Optimal outcome for Sweden in the Great Northern War

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Inspired by the thread in post 1900 where the Swedish Empire somehow survived intact and through some magic mumbo jumbo avoided butterflies until 1900.

So, let's have a realistic discussion in the proper forum, since this topic interest me. What's the best outcome for Sweden in the Great Northern War? They are pretty much attacked by everyone they had ever made angry, so a victory would be quite ASB, but what is the best the Swedes can do and how much of their empire could they hold on to?
 
Inspired by the thread in post 1900 where the Swedish Empire somehow survived intact and through some magic mumbo jumbo avoided butterflies until 1900.

So, let's have a realistic discussion in the proper forum, since this topic interest me. What's the best outcome for Sweden in the Great Northern War? They are pretty much attacked by everyone they had ever made angry, so a victory would be quite ASB, but what is the best the Swedes can do and how much of their empire could they hold on to?

Have Lewnehaupt's reserves survive the battle of Lesnaya, and let the Swedish win Poltava.

I have a TL w/ that PoD in the sig.
 
Inspired by the thread in post 1900 where the Swedish Empire somehow survived intact and through some magic mumbo jumbo avoided butterflies until 1900.

So, let's have a realistic discussion in the proper forum, since this topic interest me. What's the best outcome for Sweden in the Great Northern War? They are pretty much attacked by everyone they had ever made angry, so a victory would be quite ASB, but what is the best the Swedes can do and how much of their empire could they hold on to?

Speaking as a swede with 20/20 hindsight, OTLs outcome was probably for the best. Otherwise we would have been at war every 10 year with all of the enemies of 1700 again.

To win the war Charles XII would have to had defeated August earlier and marched towards Moscow in 1705-06 and not have the winter of 1709 diminish his troops and taken a different route towards the capital(marching towards St Petersburg through the baltic region would bring Peter out to fight a standing battle earlier)
 
Have Lewnehaupt's reserves survive the battle of Lesnaya, and let the Swedish win Poltava.

I have a TL w/ that PoD in the sig.

Even winning at Poltava, wouldn't have given the Swedes a win in the war. They're were bound to loose, hence they were fighting to many enemies. Even from Poltava there is a long way to Moscow....and even longer to Sweden.
 
Speaking as a swede with 20/20 hindsight, OTLs outcome was probably for the best. Otherwise we would have been at war every 10 year with all of the enemies of 1700 again.

To win the war Charles XII would have to had defeated August earlier and marched towards Moscow in 1705-06 and not have the winter of 1709 diminish his troops and taken a different route towards the capital(marching towards St Petersburg through the baltic region would bring Peter out to fight a standing battle earlier)

I kind of agree. At least they kept Finland. Had they kept some of their Baltic possesions, a new war with Russia would not have been far away.
 
Speaking as a swede with 20/20 hindsight, OTLs outcome was probably for the best. Otherwise we would have been at war every 10 year with all of the enemies of 1700 again.

Interesting and very mature viewpoint and could well be the case, although it did mean from that point on Sweden was a lot more dependent on the behaviour of their neighbours.


To win the war Charles XII would have to had defeated August earlier and marched towards Moscow in 1705-06 and not have the winter of 1709 diminish his troops and taken a different route towards the capital(marching towards St Petersburg through the baltic region would bring Peter out to fight a standing battle earlier)

That's the sort of thing I would have said as well. Ignore Poland for the moment and try and get a knock-out blow against Peter. Ideally prompting a conservative revolt and either replacing him or a long time civil war in Russia. Then not go for a devastating and overwhelming victory against Saxony and Denmark but a more limited one, although that does seem to be rather against the character of Charles XII from what I can tell.

Steve
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Interesting and very mature viewpoint and could well be the case, although it did mean from that point on Sweden was a lot more dependent on the behaviour of their neighbours.
I would kind of a agree that even if Sweden won the war, she wouldn't win the peace.

Is another kind of peace possible, one where Sweden don't lose any German possessions, but lose Ingria, Estonia and Livona to Russia, but keep Kexholm and the parts of East Finland she lost OTL.
 
Top