Gustav Vasa -- Phase 5: Planning orders

[Turk1964]

Thanks Pete That clarifies things a bit and I do like the look of your maps . So it Looks like Lord Turk will be besieged for a bit longer eh?

[stockwellpete]

Lord Anders update (he's the one behind bars!) . . .

[cavehobbit]

Body and head still together?

[batesmotel]

If the attacker has the option to besiege the castle without having to attack to get control of a province then it seems to me that the defender should always have the option to fight the battle as either and AFD or meeting engagement to pre-empt the siege. Since movement within the province is probably below the level of the campaign moves, this option should be resolved after the campaign moves are announced. At that point the attacker should be required to decide if he will launch an immediate assault and the defender should be required to decide whether he will sortie to preempt the siege. While the defending force for a castle may be less than 20 against an assault, a full strength force (20 if that much available) should be allowed if a sortie is made during the initial invasion. In the case that the defender sorties the battle should be fought as a field battle while if the defender doesn't sortie then there will be an assault if the attacker has so chosen or else the siege begins.

Right now the situation appears to be that if the attacker chooses not to asault, the defender of the castle is essentially trapped with no options and essentially no effect on the province. At that point it seems to me that we might as well ignore castles and just fight field battles.

Chris

[stockwellpete]

Yes, that makes sense as the rules stand, Chris.

The problem is that the garrisons of most castles were actually very, very small. Sometimes just a knight or two, a handful of men-at-arms and a few archers until reinforcements could arrive, so garrisons could not really take the field against much larger besieging armies. The bigger castles, Stockholm and Kalmar in this game, would have more sizeable garrisons but even then I doubt they would be able to take to the field to defeat their besiegers.

This is about garrisons in English and Welsh castles . . .

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=d8ba ... es&f=false

[hidde]

Lord Anders update (he's the one behind bars!) . . .

It seems Gustav has no patience with independently thinking underlings
If I may...

...a likely fate for the ruler that acts in a rash manner!
Actually a pic of the real Gustav if I understand the site correctly, not much information...

[stockwellpete]

Looks like he went to bed with the campaign rules and never woke up again!

[batesmotel]

I understand that normal garrisons should be quite small and castles should be strongl enough to be defensible with a very small garrison. In the camapign set up, however, there are full strength armies occupying the castles so these certainly could take the field and most likely would want to do so since passively accepting a siege immediately cedes control of the province and essentially gives the Swedes a free army which then can besiege the castle and control the province. Sounds like a rules problem to me.

Chris

Yes, that makes sense as the rules stand, Chris.

The problem is that the garrisons of most castles were actually very, very small. Sometimes just a knight or two, a handful of men-at-arms and a few archers until reinforcements could arrive, so garrisons could not really take the field against much larger besieging armies. The bigger castles, Stockholm and Kalmar in this game, would have more sizeable garrisons but even then I doubt they would be able to take to the field to defeat their besiegers.

This is about garrisons in English and Welsh castles . . .

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=d8ba ... es&f=false

[stockwellpete]

Sounds like a rules problem to me.

Yes, I think this is a difficult one to get right. I am not sure of the actual size of the various contingents that fought in these battles or how big the castle garrisons were. So what sort of scale is most appropriate here is fairly difficult to say at the moment. There are some clues about sieges to be found in the Wikipedia aricles about this conflict. Stockholm and Vasteras seem to have been under siege for months but Kalmar quickly surrendered. 'm not sure if any conclusions can be drawn from that though . . .


Gustav Vasa . . . decided to continue onwards to Västerås . . . arrived on April 29 and began preparing a siege. They were spotted by Slagheck's troops and attacked, but managed to force the attackers into retreat. No major victory was won and the Danish forces remained in the city for a month, making more, if failed, sorties against the besieging Swedish troops. On May 20 the Danish left the city, leaving only a small force in Västerås Castle and shipping away the other troops. The castle held out until January 30 1522, when attempts to aid the garrison by sea from Stockholm failed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... ter%C3%A5s

. . . the inhabitants quickly made contact with the commanders of the besieging Swedish forces, Arvid Västgöte and Peder Hansson. An agreement was made, that the burghers would leave the northern city gate open on the night before May 27. This was done, and the attack began. Before dawn, the city was in Swedish hands. Eight days later Kalmar Castle surrendered as well . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Kalmar

The Swedish forces had for a long time laid siege to Stockholm, which was the last Danish stronghold in Sweden. The city waited for reinforcement from Denmark, but none came . . . In June 1523 the negotiations were resumed. Stockholm's defenders were tired of the fighting, and their only demand was safe passage and that they were allowed to retain their equipment. This was accepted by Gustav Vasa and on the 17th of June the capitulation of the city and castle was officially signed. Gustav Vasa, who had been crowned King of Sweden on June 6, could march into the city on Midsummer's Eve.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Stockholm

[stockwellpete]

http://www.smb.nu/index.php/krig-1521-1 ... -1521-1523

Found this in Swedish - I don't know if it talks about castles and sieges at all. Has there been anything made available recently in English on this conflict?

[batesmotel]

Google translate works pretty well on the Swedish URL. Fewer details there than the wikipedia page.

Chris

[stockwellpete]

....

[cavehobbit]

Second battle of Westmanland: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/535 ... nland2.zip

I hope it will be no problems downloading and installing this time.

[stockwellpete]

Second battle of Westmanland: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/535 ... nland2.zip

I hope it will be no problems downloading and installing this time.

Yes, got it this time. It is still trying to block me but I just click the ignore box and it is OK.

[stockwellpete]

Result

pantherboy (Danish) 13/21 beat stockwellpete 21/20



All units on the battlefield are 26%+.

I have lost 6 units - 1xsoldier with c/bow, 1x militia with c/bow, 3x c/bows, 1x archers.

Steve says he lost 1x c/bow. Didrik Slagheap's unit also ran away off the battlefield, but he was not killed so his retinue will rise from the dead to fight again.

[cavehobbit]

Thanks, I will update the army lists.

[batesmotel]

So where are we at this point? Are we waiting to start the second campaign turn or is there still something unresolved from the first?

Chris

[cavehobbit]

Sorry for my silence. I've had some matters take care of, but yesterday I was rewriting some of the rules and will publish them later today. I've also updated the strat map and army lists. Will publish these later as well.

As all battles in the first turn has been played, both sides can start planning their orders for the second turn.

[cavehobbit]

Here's the updated army lists and map.

Army lists: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/535 ... end_p1.pdf

Map:

[cavehobbit]

As mentioned, I've rewritten the rules. The reason was to change things you found not working well. The main change is the size of the maps. For non-castle battles we will be using 20x30 maps, 18 turns. Castle maps are now 20x20 maps, 18 turns. Another major change is losses of BG's. In hope of having a better dynamic in the campaign any units routed at the end of a battle is considered lost. No changes has been made to the dissolve rule.
Minor changes are: named commanders are considered bonuses to the number of BG's an army may use in a battle; artillery bonuses to defending armies have mostly been completely removed, still the defending army will have some terrain advantages.

You may compare the old and the new version of the rules (rule sections I've rewritten have been marked red in the new version, it can be completely new rule sections or just minor changes of words):
Old version: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/535 ... _v_1_1.pdf
New version: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/535 ... _v_1_2.pdf

Some comments on the current situation.
* The army of Nerke are still in the province of Nerke, but as they moved away from Örebro castle they are not besieging the castle.
* The army of Westra Götaland was dissolved in the first phase, but some units survived and are now hiding in a remote area of the province together with their leader Ture Jönsson. They are waiting for the Danish to leave the province before they can take control of the province.
* In phase 2 any Danish BG's (including any in castles) can be issued orders.

Thanks everyone for your feedback. Special thanks to Pete for all the castle maps and for playtesting them. Many of these scenarios are very fun as they are, and I recommend all of you to try them out!