AAR 6

From: Pete Panzeri (peterpanzeri@yahoo.com)
aka Kutusov

My AAR Notes, from the allied perspective are below. [haven't quite collected a blow by blow account yet] FYI for the French our Russian pregame "Course of Action" and discussion from the Allied.egroups is posted first.

To: 'AusterlitzAllied@egroups.com'
From: Pete Panzeri
We will be beginning the action at the Decisive point... er, historically that is the "most vulnerable point" for us. Trying to circumvent hindsight, we have agreed to accept the set-up according to the Historical [Allied] Plan. We have three sectors [tables] left, center and right. Once a force is committed to battle on that table, it cannot be withdrawn to another table (it may [advance or ] retreat across that table, but doesn't stop to fight there.)

Beginning Set Up

The main columns and advance guard are marching left [to the French right - to hit a weakened Davout] while the trailing column is on the centerboard with another on the far right. The guard may be deployed on order, to any table [with some delay depending on command presence.] If we alter too far from the original historical orders we face the typical delays of changing orders in the midst of battle.

My idea is to have three "CONTINGENCY PLANS" that we can enact. We know at this "decisive point" that Napoleon is Exceptionally Strong in his center, moderately weak on his left, and very weak on his right [Davout], but defending exceptionally tough terrain there, with swampy obstacles.

Here are the three "Courses of Action" I have in mind, please read and respond.

COA #1:
PUSH THE MAIN [left] ATTACK
Defend and delay and in the Center and right. Hold the guard until absolutely necessary to commit.

COA #2:
ATTACK HARD ON ALL SECTORS
Commit the Guard to the center [weakest] sector early and surprise the French. All three forces maintain the initiative on all three tables for the duration of the game

COA #3:
ATTACK HARD on both left and right, hoping to win on both flanks, and accept a possible loss in the middle. Hold the guard until absolutely necessary to commit, possibly split between the center and right tables.

OK, respond and discuss, other options etc?? We'll make our final decision just before the battle

* KUTUSOV *

Another point:
IAW the scenario: If Reserves enter the board behind a victorious flank with the intent of attacking the exposed flank of the adjacent table [which happened historically with the French Breakthrough in the center] then we can allow them to "cross the rear of an empty table without being committed to that table."

So, one option might be to advance on the left with the Guard in reserve there, and let the French advance up the middle, hitting them on the Flank as they come up, Rather than a head-on counter attack, as happened historically. Hindsight yes, but it is a contingency allowing the Guard to support success of the main attack.

* KUTUSOV *

RESULTS

At our staff meeting on Friday, we chose to commit the Reserve on the exposed flank of the advancing French in wither the north or center table. The flank attack of the Cavalry did hinder the French in the Center and north, but committing their own, numerically superior reserves negated the effect.

Unfortunately the Russian Guard Infantry was [in Nigel's word's] "too little, too late" to make much impact on the advancing French, or the morale of the retreating Austrian 4th Column.

The fatigued Austrians all routed from the board in the face of a massive heavy CAV charge [save a lone Austrian square - which held on until the Russian Guard and 3rd Column arrived] but the weakened French troops hung in there to the bitter end, and then these same French managed to keep up the pressure while Bernadotte, the French CAV reserves and Guard CAV came to their support, beating back the Russian counter attacks.

French command control/Maneuverability, heavy cavalry, and the sheer quality and endurance of their infantry were completely overwhelming.

The computer had the French with a Major victory on the center table, minor victory on the north Table, and a Major victory for the Allies in the South, thus giving an overall win to the French... but not a strategic win.

Overall Casualties were about even - more severe in KIA and WIA for the French in the North and center, but the French took a mess of POW's and MIA's from the routing Austrians in the center.

In hind sight, I see that committing the Guard and Preshevsky earlier to the center, and keeping Lichtenstine's CAV to the north could have given a better defense (but this is only assuming that the French had committed their Guard and CAV reserves like they did, the same way. But they wouldn't have done this upon seeing our own Guard and CAV committed differently. They likely would have done differently as well. We were - by the Historical scenario - compelled to commit our reserves first, and thus any "awake Napoleon" could then react overwhelmingly.

Had the scenario not been set up and started historically [at the "decisive point" that it was] then a French victory might not have been possible. But no battle is fought in a vacuum. The scenario we enacted made victory a more evenly available to each, but not completely even to be sure. Over all, what the Allies did accomplish was to avoid an overwhelming French victory. I think we did VERY well, given the scenario.

I must now admit that I was "EXTREMELY AGGRESSIVE" on purpose. I saw the real-time clock, and knew we would not get a decision unless we either routed the French, or they us. Thus, I enacted the motto of the 100th Infantry: "GO FOR BROKE!" and charged every BN so hard, the French spent 2 hours of turns just reacting to us. So, in the end... the French won by default, as the Russians exhausted themselves battering up against the halted French.

I'd play-tested this battle at the Infantry School in 1994. Twice: historically, and with a "free set up." Using the fog as cover, the French won hands-down both times in massed assaults with superior troops.

You'll get yours at BORODINO bony!

* KUTUSOV *