 When SSI decided to continue
publishing Atomic Games’ Close Combat series after Microsoft abandoned it, it made a
lot of wargamers very happy. When SSI decided to use the engine to produce yet another
Battle of the Bulge game, it made a lot of wargamers’ heads hurt. It’s not that
the Bulge isn’t a good gaming scenario—it’s OK—it’s just that the
Bulge is probably the most overworked wargame subject ever. From AH’s classic Battle of the Bulge to SSI’s
underrated Ardennes Offensive, wargames have been made and remade about the Bulge while
other--very worthy--game subjects have gone begging. For example, many wanted CCIV to be a Guadalcanal game—and what
a game it would have been—but no, instead we get yet another visit with the battlin’
bastards of Bastogne. What’s done is
done, however, and I guess there’s always room for another good Bulge game (like GMT’s
Tigers in the Mist or the Gamer’s Ardennes Offensive). And that’s just what
Close Combat: Battle of the Bulge is.
 For those of you unfamiliar with the Close
Combat game system, it’s a real-time squad level wargame (think computerized Squad
Leader). You can play either individual scenarios, large campaigns made up of many
scenarios, or smaller operations of fewer scenarios. In each scenario you control about
10-15 squads or vehicles, and the CC system is especially renowned for modeling the
effects of psychology and morale on the battlefield. Tell your troops to run across a
field, and they’ll get tired. Tell them to attack a Panther with rifles, and they’ll
think twice about it. Tell them to charge into heavy tank and machine gun fire, and they’ll
probably tell you exactly where to go. It makes for a realistic and tense game, one that
has found favor with both casual gamers and all but the most hidebound of turn-based
grognards. As the series has developed, each game has added new features—like
elevation, leadership, and different troop and weapon types. This time, the system has
been blessed with the addition of two big improvements—air and offboard artillery
attacks and a workable strategic game.
 The new strategic game is especially welcome. The previous Close Combat games consisted of a
series of scenarios from a specific campaign—Normandy, Market-Garden, and Russia. While the individual scenarios were enjoyable,
Atomic never really found a way to tie them together in a viable campaign. With Battle of
the Bulge, they have. If you choose to play the campaign, you’ll move units about on
a strategic map of the Ardennes made up of areas (much like GMT’s Tigers in the
Mist). You can only have one “battle group” (a small unit made up of about 10-15
units and representative of a division) in each area, and when your battle group occupies
the same area as an enemy group, you’ll be switched to the tactical map to battle it
out. Do well, and your side will send the enemy scurrying in retreat; screw up, and you’ll
find yourself running out of room and the reserves necessary to reinforce your chewed-up
forces. While the strategic game isn’t particularly deep, it is fun, and does take
account of such important Bulge phenomena like supply depots and the Operation Greif
commandos. You’ll also be able to assign theatre resources like off-board artillery
and air units to particularly volatile sectors fo the front. Unlike CC3, you can’t
purchase specific units in the campaign—you’re pretty much stuck with what your
battlegroups give you. Though some may miss tailoring their own fire brigades, I much
prefer the realism of Battle of the Bulge.
When facing an SS Panzer division with a battlegroup of green U.S. infantry and no
anti-tank weapons, it gives you something of the feel for what the beleaguered GIs went
through on the first couple days of the surprise German attack.
 In the tactical scenarios, the game has changed
very little. You still give the same orders—move, move fast, sneak, fire, smoke,
defend, and ambush, and the same elegant click-and-drag interface is still in place. As in
Close Combat III, leaders are very important and impart valuable morale bonuses. The game’s
strength still lies in its spot-on representation of WWII infantry tactics. The only way
to succeed is by using cover, smoke, and fire-and-move tactics. Suicidal attacks just don’t
get it in this game. The only really noticeable change to game’s tactical side is the
addition of air attacks and off-board arty, something fans have been begging for since the
first Close Combat. They seem pretty well implemented. Sometimes a barrage of off-board
artillery will devastate an enemy force; sometimes it’ll miss entirely. Air attacks
tend to be more efficient, but rightly so; when the cloud cover lifts and the allied air
supremacy makes itself felt, you’ll know why Patton asked his chaplain to compose a
prayer for good weather.
 Graphically, the game is on par with CCIII, and
even has some improvements—I particularly like the way tanks belch out smoke, and
explosions seem much more spectacular than in the previous games. But Battle of the Bulge
also has some graphical shortcomings, mostly due to the fact the Bugle was fought around
Christmas, and all the maps are covered in snow. This is particularly problematic when it
comes to spotting your infantry units, almost all of whom are wearing (very effective)
winter camouflage. Losing track of your infantry has always been a problem with the CC
series, and the solution has always been to use the game’s graphic options to outline
them in red or green or some status indicator color, but it’s not a happy aesthetic
compromise. Similarly, it’s always been difficult to get a feel for elevation in the
Close Combat series—and it’s even worse in Battle of the Bulge, where the white
background tends to obliterate any hints at terrain elevation. Neither of these problems is insuperable, but they’re
a pain, and taken together point to the next logical step for the series—3D.
The game’s sound is
exceptionally good—as in the previous games in the series, your units will shout out
warnings if they take an objective or are taking too much fire, and the weapons effects
are first-rate throughout.
 For all my enthusiasm about Battle of the Bulge, it does have a
few problems that need to be addressed. First, the AI—especially the armor AI--does
have some problems. While one’s own tanks usually behave pretty well, and rarely turn
their flanks or rears to the enemy, your opponent’s tanks will sometimes behave in
very odd ways. Strangely enough, this doesn’t happen all the time. I’ve played
scenarios in which German tanks stood off in cover and out of range and provided covering
fire for an infantry assault. Great stuff. But I’ve also seen JagdTigers rumble
blindly into villages packed with bazooka-armed infantry, where they were quickly
dispatched. And the game also tends to get a little repetitive. Almost every scenario
entails either taking or holding a small town, and while much of the real battle was
fought in this way, it still gets a bit tiresome. Finally, the German Nebelwerfers (rocket
launchers) are vastly overpowered. A recent patch has fixed this, but beware of these guys
if you’re not running it.
Overall, Close Combat IV is a
more-than-worthy entry in the CC series. The addition of a solid and enjoyable strategic
game and off-board air and artillery are big steps forward for the series. But some things
remain to be done, including improving the AI, making terrain graphics less ambiguous, and
giving some thought to moving to a 3D graphics engine. And let’s not forget about
that Guadalcanal campaign, either.
--Rick Fehrenbacher |
