"One Hour Wargame question" Topic

Since there's no online forum for these rules that I'm aware of, I thought I'd throw this question out to the TMP folks who have read and/or played these rules. There is nothing in the rules about choice of target. Let us presume horse and musket period, with three infantry units per side lined up and shooting away at each other.

If there is no restriction, then players would do best to have all three of yours concentrate on one enmy unit, the sooner to put it away with 15 hits and stop it from shooting back.

We have been playing that doubling up is only cricket when you have more units in the fight, thus each of the three units would fire at their opposite number.

It is the only question that has arisen after 5 games played.

You are right to follow convention. If someone is in front of you they are the biggest risk to your safety, and existence in this case.

The AMW Yahoo Group deals with all the Neil Thomas rules:

link

Indeed they do and I'm a member already. My memory ain't what it used to be…

It's similar to the question of whether or not medieval archer units can fire into melee or not. Tradition says no but the rules simply don't say. I don't believe he ever mentioned this for his ancient/medieval rules, either.

Here is a good series of posts about the rules:
darkages40and25.blogspot.com.ar

About fire into melee in AMW rules: I read this in one of the rules queries files I found in the yahoo group: "…shooting at units engaged in hand-to-hand combat is never allowed…"
But this does not mean to be true in OHW.

You have to add some "house rules" to cover some of the routine situations that will come up. Neil's rules leave a lot up to the gamers to sort out themselves. Very few rule sets allow units to fire into a melee. Try finding a definition of a flank or rear attack in his rules, yet this is very important during play.

As above, the actual rules are pretty slim, you need to apply common sense. Personally I don't mind if people mass ranged fire, not feeding your troops into an unequal fight piecemeal is a command skill.

This is also less of an issue in periods without loads of ranged weapons:)

The rules are simple and flexible enough that common sense would prevail.

I would restrict blackpowder era units to firing at the target most in front of them if presented multiple possible targets, but I can see the argument for allowing multiple units to combine fire. Go with your interpretation of period practice and what makes for a better game.

I have made the adjustment to Horse and Musket of allowing Highland infantry to charge other infantry for the '45. According to the H&M rules only cavalry may charge into melee.

I am still trying to decide what modifications are needed for Colonial Sudan. The Saber&Rifle period rules don't give the right feel.

It is no surprise that some modifications are required for specific conflicts. The rules for each period are only 2-3 pages with a like amount of notes. And each period has only four categories of troops. That said, for a simple fast play set these are surprisingly good.

The thirty scenarios included are worth the price of the book on there own. Add in brief notes on using the rules for solo and campaign play and it is quite a useful volume.

1HW has got me two games lately, when I'd be lucky to see that many in a year.

I've also devised a "travel" version for taking on holiday, using card counters. I just swap inches for centimetres

Would also import rules for flank attacks, and perhaps also add a bonus for infantry firing at short range. As it stands, the Horse and Musket rules give no incentive to infantry to get in close. And I'm not convinced that infantry should be able to fire effectively (12")at double a unit's frontage (6").

Apart from that, glad I bought them.