Mirco-positions: their setup and development

Based on my comments in another thread, I thought I would share some additional information on my position in G8, the restored Hanseatic League. My intention is to give start-up details of this micro-position and, as time goes on, my thoughts on how it is developing as a position.

Of course, I don't want this to just be about me (my ego ain't that big) so hopefully other micro-position players might add theirs in

So, the restored Hanseatic League
Start-up August 1709
Overall population 222,000 (Hamburg-170,000; Bremen-30,000; Lubeck-22,000)
Overall income £603.000 (Tax income £103,000; Trade income £500,000)
Economy: 6
Recruit base: 440

Each city has its own mayor and at the game start there isn't a League head as such. I am playing the Mayor of Hamburg.

The militaries of all three cities are quite in-keeping with the historical ones (there are quite a few sources on the three cities forces for the early to mid 18th Century) at least in terms of numbers. The one thing lacking was none of the cities had a navy in-game while Hamburg and Bremen did historically had small "Admiralities" but you could argue the balance was it meant the in-game position had more practical numbers of fortress cannon (if you like, the way I see it the historical numbers in the admiralities were used to man in-game fortress cannon)

Each city is separate in regards roads and canals. The cities also have quite a few cathedrals and churches while Hamburg has an Opera House (I hadn't fully appreciated that Hamburg was a centre for German opera so need to research this further).

Initial plans have been to diversify my industries and trade beyond "General Goods", along with small military developments (along historical lines). The original plan had been to simply rely on the domestic recruit base but as that is a bit lower than expected (plus later research revealed how all three cities used a lot of "foreign" labour esp in their armies) I have been making a one-off search for additional recruits to invest in new industries etc,

Early developments have been my position becoming "Patrician" of the League, establishment of some new trades (including trade missions) and industries, opening some academies and investing in roads, doctors, etc.

This is interesting - I didn't realise such small positions were available.

It will certainly be a challenge.

At least you have decent trade income and hopefully a large starting cash/recruit balance to build from. I guess the biggest challenge will be getting more recruits. 440/year isn't enough to raise even 1 unit of night soil men.

A few wonderings ...

I don't quite follow "each city is separate in regards roads and canals". Do you mean like 3 separate countries so you can improve roads for Hamburg and Bremen separately, or that they are separate as in you have to build a single road between each city rather than a network that would belong to Lauenburg?

Another obvious question ... the Hanseatic League was famed for its sea routes, but how can you have a fleet of trading ships to support your trade if you only have enough annual recruits for 2L? The loss of a single (game) liner would be 50% of your trade.

Bremen, Hamburg and Lubeck are shown as Imperial Free Cities on the map so does that mean you have the freedom to set your own tax rates and sign treaties or are you obliged to follow the rates set by the nearest country to your towns. What happens if you find you are dragged into a war by the actions of others? Hamburg and Bremen are strategic cities controlling rivers so fairly obvious targets for blockades.

Would it not be more efficient to find a neighbour who had (for example) a medical academy, and then send a few recruits to be trained at that academy rather than using 10% of your annual trade income to open an academy?

It seems to me that the skill of playing a micro position is as much about finding alternative ways to do things and enlisting the help of others rather than thinking in the same way as you would be used to in a larger position. I can see the appeal of trying to make the game rules work on a different scale. Hopefully Richard will make allowances for the obvious distortions. For example if you build canals do you need 0.1 dredgers/city to maintain them or will you need 1 dredger/city or is a compromise that you simply send 1 dredger on patrol that covers the entire country (even though your cities are separate?)

Overall that would seem to be the second hardest aspect (after recruits) - covering the fixed costs of buildings/activities when those fixed costs are scaled to be reasonable for normal sized positions.

I wish you well with the position, but I do wonder how much progress you will be able to make year on year to sustain your interest once the initial research has been done. I think I would find it frustrating waiting for each income round to see how much my trade had expanded and whether my investment in new products had yielded the results I hoped for.

I think I should say the League isn't a standard position. On the Agema website Richard used to (still does?) give a list of positions that are potentially available but had a line saying if you want a position not on the list to talk to him. In this case, I went to Richard with four potential North German positions (each with its own advantages/disadvantages) to see which he thought were most viable in-game. I will be honest the League was my preferred one (I even suggested it could even be a single city-Hamburg). Of the three that weren't the League, Richard felt one wasn't really viable long-term and the other two were more viable than the League...however (and I am sure Richard won't mind me saying this) he also felt the League could be an interesting experiment (could such a position work?). I have always wondered if a micro-position of this size could work and was willing to give it a try to see. From my point of view (and perhaps Richard's?) this is an experiment...and even if the position doesn't work, I won't have failed (nor will it have been a failure), it will have shown whether such a position is viable.

Each of the cities are like seperate countries in regards roads and canals...or if you have large colonies, like the difference between building roads and canals in the home country and the colonies. So yes you could just build them in one or two cities.

As Imperial Cities, all three can set their own tax rates, etc. The only difference between them and, say, Hanover or Bavaria is size. They are not like some of the other smaller territories that have an overlord of this or that prince, the only person above the cities is the Emperor himself. No fear of being dragged into a war of a neighbour.

Recruits is an issue and, truth be told, the number is roughly half what I was expecting. However I have sought them elsewhere (have been gifted a small but useful number already and a couple of players have said they think they can help out in the next month or so). I have also opened a series of orphanages to boost my domestic recruit base. However I see this all as short-term, I literally need a one-off boost of recruits from beyond the League to give me a base to raise a few large-ish units and allow me to establish a number of new industries. I don't expect myself to be seeking recruits from abroad in future game years and in 3-4 game years I expect to be able to reduce the number of orphanages and really only need the natural number of recruits.
Also, historically at this time a lot of the manpower for the three cities came from neighbouring states so I am just playing within the historical model

On costs, luckily the League is relatively wealthy for its size when you compare it to one of the smaller main positions, say Scotland, so developing its infrastructure is cheaper. Using roads and canals as the best example. For Scotland, investing in a level of roads is equal to about 8% of the annual income of the position at start; for the League, investing in a level of roads in all three cities is 5% of annual income. When it comes to canals for Scotland it is 80% and for the League 12%. I have also had quite a sizeable boost in income after only five months in the game (started in the August turn, G8 has just had the December turn with the fresh year of income).
Now of course, yes, it will be cheaper to see if I can get specialists trained elsewhere however whether that is beneficial in the longer run is open to debate. Afterall if I want to undertake research to gain new skills or technologies, I will need an academy. As I've learnt in other games, other nations can't just given you (say) the technology of improved loading tackle-either you need to get recruits trained in that skill or if another nation gives you the technology (without training anyone in its use) you still need an academy to research that technology for a year before you can use it. So in the end, as I can afford it, I might as well open appropriate academies-even a medical one as I will at some stage want to do medical research. Bear in mind the position's relative wealth for its size and relatively low development costs and standing costs...in some ways I can better afford to open an academy in the League in G8 than I could as Scotland at the start of G10.

I plan to play the position as much as a character as well as a nation so little chance of me being bored or frustrated. Banquets with speeches, diplomacy, will all be a big part of the position. I've found full details for uniforms for all the various cities militaries, plenty of work there to be done...along with names of quite a few of the commanders of the military units and yes I do plan to give each unit a named commander. I hadn't realised Hamburg was the centre of German Opera at the time either, so lots of potential for (low/no cost) development there. Also, looking at the growth of income in the first few months, even if that halves next year, I will find within three or four years I am generating enough income that my problem will be spending it, not waiting for next year.
I also have a couple of reserve projects for if/when I would get bored if resources were tight-there is one remaining former Hanseatic member that is also an Imperial City (so not part of another player's position), can that be persuaded to join the League?: Can I recreate a new version of the wider old League, some sort of trading fellowship or free trade zone?; I have stumbled across a quasi-colony of Hamburg, can it be re-established? To be honest, the number of ideas for development I have (regardless of resources available) mean the biggest danger is trying to do too much.

Jason2 wrote:I think I should say the League isn't a standard position. On the Agema website Richard used to (still does?) give a list of positions that are potentially available but had a line saying if you want a position not on the list to talk to him. In this case, I went to Richard with four potential North German positions (each with its own advantages/disadvantages) to see which he thought were most viable in-game. I will be honest the League was my preferred one (I even suggested it could even be a single city-Hamburg). Of the three that weren't the League, Richard felt one wasn't really viable long-term and the other two were more viable than the League...however (and I am sure Richard won't mind me saying this) he also felt the League could be an interesting experiment (could such a position work?). I have always wondered if a micro-position of this size could work and was willing to give it a try to see. From my point of view (and perhaps Richard's?) this is an experiment...and even if the position doesn't work, I won't have failed (nor will it have been a failure), it will have shown whether such a position is viable.

I can see the attraction and yes, as an experiment, it could form a template for similar positions in the future.

I can't remember which game it was, but I was the Asante when it folded (very annoying as I was enjoying it) and I asked Richard to see if he could find an Asante-type position in another game, but in a different part of Africa. That is how Rozwi became a position - created for me and I played it for a few years before G7 started. Still have a soft spot for quirky African positions because of the freedom they give you to experiment. That said I think the way Rozwi is being played in G10 is better than I did - much more entertaining.

Jason2 wrote:On costs, luckily the League is relatively wealthy for its size when you compare it to one of the smaller main positions, say Scotland, so developing its infrastructure is cheaper. Using roads and canals as the best example. For Scotland, investing in a level of roads is equal to about 8% of the annual income of the position at start; for the League, investing in a level of roads in all three cities is 5% of annual income. When it comes to canals for Scotland it is 80% and for the League 12%. I have also had quite a sizeable boost in income after only five months in the game (started in the August turn, G8 has just had the December turn with the fresh year of income).
Now of course, yes, it will be cheaper to see if I can get specialists trained elsewhere however whether that is beneficial in the longer run is open to debate. Afterall if I want to undertake research to gain new skills or technologies, I will need an academy. As I've learnt in other games, other nations can't just given you (say) the technology of improved loading tackle-either you need to get recruits trained in that skill or if another nation gives you the technology (without training anyone in its use) you still need an academy to research that technology for a year before you can use it. So in the end, as I can afford it, I might as well open appropriate academies-even a medical one as I will at some stage want to do medical research. Bear in mind the position's relative wealth for its size and relatively low development costs and standing costs...in some ways I can better afford to open an academy in the League in G8 than I could as Scotland at the start of G10.

I can see what you are driving at, although Scotland is perhaps not the best comparative. Scotland has always been a bit odd in that it has a lot of relatively unproductive land and hills which make infrastructure prohibitively expensive; and a low population (tax base) to pay for it. It takes a lot of work to get it to the level of a small Italian state which has a similar population, but is much more wealthy and has lower infrastructure costs.

As primarily a trading position I think the League should work. You are possibly the best nation-building player in the game, so as long as you are able to stay out of trouble with your neighbours and avoid war it should work out well over a 4-5 year period.

It should be more stable than playing a Trading Company (like HWIC) where the temptation is always to smuggling/piracy, or a pirate position or a disguised pirate position. So long as you stick to trade rather than politics/spying you shouldn't fall into the HWIC trap.

Jason2 wrote:
I plan to play the position as much as a character as well as a nation so little chance of me being bored or frustrated. Banquets with speeches, diplomacy, will all be a big part of the position. I've found full details for uniforms for all the various cities militaries, plenty of work there to be done...along with names of quite a few of the commanders of the military units and yes I do plan to give each unit a named commander. I hadn't realised Hamburg was the centre of German Opera at the time either, so lots of potential for (low/no cost) development there. Also, looking at the growth of income in the first few months, even if that halves next year, I will find within three or four years I am generating enough income that my problem will be spending it, not waiting for next year.
I also have a couple of reserve projects for if/when I would get bored if resources were tight-there is one remaining former Hanseatic member that is also an Imperial City (so not part of another player's position), can that be persuaded to join the League?: Can I recreate a new version of the wider old League, some sort of trading fellowship or free trade zone?; I have stumbled across a quasi-colony of Hamburg, can it be re-established? To be honest, the number of ideas for development I have (regardless of resources available) mean the biggest danger is trying to do too much.

You might be able to try other 'free cities', even those outside the historical League. I'm not in G8, but some Italian cities were also granted 'free' status, so if they are normally attached to a larger position (and that larger position is inactive) then you may be able to get them to join the league. I think historically Austria made Fiume a free port in the 1700s. Might even try some of the enclaves in North Africa? Then you could start up a trade by sea between Northern Germany and Italy. If you are feeling rich then you could try and buy a Venetian island and develop that, so over time your network expands and with it your recruit base. I don't see why you would have to restrict yourself to the old Hanseatic towns when there are new trade centres to find.

There is always the danger of trying to do too much, especially in times like these, but I know how much you enjoy your speeches/banquets and roleplaying your characters so perhaps this kind of position suits both your playing style and interests. You have the good bits of the game (for you), without having to be bothered with the bits you don't enjoy.

I did look at Swashbuckler once and the rules were a bit too restrictive so I didn't try it. Would I try a micro-position? Still unsure. As you know I tend to be more interested in writing letters than in creating scenarios for the newspaper month after month. I don't know where the Apollo Brotherhood (G10) get their inspiration, but I couldn't come up with things like that every month, even though they have had rather a lot of help from the blunders made by the players!

Ref the city forces raised by the Hansa and other North German and Polish free cities such as Danzig.

My feeling is that the best way to represent these in Glori would be to:

- Small standing City guard of say a couple of companies and a few fortress cannon who double up as the police, security, customs service (Like Terry Pratchett's Night Watch) ready to slam gates in face of invaders & fight fire, floods and plagues of Dragons etc

- Have Burgher forces (Like the Regiments) trained and equiped and then put in "Cantonment" Danzig for instance had 5 Regiments of 12 companies each (historical total 6,000 in glori 9,000 recruits).

- This means you give the locals some miltary training (probably a company at a time) and then use them for other industrial type things (but probably not long trading trips to the East if you want them ready to defend city) but most of the time they are doing own jobs.

- Fixed agreement with local Nobles that in exchange for a retainer they will provide a Merc force if called upon.

Might be fun to have regiments based on trade Guilds so members of the Hansa double up as military commanders.

Oddly such part time troops (basic training plus meeting up after Church on Sunday for a bit of drill and shooting practice) could prove very effective fighting to defend on cities. The Swedes lead by Gustavus Adolphus was stopped dead by Danzig and the local Vienna Militia inc the Rifle club played a full part in defence of their city in the Ottoman siege.

Clearly your character will have to dig out his Uniform to go to Church on Sunday and hold regimental dinners and shotting matches to prove superior nature of own guild!

Thanks for both your comments

The Italian/North African idea is an interesting one, think though I will treat it as a longer-term goal As this is a bit of an experiment, need to prove the basics work before I get ambitious (walk before run sort of thing) I am however looking to establish a series of "outposts" by gradually re-establishing the old "Kontors" of the League (much more than a trading mission, more of an enclave in another's territory).

The military ideas are much in line with the game initial setup and my own thoughts and plans I suspect players will soon notice more than a few nods and winks to Discworld appearing in the League There is quite a lot of info out there on the burgher forces of the cities, Hamburg in particular, and the Guild idea is definitely one to look into.

The historic standing militaries are reflected quite well in game. Both Lubeck and Bremen had roughly the same sized force, a small infantry "regiment" (battalion-sized) and some fortress cannon. Hamburg was the military "superpower" of the three cities with a large-ish infantry regiment (roughly three Glory battalions in strength, with quite a large proportion of grenadiers). There was also a squadron of Dragoons in the city (had quite a long history, became the "Red Lancers of Hamburg" in the Napoleonic Wars, continued when Hamburg got its independence back and-I think-ended up as the basis of a mounted regiment in the German army up until 1918). The bit I have struggled to get information on is the city's "artillery company" (about 200 strong in 1700). It appears to be separate to the city's force of gunners for the cannon on the city walls but the records seem to contradict each other. Some make out it was the same as the wall gunners, others that it was more like a Glory field artillery battery, or gunners for battalion guns...or a force that did all three.
I do have a bit of room for military expansion if I want, using the historical standing forces. Hamburg had a second infantry regiment in the 1690s, which could be re-raised or recreated (maybe as a hired unit), while Bremen had a "rifle company" that could also be reformed. There were efforts in Lubeck to raise a dragoon unit like Hamburg's but there came to nothing (though there seems to have been a small troop of armed "mounted couriers").

And G8 reached us...so time for a quick update on the revived Hanseatic League. Generally all continues to go well. Some recruits have been obtained and further sources have come to light. This ties in with further research into all three cities and their use of manpower from surrounding lands at this time. I have also tried having a recruiting post in one of the cities, as an experiment. I must admit I was a little doubtful whether as if it would work but it does seem to be. I might be tempted to open further ones in other League cities. I am now reasonably confident that in future years I can rely on "domestic" recruits rather than looking for more from other players (which was always my intention).

One advantage of being back in Aberdeenshire for a bit has meant it's been easier to contact the Hanseatic experts up here. As a result I have been reading through a number of papers on Hanseatic trade with Orkney, Shetland, Faeroe, Greenland and Iceland. I had known there was Hanseatic trade to these islands but hadn't fully appreciated how large it was even as the League ended (and how important it remained for the ex-League cities after the end of the League).
As an aside, I hadn't realised how important the Icelandic Sulphur industry was, not just for Iceland but for the North European nations the sulphur was exported to (perhaps something for Danish players to look into?).

I did find an obscure reference to the Hamburg Artillery Company in around 1800, which described it as having 95 men and 315 cannon. That would possibly suggest it was a company of gunners responsible for fortress cannon-type guns? However at the same time this reference seems to suggest a much smaller sized company than most (which do seem to suggest a force nearer 200 even around 1800).

Doing a bit of research, and looking again at the G8 map of Germany, I appear to have located a second independent city that was part of the old League but not part of the renewed League. i knew about Goslar but hadn't noticed Nordhausen (an enclave in Hesse-Kassel). Both are quite a way into Germany and away from the current revived League Nordhausen isn't shown on the Germany map in my 1st edition "Alas", which explains why I hadn't considered it before. I will "reach out" to both cities but I think I will leave it to the game mechanics to see if they want to join the renewed League (both are small, historical populations seem to be below 10K so might have limited benefits in adding two small distant exclaves to the main League?).

Well, that's the news from the Hanseatic League, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are...above average

Jason2 wrote:I did find an obscure reference to the Hamburg Artillery Company in around 1800, which described it as having 95 men and 315 cannon. That would possibly suggest it was a company of gunners responsible for fortress cannon-type guns? However at the same time this reference seems to suggest a much smaller sized company than most (which do seem to suggest a force nearer 200 even around 1800).

Are you sure about the Hamburg Artillery Company?

I just wonder because there seems to be more cannon than men to fire them? Can't remember what the minimum ratio was, but I think it was closer to 4 or 6 men per cannon. I'm sure others can correct me if this was not the case. So either the Hamburg Artillery Company comprised far more guns than it needed or the artillerymen were trained to fire either field/fortress guns depending on need? Perhaps firing the FC as a salute when the ruler entered the city, and the FA at other times?

Or perhaps at the time the number of guns was an honour thing (Hamburg had to have at least as many as their neighbours) and nobody asked about the crews available?

I was originally using an English translation of an 1800s document in German, Papa, and my first reaction was the translation was wrong. However the translation had a scan of the original document with it. My German is terrible but looking at that, it did seem it was saying 95 men and 315 guns. Of course, always an outside chance the original document is wrong! However am back in Scotland for a bit so managed to contact an ex-colleague whose husband is German and is a professional translator of historical documents (and knows the historical quirks of German). I got him to have a look at the relevant section and confirmed the translation was correct.

This made me go back and check over some information I had found about the late 17th Century Hamburg military and in particular the guns and gunners defending the city, and those figures often showed more guns than gunners. I had previously noticed the same applied to Scotland, Bremen, Lubeck and Brunswick in the late 17th and early 18th Century in regards garrison artillery. So a small number of "professional" gunners who did the honour salutes, looked after the guns in peacetime and were reinforced (in regards garrison artillery) in wartime by a quickly assembled force to allow them to properly man all the guns. so in line with your idea.

Part of the problem is the records that survive (apparently most of the relevant ones were lost in WW2) don't make it clear what the role of the "artillery company" was (as I said before) and sometimes it seems different records are using the same term for two different units. Hamburg (like Bremen and Lubeck...and maybe other German city states?) had two militaries. They have a small professional military (the standing army) and they have a militia force. Maybe not so different to many other nations but for the city states the role of the militia (always a citizen-only force) exists partly to offset the professional military (which always seem to be at least half non-citizen) in case the professionals try a coup or anything, the militia can be deployed against them. In the case of Hamburg, this militia's role does include manning the fortifications, including the cannon on them. All well and good but at the same time in Hamburg there is this body of garrison gunners, who are fulltime professionals, but under the command of the militia and not associated with the professional military in any way. Then, just to confuse things, some of the records associate the "artillery company" with the militia and manning garrison cannon while others with the professional military force and being in the field. Is it one body? Is it two? Is it sloppy record keeping? Maybe we'll never know but it does make the research for the position a bit more interesting

Another interesting historical quirk I've noticed about the League and the three cities I'm playing, is they never seem to have "warships".

Now in the early 18th Century both Hamburg and Bremen most definitely had frigates but these were intended to protect their merchant ships and in particular when sailing in convoys, so are called "convoy ships" (not frigates or anything that sounds warlike). Their role was not to fight enemies but protect convoys of merchants. I'm not sure about Lubeck, I have found a couple of references that seem to suggest it had convoy ship(s?) at this time but no luck on names, details etc.

I've also found that in the heyday of the League the various cities tended not to have warships either...well they did but they called them "Peace Ships" as their purpose was not to fight but to keep the peace on the seas.

Who said spin is new

You know me well enough by now Jason2 to appreciate that researching a position is a large part of the fun, which is one reason why I enjoy posts like this.

There will be an explanation somewhere, if not of the precise numbers then the function. It could well be that the artillery company was just part of the militia (or in game terms a kind of town watch?)

Or (and I am simply offering ideas without anything to back them up), perhaps high status merchants contributed a certain number of militia and paid their upkeep from their own profits? They could be ordinarily used to guard their warehouses/ships, but called up for general duty to defend the town if attacked? So following this logic the 'professional' military could perhaps have been paid directly by the government, with the 'citizen' part paid privately. Researching into individual merchant houses in Hamburg might be one lead? Or if the records are all destroyed, it is reasonable to look at the pattern in other Hanseatic towns to see if something similar happened. Another avenue might be to look at the art produced - as in the Dutch Republic, merchants were very keen to get their picture painted as one of the leading merchants of their particular town. They would seek to be surrounded (in the picture) with what was important to them, so if they had just paid for some soldiers there could have either been soldiers in the picture with them or some symbolism that indicated this.

On ships what you have written doesn't surprise me. In G10 I wanted to build a Papal Navy, but didn't think it appropriate to have 'warships' or 'lineships' or something similar, but 'peace ships' I do like! It is worth remembering, though, that in 1700 (and before) the term 'frigate' was applied to much smaller ships (a bit like 'Lineship' was applied to what are HFrg in the game), so some 'Frigates' had 20 guns (or fewer if guns were removed for various reasons, though not below 18 in the Royal Navy as that was a more junior command). The average by 1750 was 28-32 guns, not the 40 assumed in LGDR rules. 40-gun Frg were considered as lineships 1650-1670, so as Lineships became bigger, number of guns tended to be reduced on Frigates. The number of crew cannot be relied upon either because ships of the period only carried enough crew to fire the guns on one side of the ship at once. It wouldn't surprise me if Hamburg 'frigates' were large enough in size to deter pirates, but in practice had many guns removed (and crew reduced accordingly), with the space created used to carry more valuable cargo or coin needed by the convoy for trade.

The ability to get really caught up in the research is something we agree on I think it is why I find the smaller positions more interesting, you can get caught up in the "Hamburg Artillery Company" (or the "Bremen Rifle Company"). There is some artwork of the Hamburg standing forces but not the militia element-while in 1700 the militia is ok-ish, as the century went on it became a bit of a mob and maybe not worthy of anyone's art Now, what makes the artworks from the latter 1700s add to the confusion is they show parades of the standing forces, all well and good, but while they don't seem to include any artillery units, they do include "Constables"...and at some times in the early 1700s the garrison gunners are also called "Constables"...

I'm glad you found the "Peace Ships" of interest, it did intrigue me. As to Hamburg, much of what you said holds true. However things are complicated by the city's reuse of the same name for new ships, which sometimes makes the records hard to follow. for example, over roughly 60 years there were four Hamburg "frigates" (each roughly of the same size) all called "Wapen von Hamburg"...add in at the same time they often had at least one other "convoy ship" with "Hamburg" in its name...

If I could add a little to the conversation about numbers of canon, it is quite likely the artillery armoury contained many more cannon than could be used at any one time. I would expect a number of different pieces and a number of canon would be used as replacements for losses. Certain pieces would be ship replacements as well. I have been trying to find information on the lifespan of an average artillery piece of the period, but information is light. I have come up with a figure of 100 to 200 rounds as an average although the barrel could split at any time of course.
I am not well read on artillery doctrine of this period in terms of numbers of artillerymen needed, but I imagine in a time of war there would be a call up of some kind to fill the ranks. The skilled part would have been setting up, moving and firing the piece so dogsbody work could have been done by any press ganged individual perhaps.
With respect to Hamburg fortress, I cannot find much specific information, although in 1869 Grauerort Fortress was built as an artillery fort to defend the port of Hamburg so this place and location may be worth researching further.

Jason2 wrote:The ability to get really caught up in the research is something we agree on I think it is why I find the smaller positions more interesting, you can get caught up in the "Hamburg Artillery Company" (or the "Bremen Rifle Company"). There is some artwork of the Hamburg standing forces but not the militia element-while in 1700 the militia is ok-ish, as the century went on it became a bit of a mob and maybe not worthy of anyone's art Now, what makes the artworks from the latter 1700s add to the confusion is they show parades of the standing forces, all well and good, but while they don't seem to include any artillery units, they do include "Constables"...and at some times in the early 1700s the garrison gunners are also called "Constables"...

I know it might sound like a long shot, but have you thought about writing to the current Mayor of Hamburg? He might be able to put you on to a local society that has done most of the legwork?

Failing that it sounds like you are free to make the Hamburg Artillery company to your own specifications.

On research (and this is something you will probably know anyway, but perhaps others haven't found it yet), when I was trying to work out how to structure the Scottish army, I came across the Royal Company of Archers (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Company_of_Archers for pictures). The idea of them being a secret Jacobite sporting society which became a 5th column of over a thousand men particularly appealed, but what is putting me off is the horrible uniform. There is a picture of the 1704 uniform in the wikipedia article and you will see what I mean. Of all the uniforms I've seen so far, that has to get top marks for the most embarrassing and unappealing 'uniform' of the period. I would even go as far to say (as a Jacobite) that the Hanoverians undoubtedly did a good thing when they substituted a more normal uniform. If you do decide to recreate the Hamburg Artillery company then that could be your opportunity to design an even worse uniform (if that is possible)?

Jason2 wrote:I'm glad you found the "Peace Ships" of interest, it did intrigue me. As to Hamburg, much of what you said holds true. However things are complicated by the city's reuse of the same name for new ships, which sometimes makes the records hard to follow. for example, over roughly 60 years there were four Hamburg "frigates" (each roughly of the same size) all called "Wapen von Hamburg"...add in at the same time they often had at least one other "convoy ship" with "Hamburg" in its name...

Re-using the name of ships was common to all navies, as was renaming them (a practice I have never been that comfortable with except in the case of ships captured from the enemy). HMS Victory first appeared in 1560 with 42-guns under another name, but was renamed 'Victory' after the Spanish Armada. The 2nd incarnation was in 1620, with the same number of guns, though this ship was broken up and rebuilt with twice as many guns in 1682 so should perhaps count as a 3rd incarnation. The 4th HMS Victory was originally built as Royal James in 1675, but then in typically Williamite fashion rebuilt/renamed as 'Victory' in 1695 after the death of Queen Mary. This didn't save it as it was accidentally burnt 25 years later (no Jacobites were implicated, but ...?) The 5th HMS Victory was a prestigious 100-gun SoL built 1737, but was wrecked in 1744 - it was a bad ship, whose construction was marred by political infighting and design changes during construction - she failed sea trials several times so it was a bit of a relief when she sank. The famous HMS Victory (Nelson's flagship) took 6 years to build, being launched in 1765 so by Trafalgar was probably nearing the end of her useful service. There was some controversy of the use of the name 'Victory' given the fate of the 5th HMS Victory, but she proved her worth, partly because the heavier 42pdrs were replaced with 32pdrs (shortage of 42pdrs) which actually improved her sailing qualities. Upgunning ships (or overloading them with guns) has long been the primary reason ships flounder, but politicians never listen. She was due to be decommissioned in 1796, but shortage of ships meant she was refitted (and packed with a few more guns). She was nearly captured at Trafalgar, and after this surplus guns were removed, but in reality her days were over, temporarily being a prison hulk. There were no more HMS Victories after this due to public campaigns against her being broken up.

There are plenty of other examples, but without dockyard records it may be that the various Hamburg frigates were partial rebuilds given their similar size or ships purchased from foreign navies and deployed as convoy escorts? It is the great thing about wooden ships that they can be repurposed and timbers from older ships included in the rebuilds. There is documentary evidence that timbers from the 4th HMS Victory were used in the 5th HMS Victory, but I doubt they would risk reusing them in the 6th. If you are going to develop a shipbuilding industry, you might like to only reuse timbers from ships that had a good sailing record, selling those with an unfortunate past to Russian shipbuilders or if you are doing it in G10, to the French Corsairs?

Vauban wrote:If I could add a little to the conversation about numbers of canon, it is quite likely the artillery armoury contained many more cannon than could be used at any one time. I would expect a number of different pieces and a number of canon would be used as replacements for losses. Certain pieces would be ship replacements as well. I have been trying to find information on the lifespan of an average artillery piece of the period, but information is light. I have come up with a figure of 100 to 200 rounds as an average although the barrel could split at any time of course.
I am not well read on artillery doctrine of this period in terms of numbers of artillerymen needed, but I imagine in a time of war there would be a call up of some kind to fill the ranks. The skilled part would have been setting up, moving and firing the piece so dogsbody work could have been done by any press ganged individual perhaps.
With respect to Hamburg fortress, I cannot find much specific information, although in 1869 Grauerort Fortress was built as an artillery fort to defend the port of Hamburg so this place and location may be worth researching further.

Thanks Vauban, that's useful I'm doing some digging round on the various fortifications of Hamburg (along with Bremen and Lubeck) so various fortresses will keep popping up in-game

Papa Clement wrote:I know it might sound like a long shot, but have you thought about writing to the current Mayor of Hamburg?  He might be able to put you on to a local society that has done most of the legwork?

Failing that it sounds like you are free to make the Hamburg Artillery company to your own specifications.

On research (and this is something you will probably know anyway, but perhaps others haven't found it yet), when I was trying to work out how to structure the Scottish army, I came across the Royal Company of Archers (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Company_of_Archers for pictures).  The idea of them being a secret Jacobite sporting society which became a 5th column of over a thousand men particularly appealed, but what is putting me off is the horrible uniform.  There is a picture of the 1704 uniform in the wikipedia article and you will see what I mean.  Of all the uniforms I've seen so far, that has to get top marks for the most embarrassing and unappealing 'uniform' of the period.  I would even go as far to say (as a Jacobite) that the Hanoverians undoubtedly did a good thing when they substituted a more normal uniform.  If you do decide to recreate the Hamburg Artillery company then that could be your opportunity to design an even worse uniform (if that is possible)?

Unfortunately was in touch with various colleagues in Hamburg from taking on this position and it's from them that I've got a lot of the information as well as the explanation as to why the records aren't there any more.

The Company of Archers do have a rather amusing uniform do they not? Met a few of their modern members when working in Edinburgh a couple of years back, nice bunch of blokes. In G6 and G10, they acted/acting as a loyal government unit and as a ceremonial palace company. As to the Hamburg Artillery Company, I am most probably going to use either Hannover or Brunswick as a model and base the uniform on one of their artillery (with a strong focus on red to reflect the League).  I have decided to go for a standard uniform for garrison artillery units across the League (based on the historic one of Bremen's garrison gunners)

Papa Clement wrote:
There are plenty of other examples, but without dockyard records it may be that the various Hamburg frigates were partial rebuilds given their similar size or ships purchased from foreign navies and deployed as convoy escorts?  It is the great thing about wooden ships that they can be repurposed and timbers from older ships included in the rebuilds.  There is documentary evidence that timbers from the 4th HMS Victory were used in the 5th HMS Victory, but I doubt they would risk reusing them in the 6th.  If you are going to develop a shipbuilding industry, you might like to only reuse timbers from ships that had a good sailing record, selling those with an unfortunate past to Russian shipbuilders or if you are doing it in G10, to the French Corsairs?

Luckily we still have the records of the building of the various "Wapen Von Hamburgs", including in some cases details of expenditure on wood bought, and also records of what happened to some of the old ones. Same applies to the other convoy ships.   Hamburg, along with Bremen and Lubeck (two of the Darien Scheme's original fleet were from Lubeck), had a strong heritage of shipbuilding and each city built their convoy ships herself.  If I'm reusing anyones timbers it will be from good Hanseatic-built ships, none of your foreign rubbish!

On The matter of crewing Guns, It could be the case that you have a number of "Skilled " Gunners who are supported by unskilled labourers in wartime, so you have a small core of officers & artisans you maintain the guns & in times of need a draft of men is used to haul the guns into position & lay them on target under the supervision of the trained gunners. In the period in question Gunners were in some countries still civilians who were hired as & when required.

With gun crews from memory I think it's between 6-8 men per piece depending on size of the gun.

On The matter of crewing Guns, It could be the case that you have a number of "Skilled " Gunners who are supported by unskilled labourers in wartime, so you have a small core of officers & artisans you maintain the guns & in times of need a draft of men is used to haul the guns into position & lay them on target under the supervision of the trained gunners. In the period in question Gunners were in some countries still civilians who were hired as & when required.

With gun crews from memory I think it's between 6-8 men per piece depending on size of the gun.

Ref German Artillery I was reading about the Landsknechts and for a proposed train of 130 pieces including 100 field guns (in 1566 most would have been small not Napoleonic style 12 pounders!) it was planned to employ:

891 Carters, 5 Geshirrmeister (officers), 124 Buchsenmeister (Master Gunners), 63 Ammunition carriers, 4 Fahnlein (Sappers) and 200 Schneller (loaders)......oh and 2,675 horses.

If this unit was semi disbanded in peace-time the Officers and Master Gunners would be about company strength. In wartime it could then fill out to regimental strength by taking carters and loaders from civilian life or like in French service borrowing men from the Infantry to do the grunt work of carrying cannon balls and pushing guns into position.

Two other points I have noticed about early artillery is that Master Gunners considered themselves tradesmen (with own guild's) and not soldiers and as such expected and got higher pay! Partly because they had to stay with their guns rather than loot, but the did get first dibs on any captured guns, powder, shot and the Church bells!

As for the company of gunners who were not artillery. One possible explanation apart from bad records is that apart from cannon and infantry muskets a fortress could also be protected with wall or punt guns. Not 100% sure if you would class these as very small cannon like a swival gun at sea or very large calbre muskets/rifles perhaps on a rest but basically handy in a siege for targets too small and fleeting for canon and too well covered for muskets.

Probably same men may have had control of both artillery and wall guns but for "traditional reasons" got paid twice!

PS Down on the Somerset levels and also on the Norfolk Broads we used to hunt water fowl with "punt guns" fixed to small boats. Basically you paddled your punt gun mounted boat up to a flock of feeding water fowl and fired a large load of buck shot into the flock. Duck soap anyone?

And Stuart might be interested to hear I had an email from a conservator friend this week who was talking about some objects they are working on...including conserving a punt-gun for a private collector...not restoring it to working condition but restoring the look to "original"