The Campaign in Poland and an assessment.

Poland launched its campaign against the Swedish army, in the spring of 1655. Near Poznan, the advance guards of each army probed the others cavalry screen while the armies marched. As the armies maneuvered, detachments were busy seizing river crossing points, capturing prisoners, or shadowing the enemy, moving from one campsite to the next. The cat and mouse game that developed during the first month presented Sweden with the upper hand.

While cavalry patrols skirmished, an encamped army regularly sent foragers to collect supplies. One such episode, Swedish foragers were surprised by Polish cavalry, but managing to save its collected supplies, paying a heavy cost doing so. Moving to a region offering better forage, the Polish commander tasked the rear guard to delay delaying the enemy for day, allowing the main body to gain a day’s march. Unfortunately, the rear guard were not up to the task and the Polish were forced to give battle.

Battle

Poland selected a defensive position, using a hamlet and woods to protect its flanks. Despite Poland’s cavalry advantage, it was the Swedish infantry that breached the Polish centre, capturing the hamlet further weakened Poland’s position. In the end, the Polish army was shattered, losing 43% if its force, not counting the loss to the rear guard, the previous evening. This was a grim end of the campaign’s second month for the commonwealth. 

Scrambling to regain the initiative, Poland resorted to guerilla activity to gain time and rebuild its forces. Nonetheless, many of these actions were squelched by Swedish cavalry during their frequent patrols. One such incident, Swedish patrols intercepted a column of Polish reinforcements, enroute to join the main army. The action was brief, escorts were killed sending the conscripts fleeing for their lives.

Following a humiliating three months, Poland sought a truce and open negotiations for peace talks, ending the spring campaign of 1655.

 

 

An assessment:

This developed better than expected. Completing each scenario, the campaign developed a narrative, combining the day-to-day routine of an army in the field, eventually leading to an open battle. 

Few orders needed amending and when made, this was for clarity of certain points, such as order five, stipulating the departure of supply wagons, order ten, defining the protection an entrenched position or ‘fort’ and order twelve, the addition of peasant militia (7Hd) as reinforcements. 

The completion of each order generated a score for the winner and loser, the higher scorer was allowed access other troop types for its next assignment. The Swedes profited well by the advantage in the second month of the campaign. 

Three months of campaigning, the difference in scores became too great, presenting the likelihood of a Polish-Lithuanian capitulation, Sweden +6, Poland – 6. Historically, this did happen would be known as the Swedish Deluge. 

 

Features requiring further thought:

Alternating between attacker and defender created a nice balance to the campaign. The tests were done in the sequence listed, but in future a card draw and discard system, would make the campaign less predictable. 

At the moment, the difference of win/loss points, earned one side an extra selection of troops. Further options could include selecting the start time as both sides begin their day at dawn. A points advantage of points could have that side arrive on the game board a full turn ahead of the opposition. Still thinking on this. 

Players were under no obligation to have equal size armies, as long as the command had 6 and 12 elements. Most conflicts were fought between unequal sized forces, gaining a reward for a smaller force defeating a larger one would be interesting. Perhaps, extra points could be earned this way, but this needs some thought.