Wealdmaster | 06 Jan 2020 1:32 p.m. PST |
I'm considering another forray into the ACW. Many moons since the last game was had… I see people think highly of Regimental Fire and Fury, but also have read good things concerning Johnny Reb II (not III). Have heard the third edition was a divergence of sorts and perhaps not the way to go. Does anyone know the key contrasts between JRII and JRIII? Once upon a time we played a bit of Fire and Fury Brigade level and it was okay I suppose (don't remember that much about it actually other than it needed to be written and organized better. Still, what about JRII? |
Bashytubits | 06 Jan 2020 2:06 p.m. PST |
I have played tons of JR 2 games, it is an excellent set of rules for brigade sized battles. The rules are good but there is no index and sometimes hard to find salient points in the rule book. Also, other than very experienced players you should limit each player to no more than a brigade each as newer players have too difficult a time managing more than one brigade which greatly slows down the play of the game. If you have a large gaming group it makes for a very good multi player game. JR 3 uses 4 bases of figures per unit and JR 2 uses 5. In 2 the numbers of figure and size of base is dependent on the size of each regiment. A regiment being 5 bases. We would just average regimental sizes and base accordingly. A 500 man regiment would have 5 figures and 5 bases, a 300 3 figures per base and 5 bases. JR 3 uses 4 bases per regiment. I played JR 3 and did not like it. JR 3 was supposed to make larger battles possible but our group found 2 to be much more to our liking. The chit activation used in JR 2 really rewards players for thinking ahead. |
Wealdmaster | 06 Jan 2020 3:09 p.m. PST |
This is all very interesting. The variable number of figures is a bit odd but I'm prepared to go with it. |
PJ ONeill | 06 Jan 2020 3:48 p.m. PST |
There are no saving rolls in JRIII- 1 roll for each fire. The charge sequence in JR3 is a bit shorter and more intuitive, but still takes a while. I have played JR since it came out- 1, 2 and 3 and I like 3 the best. There is still a solid core of JR3 players at the HMGS East conventions and always a couple of games. |
PJ ONeill | 06 Jan 2020 3:50 p.m. PST |
It is still simultaneous movement in all 3 versions, no activation. The chits are for giving orders. |
French Wargame Holidays | 06 Jan 2020 3:50 p.m. PST |
,I have played all three, I prefer JR3 also Cheers Matt |
epturner | 06 Jan 2020 6:02 p.m. PST |
Long ago and far away, I played JR2. And I liked it. We used a convention of either 3 or 4 figures per stand, usually 3 for the Rebs and 4 for the Yanks. A brigade per player seemed about right. When I moved South to Pennsyltuckey, I started playing F&F (Original) since that's what the folks down here played. I liked JR2, never really got much chance to play JR3, but since I've been playing F&F for so long, I don't see any reason to go back. My two shillings, YMMV. Eric |
jdpintex | 07 Jan 2020 6:34 a.m. PST |
For years I played JRII. Never cared for JR3 and my rules of choice switched to Fire and Fury as a result. |
It is good to be King | 07 Jan 2020 8:21 a.m. PST |
I also have played JR2 and JR3….prefer 3. |
Martian Root Canal | 07 Jan 2020 12:03 p.m. PST |
I have played them all…but I prefer JR2. |
Wealdmaster | 07 Jan 2020 2:46 p.m. PST |
Thanks, I've found a nice used copy online and await its arrival! |
Fried Flintstone | 07 Jan 2020 4:30 p.m. PST |
Have you also considered Pickett's Charge? You can use the same figures / basing. Good rules! |
doc mcb | 08 Jan 2020 6:56 a.m. PST |
We played both but preferred JR2. One nice thingabout JR is that if you do non-historical scenariors, there is a good bit of uncertainty about the enemy even when the minis are visible on the table. Huge difference in reliability between the morale types (A to E) plus big difference between smooth bores vs rifled muskets. Quality of commanders can be a big factor too. Until the first combat you really don't know what you are facing. |
Wealdmaster | 09 Jan 2020 5:51 a.m. PST |
Yes, re reading Nosworthy's Bloody Crucible of Courage and finding so many granular details that determine combat at the regimental level. His intro with the description of the small engagement at Wilson's Creek in 1861 vividly captures the need for rules that show these details. |
historygamer | 09 Jan 2020 9:58 a.m. PST |
I like JR II, except for the charge sequence. The worst part of that are the distance dice thrown for it – a unit can go way too far. Other than that, they are well written, well referenced. I like the variable size of units as well. JRII seems written best for division level size. Says so in the forward, IIRC. JRIII is similar, but with some significant changes. I thought parts of them were great, but not crazy about the reduced scale/unit size. Felt it was somewhat of a knee jerk reaction to F&F brigade level rules. Oddly enough, if you look at the recent HMGS cons, not many games are run at all using JR or F&F (both brigade level and regimental level). Teppsta – I haven't found that Pickett's Charge seems to have caught on here in the states. I like the previous effort – Guns at Gettysburg, as to me, they seem like a JR-lite rules set. I have PC, but haven't seen any games of it run at the cons here, though I could have missed the odd game listed. |
PJ ONeill | 09 Jan 2020 12:21 p.m. PST |
Historyg- There are at least 2-3, and sometimes more, JRIII games at the HMGS East cons, in recent years, not bad for a system over 40 years old. |
Fried Flintstone | 09 Jan 2020 5:33 p.m. PST |
I enjoy the odd game of JR2 but we usually play Pickett's Charge now. HistoryGamer – worth a try. It uses the same basing |
Grumble87106 | 10 Jan 2020 6:51 p.m. PST |
JR II was the ACW rules set of choice for the Albuquerque Camino Real Wargamers group during the most recent period that I lived there (1992-2012), so it is the version that I have played the most. I really like the granularity of detail. In fact, I have registered to run a JR II game at Cold Wars 2020. It's a small scenario, for which I think JR II is ideal. Roughly two brigades per size, set in New Mexico. Another thing I like about JR II is the five-stand regiment system with varied numbers of figures. The command stand is in the middle of a line (or the head of a column). I have played with stands as small as one figure each (a sharpshooter battalion) and as big as 8 or 9 figures per stand (very large, very green regiment -- if you don't believe it, come see me at Cold Wars). JR III was mainly made (I think) for bigger battles, and IMO for those it is a better system because of the streamlining. I have never played the original JR, though I do own a copy. Similar to JR II with certain exceptions, such as the artillery rules. The chit command/movement system is sheer genius. Frank Chadwick says he stole the concept from John Hill and used it in Command Decision -- which is my favorite WW II operational-level rules set. I have run a CD game at nearly every HMGS convention since moving to PA in 2012. Have never played F&F brigade or regiment, so no comment on those. I did try Mr Lincoln's War and went back to JR II, though I am told by the San Lázaro Spy Company that my colleagues in New Mexico have begun playing MLW quite a bit since I departed. |
Wealdmaster | 11 Jan 2020 12:05 p.m. PST |
Like these comments. My copy of the rules arrived yesterday and I'm reading away, making a few notes. One issue I forsee is the sheer impossibility of using the base sizes given for 20/25mm miniatures. I cannot fit my 28mm troops on these, or even anything close if using a 4 miniature base size. Is there any possible hangup if I increase the base size and keep it standardized for both armies? |
PJ ONeill | 11 Jan 2020 1:24 p.m. PST |
Weald- There is no problem using slightly larger base sizes, as long as it is consistent for both sides. Many of the bases I use for JRIII were based for F&F (1" square), and I have had no problems. |
Marcus Brutus | 13 Jan 2020 8:06 a.m. PST |
I played JR2 back in the 1990s weekly. It had its strengths but it had lots of weaknesses in it too. There was always some argument each game. The charge sequence, as historygamer suggests, was a bit of disaster. I didn't like being forced to commit to regimental size by having bases of different numbers of figures. That meant the OOB was fixed on one battle. Personally, I would be looking at a new set. Pickets Charge sounds interesting. I think JR3 was designed to compete against Fire and Fury. I remember with great excitement waiting for its release hoping that it was JR2 with the system's bugs fixed but sadly it turned out to be different game. An experienced player should be able to handle a Union division in JR2. |
Wealdmaster | 14 Jan 2020 3:29 p.m. PST |
Thanks, yes, been reading the charge sequence with a bit of apprehension. Otherwise, it looks to have the right tactical feel I'm looking for. I may look at Pickets Charge. |
historygamer | 19 Jan 2020 5:42 p.m. PST |
Cut down on the number of charge dice. |
Sparta | 25 Jan 2020 5:34 a.m. PST |
JR seems extremely archaic to me. The chit system iw weird and time cosuming without adding much to the decisions you make as a gamer. I cannot for the world see why the charge system has to be so complicated and the charge dice is extremely weird. F&F´s activations and integrated morale system seems so much more modern in style. |
French Wargame Holidays | 30 Jan 2020 4:53 p.m. PST |
Played a lot of JR2 then switched to JR3, must say I prefer it, JR3 works very well for larger divisional and even corps sized games. I like the chit system, and the ability of the rules to create a seesaw action. We also enlarged to bases to accomodate the latter redoubt and Mark Fenlon miniatures, plus made the gun bases wider longer to represent the size of a battery bettter.
|
Grumble87106 | 05 Feb 2020 6:39 p.m. PST |
I like the chit system because it throws uncertainty into each player's plans. You have to issue orders without knowing what your opponent will do. Is that enemy unit going to charge? Should I hold? Or will it fire, and should I do First Fire to cause as much damage as possible? Or should I move? But then if they charge, I'll be on Conditional Hold and that will not be pretty. |
Old Guy | 06 Feb 2020 2:57 a.m. PST |
I have played JRII since 1988 and see no reason to change, I think it is one of the best sets of rules I have ever played. Although the charge process is clunky, with experience you soon know who is going to win or lose. I have heard people say it is complex and I cannot understand where this comes from, I have played other rules none of which are as clean and precise as JRII. |
historygamer | 06 Feb 2020 7:29 a.m. PST |
So it depends on the type of gaming you are looking to play. I believe that it states up front that JRII is geared toward a divisional sized game. So that means about three or so brigades per side – give or take. Anything bigger than that and you aren't using the right rules system. If you want Corps level games, then play F&F, or perhaps even JRIII. Most rules systems are written with a set number of figures/units in mind. Exceeding that and you kind of "break" the rules and what the author intended. |