Certainly agree with you Jim, Clausewitz argued against prescriptive warfare rules.
War, being too complex. Brits marching in rows/columns during Revolutionary War comes to mind.

I frame Clausewitz thinking as a three legged stool. The 2nd leg of which you refer to Jim is the "play of chance and probability." The last leg however -“…last, cold reason—policy's last redoubt” refers to the element of reason or political objective. My narrow Pollyanna opinion - War is not an end in itself but a continuation of politics by other means. It SHOULD serve a rational political purpose. Political goals SHOULD serve as the ultimate control over the chaos of war. He seemed to stress the need of critical thinking and moreover the adaptability of the war commanders.

I remain deeply in your debt for your Berkshire quant/qualitative analysis and true wisdom, Jim!

Grateful Always,
PaulnKC