Home Forums Horse and Musket American Civil War Jacob’s Hill, an ACW small game AAR

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
  • #178396
    Avatar photoNorm 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.



    Avatar photowillz

    Cool looking game.

    Avatar photoTony 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.

    Avatar photoNorm 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.


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

    Avatar photoian 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


    Tally-Ho! Check out my blog at…..

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.