Jacob’s Hill, an ACW small game AAR

[Norm S]

I am taking one of the scenarios from One Hour Wargames (Neil Thomas) and running it for different periods and with different rules. At most, each side will only ever have 6 units.

Today we have ACW and the Two Flags – One Nation rules on the table.

link

http://battlefieldswarriors.blogspot.com/2022/09/jacobs-hill-american-civil-war.html

[willz]

Cool looking game.

[Tony S]

As ever, a fascinating read as well as some attractive eye candy.   I would have guessed that the Confederate commander was going to have a hard conversation with Lee about that battle, but apparently not.

Even though I’m not a huge fan of OHW rules, I absolutely love the ethos of his designs, especially the scenarios.   As you’ve mentioned, adapting his scenarios to other rules isn’t hard, although sometimes there are a few quirks that one has to think through.

We’ve used DBA, using their army lists (which is a bit of a shame; another thing is I greatly admire about Thomas’ rules is the random army generator roll) and pretty much the scenario as written.  A right timetable, again as you’ve noted, is a wonderful tool to drive the scenario.  Indeed, the last couple of scenarios I played it, saw me win quite handily, as I played with an eye towards the victory conditions of the scenario.  I suspect the habits of many decades of DBA games subconsciously made my opponents a bit more cautious and deliberate than was wise, given the time pressure.  During the games, I reminded them of the victory conditions, but it wasn’t enough to overthrow years of DBA inertia.  That said, the games were still tense.  Previously I was worried that some army combinations and scenarios might lead to hideous imbalances, but so far the scenarios have been very well balanced.  Hats off to Mr Thomas.

Oh – a final note.  I have found it interesting that most players, when playing a game wherein you must seize an objective, often cease any offensive actions once reaching it.  Quite often that is a good idea, but other times perhaps not.  Had the Union taken the hill, but continued to push forwards (not ignoring their orders, just a quick reconnaissance in force you understand) perhaps the outcome would have been different?  The North might have been able to trade space for time?  Either way, I just find it interesting how most wargamers tend to play.

Again, thanks for a lovely post Norm.

[Norm S]

Thanks gents. Tony, ‘hats off to Mr. Thomas’ indeed, it would be nice to see another book from him, but it appears quiet on that front. I have his Ancients & Medieval and Napoleonic books and enjoy both.

agree with pushing forwards a little, though some commercial scenarios are timed so tightly that just making the objective pretty much consumes the game clock.

[Konstantinos Travlos]

His 19th Century Warfare Book is also very good and has some nice scenarios. I recommend it.

[ian pillay]

Norm, your posts never fail to impress and inspire me. I love OHW rules and use them almost as my exclusive go to rules system. I do like the morale tweaks and in my fantasy version there is a -D6 to every unit if you loose your leader stand.

I do need to get my ACW back on the table after reading this.

Thanks for sharing

Ian

Tally-Ho! Check out my blog at…..
http://steelcitywargaming.wordpress.com/

[Author]

Posts