"ECW versus TYW" Topic

This question probably comes up from time to time but I am wondering how others imagine ECW armies fairing against a contemporary European opponent. I would suspect that the Europeans would have big advantage over the initial ECW forces in 1642. But what about a few years later. Imagine the Imperialist or Swedish forces at Lutzen versus the English armies at Marston Moor or Naseby. How would they stack up against each other? Or perhaps the French or Spanish forces at Rocroi versus the English armies that fought at Marston Moor or Naseby. Thanks for your thoughts.

Didn't the New Model Army fight Spain in Flanders and the Caribbean in the mid 1650s?

Battle of the Dunes 1658

link

The Battle of the Dunes falls outside the ECW and TYW timeline. Also, the English forces formed only a small part of the allied contingent. What part of the battle do you see as being relevant to the question above?

My impression is that the continental forces were more professionally than than their British counterparts and certainly more experienced than them by the time of the ECW so I imagine your assessment is right. By the close of the ECW I believe the NMA would give the Swedes a good run for there money.

Marcus Brutus

My response was directed to Rallynow who made a reference to the NMA in Flanders in the 1650s. I am sorry if my response antagonised you.

Regards

Your response didn't antagonize me Wargamorium. I was curious about what we might infer from the Battle of the Dunes. Even though the battle is a bit late, and the English involvement limited, it is still the best crossover we have.

Actually, although the Dunes fall outside the period of the ECW, I think it does present a good evaluation of the difference between the island forces and the mainland forces. The NMA units posted to France were veteran units, and some had a reputation for being disgruntled with their treatment. So it would be hard to justify them all being of the same quality. Which I think strongly reflects the nature of ECW armies. Which also reflects the nature of a lot of the armies at major battles on the continent.
And basically, weapons and tactics hadn't changed in the very few intervening years.

Turenne was said to be impressed with the professionalism shown in camp by the NMA pre-battle. So we can safely assume his expectations at the time were low.

Depending on which write up of the battle you read, the NMA fought manfully and pushed their opponents from the field unaided. Or, the English ships firing on the Spanish from the sea helped them hold back their opponents and allowed them to push their weakened opponents away.

Don't forget that ECW refugees were fighting on the Spanish side too. They seem to have been below acceptable quality due to the lack of funds to clothe and feed them.

All in all, I think the soldiers of the ECW armies from the end of the war could probably hold their own against most opponents. Personally, I am not so sure about their leaders.

The first thing to keep in mind is that neither ECW nor TYW armies were uniform in quality or ability, Wallenstein, Gustavus and Rupert might have the all the nice toys to play with while local commanders struggled along with much less impressive collections of men and equipment.
Secondly temporary conditions had much greater impact than most wargames rules allow for, at Lützen both armies had suffered extensively from the starvation warfare at Nürnberg and neither side had recovered to pre-Nürnberg levels of strength. (For example thousands of Swedish cavalry men did not fight at Lützen because they lacked horses.)

That said the general impression when you compare the performance of continental armies with that ECW armies is that the ECW armies remained inferior in overall ability to at least the very end of the 1640's, even at Marston Moor and Naseby the source material suggests that ECW armies were less able to inflict and absorb casualties than TYW armies were. One major reason for this was the lack of a professional and well equipped artillery, another was the lack of veteran officers, NCOs and rank-and-file so serve as the core of the regiments.

Comparing the armies of the ECW directly with the TYW armies of the same period is in many ways unfair. By 1645 the ECW was in its 3rd year, the Swedish army on the other hand had been on a war footing almost continuously since 1600. That's a lot of time in which to develop military skill and do reforms. A better comparison is to compare the ECW armies with the armies of the early TYW. So White Mountain, Wimpfen, Fleurus and Stadtlohn rather than Lutzen, Rocroi or Jankow.

In such a comparison the performance gap shrinks a lot or even disappears depending just on which armies you compare at which point in their evolution. ECW armies with their 1645 level of development would for example probably have had the advantage over the 1621 Swedes in the open field due to ECW cavalry being better while neither Swedish infantry nor artillery had evolved enough to make up for that shortage.

The only early TYW armies that were clearly superior to ECW armies were the Army of Flanders and Tilly's Leaugists. Despite some decline the Spanish were still a professional standing army with a lot of experience while Tilly was able to recruit a cadre of experienced officers who then got sufficient time to train their troops before the army went into battle. (And of course the Leaugists had the advantage of having one of the most experienced and talented battlefield commanders in Europe in command.)