Gustavus Adolfus conquer Germany, Poland-Lithuania,Denmark-Norway

[Ohfshkssgb]

Gustavus Adolfus of Sweden centralized the Swedish State and revolutionized modern warfare. He intervened in the thirty years war to protect the protestants. He defeated the catholic league and pushed back the Habsburgs. But he was killed at battle of Lutzen after winning it. What if he survived the battle ? He continues his victories and ends the Holy Roman Empire. A Protestant confederation is created with his allies and conquests. He later conquers Denmark-Norway and unites them like UK. He then creates situation like the deluge conquering all of Poland-Lithuania except for Ruthenia and Hetmanate.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

What if he survived the battle ?

God help all those Catholics

 

[Lalli]

God help all those Catholics

Indeed. Catholics are in deep troubles now. And Poland would be endless warfield until GA is either killed or has just leave the place alone.

But seriously I doubt that he can or even want to conquer all of these places. Him had some really megalomanic plans but even he would face realities. Even if that empire manage to stay together during the king's lifetime, it almost certainly collapses soon after his death.

 

[Nuraghe]

God help all those Catholics

this is the perfect scenario for a French wank, where with the Austrian Habsburgs defeated, all the Catholics' hopes of survival lie in Paris, which will be able to count on Rome to fund it handsomely to stop GA ( since I doubt the idiot do not try to cross the Alps to raze "Babylon" to the ground ) with even Madrid possibly offering to militarily support Paris against the common Lutheran threat

 

[Cudymcar]

this is the perfect scenario for a French wank, where with the Austrian Habsburgs defeated, all the Catholics' hopes of survival lie in Paris

France was GA's ally in the 30YW.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

France was GA's ally in the 30YW.

financial backer, not "ally" per se. After all, Cardinal Richelieu couldn't afford to have either the pope (although, IIRC, Urban VII was notoriously pro-French) on his back or give the Huguenots hope by openly siding with a Protestant who wanted to destroy the Catholic church. It was why France only entered the war officially after Gustaf was dead, that way, they could claim that it was just about their own issues with the Habsburgs.

 

[Nuraghe]

France was GA's ally in the 30YW.

financial backer, not "ally" per se. After all, Cardinal Richelieu couldn't afford to have either the pope (although, IIRC, Urban VII was notoriously pro-French) on his back or give the Huguenots hope by openly siding with a Protestant who wanted to destroy the Catholic church. It was why France only entered the war officially after Gustaf was dead, that way, they could claim that it was just about their own issues with the Habsburgs.

As my friend Kellan has already rightly pointed out, France exploited Gustavus Adolphus' mania for grandeur and claims to be the defender of the faith for its own purposes ( i.e. to further destabilize the Reich, prevent better coordination between the two branches of the Habsburgs, so as to weaken their "encirclement" on it ) in order to break the possible Habsburg hegemony and replace it on the continent, therefore GA which continues its disastrous campaigns in the HRE ( without forgetting that its policies of Otl, alienated him several times even the support of the Protestant princes ) only facilitates this possible development, given that the local Catholics ( in order not to suffer Swedish persecution ) will immediately prefer to vigorously support a French conquest, and considering the very high probability of important defections by the princes who are under the yoke of GA, towards Paris and the ability of the French to deploy armies much superior to the Swedes ( in terms of sheer number of mens ), it is easy to understand why side will tip the scales in the conflict

 

[Ohfshkssgb]

only facilitates this possible development, given that the local Catholics ( in order not to suffer Swedish persecution ) will immediately prefer to vigorously support a French conquest

The Catholics would've already lost so their support is irrelevant.

 

[Nuraghe]

The Catholics would've already lost so their support is irrelevant.

in reality you are very wrong, the support or resistance of a certain population to the conquests / advances of an army matters a lot, if the local Catholics, in order to get rid of the Swedish terror, would be more than willing to help in any way the French, both as logistical help and by creating huge problems for the GA garrisons present in the region, this would greatly facilitate Paris's ability to consolidate and maintain the new conquests and at the same time would make it very dangerous for the Swedish troops to remain in the region, knowing that they were clearly outnumbered, terribly hostile to the population and having no secure base for many kilometers in the area

 

[Ohfshkssgb]

in reality you are very wrong, the support or resistance of a certain population to the conquests / advances of an army matters a lot, if the local Catholics, in order to get rid of the Swedish terror, would be more than willing to help in any way the French, both as logistical help and by creating huge problems for the GA garrisons present in the region, this would greatly facilitate Paris's ability to consolidate and maintain the new conquests and at the same time would make it very dangerous for the Swedish troops to remain in the region, knowing that they were clearly outnumbered, terribly hostile to the population and having no secure base for many kilometers in the area

He defeated the Habsburgs who more powerful than France at time.

 

[Nuraghe]

He defeated the Habsburgs who more powerful than France at time.

in reality you are wrong again, the Habsburgs of the time were not much stronger than France, rather they were on par ( and I'm talking about the possessions of Charles V, because if we take the imperial Habsburgs individually, then they are inferior to France in terms of war capabilities ) but unlike it they could count on a vast network of allies who had in common with them the desire to stop French expansionism ( which was the main military power in that part of Europe, as well as the most populous country ) , because it should be remembered that when the Swedes met the Spanish armies, they lost quite easily, it is the Tercios formation, it was famous for its versatility in defense, unlike the Swedes who were focused on attacking power, so I'm sorry, but it continued to see GA and his troops being torn to pieces by the French in the long run

@Kellan Sullivan, I ask for your opinion on the matter

 

[alexmilman]

He defeated the Habsburgs who more powerful than France at time.

This is a highly questionable statement:

• By the time of his death the Imperial Hapsburgs had been anything but defeated strategically because they kept fighting even after his death. On operational level, he was defeated at Alte Veste and, strictly speaking, the Battle of Lutzen was won by Bernard of Weimar because GA had been killed at the early stage. Anyway, after Lutzen the imperial side still had an army even after Wallenstein’s assassination. The Spanish Hapsburgs were not seriously directly involved until after GA’s death and Imperial-Spanish army in 1634 crushed Swedish-German army at Nordlingen.
• “More powerful than France” is not a big compliment at that time because France did not have a meaningful army of its own and, for quite a while, it was Richelieu’s explicit policy to subsidize the foreign armies instead of building a national one. Only after this policy demonstrably failed, creation of a serious regular national army started.

 

[Nuraghe]

This is a highly questionable statement:

• By the time of his death the Imperial Hapsburgs had been anything but defeated strategically because they kept fighting even after his death. On operational level, he was defeated at Alte Veste and, strictly speaking, the Battle of Lutzen was won by Bernard of Weimar because GA had been killed at the early stage. Anyway, after Lutzen the imperial side still had an army even after Wallenstein’s assassination. The Spanish Hapsburgs were not seriously directly involved until after GA’s death and Imperial-Spanish army in 1634 crushed Swedish-German army at Nordlingen.
• “More powerful than France” is not a big compliment at that time because France did not have a meaningful army of its own and, for quite a while, it was Richelieu’s explicit policy to subsidize the foreign armies instead of building a national one. Only after this policy demonstrably failed, creation of a serious regular national army started.

I fully agree with what has been said, I would also like to add that we are talking about a country ( France ) that was emerging from decades of disastrous internal civil wars with a confessional theme, with still the very real possibility that its religious minority ( the Huguenots ) who were opposed to the strengthening of royal power, could, with external support, represent a threat to the "state" ( a danger that Sweden did not run, given the treatment reserved for its non-Lutheran minorities ) furthermore it is good to keep in mind, that to stop ( temporarily ) the expansionist claims of France, an immense alliance was needed, which involved ( all the territories under the government of Charles V, the Papacy, England, a part of the ( scarce ) resources coming from Ferdinand I 's possessions, Florence, Genoa and finally Venice ( which, like Ferdinand, would have preferred to concentrate elsewhere, due to a very worrying threat to their security: the Ottomans ) in short, I don't understand how it is possible to define the imperial Habsburgs much more strong of France, when several times throughout history, it has been demonstrated that only a coalition of countries could contain/defeat ( with difficulty, more often due to the demerit of the Parisian elite than anything else ) the French war capabilities, furthermore I struggle to see where the Habsburgs in Otl were definitively defeated by GA, when immediately after having suffered various defeats against the Swedes they could once again deploy armies led by the various Montecuccoli, Piccolomini ect

 

[Ohfshkssgb]

the expansionist claims of France, an immense alliance was needed, which involved ( all the territories under the government of Charles V, the Papacy, England, a part of the ( scarce ) resources coming from Ferdinand I 's possessions, Florence, Genoa and finally Venice ( which, like Ferdinand, would have preferred to concentrate elsewhere, due to a very worrying threat to their security: the Ottomans )

No it was the other way around. France was defeated by the coalition but even coalition was defeated by Habsburgs who eventually dominated italy. Habsburgs remained the hegemon of Europe until they lost the Thirty years war only then did France surpassed them.

 

[Nuraghe]

No it was the other way around. France was defeated by the coalition but even coalition was defeated by Habsburgs who eventually dominated italy. Habsburgs remained the hegemon of Europe until they lost the Thirty years war only then did France surpassed them.

Yes, in fact, they were so much the undisputed hegemons of the continent, that they immediately crushed the league created by the Protestant princes, with the aim of opposing their ( Habsburg ) policies ..... er, no, in fact that war was a draw, which forced the aspiring " hegemon " has to compromise with the Lutheran principles regarding the internal politics of the Reich, perhaps it is better to look for another example, but of course, here is the right one, they were so superior militarily that the Dutch failed to obtain independence from them, right ?, this also seems like a wrong statement to me ( and I could mention more examples if I wanted )

now despite being a fan of the Habsburg dynasty, I have no problem recognizing the defects and the opportunities wasted by them over the centuries, so I'm sorry but I don't see how actually could have been the undisputed hegemons of the continent, given that the very word ( hegemony ) implies specific capabilities ( ranging from military, economic, cultural and political power) that the Habsburgs themselves did not have all in all , they were certainly the leading power in Europe ( if the coordination between the two family branches managed to work ) but from here to being the local hegemon, the road is very long

 

[Ohfshkssgb]

Yes, in fact, they were so much the undisputed hegemons of the continent, that they immediately crushed the league created by the Protestant princes, with the aim of opposing their ( Habsburg ) policies ..... er, no, in fact that war was a draw, which forced the aspiring " hegemon " has to compromise with the Lutheran principles regarding the internal politics of the Reich, perhaps it is better to look for another example, but of course, here is the right one, they were so superior militarily that the Dutch failed to obtain independence from them, right ?, this also seems like a wrong statement to me ( and I could mention more examples if I wanted )

now despite being a fan of the Habsburg dynasty, I have no problem recognizing the defects and the opportunities wasted by them over the centuries, so I'm sorry but I don't see how actually could have been the undisputed hegemons of the continent, given that the very word ( hegemony ) implies specific capabilities ( ranging from military, economic, cultural and political power) that the Habsburgs themselves did not have all in all , they were certainly the leading power in Europe ( if the coordination between the two family branches managed to work ) but from here to being the local hegemon, the road is very long

France also had to compromise with the Protestants until Louis XIV despite being an hereditary monarchy rather than an elective one like HRE whose problems the Habsburgs recieved. So by your logic France was the weakest in Europe.

 

[Nuraghe]

France also had to compromise with the Protestants until Louis XIV despite being an hereditary monarchy rather than an elective one like HRE whose problems the Habsburgs recieved. So by your logic France was the weakest in Europe.

So let's make it clear, I don't want to end up answering badly, but I would say that I'm starting to get slightly tired of having to explain why I believe that France in this period was ( except for serious internal problems ) militarily stronger than the individual imperial Habsburgs, you you tell me that the French sovereigns had to compromise with their Protestant minority ( which is partly true ) but it must be remembered that the Huguenots were in the end CONFINED in their ONLY stronghold in La Rochelle, on the contrary the Habsburgs had to negotiate not one but as many as TWO PEACES ( that of Augsburg and then Westphalia ) with the Protestant Princes ( who I hope we can agree were more than capable of seriously hindering/worrying the imperials ) where they were forced TO CEDE large privileges to the Protestant potentates, to the point that they were almost independent from imperial interference in their politics ( especially internal but also foreign ) it seems clear to me which of the two ( between Paris and Vienna ) was forced to give up its previous political ambitions towards them

 

[holycookie]

He continues his victories and ends the Holy Roman Empire.

Well, assuming that the HRE implodes, most Catholics will run to France. The France that it previously supported Gustav will withdraw this support and try to demonstrate itself as the defender of the Catholic world. Considering the collapse of Habsburg power, Catholics will likely accept being part of the French sphere. Hungary may declare independence. As a whole will depend on what this end of HRE would be like, but I would say it is very likely that the French sphere extends to the Rhine River without any major problems.

A Protestant confederation is created with his allies and conquests. He later conquers Denmark-Norway and unites them like UK.

Of course, this confederation will be a smaller version of the North German federation. It is difficult to say how unstable it will be to have Sweden as an overlord. Sweden did not have the manpower to maintain this empire so that will be a major problem. Denmark will be difficult to maintain, and Norway may be easier.

He then creates situations like the deluge conquering all of Poland-Lithuania except for Ruthenia and Hetmanate.

This will not happen, the lion of the north is not invincible and this is not a game of EU4. Now he can theoretically try to conquer the Baltic part of Poland-Lithuania. Making the Baltic a Swedish lake for a while. Whether this collapses the Commonwealth is difficult to say. But it's probable. In this case, Russia will get most of the Commonwealth, annexing Ukraine and much of Lithuania. If they are smart they support the kingdom of Poland (a smaller one than the Commonwealth one) which will want a round 2 against Sweden in the future, just like the German Catholics of the south and Russia itself (also Denmark will want independence sooner or later). Among the Catholic Germanic kingdoms, Bavaria probably rises as the most powerful. Perhaps cannibalizing Australia and Bohemia. The Ottomans may have more time to reform, but without Austria to compete with Russia we may have the opposite. As a whole, I would say that after Gustav's death, we will have a round 2 between those involved. With great chances of the Swedish empire being imploded. But this could generate a "Protestant German kingdom" before our OTL. We can have Sweden maintain the baltic part of Germany depending on the situation (in this case goodbye Protestant Germany).

 

[marcinL]

Well, assuming that the HRE implodes, most Catholics will run to France. The France that it previously supported Gustav will withdraw this support and try to demonstrate itself as the defender of the Catholic world. Considering the collapse of Habsburg power, Catholics will likely accept being part of the French sphere. Hungary may declare independence. As a whole will depend on what this end of HRE would be like, but I would say it is very likely that the French sphere extends to the Rhine River without any major problems.

Of course, this confederation will be a smaller version of the North German federation. It is difficult to say how unstable it will be to have Sweden as an overlord. Sweden did not have the manpower to maintain this empire so that will be a major problem. Denmark will be difficult to maintain, and Norway may be easier.

This will not happen, the lion of the north is not invincible and this is not a game of EU4. Now he can theoretically try to conquer the Baltic part of Poland-Lithuania. Making the Baltic a Swedish lake for a while. Whether this collapses the Commonwealth is difficult to say. But it's probable. In this case, Russia will get most of the Commonwealth, annexing Ukraine and much of Lithuania. If they are smart they support the kingdom of Poland (a smaller one than the Commonwealth one) which will want a round 2 against Sweden in the future, just like the German Catholics of the south and Russia itself (also Denmark will want independence sooner or later). Among the Catholic Germanic kingdoms, Bavaria probably rises as the most powerful. Perhaps cannibalizing Australia and Bohemia. The Ottomans may have more time to reform, but without Austria to compete with Russia we may have the opposite. As a whole, I would say that after Gustav's death, we will have a round 2 between those involved. With great chances of the Swedish empire being imploded. But this could generate a "Protestant German kingdom" before our OTL. We can have Sweden maintain the baltic part of Germany depending on the situation (in this case goodbye Protestant Germany).

Right, so, Charlie Gustav couldnt take PLC when half of it was controlled by Cossacks and Russians, and of the remaining part half surrendered to him without fight. Best luck taking on it at its strongest

 

[holycookie]

Best luck taking on it at its strongest

I mean I guess it could leach off its satellites in northern Germany for a while. Using German manpower until they rebel, even if they don't this will only generate something like a weaker Austrian empire. Maybe this will help revive Poland. Especially if the country manages to get out of the death spiral that was the government of the Commonwealth