must pretend to be another unit (the U.S. and British parachute corps, for instance, end up being Belgian). Not much play value here.

WestFront uses EastFront rules pretty much up and down the line, with additions for the special circumstances of the Western Front. As the EF rules are good, this could have been A Good Thing. However, those "additions and special circumstances" turn that promise into an inferior sequel. The war in the West was an altogether different, and more complex, war than the one in the East. And while WF gamely tries to tackle the differences with one system - and, in a couple of instances, succeeds admirably - in general, the system graft fails to take. Some things WF handles quite well. One example of this is Allied air superiority. This mechanic also enables WF to tackle the destruction of German mobility in a simple, yet effective, way. WF simply makes German headquarters more expensive to replace as Allied airpower gets stronger. The loss of their HQ's makes it increasingly difficult for the Germans to move, especially if they want to replenish their armies as well. Strategic movement via railroads also becomes more difficult, since strategic movement is governed by headquarters. There are many West Front games out there which do not adequately reflect the great problems the Germans had in simply getting troops where they wanted them. WestFront does this admirably.

Other aspects of the game don't fare so well. WestFront suffers from a tendency to either over or under-simplify. Take the production rules. American, British, Polish, Canadian, and Free French units are all lumped together into the "Allies." They can all draw from the same pool of production points. This means ignoring completely the historical replacement problems that many Allies had. The production rules make German cadres easier to build than Allied ones, which is realistic, but they don't make Allied armored units cheaper than German ones, which is not. Furthermore, the Allies gain production points by capturing production centers in Europe. Actually, if anything, these production centers should produce a drain on Allied resources, rather than a gain, since they contributed absolutely nothing tot he Allied war effort. They did, however, consume huge amounts of coal and other raw materials as the Allies had to feed and provide for the newly-liberated populaces. Supply is another major over-simplification, and the whole production system seems much too "gamey."

In other areas, though, the rules seem over complicated. For instance, six whole pages are devoted to sea movement, invasions, and beachheads, and there is a confusing melange of sea areas, interdiction levels, sea assaults, combined assaults, beachheads, ports, ad nauseam. This would be fine, except that these rules are neither clear nor particularly realistic. Successful invasions are never completely defined, and the role that HQ's play over bodies of water is equally opaque. Since, obviously, the invasion procedure is the crucial component of the game, these rules needed to be shaken down and ironed out far more than has been done. More examples wouldn't hurt, either.

WestFront contains a great deal of chrome, and not all of it adds to the game. Relatively harmless are: the non-existent U.S. First Army Group as an actual headquarters unit; an Allied "Liberation" army that can pop up virtually anywhere, rather magically, but only once per scenario; and the German ability to change their paratroop units into elite - but cheaper costing, infantry units. More problematic are the Soviet Fronts, counters that move towards German objectives from the East. While on the one hand, this does serve to put some pressure on the German player, the Fronts are not particularly realistic in movement, effects, or objectives. Another problem is the Balkan theater, with all of its stolid garrison units. What these units do mostly is just sit there, since the German player cannot usually afford the HQ steps to move them. T'ain't much of a thrill. A decent set of garrison rules would have helped immensely.

Given all of this, how does the game play? Well, as we said above, "…T'ain't much of a thrill." Fronts are too constricted -Italy, for instance, is three hexes wide - so there isn't too much movement. The Germans, of course, become increasingly hard-pressed to be able to move at all. Mostly what happens is a big slug-fest at the beaches. If the Allies don't choose carefully, they can be eliminated on the beachhead, and, a second invasion will be often be necessary just to get more troops into the fray. Sea movement restrictions allow the Allies to build up their forces only very slowly. This doesn't strike me as being particularly realistic. In any case, a wise German will have been preparing a defensive line. If he can hold the Allies in the beachhead area for a fair amount of time, then the magical weather result "mud" will virtually grind all armies to a halt. Somehow I must have sneezed whenever I got to this part of the campaign, because I don't remember weather completely stopping the Allied advance. When the Allies finally do cozy up to the German defensive line, it's all pounding until something gives or the scenario ends. The game's unique format does a fairly effective job of nullifying any of the rapid, operational maneuvers that punctuated the western campaigns.

If you are rich enough to be able to afford both of these games, I suppose you might as well get them. But prepare yourself for a little disappointment, because, while it isn't bad, WestFront simply doesn't measure up to it's Russian brother. And, for sixty bucks, it shouldn't just be good, it should also wash your car for you.

CAPSULE COMMENTS:

Graphic Presentation: Poor. Black on brown, with no hexnumbers. Blocks are functional.

Playability: If and when you can figure out the sea movement/invasion rules, it isn't very difficult. Examples help. Solitaire is a no-no.

Replayability: Not nearly as high as its predecessor.

Historicity: Fair. You have to give them credit for trying, though, given the system's inherent restrictions.

Playing Time: Six month scenarios can be played in a few hours.

Comparisons: Falls short up against EastFront. Other "small monsters", such as Fortress Europa, Road to the Rhine, France, 1944, and Against the Reich, all deliver more bang for the buck. It's better than D-Day, though.

Overall: An "E" for Effort. Or is that Expensive?