|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Feb 16, 2017 13:34:57 GMT
That's true IRL. Pikes are supposed to anti cav, not cavalry massacring spearmen. The Spanish tercio only got defeated at Rocroi during the 30yw, under artillery bombardment and repeated cavalry and infantry charges for 5 days. Actually, pikes/spearsmen are anti-cav AND anti-inf in real life. But in popular war games, they're set to be anti-cav, cav set to be anti-inf, inf set to anti-pike, forming a rock-paper-scissors relationship. Try Rome Total War. A good phalanx could massacre even Hastatii |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Feb 16, 2017 15:55:02 GMT
Actually, pikes/spearsmen are anti-cav AND anti-inf in real life. But in popular war games, they're set to be anti-cav, cav set to be anti-inf, inf set to anti-pike, forming a rock-paper-scissors relationship. Try Rome Total War. A good phalanx could massacre even Hastatii back to my oringial point however Wargame =/= RL warfare. We can't rely on results of a simulation declare something in RL. We certainly can manipulate the data of a simulation to get the precise results we wanted to see. |
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Feb 16, 2017 16:43:15 GMT
Try Rome Total War. A good phalanx could massacre even Hastatii back to my oringial point however Wargame =/= RL warfare. We can't rely on results of a simulation declare something in RL. We certainly can manipulate the data of a simulation to get the precise results we wanted to see. Certainly, I wasn't arguing that. I just think that RtW was the closest to it. Of course, there did exist infantry that could kill off spearmen, and vice versa. Take the Sirica Pikemen of Macedonia, nothing could kill them. I agree entirely. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Feb 16, 2017 17:16:15 GMT
The only real problem with phalanx always was terrain.
Good example, where real history and RTW work well together :0)
|
|
|
|
Post by Imperial RomeBall on Feb 16, 2017 17:26:32 GMT
Bismarck Jr , Desophaeus , but didn't the Legions decisively defeat the Phalanx? I dont have time for video right now, but wikipedia says that new historian thought says that Cyniscephalae did not prove this desively. However, the battle did not conquer greece for the Romans, so there would be plenty more time to prove this, no? I just searched up Hastati. They were disbanded in 107 BC, so perhaps the Phalanx COULD kill hastasti. However, that was 90 years after Cynoscephalae. So I still disagree Krautball. Not all spearman are created equal, nor are all swordsmen. Of course, all historian seem to be doing these days is disagreeing with their ancestors for fun...
|
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Feb 16, 2017 17:40:45 GMT
This is still Medieval weaponry right?
I'm pretty sure EW5 isn't the best indicator of accuracy for the time period of the Phalanx and the Legion....
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Feb 16, 2017 17:45:58 GMT
There were several encounters
1. Pyrrus vs early Legion
2. Roman-Macedonian wars (two major battles - one above, another one is Pydna).
3. Roman-Selucid war. (One major battle Magnesia, but the main source Polybius in incomplet).
4. To some extent Mithridates's wars.
In all of these conflicts Phalanx was not in best shape (only in first instance it was close to that, and outcome was not that certain).
Anyway Phalanx needs good cavalry in support to work like shield and sword together.
Oops! Sorry for off-top..
|
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Feb 16, 2017 18:34:43 GMT
Bismarck Jr , Desophaeus , but didn't the Legions decisively defeat the Phalanx? I dont have time for video right now, but wikipedia says that new historian thought says that Cyniscephalae did not prove this desively. However, the battle did not conquer greece for the Romans, so there would be plenty more time to prove this, no? I just searched up Hastati. They were disbanded in 107 BC, so perhaps the Phalanx COULD kill hastasti. However, that was 90 years after Cynoscephalae. So I still disagree Krautball. Not all spearman are created equal, nor are all swordsmen. Of course, all historian seem to be doing these days is disagreeing with their ancestors for fun... Roman legions fought with two Pila, one Gladius, and a Scutum. For our anglophones thats two throwing spears, a shortword and a giant shield. The legions are equipped to skirmish a spesr unit, but could not defeat them in face to face combat, because the shortsword has very limited reach, and a phalanx has spears with very long range. |
|
|
|
Post by Imperial RomeBall on Feb 16, 2017 23:25:35 GMT
Bismarck Jr , Desophaeus , but didn't the Legions decisively defeat the Phalanx? I dont have time for video right now, but wikipedia says that new historian thought says that Cyniscephalae did not prove this desively. However, the battle did not conquer greece for the Romans, so there would be plenty more time to prove this, no? I just searched up Hastati. They were disbanded in 107 BC, so perhaps the Phalanx COULD kill hastasti. However, that was 90 years after Cynoscephalae. So I still disagree Krautball. Not all spearman are created equal, nor are all swordsmen. Of course, all historian seem to be doing these days is disagreeing with their ancestors for fun... Roman legions fought with two Pila, one Gladius, and a Scutum. For our anglophones thats two throwing spears, a shortword and a giant shield. The legions are equipped to skirmish a spesr unit, but could not defeat them in face to face combat, because the shortsword has very limited reach, and a phalanx has spears with very long range. Why do you have to single out Anglophones? Do you have stats on whether Germans love Latin more or not? |
|
