"Fire & fury V's Johnny Reb III" Topic

Hi there,

I am seeking to build a ACW Union and Confederate armies and I first am seeking a set of rules that use 15mm figures…I am seeking to game using regiments as the smallest unit and maybe a division or two to be fielded each side.

Could some one please tell me the pro's and the con's of these two Rule sets.

What are the mechanics of each of these rule sets?

Cheers

AG 2001

play in 28mm and use warhammer it's great fun and it has been a great way to get kids involved.

Jules

If you already play Warhammer then this is a great way to get started. But as the author of these rules, I would say that. If you have a deep interest in the subject (I've been doing this for 35 years now, then perhaps JRIII is going to give you more mileage than F&F.

As a game F&F is more attritional. The game mechanics are more easily assimilated and thus more repetitive in operation – the contstant falling into disorder and reforming gets a little tedious.

With both some wild results are obtainable but the likelihood of such is considerably less in JR. F&F has a 1 -10 variable for all calculations, JR averages results more with 2d6. JR is geared to making decisions and second guessing your opponent's moves through placed order chits. F&F requires you maintain good order and command to get your units working and has morale and response to orders tied in with fighting, which is nice. JRiii is concerned with brigade dynamics rather than those of the division ala F&F.

F&F is good for refighting large battles but if you have the time and enjoy reading the many good tactical studies available, I think you will find JR is more accurate historically and as a game, a more stimulating set.

Good answer Cherypicker – although are you sure it was for this question?

Normal Fire 'n Fire's smallest unit is a brigade, although there is a prototype Regimental FnF – which you can download for free, so why not try it out to see if you like it?

Fire and Fury is excellent but is not designed for small encounters, consequently there is a built in delay before you start to actually play because you need to amass the required forces.

I disagree with Skumdreg about 'constantly falling into disorder' as this is not a recurring factor in games I have played using this rules set over the last 12 years. If you keep your commands together most units will do what you want most of the time.

Also, I would take issue with the assertion that 'easily assimilated' rules are somehow a bad thing. Presumably a game is extra fun if you have to keep looking in a rulebook to work things out?

I don't play JR so I can't comment.

Warhammer? Yeah, right.

I have played both F+F and JRIII. I think matakishi is right with his appraisal of size of battles, but have I have enjoyed many small battles (less then a division of confederates and a corp of union) with F+F.
If you are testing rule sets and different sized battles, at wargamesdownload.com there are a set of ACW Paper Armies that can be used to try out various rule sets.

Enjoy your new time period. I hope you find the ACW as fun as I do.

I think he is talking about Fire and Fury Regimental (V) vs JRIII. F&F Regimental is new and the basic unit is a regt. More later.
VR
James Mattes

Fire and Fury Regimental takes the basic system and scales it down for Regimental gaming. I would think you could use it for up to Corps on Corps gaming as one play can control several bdes. I do Longstreets attack on day two with each player on the union side having a Division and Confederates controlling two or so Bdes. RF&F is a stand removal game and is (IMHO) more abstract then JRIII. I like JRIII but it is for the hardcore ACW gamer. I find both systems to be fun and enjoyable. I can do a larger JRIII game with an additional GM and one or two player who know the rule well at a convention. We just recently did a Indian Mutiny Game using RF&F. Fire and Fury has several games now that are based on the same system. Napoleonic Fire and Fury AKA Age of Eagles is going to be published this Historicon. Also there is a very active Yahoo group for both.

I would say JRIII has some utility as a basic rules system for AWI as well. I have not seen a version for Napoleonics but I think there are some in play test around the world.

I would have to compare the two as JRIII is to Indianapolis 500 as F&F is to Indy racing league.

VR
James Mattes

Skumdreg wrote: "JR is geared to making decisions and second guessing your opponent's moves through placed order chits."

I have seen folks try and "game" the system, generally those who use proper tactics fair much better than those who try and exploit the system. There are many who know the rule very well and I have to keep an eye on them when I am GMing a scenario. But in general I will saddle those who know the system too well with a new player to mentor and it keeps them busy and not focused on the game and not gaming the system.

VR
James Mattes

Here are two links and the turn sequence for both:
VR
JKM

link

JRIII Turn Sequence:

Mark orders
Rout, Rallies and Replacements
Reveal orders
First Fires
Disengage
Charges
Movement
Moving Fires
Officer Casualties

link

Fire and Fury Turn Sequence:

Union Player Turn

Manoeuvre (1st) Phase: The Union players manoeuvre their brigades, batteries and leaders.
Replace fallen leaders, attach and detach leaders.
Move brigades and batteries
Move detached leaders

Musketry & Cannonade (2nd) Phase: The Confederate player resolves his defensive fire and applies all combat effects. The Union player then resolves his offensive fire combat and applies the effects.

Charge (3rd) Phase: The Union and Confederate players simultaneously resolve combat for all charges made during the manoeuvre phase and breakthrough. All combat effects are simultaneously applies at the resolution of combat.

Confederate Player Turn

Manoeuvre (1st) Phase: The Confederate players manoeuvre their brigades, batteries and leaders.
Replace fallen leaders, attach and detach leaders.
Move brigades and batteries
Move detached leaders

Musketry & Cannonade (2nd) Phase: The Union player resolves his defensive fire and applies all combat effects. The Confederate player then resolves his offensive fire combat and applies the effects.

Charge (3rd) Phase: The Confederate and Union players simultaneously resolve combat for all charges made during the manoeuvre phase and breakthrough. All combat effects are simultaneously applies at the resolution of combat.

Skumdreg: Are you saying you are the author of Warhammer, Warhammer ACW or Johnny Reb? Your post is confusing.

That's a good question. Skumdreg confused me a bit with that one, too.

As to the question at hand… I've always liked both systems, although I prefer JR III nowadays because of the detail it contains and the fact that you can play smaller, faster games if you prefer.

The focus of F & F is larger (I can't speak for Regimental F & F, as I haven't had the pleasure of trying it), and it plays a little slower for me. I always enjoyed the command and control mechanics in F & F, as you were never sure that a unit would move when you wanted it to. That was always a little bit of a problem with me, too, because if you are having a bad day and rolling a LOT of ones on your D10, your units would just sit there. It was believable occasionally, but when a large part of your force essentially makes camp in the middle of a battle it's a bit much. The shooting is much the same— I've had turns where two or three Brigades combined fire, and come up with zilch as a result. Kind of hard to believe that kind of firepower would do NOTHING to the enemy. Adding in a house rule for averaging two D10 instead of rolling just one rectified this problem somewhat.

JR III has a focus on the Regiment as your basic unit, and how you use the three or four elements in your Brigade is very important. Orders are put down with hidden chits, and charges, movement and shooting are done simultaneously in phases by both sides. I've always thought this to be one of the most unique and well written part of the rules. Everything isn't done as a direct reaction to what your opponent has done in the preceding phase (as in most games). Unfortunately units can do what they like without regard for C & C, but we play an optional rule in the book which limits that somewhat by only allowing a commander to give as many different types of orders as his Level allows. This tends to make Brigades move a bit more ponderously, and they "feel" more period in flavor.

I know it probably doesn't help much, but I would suggest trying to get to a convention and giving both games a go with people who know the systems. I learned on my own with friends, and that helped a bit. But nothing beats learning a game with guys who KNOW the system inside and out.

Info on JR III— warweb.com/johnreb.html

TMP link

Info on F & F— pease1.sr.unh.edu/FnF

I have both sets but I slightly edge towards F&F because I've played it longer.If you dont mount more than 3 figures per stand you can play either system.

Fire and Fury.

Or "On to Richmond"

He wasn't looking for votes or suggestions, guys, but a discussion of mechanics and differences between JR III and F & F.

A lot of people use house rules instead of d10, using 2d6 -2 or some such variation so as to try and even odds out a bit.

If you read a battle report from the war (ORs as an example), I can picture the description in JRIII rules. I can not do that when playing F&F. Large games, IMO, do not play well in JRIII. If you want to do all of Gettysburg, go with F&F. If you want to command three brigades with separate commanders and you are the division commander, go with JRIII. F&F is more abstract and does an excellent job if you are playing Lee or Jeff Davis. My biggest difficulty when playing F&F disappeared when I considered the level to which I had to think. The two reflect different levels of thought process.

I have played JR at up to corps level, with two or three players per side. It's hard to command more than a division. We use a timer and allow only a few minutes for placing orders. JR involves a LOT of dice rolls, and extreme things happen, well, at the extremes, particularly that any regiment will rout on a roll of 2 (1+1) on 2D6. That happens 1/36 times, so one key to winning is to get your oppopnent to make a lot of morale rolls; sooner or later a unit will rout. Victory often goes to the commander who is prepared for the inevitable rout, e.g. with reserves to plug the hole.

I love JR3,

It delivers these three items to me.

1. Research for battles, regiments and flags.

2. A real feel for the effects of Morale, correct use of historical formations, rewards you for using tactics on a regimental level and brigade level.

3. Visualy very pleasing in 28mm my chosen scale. here is a link to some of my pics

link

I have not played F & F, but as a rule I prefer 1 figure reprents 30 men scale or less.

cheers

Matt

Very nice, bluewillow. I do JR with 15mm and use by 28mm for skirmishes — but your pics tempt me to rebase.

It all started with the release of Mark fenlons figs about three years ago, I started with about thirty figs per side for Brother aginst Brother, than one of the guys (Boyd)decided to build something more substantial, so we moved to JR3 as I had played it with Bruce's 15mm figs and i liked the rules, so it has now become my second largest army after Napoleonics, since those photos I have finsihed another 6 Regts of Infantry (including coppens Zouves), and 1 btn of cav.

Boyd and I concentrate on the Western Theartre, I will post some more pics soon.

cheers

Matt

I get the impression that both fnf and jr111 are not quite what we are looking for. I think that there is some room for impovement in Civil War rules, and although there are a few other systems out there, None of them seems to quite hit the mark. The problem is, that although many of the firefights were within a relatively short distance, the range of a rifled musket was much further than the days of Napolion. Also, some units would march to almost certain death rather than have the people that they grew up with look at them as cowards. Artillery only attributed to 10% of the wars casualties. How many of you have lost more than that in a game? I just think that there is another way to portray a more accurate type of game wether it be regimental or brigade style. Let me just say that I like both games, but I just feel that there is room for improvement in this area. A good start would be to determine how many yards per inch would be the best scale.

Well, I've broken up large attacks with long range riflery in JR3 — and also had a regiment stand after suffering 75% or greater casualties. And artillery is far more likely to have a morale impact than to produce lots of casualties. That seems to be what you're after.

But to each his everlovin' blue-eyed own.

Moonhippie— those two games might not be what YOU are looking for, but a rather large majority of ACW gamers would probably disagree with you as to whether ANY improvement is needed in either one. I sure don't think any changes are necessary!

Of course, if you think you can do better, I say go for it. As with a select group of gamers, that may be the only way you'll ever be perfectly happy with a set of rules…

JRIII vs. FnF

The whole idea of one vs the other has always seemed silly to me. Both have excellent qualities and address completely different unit sizes. FnF is fantastic for large battles. If you wish to fight the entire battle of Shiloh for instance, nothing is better.

However, if you want to fight the Hornet's nest at Shiloh, JRIII is excellent. I own and have played both.

Regarding Regiment FnF, if you're going to attend Historicon Scott Mingus and I will be doing a joint game at the con. I will use Regimental FnF and he JRIII using the same terrain and scenario from his new scenario book "Undying Courage". The scenario we chose is Bloody Lane. You can observe the differing mechanics by hanging around both games for a time. You can also, of course, sign up and play.

Bill Moreno

Nazrat- so JR and F+F are perfect rule sets then?
Steve.

Did I SAY they were? I was just pointing out that while he and his group feel they may not be "accurate and need improvement", most gamers I have met have been happy with one or the other, or even both. Hence I encouraged him to write his own.

Not sure that there is anything in the world that is perfect and is probably an unatainable goal. I play mostly JRIII and have seen any number of house rules which work well to reflect what ever the house wants to show. As long as the basic concept is unchanged, your house – your rules, my house – my rules. I do not see any changes to make in JRIII which would make it a better game. Have not played F&F enough to venture an opinion.

I think nazrat makes a valid point—the overwhelming majority of ACW gamers seem pretty satisfied with the available rulesets (they have one they like)—unlike say, WSS or ECW, where the only thing that everyone agrees about is the fact that they don't really love any of the available rulesets and wish someone would write another one.

JRIII v. F&F.

Fire and Fury got it right the first time.

JRIII is still trying.

So… funny…. har. Har.

Don't quit your day job. 8)=

nazrat- we're discussing how to play with toy soldiers. Lighten up mate!
Steve.

Ok, I am seeking to build infantry regiments of 30 figures strong and cavalry regiments of 16 figures strong. I am hoping to put these regiments into brigades and then have a brigade commander that is in charge of that brigade. who recieves orders and then his brigade is moved according to those orders.

So which of these two rules would be best to simulate a brigade based game.

JR3? or F 'n' F?

I play General De Brigade for Napoleonics and would like an ACW rule se that is simular to this level of gaming.

Cheers

AG 2001

30 figures is too much fire power for a JRIII unit, unless you do early war or late war heavy artillery regiment. Units are generally 12-16 figures per regiment. JRIII has four stands per regiment and heavy emphasis on morale based on stand loss. Units tend to just fade away over combat. Best suggestion I can make is to go to a convention and play a couple of games of both JRIII and F&F and see if they meet your need.

SteveJ— I WAS being light, note the "smiley' icon. I generally don't put that if I am being deliberately snide or cynical. Sorry if it came across to you any other way.

Man, I like real conversation so much better than the web. There are far less misunderstandings.

Always wondered what '8)=' meant.
Steve.

30 figures will not be too much for the proposed "Regimental Fire and Fury." You can get a free playtest set from their website. In it each stand represents 40 men regardless of how many figures you put on it as long as each stand is one inch wide. Also, a typical line formation is represented by double ranking your stands, i.e. if you have sixteen stands, eight in front and eight in rear.

My game of choice is JRIII for the detail, but this new regimental F & F looks nice, not as detailed, especially since it is intended to cover other periods and allow me to game the War of 1812.

Nazrat- I'm sorry you took such a harsh view of my post. All I am saying is that there may be some room for improvement. I have no doubt that many people are satisfied with the two games. I was just simply wondering if there couldn't be a third option out there that could draw upon recent advances in rules ideas that could be used to make a more interesting game. Just a thought.

Ahhh, I didn't take it harshly at all! I just stated my own differing opinion and suggested you try and come up with something better if your group needed that. It certainly wasn't meant as, "If you don't like it, why don't YOU write something better?!! Betcha can't!" I, for one, would look at and comment on anything you created that might be a better or different set.

Sorry again for any misunderstanding my imperfect wording and/or tone may have caused!

The good thing is that both JR3 and F&F are well supported by a bevy of published regimental-level scenarios (well over 300!!!) that are catalogued / indexed on the Yahoo Groups website for JRiii. And with CHARGE! and Undying Courage, the hobbyists continue to publish more scenarios that will work for either set of rules.

And you forget there is a whole convention in November that is going to focus around these two rules and a few more! Fall In! 2005 The Sunset of the Confederacy, The Union Restored 1863-1865. I think I know who is doing the promotions and events so get those games in. Oh dont forget the Featherstone Cup this year as well.
VR
James Mattes

I'd say Johnny Reb 3. I've played them both, and I seem to have a tendency of getting bored of the game while its the other person's turn. I'd say go JR3, its simultaneous without overwhelming you.

Its got to be Fire & Fury for me. You can look in the history books see the number of troops in a brigade divide by 200 and thats how many stands you have. They are easy to learn and easy to play and give a real feel for the battles, the battles actually look like the pictures in the history books. Johnny Reb are nice rules but harder to play and the scale is alot smaller than I like. I do like FF basing system, I use 6mm Adler 3 figures on a 20mm square base and they look great.

"Johnny Reb are nice rules but harder to play"

I don't know, I caught on to JR3 pretty quickly my first game.

"Johnny Reb are nice rules but harder to play"

I don't know, I caught on to JR3 pretty quickly my first game.
————————————
I meant a 3 Corps game. Yes in smaller games they handle quite well, but I prefer to play full battles rather than parts of a battle, I find JR2 are more difficult and too detailed to get through a game with 3 or 4 brigades to a division, 2 or 3 Divisions to a Corps. Whereas FF for me fit the bill perfectly.

I actually make one rule amendment in FF. – When a brigade becomes spent it cannot charge or advance, only stand and defend or retire- .

It works well

Hammer

Do not think JR was designed to play "monster" games. My experience indicates that the game can really bog down when more than one division is envolved. I know that bigger games are played with the rule set but my experience does not support the use.

No, I don't think it was designed for that large of a game. But if one DOES field that much stuff, it's best if it's a multi-player game, with each player handling at least a Brigade or more. That speeds things up immeasurably, as does everybody being very familiar with the rules (but that's true with all games).

That is beauty of Fire & Fury you can play 'battles' I like the feel of them. I use Adler 6mm 3 figures to a 15mm square base and halve the distances. With 6mm and an 8' x 5' table you can watch the reserves slowly moving up. I do like the look of that. But JR are ok for smaller actions.
better for 25mm.

Hammer