Home Forums Renaissance ECW Campaign: Second Battle Reply To: ECW Campaign: Second Battle

Guy Farrish



I’m going to have to go and have a look back through some actual battles rather than relying on memory but I have to say that those results look wrong to me.

Not your workings! Their reflection of actual battles.

The split in charging home and results once in combat look odd. The idea that early (up to Marston Moor at least?) Parliamentary cavalry wander up to the Royalists and have a 2/3 chance of winning seems wildly at variance with real experience.

Royalist pursuit – bit of a stereotype but mostly true – so if they are that unruly and gung ho, why so difficult to get to charge? On the other hand 72% chance of victory once in contact probably feels a little high – especially for mid war on, once the lower classes have been shown which end of a horse is which. (Outrageous hyperbole for effect only – but you know what I mean).

I know the Dutch/Swedish tactic split is  a nice way of giving a period ‘feel’ but I’m not sure how accurate it really is.

Dr Gavin Robinson is one person who has had a bee in their bonnet about this for some time eg

Dutch or Swedish or something else

He only reads English, so following some of the continental 30Years War accounts may give other slants for the period (Daniel Staberg I know has very different views on the ability of cavalry to break pike blocks for example).  I think Gustav Adolph’s rep has been massively ‘bigged up’ by some US military historians who seem to love charismatic heroes and I think this has probably coloured some of our ECW interpretations.

I really must play through a few whole battles to see if the rules give believable results as a whole, but at the moment I am having some doubts about them.

What do I want? Good question! A set of rules that allow relatively (for the majority, not all by any means) less enthusiastic Parliamentary horse at the beginning to have a really hard time against the Royalists, changing over the war to something more like parity of quality and possibly better Parliamentary control.

I am not convinced I want a division of tactical doctrine along a Royalist/Parliamentary split – I suspect both sides used different options depending on circumstances – but in big battle I am not sure how much I want to explore those nuances in complications of rules. I think I just want something that delivers a believable spread of outcomes for big(gish) battles.


Thanks for the reports and the stats.

Having printed the pdf off and read them more closely, part of me really wants to like these (tempo bidding remains a niggle!) but I’m not sure.