"Across a Deadly Field - Very pleased" Topic

Recently, I have been considering the possibilities of gaming the ACW. As I already have quite a large collection of wargaming armies for other periods and no intention of joining a club where players can muster large armies and above all field them on gigantic tables,with the publication of Across a Deadly Field the possibility of playing a Corps Size Battle at the regimental level on a 6x4 table becomes a reality. For these reasons I give these rules a big thumbs up!
I have never been a fan of the 'Big Battalions', some horse and musket games and displays which I have seen at clubs and
shows seemed more like Ancient battles because there were just too many figures on the table. I think the author has got it right.
To be fair,I am not in a position to criticize the rules as I have not yet played a game with them but what I have read and above all understood……. they seem to be excellent.

Did you see this review?

TMP link

I found it interesting.

Did you see this review? TMP link

I found it interesting not only because I wrote it, but also because I read the rules very thoroughly and played a game before writing it.

So, in my humble opinion, it's much more useful then comments from those who flicked through the pages on the store's shelves, saw the charts, and threw up their hands in horror.

Note I am not a fanboy or partisan (I still actually prefer Regimental Fire & Fure for ease of play and the look of it) but fair is fair.

Rules are like ice cream; not everybody likes the same thing. Let us know about your experience once you give them a try.

Rules seem OK, just 1 figure representing 60 men means average regiments of 5 to 8 figures which seems a bit small.

I played several games at Nashcon and loved the rules. The mechanics are intuitive and easy to teach/learn. Game flow and combat outcomes are historically realistic. I was a little disappointed in the content of the rule book once I received it. Take out all the Osprey pictures and photos of JR games that use a different basing, and there wasn't much there for the price. The charts cover a lot of pages and are necessary to cover all the common scale figures. Yes, the full charts are pretty crowded since they cover all the possible weapon, but there are now plenty of home made charts on the web that reduce them to just what you need for a game. Again, I love the rule mechanisms. I wasn't thrilled with the 1:60 ratio either, but the great guys on the JR Yahoo group quickly came up with a 1:30 adaptation. Overall, a pretty good set of rules.

do you have a link to the 1=30 adaptation?

Follow the threads at jriii@yahoogroups.com. May have to join the group and review the files and messages.

In the Files section of the JR Yahoo group. Basically for 15 mm, just use the 10 mm charts and the cavalry fire charts (they are already 1:30). Remember to keep the maximum 16 infantry or 18 fire points. There are also mods for 3, 4, or 5 base units.

link

I'm sticking with JR 2. I find it gives a very satisfying game.

I don't play any rules when a figure represents so many men be it 20 or 30 or a 1,000 and you count figures for combat. I only use rules that use bases to figure out combat. Why should it matter if I put 1 miniature or 12 on a base. Also if you have more then a half page of charts for combat forget it.

Fair enough Doug Redshirt, but for those of us who like to play a game slightly more complicated than checkers, this may be to OUR liking

Fair enough Doug Redshirt, but for those of us who like to play a game slightly more complicated than checkers, this may be to OUR liking

I don't see that there is any correlation between rules that use figures to track casualties or calculate combat and complexity.

But if you say so…..

Here is a link to a pdf on playing 15mm ADF at 1:30 with larger, four stand units:

link

nice and useful review – some great thoughts.

Thanks!