And now for something completely different

This is sort of a what-if. It definitely in not an information request.

So, is there a reasonably accurate way to simulate through mathematical (or similar) modelling the outcome of historical battles? There are the perannual Lanchester equations (eg for those not familiar are: aimed fire dR/dt = -rB and area fire dR/dt = -rRB, where R and B are Red and Blue opponets with Blue being the converse of above) for pure attriton warfare. Dupuy in Numbers, Predictions, and War offered the QJM (Quantified Judgement Model) as an, in my opinion excretable, alternative.
There are a number of other models available too. Are any of these any good? Do MOLGs offer a viable alternative? Can we actually simulate war accurately with some model?
Opinions...(see TA, half a dozen beers and great questions )

 

Just because you spank your monkey does not mean it's been bad.

Old Polish proverb.

 

Area fire: Nothing succeeds like excess.

It is as effective as area night-time bombing on Germany during WII. Some nights the Brits were lucky to get their bombs within five miles of target.

If area fire were so effective against all target then Iwo Jima et al would have been a cakewalk.

This is not to say area fire does not have its place in the options for a commander, but this writer believes it to be over-used and a waste of logistics.