I had my own theories about how to handle Prussians and Frenchmen in this era. Looking at the field (see map 1) with two routes of access for the French, the intervening woods, etc. I thought the Prussians should try to get their infantry into the woods and to within 12" of the military crest of the hill before the French could build up a firing line. The wood should enable them to get within Dreyse range (12" absolute versus 12" close, 18" long for the Chassepot). The guns, whose 48" range was not fully exploited by this small scenario were to set up at a respectable distance to sweep the hill and/or town.

Large Map (63K)

Conversely, I thought the French should come up as fast as they could and seek to form a line on the hill to dominate the Prussian approach road. Ordinarily I would have sent the cavalry in either case to engage any enemy mounted vanguard and if possible seize and hold the town. However, according to Dave Waxtel, a true cavalryman in this era would never dismount on a formal battlefield, even to relieve himself(more about this heresy later.) Therefore I would have tended to use them to escort the artillery then fall back in reserve.

So much for my theories. Bill rushed his Prussian dragoons toward the town and fought a successful melee with Rich's French chasseurs a cheval. This was followed up by an attack on the French cavalry who had retreated into the front of their infantry. I searched in vain for a rule which would allow an automatic follow up of troops beaten in melee by the victor, but it doesn't exist ("no breakthrough!") The French cavalry was pretty well eliminated at moderate cost to the Prussians (an even up situation at the start) but the latter hung about drawing long range fire at almost absolute effectiveness.

Meanwhile one French column had come in by the south road and had skirmishers in range of the hill supported by one battery. On the main (north) road the other battery along with infantry and mitrailleuse had arrived. Bill planted his battery in the midst of this converging fire and, to everyone's amazement, decimated the prone skirmishers to his front with cannister while taking only two casualties. However, owing to the sequence of movement, French artillery fires first in an exchange, while the Prussians move first. Combined with the increasing skirmisher fire, the French artillery were able to silence the exposed grand battery.

The flanking maneuver through the woods came up against a couple of problems. First, we misunderstood the ability to fire 4" into the woods. A careful rereading later suggests that you have to be just outside the wood to fire 4" in, because that is how far you can see. This cost the Prussians unnecessary casualties. Second, when they emerged, even though using the "open column," which seems to be a renaming of the mythical "flying column" critiqued in my flags and formations article,(THE COURIER , Vol IX, No. 3 - ED) they spent a lot of time under fire.

By this time the French had a dominant firing line, the Prussians had lost their vaunted artillery, and we called it a game in favor of the French.

The game was distorted by our use of 25mm frontages with 15mm ranges and moves. I did not feel too guilty about this, because I've seen Dave Waxtel do it repeatedly with single mounted figures which, with masses of dice rolled (5 dice to a French battalion volley) gives it a highly photogenic beer and pretzels quality even though it can be a fairly serious game. Moreover, since firing lines are effectively two bases deep a French battalion with 16 figures occupies only 3" in 15mm, 6" in 25mm. With a range of up to 18" in 15mm, the effective long range for a Chassepot is 6 times the frontage of a battalion, which must be at least 200 yds. In fact, since the French 1867 regulations mandated a 2 deep line, we could reckon that even with a 6" frontage representing as much as 311 yards the 25mm scale only brings the Chassepot down to 933yds, the Dreyse down to 600 yds or so. That's adequate if short.

Other problems? Well, Rich complained a lot about the sequence which allows the French to get off the first artillery shot, even though he was the French, and we were all somewhat astonished at the ability of the Prussians to wipe out skirmishers with cannister. Moreover, there were, according to the players, an unnecessary number of die rolls. This was particularly true of artillery fire. There seemed to be an extra set of dice rolled which could have been factored in some other way.

It was also noted that morale reduction from casualties needs at least a 3 figure loss. We were unable to relate that to artillery, which has only 3 figures total in a battery versus 16-20 for infantry.

As for command and control, TDFG mandates only one move per turn when troops are out of command range (French 12", Prussian 18") but this did not become a factor in our game.

One other problem unique to TDFG is that the mitrailleuse has 3" less range than rifles using the same ammunition. Years ago Dave Waxtel(author of TDFG) had a set of WWI rules in which medium machineguns had shorter ranges that shoulder arms. I don't know where he got this, but it is a factual error. Machine guns have stable mountings (the effect you would get from bench resting a shoulder arm) and are crewed by specialists. Those facts, combined with a fire density which makes them dangerous in an area rather than a point causes machineguns to be militarily effective at significantly longer ranges than shoulder arms with the same ammunition.

The mitrailleuse range, like the low French infantry melee value had no effect on the game in question. However, it should be noted that in melee most French infantry get only 1 die for 2 figures (4-6 kills) versus 2 dice for 3 figures for Prussians. Walter Simon criticized this feature mightily in a recent POTOMAC WARGAMER'S REVIEW. Since he managed to get his French skirmishers into a melee with a Prussian column he deserved what he got. None of us knew of any supporting data for this feature. It may be based on reports that French medical personnel found it took as much room for 2 Prussian as for 3 French wounded. I also noted that the Chasseurs d'Afrique, who were superb swordsmen, have the same melee value as Gard Mobile cavalry, who could hardly stay in the saddle unmolested. They are superior in morale, however, and seem to have a morale advantage over Prussian cavalry.

On the subject of morale, Waxtel gives Saxon infantry and cavalry a 4 compared to 6 for French and Prussian line, 5 for Bavarians. The 12th Royal Saxon Army Corps commanded by Prince Albert of Saxony had performed well in 1866, and bailed the Prussian Guard out at St. Privat. The Bavarian reserve cavalry brigade (cuirassiers) routed at the first shot in 1866 and to my knowledge never accomplished anything (not even a glorious failure) in either war. The remainder of the Bavarian Army showed itself to be more numerous than enthusiastic. I think he has it wrong.

The basic game also ignores flank attack as a melee advantage, but except for the cavalry, who had nothing better to do, we didn't encounter any melees, and the flank and rear attack bonuses are available as options.

One nit-picky complaint of my own - when routed all arms seem to travel 12". Horses, if nothing else, facilitate rapid departure. That's why in the western movies (and skirmish games) desperadoes leaving a bank robbery ride horses rather than going afoot.

Positives? Of the rules tested TDFG was quickest to learn, fastest (in spite of all the dice) to play, and moved quickly from beginning to end. It has rough edges and a few quirks, but most results are historically believable. The rules are clearly written, contain well illustrated examples, and, as some critics have observed, they are slick and colorful. Why not? If we didn't appreciate the artistic touch wouldn't we play with cardboard tiddly winks? Unlike the other two rule sets, these rules address only one war. This allows several pages<%-2>

of well written and illustrated scenarios and a complete order of battle for the two armies at the start of the war.

More Three Roads to Paris

Introduction
Review: They Died for Glory
Review: Grand Bataille Grand Victorie
Review: In the Age of Bismark and Napoleon III
General Issues

Letter: Clarification for They Died for Glory (#65)
Rebuttals to Three Roads to Paris (#66)