The Battle of Helsingborg, 10th March 1710

On a freezing cold day in March 1710 the Swedish army gulped down a shot of vodka for breakfast and set out on a march towards Helsingborg. Their march brought them down on the flank of the defending Danish army, which was forced to redeploy, leaving their guns behind. The progress of the Swedish march and the Danish redeployment can be seen in the picture below (Swedes in blue, Danes in red):


The Terrain of the battlefield was largely flat with marshy areas, streams criss-crossing it and a small number of low hills. You can check out a full description of the terrain on the Helsingborg page on this blog (see the toolbar at the top of the page. I plan to complete the full translation and post it there at a later date). For other images of the battlefield, you can view older maps on the Terra Scaniae website. These are really useful for understanding the terrain. We based our terrain for our refight on the map above and the maps on the Terra Scaniae website.

The Battle
Historically, the battle saw the Swedes advance on the Danish flank. The Danes had to redeploy to face the Swedes. The Swedish Centre and Right wing advanced steadily, but their Left wing seems to have had some difficulties, so a portion of the Right wing cavalry was redeployed to the Left wing and soon the Danes were being driven back. At the end of the battle, the Danes were in flight and the Swedes held the field.

So, how did our game go? Click on the pictures that follow for larger images.

The view from the Swedish lines:


The view from the Danish lines:


Overall view of the set-up:
We began the game with both armies deployed and ready to fight rather than modelling the approach march, largely because of lack of time, but also because we just wanted to get to the action as fast as we could.


Turns 1 and 2:
Both sides advance.



Turn 3:
I decided to try redeploying part of the Swedish right flank to their left flank, just to see if the rules would enable me to do this.


Turn 4:
The redeployment continues, while the Danish left flank cavalry have now crossed the stream and are ready to fall on my cavalry.


Turn 5:
The Danish cavalry learn the error of their ways, as the Swedish cavalry drive them off. Meanwhile on the Swedish left flank the Danish cavalry are looking decidedly stronger.


Turn 6:
On the Swedish left flank their cavalry are really getting the worst of it, but they are just holding on, while part of their force attempts a swift march around the flank. On their right, the victorious Swedish cavalry is proving hard to control, but the loss of the Danish first line of cavalry has caused that command to fail a command morale test. They are not happy.


Turn 7:
The failed command test causes the Danish left flank to begin disintegrating, while most of the Swedish cavalry comes under control again, with only one troop disappearing off into the distance in pursuit of the fleeing Danes. In the centre, both sides have started some desultory fire resulting in one Swedish battalion being driven back slightly, but no really effective fire. On the Swedish left flank, the cavalry is still struggling, but the flank march is now in place (and in view in this shot), ready to fall on the Danes just as soon as they have reordered their ranks.


Turn 8:
The Danish left flank is almost non-existant now. The Swedish right flank is close to routing and the infantry in the centre are now firing at close range, with the Swedish infantry getting the worst of it.


Turn 9:
The Swedish flank march falls on the Danes and drives off a number of them, while the rest of the cavalry on that flank has fallen back to regroup. The fighting in the centre still continues in a rather unenthusiastic manner.


Turn 10:
Things start to improve for the Swedes on the left flank as Danish units rout, but casualties have been fairly heavy and a Swedish cavalry troop has routed. Those that were fighting before are content to hold their ground and recover before charging again. In the centre a Swedish battalion has routed, but all is not lost yet.


Turn 11:
The Swedish flank march pays off. By falling on the enemy flank they are able to cause enough casualties to break the Danish right flank. With their left flank fled and Swedish cavalry swarming all around the Danish infantry surrender.


Conclusions
We had a good fun game using Polemos:GNW. I am warming more to these rules as we use them more, but the learning curve is steep and I can see how others might be put off. We managed to get a few rules wrong over the course of this game. I would like to refight it again and try to get the rules right, but even with the mistakes, the battle was enjoyable. In total, it took us about eight hours of playing time over three evenings, which was not too bad really, considering that we were busily relearning the rules as we went.

I have added some notes about terrain and orders of battle below, as I felt these comments needed more detail and sections of their own. Hopefully you can use the information here and on the Helsingborg page to refight the battle yourselves.

Terrain
We played the game on a 6x4 foot table with the terrain as closely modelled on the historical terrain as possible, within the limitations of the terrain tiles, etc, etc. We also set up the armies at the recommended 600mm apart so that we could get into the action quickly. Other rules might need to adjust that distance.

One area where we had to compromise was the stream through the deep gully on the Swedish right flank (closest to the camera in all the shots). Modelling that would have entailed raising the entire rest of the table, so we just agreed where the ravine went to and made allowances for that in our game play.

The streams are far too wide on the table, but we made some allowances for that in how we administered the terrain rules, once we saw how it was affecting the game. In a future refight, I would count the streams as rough going/area terrain so that they cause a level of shaken while you are in it but you lose that shaken level immediately upon exiting. What we found was that the Swedish infantry could not mirror the moves of their historical counterparts if we counted the streams as streams for terrain type.

The villages may have had too great an effect as well. I am not sure they hindered the real battle that much, so perhaps we should have just treated them as decorative features.

So, I suggest the following terrain rules for this battle using the Polemos rules:
Boggy areas, villages/farms and streams count as Rough Ground (does not hinder movement but disorders troops).
The Wall counts as a linear obstacle with an Obstacle Value of 1 (Reduces movement and disorders troops).
Roads are treated normally, even though they were barely more than muddy tracks at the time of the battle.

Orders of Battle
Another problem we had with the game was fitting in the troops into the space occupied by their historical counterparts. There were simply too many troops for the space available. Given that we modelled the terrain to the ground scale of the rules, the stands should have fitted in. Analysis of the orders of battle suggests to me that Nick, who wrote Polemos:GNW, has used the ration strengths of both sides to calculate the order of battle. This is fairly sensible because we know what they were for both sides. However, the Danish staff history records the field strength of the Danish army too so it is easy to work out what they actually fielded. The Swedish army is more problematic. On 17th March 1710 the Swedes reported that they had 4308 cavalrymen and that they had lost 1187 in the battle, which suggests that they had c.5500 cavalry at the battle. No records survive of the infantry losses. If we assume a similar level of loss for the infantry though, then we get a total army strength of around 14000 men versus a Danish strength of 14000 men. So, the armies are similar in numbers. How do their various arms compare though?

Danish Army:
Cavalry - c.1750 men
Dragoons - c.2250 men
Infantry - c.9600 men
Artillery - c.400 men (note that most of the Danish artillery did not see use in this battle because of the redeployment)

Swedish Army:
Cavalry - c. 5496 men
Infantry - c.8000 men
Artillery - c.400 men

So, the Swedish cavalry outnumbers the Danes while the Danes have more infantry. That should make the game interesting. So, where does this leave us in terms of numbers? For the Swedish army, I propose the following numbers and order of battle based on these calculations.

Swedish Army

Cavalry	Ration Strength	Probable Strength	Polemos Stands
Enkedronningens	976	770	3
Vestgöta	679	536	2
Vestgöta Tremänninger	632	499	2
Uplands Fyr- og Femmänninger	787	621	2
Skaanes Tre- og Femmänninger	678	535	2
Smalands	986	777	3
Østgöta	1000	788	3
Livregiment til hest	986	777	3
Adelsfane	250	197	1

Infantry	Ration Strength	Probable Strength	Polemos Stands
Elfsborgs	1216	959	2
Uplands Fyr- og Femmänninger	930	733	1
Sachsiske	700	552	1
Malmø Garnison	600	473	1
Uplands	1068	842	2
Østgöta	1165	919	2
Kalmar	1019	803	2
Vestmanlands	1141	900	2
Kronobergs	930	733	1
Jønkøpings	734	579	1
Sødermanlands	1167	920	2

I also suggest giving them two light guns and two field guns.

For the Danish army I propose the following order of battle:
Danish Army

Cavalry	Ration Strength	Field Strength	Polemos Stands
Livgarden til Hest	400	300	1
1st Sjællandske	452	250	1
3rd Sjællandske	392	200	1
1st Fynske	455	360	1
2nd Fynske	456	300	1
1st Jyske	456	330	1

Dragoons	Ration Strength	Field Strength	Polemos Stands
Livregimentet	992	700	3
Ungarske (Bulow)	994	660	3
Sjællandske Landdragonregiment	1200	900	3

Infantry	Ration Strength	Field Strength	Polemos Stands
Grenaderkorpset	1200	826	2
Garden til Fods	1344	925	2
Dronningens Livregiment	1365	940	2
Prins Christians	1408	969	2
Jyske	1352	931	2
Fynske	1335	919	2
Marineregimentet	1366	940	2
Prinsen af Hessens	1300	895	2
Leepels	1216	837	2
Vestsjællandske	1612	1110	2
Østsjællandske	1500	1032	2
Laalandske Bataillon	800	551	1

The Danish army could have one stand of light guns too.

Hopefully this should permit you to refight this battle. If you do, I hope you will post reports and let me know how it went. Any suggestions for ways to improve the details would be appreciated, as would any additional information on the battle. In the meantime, I shall continue trying to improve my html so that my tables take up less space and I shall also finish the translation of the staff history of this battle, when I can find a bit more time.