I've played them all (I'm old), and it's a matter of preference. JR3 went from 5 stands to 4 stands, simplified the charts, added in John Hill's 20+ years of reenactor experience and made guns represent batteries rather than sections. It also corrected the effect of cavalry in the game, which I thought was a real problem with JRII. It's moved up a level in command from JRII. Some folks like the larger 5 stand regiments, artillery becomes deadlier, and there are more charts. Yes, it is more intensive than F&F. It has a lot of flavor. If you are an experienced wargamer, JRII/III will not be a problem. Just do it the way it says to and don't reinvent the wheel. I think that it is a really easy ruleset to play. Back to Table of Contents -- Game! # 14 To Game! List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2005 by George Phillies. This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com