Can Our Kriegsspiel Players Beat Napoleon III?

Paul LaFontaine, 1 November 2026

A report of a scenario on the Battle of Magenta

Napoleon III was an ambitious ruler determined to restore France’s preeminence in continental Europe. He entered a war against Austria in 1859 with four principal objectives: weaken Austrian influence in Italy, establish a friendly Italian state under Piedmontese leadership, strengthen France’s position in Europe, and secure territorial compensation for France. 

Kriegsspiel players Bonvi, Jacks, and The Antagonist joined forces as the Austrian command in order to fight against the historical plan of Napoleon III at the Battle of Magenta. As all the players were on the same side, and I, as the umpire, moved the French forces as Napoleon did historically. We had the chance to see if the players could develop an alternative plan that would have defeated the French, as their Austrian forebears had failed to do so.

Historical battle of Magenta

Austrian commander General Gyulay invaded Piedmont on 29 April, hoping to defeat the Piedmontese before French reinforcements arrived. His cautious advance failed to achieve this objective, allowing the French and Piedmontese armies to concentrate. Following French victories at Montebello and Palestro, Napoleon III shifted his army northward, intending to outflank the Austrian positions and advance toward Milan. On 3 June, French Marshal MacMahon crossed the Ticino River, threatening the Austrian right flank, while Napoleon III prepared to advance from the west. The opposing armies converged near Magenta on 4 June, with the Austrians attempting to prevent the separated French forces from concentrating.

Early Moves

most images can click to enlarge

In our scenario, we disguised the battle by using the Battle Decisions Kriegsspiel map. Kleindorf is the town that represents Magenta (1), and the river to the west, the Ticino (2). We will cover the historical movements on the map we use for the game so you can more easily follow the comparison. 

On the morning of 4 June, MacMahon marches toward Magenta (3) while Napoleon’s troops approach the canal from the west (4). Neither French commander has a reliable picture of the other’s progress. The Austrians occupy the central position between the two forces (5). 

Midday

By 14:00, the French Imperial Guard conducts canal crossings. The Austrians have destroyed or obstructed some crossings, one remains usable. The French established a bridgehead at 1400. Austrian infantry and artillery resist from higher ground and fortified farm buildings. Gyulay commits a division against the French bridgehead and directs forces to threaten the French right flank. MacMahon has not yet launched his full attack.

Austrian counterattacks threaten the Guard who are compressed into a small bridgehead. The Austrian command has an opportunity to defeat this French force before substantial reinforcements arrive. MacMahon, meanwhile, has paused to concentrate his divisions for a coordinated assault.

Afternoon

The battle reaches its crisis. MacMahon’s attack, begun around 15:30, developed against the Austrian northern positions (1). Around 16:30, the Austrians attack the French to their west, driving them back toward the river and threatening to isolate the bridgehead (2). The French are in serious danger.

This is another of a series of Kriegsspiel AARs very similar to the events in our Wargame HQ at the Origins Game Fair. You can find the original article here.

The Austrian defense begins to give way. MacMahon’s troops press toward Magenta while French reinforcements expand the western bridgehead. The Austrians withdraw toward the town and its railway defenses. By approximately 18:30, Austrian formations begin a fighting withdrawal. The French have not yet fully secured Magenta, but the operational balance has shifted decisively.

MacMahon launches his final assault on Magenta, supported by substantial artillery fire. Fighting develops around the railway, streets, and buildings. Austrian resistance is increasingly fragmented.

Evening

Magenta is captured (1). The French secure the town after severe fighting. Austrian formations withdraw eastward (2). The two French attacking forces have effectively joined, ending the Austrian opportunity to defeat them separately. The Austrian army withdraws. Magenta is a French victory, opening the road to Milan. The Austrian army has not been destroyed, however, and will fight again later in June at Solferino.

The Scenario

0900

As was the historical case, the French began crossing the river in the west (1), and the heavier force under McMahon began marching south toward the battle area (2), already having crossed the river. Instead of concentrating around Kleindorf (Magenta), the Austrians broke into two sections, and one commanded by Bonvi began marching north toward Weisen (3), which put it in a different position than it was historically. Jacks commanded the force at Kleindort which he ordered south (4) and Antagonist commanded the southern force (5). 

1200

Because Bonvi placed his force on the northern flank, it created a situation where McMahon was forced to split his attacking force in two (1), which reduced the power of the strike to the south (2). This allowed the Austrians around Kleindorf time to bring up their units to defend that flank (3). The force under Napoleon III attacks strongly from the river (4). 

1300

By 1300, the advantage of having forces on the flank for the French was lost. Bonvi presses his attack in the north (1). The Antagonist holds at Kleindorf/Magenta (2) while Jacks tries to hold on in the south (3). 

1500

The superior numbers of the Austrian force and the French loss of terrain advantage forced the French backward. Napoleon III, realizing that the attack from the north, which was his opportunity to defeat the Austrians, had been foiled, realized this battle had not been successful and he began to withdraw. Our players had defeated Napoleon III!

Umpire Analysis

I decided to experiment with all the players on one side in this scenario because we only had three players. I believe that you need at least two players to make a Kriegsspiel interesting, and putting three players on two would have had a solo player on one side. I put all three on one side as the Austrian command team. To do so, I had to ensure that the French played realistically.

When you have human players on both sides, you can have reveal the historical battle before play because nobody is sure what the other side is going to do when there are human players as an opponent. However, when all the players are on one side, you can’t realistically reveal the scenario, because then the umpire-controlled forces can be predicted by a quick study of the historical battle.

To run all the players on one side you have to do your homework and understand what the historical battle plan was and the decisions that the historical commander made in order to understand and reflect his intent when playing. If you know the intent of the historical commander, you can also know what they thought victory would look like. In this case, Napoleon had planned for McMahon to flank the Austrians. If McMahon’s advance was frustrated, Napoleon would have felt that his plan was defeated. If McMahon had been successful in the attack, Napoleon would have persisted. Understanding this allows for proceeding players with realistic French behavior.

The game being used is Battle Decisions: Kriegsspiel from Catastrophe Games.

The approach worked. Players enjoyed the scenario and felt like they had a chance to understand the Battle of Magenta more closely. The challenge, of course, is the difference between having the scenario obscured or having it be revealed. In order to do this, you have to have the maps, the forces, and the channels set up ahead of time. So the number of players has to be known ahead of time. The only weakness of the approach is you can’t switch at the last minute to having all the players on one side. It has to be determined at least 24 hours in advance.

Looking at the turn cycle more closely, I realized that when using Discord, there’s an impulse to move from giving the report to quickly taking orders. Upon giving the report, some players will be ready to give orders immediately. Taking orders very quickly will accelerate the turn cycles and the game starts to lose its rhythm.

Upon giving the report, it’s important for the umpire to insert, “I will return for orders after you’ve had a moment to think about your report,” because this signals to the player that they should consider the situation before giving orders. This also gives the umpire time to give all the reports, check the timer, reset it, and begin the next turn.

I had an older version of the map in the Tabletop Simulator module, but I had an updated version in Discord and on my physical table. This was a dumb error that is inexcusable. I need to expunge all old maps from Tabletop Simulator and my files so that the maps match up. It was a slight distraction. The players were good-humored about it, but this kind of stuff can be avoided in the future. 

Short of the small notes for continued improvement, this was another successful Kriegsspiel scenario, and the players did a nice job reversing history and defeating their historical adversary. We’ll keep putting these scenarios on the table, and we hope that we’ll see you out there.

If you’d like to join one of Kriegsspiels you can pop into this part of our forum for more
and you can also find out about the International Krieggspiel Society here

Thank you for visiting the Regiment of Strategy Gaming and riding with The Armchair Dragoons.
Rather than list a bunch of social media links, the easiest thing to do is to check out our LinkTree, which connects you to all of our various locales around the web.
You can also support The Armchair Dragoons through our Patreon, and find us at a variety of conventions and other events.
Feel free to talk back to us either in our discussion forum, or in the comments below.