|No longer in print.|
| ||This is the Second World War at its most tactical level, as individual tanks and soldiers slug it out in the Pacific Front, in Russia, and in North Africa. Combat takes into effect the angle of shot and armor thickness, and provides detailed results (gun knocked out, periscope gone, tracks jammed on one side). Additional rules cover paratroops, amphibious landings, artillery, mines, and so forth.|
|Period||Early WWII (1939-1942); supplements provide data for other periods.|
|Scale||Tactical. 1 minute per turn. Ground scale is 1:1,000 (1 cm on the tabletop represents 10 meters). Units are individual vehicles and soldiers. All game measurements are in metric.|
|Basing||Individual vehicles and soldiers. Exception: The rules recommend basing four soldiers to a 2 cm-square base when using microarmor-scale figures.|
|Contents||Game set includes 3-ring binder, rules (106 pages), data sheets (71 pages), and 2 overlays. Rules include an index. Required pair of 20-sided dice is not included.|
|Designers||Michael E. Kelly and Michael S. Pula|
|Publisher||First edition published 1993 by Phoenix Military Simulations.|
A detailed description of this game is also available.
|Cameron Fairchild (Cameron_Fairchild@publicis-pr.com)|
|Battalions in Crisis is a well-researched, thoughtful, good
set of rules.
It works very well as long as each player has no more than a platoon of infantry and a couple of vehicles to control. Any more force than that, per player, and the game bogs down horribly.
There are a few vague rules and omissions, easily remedied by common-sense house rules.
|Ric Walters (firstname.lastname@example.org)|
|I have played it once with a group of eight. I thought it was smooth running,
logical, and a lot of fun. The charts and modifiers can be a bit daunting,
but they are easy to understand.
I used to use the rules from Yaquinto's Armor/88/Panzer games for one-to-one miniatures gaming. I think Battalions In Crisis! is more playable, with as much detail and a better representation of infantry capabilities. No rules set is perfect, but Battalions is very playable and has a good "feel" for what is happening on the battlefield at this scale. It's also a lot of fun, and that's why we game with miniatures - isn't it?
|M. Allen Schweitzer (MSchwtzr@AOL.com)|
|After reading through this set of rules, I soon realized I would probably never use it. Certainly well researched, and a lot of thought went into it, but it's clearly an example how trying to "simulate" every possible weapon, firing angle, cover mod or morale factor can render you an accountant rather than a gamer.|
|James May (email@example.com)|
Our club loves BIC! Yes, it is detailed, but that's what happens when you get down and dirty at 1:1.
My buddy and I presented a game at TwisterCon last year and we had 14 players - 7 German and 7 American. We recreated the Command Control system through the players. Each player had no more than a squad of infantry or a platoon of armor. To get the full benefit of BIC, I highly recommend using a chain-of-command system. It forces players to work together for a common goal. After playing BIC, we never hear gamers say "Well, my flank held, what happened to you?" Everyone is in it together, and the CO commands the battle.
Get BIC if you like skirmish-level WWII.
|Steve Pittman (SPittman@BEACHYHD.DEMON.CO.UK)|
I bought these a couple of months back. They are very good if you want to play strictly 1-1 games, as the info on vehicles is amazing - when you fire AP at an AFV and you get a lucky roll, you can do stuff like put one through a vision block or a turret hatch, bogie wheel, etc., etc. - great fun!
Seriously though, it does make things like Tiger tanks a bit less invulnerable, as there is usually a (slim) chance of disabling it and maybe killing a couple of the crew.
The infantry rules are good, fairly fast, and deadly to boot - set up a MG and dare someone to come at you across open ground. They do give a reasonably fast game with quite a few figures, but I seriously advise you to only field one or two AFV's, because of the detail involved in killing them.
I played a game at my club with 5 people who had never seen the rules before, with a couple of sections each, and they worked very well.
On the downside:
|Michael Koznarsky (firstname.lastname@example.org)|
| Our game club made a few changes to the rules to improve the game:
Although these did increase complexity a little (research before the scenario played and actually remembering the change during the game), play balance improved significantly and we all enjoyed the increased realism.
|Jim O'Neil (email@example.com)|
| I cannot recommend Battalions in Crisis; it is a redo of
was horrible. BiC is better, but not to the level I could recommend. I
bought a set at Historicon two years ago -- they have proven to have minor
data flaws, a lack of understanding of the physics of small arms fire and
no understanding of armor, its resistance to penetration or how shot &
shell affect it/are affected by it. Worse, it still has the complex and
ungainly play of its predecessor. It may be the best there is, but better
is coming, and in my opinion, worth waiting for.|
|Mike Kelly, the designer, replies:|
| Yes, the game has many of the factors of Tractics, because that is
the level it is at. However, if you actually played the game, you
would find that it is not the same in any way.
As far as armor penetration and small arms go, you can make many different assumptions about how rounds will work in any given situation. The same goes for small arms. If you read reports of actual small unit actions, such as Small Unit Actions During the German Campaign in Russian, you will find that our game creates the correct effects when you use the correct tactics. We have many ex- and current military who use our game and swear by it. The artillery effects are considered very realistic, and this by artillery officers from both current and past history.
Obviously, I am biased, but we are always looking for feedback from the owners of our rules. Our address and phone number are in every copy of our game that we sell, and we answer every phone call and letter from players.
The feedback that we have gotten often finds minor points of disagreement, but the overwhelming response is what a good time people have with the rules. I will be running games or tournaments at the following conventions, and I urge anyone who is interested to come and play a game. Pointcon at West Point 28 April, Nashcon at Nashville 26 May, Historicon in July at Lancaster, Southern Front in November, and Cold Wars in March 96 at Lancaster.
If anyone has comments of questions, they can reach me in the evevning at (301) 860-9492 between 7:30 and 9:30.
If you would like to add your opinion to this webpage, use the following form or send email to the editor.
|19 August 1999||out of print|
|24 April 1999||comments by Cameron Fairchild|
|14 April 1999||comments by Ric Walters|
comments by M. Allen Schweitzer
|24 December 1997||comments from James May|
|16 November 1996||comments from Steve Pittman|
|Comments or corrections?|