I waited for a few issues before choosing to review John Hill's "Johnny Reb" rules set, primarily to allow the dust to settle from the review battles fought not long ago in the pages of THE COURIER. Apparently, either not all of you subscribe to that fine magazine or you wanted my humble opinions on the set of rules.
It would be fair to state up front that the New Orleans gaming group that I belong to uses "Johnny Reb" (JR) for most of its scenarios, and that I have had several conversations/debates via the phone with Dean West, the current "Handler" of JR questions. I am fairly certain that he will want to give a response to my review, but I would like for this not to get into a battle royal with pro and con forces fighting a never-ending war in THE ZOUAVE.
"Johnny Reb" is a 20:1 scale game (each infantry or cavalry figure represents 20 actual effectives), which bits the scope of battles to about a corps per side, depending on table size. The ground scale, 1 inch equals 40 yards, gives an 8 ft. wide table the equivalent of a 2 mile wide battlefield certainly enough to conduct many of the moderate sized ACW engagements.
The flow of a JR battle is an incredible feeling. Morale is such an integral part of the game, and it is extremely 311 handled in this rules set. In the games I have participated in, well laid plans often explode in your face, with "key" regiments failing morale just when you need them the most! This almost makes up for the absence of "command control" in a JR game.
Personal Gripes
Before I get into most of the things I like about JR, let me point out some personal gripes:
1. The lack of command control is something hard for someone like myself to handle. So many battles were won or lost, not by the common soldier, but by the efficiency (or lack thereof) of the generals leading the various groups of men. Some people, and maybe they constitute a majority, say that they do not want to be encumbered by the weaknesses of various leaders during the war. After all, who wants to play in a battle where it has been decided beforehand that you will be incompetent as a commander? This line of thought is certainly understandable to me, but if you plan on RECREATING a battle shouldn't such things factor into the concept of war? My main complaint with a lack of command control is the fact that so many battles were decided by someone not receiving an order or acting upon it in time. In JR, this is not likely to be a factor. Having stated my complaints as an historian, it is easy to add some sort of command control to the rules, as displayed by my very basic ideas written in Issue #2 of THE ZOUAVE.
2. There are SO many die rolls involved with a JR game! I'm not sure how valid a complaint this is, since I have no suggestions for change. The truth is that I like the overall effect of the rules, part of which has to do with the number of die rolls (which bring about uncertainty), but I hate having to roll so often. We DO use several pairs of dice at a time to make fewer rolls, which is an absolute necessity if you believe in efficiency of time.
3. The artillery tables are somewhat awkward in this rules set. Admittedly, I hate reading through rules, but after several games of JR I still sometimes found it difficult remembering how the artillery tables went. In fairness, Clay Cooper hasn't been 'afflicted' with this problem, so perhaps I am a little slow to catch on. However, I disagree with the rapid drop-off of effectiveness with rifled guns (especially Union) over a distance. Rifled guns could not match Napoleons for close firing power, but they tended to be very accurate, even at long range. Dean West's response to my complaint in this regards was that smoke would often make long range firing hard to do if you considered visibility, but what about on the first shot?
4. While on the subject of artillery, our group had a very disconcerting experience during a recent scenario. Confederates were behind medium works and all Rebel artillery was classified as "Average". The Union force had an advantage in number of guns, and all were classified as "Elite". During the entire battle, using counter-battery fire, not ONE casualty could be made to stick on the Confederates due to "saving rolls". We learned from this experience that you can't really inflict casualties on artillery crews if they are behind fairly strong works due to "savings rolls". Why must you inflict at least two casualties in order to remove any figures? The rules state that one hit that "sticks" means no result other than a morale test. Perhaps this is too much power to give since I have never known of dead men rising to fight again! Why even bother with saving rolls? It takes up time and could have been easily factored in to the firing modifiers, saving valuable minutes and aggravation. My final gripe question is, "Why can artillery only shoot section by section instead of by the battery?"
Having stated all of the negatives I came across, this is one great rules set! As written earlier, morale plays such an important part of the game, as well it should. I like the movement rates allowed in the game, including the random roll to see how far a regiment can charge before becoming disordered. I LOVE the use of counters for each unit, which are placed face down each turn, telling the opponent what the unit is supposed to do. The choices for each turn (which represents 15 minutes battle time) include: First Fire (the unit shoots before any opposing movement is done and the firing unit gets a small firing bonus, but cannot shoot later at point blank range if charged); Movement Arrows (which show what direction the unit is to move that turn); Charge (self-explanatory); Formation Change (it takes the full 15 minute turn to go from column to line, etc.); Disengage (self-explanatory); Hold (no real movement, but allows a few options regarding fire, etc.); and Conditional Hold (allows you to cancel other orders after seeing what is going on).
These order counters prevent the typical "if you do this, I'll do that arguments and also add some variety to the game. A "First Fire" order might be great in terms of inflicting some heavier casualties on an opposing unit if it merely advances or holds, but will make you regret giving the order if the opposing regiment charges you, since you will not be able to fire at point blank range. The counter concept in JR makes the game exciting and puts some strategy into giving simple orders! Perhaps this makes up in some ways for the lack of command control.
The optional rule for hidden movement using counters to represent either regiments or brigades is a "must", in my opinion. One can use a certain proportion of "dummy" counters to throw off the enemy's intelligence. Such useage of dummy counters and the fact that a single counter might represent a brigade or only a regiment adds a true "fog of war" to the game.
Players can fairly easily handle pushing a division in this rules set once they have gained experience. You will find that you get so wrapped up in what you are doing that you tend to not notice the rest of the table action, a pretty good statement on how interesting a Johnny Reb game can get. Commanding a division per player, the rules move quickly enough to allow a battle to be fought in three to six hours. This fits my attention span pretty well and allows one to go out with a spouse or girlfriend that same evening, a real plus for not getting hassled about gaming by the fairer sex! Shooting factors are determined by a series of modifiers and the total is then strongly effected by a die roll. Some might dislike this "luck of the dice" concept, but it certainly allows for the unexpected, ranging from 0 casualties to a devastating "blast of lead".
"Johnny Reb" is strongly recommended for those liking a 20:1 scale for their figures. It certainly makes "Rally Round The Flag" look like a child's game. JR is extremely well written and one can find the answer to a question very quickly due to the way the rules set is put together. We have found few questions during the course of a battle that were not answered in the rules, a sign of careful thought and planning on the part of the creators. Finally, JR seems historically sound in both the reading and playing of the game. If only John Hill or Dean West would make a larger scale set for those "Big Battles"!
Back to The Zouave Vol I No. 4 Table of Contents
Back to The Zouave List of Issues
Back to Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1987 The American Civil War Society
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com