Weighing The Rules

THE early days of modern wargaming with miniatures saw rules divided into three periods: ancient, which included medieval; horse-and musket; and modern, which generally meant just WW2.
Such rules can provide enjoyable games, but usually do not give period flavour - armies in the War of the Spanish Succession fought very differently from those little more than 150 years later in the American Civil War.
One of the earliest, if not the earliest, sets of rules for the Franco-Prussian War was published in the 1974 book Practical Wargaming by Charlie Wesencraft.

Practical Wargaming … I have the 2009 reprint organised by John Curry

Wesencraft's rules use many of the same mechanisms as the book's Napoleonic rules. The interest lies, naturally enough, in the differences.
He identifies six factors as being significant for the 1870-71 conflict:
1. "The French … were armed with the most advanced infantry weapon yet produced, the Chassepot bolt-action rifle."
2. "They also had the Mitrailleuse machine-gun, which would have been a battle-winner if it had been used correctly, (ie) distributed among the infantry (instead of) treated as artillery."
3. "(French) regiments were known for their élan in attack which the Prussians never equalled."
4. "The Prussians were able to rely upon superior staff work, which meant that their troops had ammunition for their guns when required, that their railway timetables reduced delay of troop movements to a minimum - they were thus able to carry out an attacking type of war."
5. "(Prussian) artillery was far superior to the French in numbers, accuracy and range."
6. "(Prussian) individual troops were heavier than the French, giving them an advantage in the melee."
Here is how he deals with these factors.
1. French infantry throw a die per three points; Prussian infantry a die per four points. Since an ordinary infantryman is worth 1pt, a typical French infantry battalion of 16 figures would throw five dice, in each case needing a 3 or more for a kill. A typical Prussian infantry battalion of 20 figures would also throw five dice, again needing a 3 or more for a kill. In other respects the French Chassepot rifle and the Prussian Dreyse needle gun are treated as being the same, including having a maximum range of 12in.
2. French machineguns are given a range of 24in - half that of Prussian field artillery - but are otherwise "used exactly like artillery." However, it is not explained how they score hits. Is a 3 or more sufficient, as for Prussian guns firing shell (against targets in the open); a 4 or more, as for Prussian guns firing shot; or a 5 or more, as for French guns firing shot?
3. Morale rules are the same as for Wesencraft's Napoleonic rules (ignoring squares), except French troops never have to test for morale before a melee. Generally before a melee, Prussians ordered to charge the enemy or receiving such a charge have to test (the one exception is, as in the Napoleonic rules, when charging an enemy in the flank or rear).
4. The superior Prussian staff work has no effect on the rules. Perhaps it was supposed to be at least partly represented by the Prussians having larger forces on the table.
5. Prussian field artillery has a maximum range of 48in compared with 44in for French field artillery. As noted under point 2 above, Prussian guns have a much greater chance of scoring hits.
6. Prussians in a melee roll a die for every 3pts; French for every 4pts (the reverse of the infantry-firing rules).
There is much food for thought here, including two points I regard as rather controversial.
The first is the Chassepot and Dreyse having the same range. Depending on which authority you consult, the Chassepot's maximum sighted range was at least twice that of the Dreyse and probably closer to three times as far. It became something of a norm in battles for French rife-fire to keep Prussian infantry at bay until the Prussians brought up their artillery, which outranged French rifles.
The other controversial point is making Prussian infantry 25% more effective in a melee (this can also be expressed as making the French infantry 33.3% less effective than the Prussians - that's statistics for you; it depends on whether you are comparing three with four or four with three). Were Prussians really "heavier" than Frenchmen? I have not read of this elsewhere, although any reader of the Latin classic histories will know how Roman legionaries were fearful of the greater height of Germans and of Gauls.