Battlelines® A Review: Part III By Jay Wissmann
So, just what does all the preceeding mean as you try to play the game?
Basically, it means the choices you makes at the very beginning, during setup,
are going to carry through (to reward or haunt you) the entire game. You need
to have a overall plan how you are going to utilize the entire deck through the
campaign. What sub-units are you going to accomplish this mission, which ones
are you going to hold for future missions? What routes are you going to take to
the objective location, if on the attack; and which ones do you need to hold to
the last card, if on the defensive? How are you going to use the supporting
elements—artillery to barrage the bejeezus out of the defenders, engineers and
sappers to dig out tough positions, recon units to flank or infiltrate? You
know what all those questions have in common? They all appear in the US Army
field manual on Operations, FM 100-5. To me, that validates the game as a
worthwhile expenditure in time and effort. That is what I look for in a
wargame—does it require me to make the decisions that a real-life military
commander is required to make?
So get to the chase, already—what units should you pick for that first mission? It of course depends on the situation, the unit deck, and the terrain, but there are a few generalities that I can share. My preference is for a balanced force; a regimental HQ, most of the line elements for that HQ, some arty. If I have any slots left open for further picks, I usually go for the supporting arms.
In any attack situation, you can not go far wrong by picking the deck’s Recon
unit. The ultimate expression of that is undoubtably the 9th Panzer Division’s
Recon Battalion—it has a cover modifier, it’s FAST, it can Flank, it has decent
attack and defense values, and it has one other redeeming factor. This can only
be described as a "slick trick"—there is only one card in the 9th Panzer
Division’s deck that has a "3 Hits—Hold on…" combat result. You guessed it,
bright eyes, it’s on the 9th Recon Battalion. That result is a killer, it will
totally destroy any formation card unless it is one of the maneuver battalions
(fancy term for Panzer or Motor Rifle Battalion s) AND it has one of the
company cards attached. There are two "downsides" to using the 9th Recon
Battalion, however. First is the fact that if you lose it or it gets damaged,
you will not have it for the rest of the game. Secondly, and this is
far-outweighed by all the positive attributes described above, the average
Indirect Fire combat check in the deck is 4.5 and the value on the 9th Recon
Battalion is an 8—it would be a shame to lose the ability to draw an 8, but….
When playing in the Streets of Stalingrad or whenever the "critical path"
involves a location with a really big defense modifier, picking the Engineer
(or Sapper) Battalion is usually a good move. If you are up against an opponent
with armor, you might want to consider an AT unit. Finally, if you cannot think
of what else to pick—grab more artillery, and then pick another artillery unit
(one can NEVER have too much artillery).
With all the good that I have mentioned in the system, and it is truly an
outstanding system, I would like to mention a few of the flaws that I have
found. First, the system does not allow for the German practice of forming
Kampfgrüppen such as putting one of the Panzer Battalion s under the command of
a Motor Rifle Regiment—maybe, if enough people raise the issue, the designers
will make it an optional rule?!?! Keep checking the website. Second, some
values are "overused". For example, the Shock combat value is for aircraft
bombing attacks and a defense modifier against Shock attacks appears on
anti-aircraft weapons. That makes sense. However, the Shock combat value also
appears as engineer/sapper attacks, you know with flamethrowers and satchel
charges and the like. 
A FLAK unit positioned for AA defense is not going to help out the schmucks in
a bunker about to be turned into crispy critters by some combat engineers.
Third, the "blue shield" defense modifier on some location cards in the Streets
of Stalingrad deck do not, in my opinion, produce the result desired by the
designers. As written, any hard (armored) target at that location has its
defense value reduced by the modifier’s value. This makes armored vehicles more
vulnerable to things that already have anti-armor capability such as other
tanks, anti-tank guns, and some aircraft cards. That is debatable. Ruskie Rifle
and Motor Rifle units are still helpless—meat on the table—against German
Panzers. That is not historically accurate. German Panzertrüppen Russian
infantry in built-up areas because of their nasty habit of tossing Molotov
Cocktails or swarming the tank and immobilizing it; something they could not do
out on the open steppes. A better solution would be to add the blue shield
modifier number to the attacking units’ anti-armor combat value reading a unit
with no value as a zero. The best solution would involve adding the modifier
ONLY to those units where the intent is to model this vulnerability of armor to
close-in infantry assault and exclude those units where their anti-armor combat
value is the result of inherent anti-armor weapons. That is, again, something
the end users of the system can influence by giving the designers some
feedback.
Summing all the above up—Battlelines is a very worthwhile expenditure of time. It does accurately model the level of combat on World War II’s Eastern Front in a format that is innovative, attractive, fast-playing, and realistic. While an individual hand, a mission, makes for an enjoyable hour with a friend across the table, the system’s real challenge comes in when playing through an entire game of linked missions. Then the entire planning sequence comes into full effect. I, personally, cannot wait for more decks to appear!!!
