I'm losing track of the forum discussions on casualties and how they are calculated.
I have just read a short article stating that if only Napoleon had Davout at Waterloo he would have won.
So, it occurred to that perhaps some of you clever chaps could run and re-run a large WON battle many times to get an average outcome; and then re-run it many times with just one factor changed - e.g. a general's stats. And then compare the two sets of results.
AGEOD battle results have always been a black box to me, I sometimes suspect that despite a hundred different variables the result is just one dice roll - win, draw or lose.
I really would like to know if 6-6-6 rather than 5-5-5 gave me a 10% 20% or 50% better chance.
Also, a supplementary question: concerning general's stats. Are they based on what was thought of them at the time - e.g. by colleagues and opponents; or are they based on after the event historical research about capabilities?