Slitherine

The diagram shows six(seven?) separate maneuverable units. They moved separately in smaller formations so could turn on a dime, for instance. The main weaknesses of the Swedish system were that one needed well-trained troops and lots of well-qualified NCOs to keep the component parts in formation. Due to Sweden's small population base, Gustavus was not able to completely fill his ranks with Swedes after Breitenfeld. Breitenfeld was his 'Crown jewel' which is why it is a shame it cannot be fought the way Gustavus did it.
The tercio, otoh, was a single rigid formation. 1500 men had to move together for it to maneuver. There was little ability to turn quickly for instance. Keeping formation was critical with the tercio.
While the tercio moved as a single mob, the Swedish salvo infantry moved by companies.
Warfare had not yet evolved into the long lines of musket-armed infantry that fought on battlefields of the 18th century.
And we have not even touched on why the Swedish cavalry cannot defeat the imperial cavalry. I suppose Pappenheim would be pleased with this in the game, but I am not.
Perhaps I sound overly critical, but this is actually my only problem with the game system. I particularly like the play in the ECW, for instance.

shawkhan2 wrote:Not really.
The Swedish cavalry cannot defeat the Imperial cavalry.
Everyone has to use infantry units to help out.

IMO and experience the Swedish right wing cavalry can defeat the Imperial cavalry facing them. I've certainly used some infantry to "bounce" a couple of Imperial cavalry units as they will fall back in front of the infantry, however, last time I gave it a go without doing this and still won the cavalry battle - which meant not distracting any of the Swedish infantry with chasing mounted.

W/o supporting the Saxons one cannot win this battle. Noone wins fighting historically, meaning that this battle fails as a simulation.

I have never supported the Saxons and have won the battle a number of times.

The Swedes are much slower than they were historically, while the early Imperial tercios race around the field, despite having a huge complicated rigid formation of some 1500 men,

This is the battle where the Imperial infantry moved obliquely across the battlefield at a fair pace to attack the Saxons and hoped to outflank the Swedish part of the protestant army - they were clearly able to undertake reasonable manoeuvre. What I would suggest did for them was that the Swedish second line was able to move around (a shorter distance due to "internal lines") to prevent the outflanking.

shawkhan2 wrote: Due to Sweden's small population base, Gustavus was not able to completely fill his ranks with Swedes after Breitenfeld.

He wasn't before that either.

shawkhan2 wrote:The diagram shows six(seven?) separate maneuverable units. They moved separately in smaller formations so could turn on a dime, for instance. The main weaknesses of the Swedish system were that one needed well-trained troops and lots of well-qualified NCOs to keep the component parts in formation. Due to Sweden's small population base, Gustavus was not able to completely fill his ranks with Swedes after Breitenfeld. Breitenfeld was his 'Crown jewel' which is why it is a shame it cannot be fought the way Gustavus did it.
The tercio, otoh, was a single rigid formation. 1500 men had to move together for it to maneuver. There was little ability to turn quickly for instance. Keeping formation was critical with the tercio.
While the tercio moved as a single mob, the Swedish salvo infantry moved by companies.
Warfare had not yet evolved into the long lines of musket-armed infantry that fought on battlefields of the 18th century.
And we have not even touched on why the Swedish cavalry cannot defeat the imperial cavalry. I suppose Pappenheim would be pleased with this in the game, but I am not.
Perhaps I sound overly critical, but this is actually my only problem with the game system. I particularly like the play in the ECW, for instance.

Please tell the Swiss, whom fought in "mega rigid mobs" of 2, 4 or even 6,000 man blocks that we are now defying the myth that they could rapidly maneuver across the battlefield.

Good point there, except for the fact that the Swiss used just pikes and did not have to worry about keeping blocks of musketmen, halberdiers and even musicians in their proper places.
Proper phalanxes of well-drilled troops can indeed move forward well. Turning is another matter. Moving at more than a slow walk would quickly get all the component parts out of alignment.
Trying to keep a rigid formation like the tercios while turning must have been a sight to see. One or two men stumbling could disorder the whole thing.
The simple idea that 1500 men in a rigid formation could turn and maneuver as well or better than a hundred defies belief for me.
I am surprised that Gustavus did not just stick with Tercios if they were really that good.
I can win Breitenfeld, but dealing with the Imperial cavalry is not pretty. If someone can actually defeat them just using cavalry and their support muskets, my hat is off to you and I fear to meet you on the battlefield.

Can the Swedish artillery move?
I can only change the facing.

Warlord wrote:Can the Swedish artillery move?
I can only change the facing.

It can't.

Had a really close attempt at this one today. The Imperialists beat me 60% to 52%. Got some flank charges in on the left once the Imperial cavalry was committed against the Saxons but ultimately ended up having the right flank develop too slowly to fully even the odds. The Saxons just sit there and let the Imperialist light cavalry pick at them

Still I had some success using the salvo foot's firepower to disrupt/fragment and then hammer home with charges on the Imperialist left flank. But I think I took too long and had a few too many losses otherwise I might just have been able to push the enemy hard enough to make it a narrow victory. But, alas they got the upper hand and the Swedes were defeated.

Winning Breitenfeld in the manner that Gustavus did it has been a pet project of mine. Last night i tried it again and won by my best margin so far, 64% to 32%.
On the right flank I sent the commanded shot into the woods, shifted more cms to the right from the center and fell back with my cavalry to the bottom corner of the woods.
I shifted 6 salvo infantry to the right and started to build
an oblique line from the artillery to the edge of the map on the left with the rest.
I allowed the Saxons to be obliterated w/o support as happened historically.
When Pappenheim's boys advanced on the Swedish right they walked right into a firestorm.
A couple rounds of fire and some of them became disrupted, then I sent in the Hakkas and my veteran horse.
I have found that using regular horse can be frustrating against the Kurraisers.
I broke four Imperial cavalry then as the rest fell back, I continued to advance slowly and pour fire into them, even turning two artillery to augment the effects. By the time the Imperial infantry began its advance, there were two cavalry left on the Imperial left, one fragmented and one disrupted.
I turned the regular horse loose and swept the field clear on the right, destroying the Imperial artillery and advancing to complete Gustavus's right-angled line as the Tercios raced across the field.
By turn ten, the Saxon massacre was over and the right wing Imperial cavalry began to trickle towards my oblique line.
Fire alone could deal with them.
Tercios in this game are veritable juggernauts, not the primarily defensive formations they were historically. As the Swedish right wing overlapped the remaining Imperial tercios, I would concentrate fire from three or more salvo infantry and the commanded muskets on one until it became disrupted. The late tercios can be dealt with by melee but the Early tercios are to be feared. I did have one Salvo infantry broken by the dreaded Early tercios as they had charged,
As the remaining 7 Imperial tercios became surrounded, multiple cavalry attacks on their rear begun to break them and the effect escalated as each tercio in turn caused disruption in adjacent ones.
This became the first time I have played Breitenfeld to a triumph approximating that of the Great Swede.
Usually it is a nail-biting affair where I hope the Imperials break before I do. Outsmarting the computer in this game is hard.

That's pretty much how I've pulled off a couple of Breitenfeld victories, and many more defeats.

Much seems to depend on how long the Saxons take to break. Both times I won the Saxons still had a few functioning foot when my batallions engaged the tercios, the Imperial horse on the Swedish right having been eventually defeated. Most times the Saxons are much worse than useless. The Imperialist horse charges the Saxon tercios head on and the Saxons drop their pikes, throw their hands in the air and run for the hills

The worst Saxon performance I've seen was all the Saxon right flank horse routed by a couple of Imperialist horse in two moves. The Imperialists routed their first opponents in one move then the rest of the Saxons either routed in sympathy or disrupted/fragmented. One Imperialist then hit a fragmented Saxon unit while pursuing, routed that instantly and the remaining Saxon horse fled in sympathy.

It wouldn't be so bad but the Saxons count as losses for the player. If the Saxons collapse early all the Imperialists then have to do is rout a few Swedes to get 40% with 25% difference and game over. In the historical battle the defeat of the Saxons didn't seem to bother the Swedes much at all....

TimW wrote:It wouldn't be so bad but the Saxons count as losses for the player. If the Saxons collapse early all the Imperialists then have to do is rout a few Swedes to get 40% with 25% difference and game over. In the historical battle the defeat of the Saxons didn't seem to bother the Swedes much at all....

I am sure it did. The genius of Gustavus is that he managed to win the battle despite that. However, the Swedish "first" breakpoint is 50% in this scenario, not 40%.