smaller german states (ratings)

A section devoted to questions and answers for this period.
ciaphas
Private
Private
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:10 pm

smaller german states (ratings)

Post by ciaphas » Mon Jul 16, 2012 8:59 pm

Hi, at present i am painting up a mix bag of troops to suppliment larger forces, so far i have painted up swabians and wurzburgers but have no idea how to rate this fairly. I dont think they were that "good" overall but i am finding it difficult to really nail this down, as they as far as i can tell never fought battles on there own.

further to this i have a bavarian force which has 2 battalion regiments is there a drop off in performance between 1st and 2nd battalions?

any help would be greatly appreciated.

jon
User avatar
Friedrich August I.
General of the Army
General of the Army
Posts: 2135
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 4:23 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by Friedrich August I. » Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:20 pm

ciaphas wrote:Hi, at present i am painting up a mix bag of troops to suppliment larger forces, so far i have painted up swabians and wurzburgers but have no idea how to rate this fairly. I dont think they were that "good" overall but i am finding it difficult to really nail this down, as they as far as i can tell never fought battles on there own.

further to this i have a bavarian force which has 2 battalion regiments is there a drop off in performance between 1st and 2nd battalions?

any help would be greatly appreciated.

jon
Jon,

cant tell for all german states but in case of the policies of that time each prince or prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire kept his troops under arms. But if they are not used by themselves they "sold" them to fight for other countries.
So I would say that the Wuerzburgers and the Swabians should be termed as at least Drilled. Even 2nd Battalions are drilled as they were exchanged after some times against the 1st Battalion who was in the field.

Hope that helps

Günter
„Macht Euch Euren Dregg alleene“

"Sort your filth out by yourself!" The King of Saxony Friedrich August III., at his abdication 1918, referred to the quarrels in the parliament and the squabbling within the provisional government.
User avatar
obriendavid
General of the Army
General of the Army
Posts: 2559
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by obriendavid » Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:51 pm

ciaphas wrote:Hi, at present i am painting up a mix bag of troops to suppliment larger forces, so far i have painted up swabians and wurzburgers but have no idea how to rate this fairly. I dont think they were that "good" overall but i am finding it difficult to really nail this down, as they as far as i can tell never fought battles on there own.
jon
Personally if I was sent off to fight for someone else while my monarch got paid for it I doubt I would be putting myself in the way of too much danger, therefore I would rate them as Raw. no matter how much training they had.
Cheers
Dave
Churchill
General
General
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:49 pm

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by Churchill » Mon Jul 16, 2012 11:24 pm

Ray.
Last edited by Churchill on Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
wdrenth
Sergeant Major of the Army
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 9:57 am
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by wdrenth » Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:55 am

Hello all,

The popular view of German states hiring out their soldiers is one of trading soldiers as cannon fodder for gold. However, this view is far too simplistic. Peter Wilson, know for this TYW book, wrote another book, German Armies: War and German Society, 1648-1806, that covers the subject pretty well. He also wrote an important paper on the German ''soldier trade'' during the 17th and 18th centuries, in which he points out there was more at stake than gold for the various princes when 'selling' their soldiers (The German 'Soldier Trade' of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries: A Reassessment; in: The International History Review Vol. 18, No. 4 (Nov., 1996), pp. 757-792).

@Dave, the Royal Scots originate from 1633 and not 1625. Though only 8 years on 370 years of history, there 8 years contain the popular myth that the regiment originated from Scots in Swedish service, eventually finding themselves in French service. I might also argue that the regiment was raised in 1633 as a mercenary regiment for French service, and not as part of any British/Scots army. A lot more Scots regiments were raised for service in France in the 1630s and 1640s, and I think that this particular regiment was just lucky enough to survive.

But that is of course nitpicking from my side, and I have to admit that those myths make military history sometimes a bit more palatable, and it gives lineage addicts like me something to debunk 8)
User avatar
maciek
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 11:53 am
Location: Poland

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by maciek » Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:59 am

Don't forget that they were professional soldiers. The fought for "king's penny" not for they homeland.
The most widely known example of soldiers "hired to someone else" are Swiss. No one would rate them as "raw".
In the WSS Hessen Cassel also turned they army into industry. Regiments were formed and trained for hire. It's also worth mentioning, the elector issued special instruction forbading enlistement by force. His soldiers were intended to be genuine volunteers, soldiers by profession.

In the WSS soldiers of German states fought not worser than average.
Maciek

http://zealandbayonets.blogspot.com/
wargaming in 10mm
User avatar
obriendavid
General of the Army
General of the Army
Posts: 2559
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by obriendavid » Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:45 am

Churchill wrote: Dave,[/color] I better start off with I'm not looking for a arguement with you, I've had enough of that already on this forum recently. :evil:
Ray.
Ray, I'm not looking for an arguement with anyone :shock: , as I stated at the start of my answer, this was purely MY personal view and was only related to the minor German states. Raw means that the troops have had basic training but virtually no expereince, again in my view this could relate to many mainstream units which have a good historical background but been in garrison for a few years.
Just my thoughts so feel free to disguard them if you want an army full of drilled, elite and Guard units.
Cheers
Dave
Churchill
General
General
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:49 pm

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by Churchill » Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:48 am

Ray.
Last edited by Churchill on Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
obriendavid
General of the Army
General of the Army
Posts: 2559
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by obriendavid » Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:28 am

Even just using a regiments passed history to rate it is not always the best guide. If you look at the Royal Scots at Waterloo most gamers would at least rate them as drilled or vetern plus adding elite to their rating but the unit was actually the 5th battalion and basically called the 'boys battalion' as the average was only about 18, they had been drilled but had no military experience so to my thinking they should be rated as raw. And it's not as if anyone who knows me could accuse me of being pro-french :D
Cheers
Dave
wdrenth
Sergeant Major of the Army
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 9:57 am
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by wdrenth » Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:03 pm

Churchill wrote:Hi wdrenth,
It was I and not Dave who used the Scots regiment as a example.
Hello Ray,
My mistake, I meant to comment on your comment of course! Some time ago I posted some thoughts on the early history of the Royal Scots: http://britisharmylineages.blogspot.nl/ ... ughts.html.
cheers,
Wienand
User avatar
BP
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:09 pm
Location: Motherwell

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by BP » Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:39 pm

obriendavid wrote:Even just using a regiments passed history to rate it is not always the best guide. If you look at the Royal Scots at Waterloo most gamers would at least rate them as drilled or vetern plus adding elite to their rating but the unit was actually the 5th battalion and basically called the 'boys battalion' as the average was only about 18, they had been drilled but had no military experience so to my thinking they should be rated as raw. And it's not as if anyone who knows me could accuse me of being pro-french :D
Cheers
Dave
Raw/Elite surely Dave? :) Elite is more about what the troops believe in and of themselves, and they are still the Royal Scots. Officers and NCO's would drum that into them.

Bill
light blue touchpaper and run away :lol:
User avatar
obriendavid
General of the Army
General of the Army
Posts: 2559
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by obriendavid » Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:29 pm

BP wrote: Elite surely Dave? :) Elite is more about what the troops believe in and of themselves, and they are still the Royal Scots. Officers and NCO's would drum that into them.

Bill
light blue touchpaper and run away :lol:
Elite is one of the options we have given to all British troops in the Crimean supplement because basically the Brits thought they were much better 'in their eyes' than any 'jonny foreigner'
Cheers
Dave
ciaphas
Private
Private
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:10 pm

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by ciaphas » Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:52 pm

thanks to all there is a lot to look at there, still relatively new to the period and these rules, but enjoying the journey, most fun i have had wargaming in years. didnt expect the same level of ... as naopoleonics which was rife with it.

but everyones input has been appreciated. can i ask a further series of questions do they retain the pike and rank fire or do they switch over?

jon
User avatar
obriendavid
General of the Army
General of the Army
Posts: 2559
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by obriendavid » Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:26 pm

ciaphas wrote: everyones input has been appreciated. can i ask a further series of questions do they retain the pike and rank fire or do they switch over?
jon
Now that is opening another whole can of worms which has upset some people in the past and I suppose it depends which theatre and timescale you are talking about but feel free to ask away.
Cheers
Dave
ciaphas
Private
Private
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:10 pm

Re: smaller german states (ratings)

Post by ciaphas » Wed Jul 18, 2012 2:13 am

ok i'll bite, i assume from that that there is a cut off point where the pike was common and theafter fell away, i understand that even with nations that disgarded the pike such as UP there wer units so equiped as late as '18. so from that assumption rank to platoon fire would be the same?

cheers again
jon
Post Reply