AAR 2

From: Tom Ballou, umpire

On the way back to DC, Pete and I had about 3 hours to discuss & dissect the battle. It seems to us (or me, correct me if I'm wrong on this Pete) that the difference from a French Major Victory and the French Minor Victory was the Great Redoubt.

If the commander had demonstrated as instructed by Norbert, the French would have had a reserve Corps to commit. This Corps could have been committed to the Flechettes, that had fell apart by the end of the game. That reserve Corps's commitment to that board would have precipitated a break through, much earlier, and closed the door on all the forces behind Utitsa, being the Anvil to the right hook's Hammer. With the cracking of the Flechetts, the Guard Cav could have been committed to the break through and closed the door on the rear of the Great Redoubt (if they one the battle with the Russian Cav reserve) and move towards the Russian LOC.

Now whether the timing of all this was possible, I don't know. But clearly, the forced commitment of the on table reserves to the meat grinder that was the Great Redoubt, removed the options (and any chance) the French had to deliver the killing blow. Of course the other factor to consider is the forces behind the Great Redoubt, would not have been committed to a fight if the French did not press them, so they could have pull out and back to deal with the encirclement threat, so timing of the actual assault on the Great Redoubt would have been critical too.

Over all I was very impressed with both sides plans, the Russians clearly knew, what they had to accomplish and what to avoid. The French had a good plan, and executed the flank assaults with élan. I wish we had more time to deal with the withdrawal of the Russians, could the forces in the Great Redoubt pull back in time to prevent encirclement and destruction? I'm not sure - their blood was up, and they where charging forward, a pull back would be very hard to execute.

I had a wonderful time, and thanks for your fantastic work.

--Tom