Roman Manipular Formation

[m4rt14n]

How do u usually form ur battle line with Pre-Marian troops?

I usually go with:

*** *** *** --- velites
------ ------ --- barb mercenaries/samnites
||| ||| ||| ||| --- hastatis
||| ||| ||| ---- princeps
|||| |||| -- triaries/more barb mercs or samnites
0 -- general

and I would generally have cavalries (preferably Gaulish mercs) and wardogs on my wings for flankin manouvers. I tend to stay away with archers cos they only add to friendly fires.

I like keeping barb mercs in the front, in long thin lines, to absorb/deliever charges. This way my hastatis would get the chance to throw their pilas without getting slobbered by massive amounts of screaming enemies. IIRC, their pilas do more damage then their actual attack. This kind of armies work well with barbarians, although against Phalanx they may not be worth it.

With Post Marian troops I keep the same formation only changing hastatis, princeps and triariies with Legionaries. Especially after the reform, retraining is hard when ur campaigining in less developed regions. I'm guessing I could've used Auxillias or Town Watches, but I like the merc's charge better.

I just wished there's an auto manipular formation setting. I know sometimes the AI form ur troops in maniple, but a lot of times its just one big line of troops and u had to move stuff around alot.

[Somebody Else]

I tend to have my skirmisher types (velites) way out in front, my main infantry in a double line - weaker (hastati) in front, heavier (principes) slightly behind and on the wings. Spears (triarii) on the wings in the same line as the light line, but slightly away from the line - so that my archers/slingers/whatever can fire through the gap. Cavalry behind my archers.

[LordKhaine]

A line of principes/hastati at the front, and archers in the middle. And either a second line of principes or ideally triarii at the rear. If I have any velites they shall be in a flank. My general and cavalry would start at the rear, and move up either of the flanks depending on where they're needed. If I have any cheap mercs, they will usually take the front line so I don't lose good Roman lives when I have cheap barbarian scum to die instead Decent melee mercs will usually be kept back as a reserve to protect my flanks.

That's my basic start formation, but they usually aren't in that formation when I meet the enemy.

[USMCNJ]

as romans i usually don't use cavalry or missle troops, the army consists of general (x), and affordable roman infantry (chars)

AAAA BBBB CCCC DDDD EEEE FFFF GGGG
HH LLLL x MMMM JJ
I I KK

with fire at will on, the front line is stretched 2-3 ranks deep ( to make the army almost the same width as the enemy). 2 units on each flank 5-6 ranks deep. and if i have enough units i put a few stretched units as a second line.
general in the middle of the second line.

once ingaged i send the HH&II to flank the units that is fighting AAAA, and i send JJ&KK to flank the unit that is fightin GGGG. Once they rout I move on to help BBBB and FFFF and just keep on going towards the center.

[FURRY_BOOTS]

////////////////////////// ^^^^

xxxxx lllll lllll lllll lllll xxxxx ^^^
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
kkkkk kkkkk kkkkk kkkkk



l=triarii
x=hastati
k=principes
/=veletis/archers,who fall back if charged.
^=cav,protecting the flanks

this formation works for me most times,
very early in the game i use town watch for triarii, & i find there not to bad as long as the flanks are protected.

[KyodaiSteeleye]

sorry for ignorance - what is the manipular formation? - the chequerboard one, or the 3 lines?

[Kraxis]

sorry for ignorance - what is the manipular formation? - the chequerboard one, or the 3 lines?

Both really...

[TheDuck]

sorry for ignorance - what is the manipular formation? - the chequerboard one, or the 3 lines?

Post Marian reforms:

maniple = 2 centuries = 160 men

3 maniples = 1 cohort = 480 men

10 cohorts = 1 legion (minus horse and other auxiliaries) = 4800 men

cohorts organized themselves in rectangles.. The full 10 making a typical 'checkerboard' layout.. sometimes two lines of offset rectangles (5 and 5) , sometimes 3 (4/3/3). All this depends on circumstance and what they were facing.

Each rectangle (I believe.. I'm foggy on this part because its been so long since I read this..) was organized by maniples in lines.. so 1st maniple in front, 2nd behind, 3rd in rear. based on circumstance if the cohort was charged from behind the 3rd maniple could change facing and defend the cohort.. same for the leftmost centuries when attacked from the left, etc.

That reason alone made the roman army a very difficult thing to contend with.

If anyone is fresher on this, feel free to correct me..

And to stay on topic:

full 20 unit deployments for me:

3 units Equites + general for cav support
4 units either Velites or Archers
12 units Hastati.

2-4 units of hastatii held in reserve on both wings (either 1/1 or 2/2)... velites either set up on the wings or in front depending on presence of enemy cav... archers always behind if I have them.

the balance of Hastatii set up shoulder to shoulder 4 deep.

When engaged, I commit my reserves where my line beings to bow inwards. Horse are charged to flank enemy when the enemy has fully committed their flank units. Horse charges unit closest to end of my line until it routes, continues to next..

If I have Velites, once they have expended their ammunition I'll use them (sometimes) as flankers.. I only do this if all enemy units on the side I'm flanking are fully engaged.. otherwise they end up going toe to toe with something that can kill them easily.

And I follow the general rule of warfare practiced for centuries... I only close to melee if ranged attacks do not decide the engagement or the enemies ranged attackers will decide it for me if I don't close (chasing down routers being the exception to this rule, since there is little risk to your melee troops).

Finally, I don't use Triarii since I only get them JUST before Marian reforms.. and Principes are so similar to Hastati, and use of principes complicates logistics so much.. I just stick with Hastati.

[lars573]

Legend V=1 unit of velites, H=1 unit of hastati, P=1 unit of princepes, T=1 unit of triariii, A= 1 unit of roman archers, E=1 unit of equites, S= special troop unit, G= general,*=space filler.

***V***V
**H*H**H*H
E*P*P*S*P*P*E
*T*A*G*A*T

More or less like this. The special weapon slot can be filled by dogs a siege weapon or a really keen merc unit. Also the triarii slot can be filled by samnites or barbarian mercs if I haven't gotten to triarii level yet.

[TheDuck]

Legend V=1 unit of velites, H=1 unit of hastati, P=1 unit of princepes, T=1 unit of triariii, A= 1 unit of roman archers, E=1 unit of equites, S= special troop unit, G= general,*=space filler.

***V***V
**H*H**H*H
E*P*P*S*P*P*E
*T*A*G*A*T

More or less like this. The special weapon slot can be filled by dogs a siege weapon or a really keen merc unit. Also the triarii slot can be filled by samnites or barbarian mercs if I haven't gotten to triarii level yet.

Interesting.. I've come to a similar arrangement in Post Marian. I find that the AI likes to flank my archers/seige in the back if given half a chance, so I find myself replacing two rear reserve legionarres with 2 auxila for spear protection against cav charges on my rear units. This still leaves me 8 up front infantry and 2 infantry (generally very heavy.. urban cohorts or the like) in reserve for emergencies.

[Kraxis]

Duck, you have actually mixed up the good old Manipular formation with the Marian one (I only call it that since I don't know when it was introduced).

The Manipular formation was indeed made up of maniples (duh) cosisting of two centuries. But where it differs from your presentation is in the layout.
The Manipular formation was simple enough. The first line was the Velites out front (ahead you might say), the Hastati would then form up in maniples with openings one maniple wide between them. The maniples themselves were the two centuries behind each other. So if the centuries were 10 wide (only a hypothetical case here) and 8 deep the maniples would be 10 wide and 16 deep blocks. Behind the Hastati line would be the Principes in an equal setup (same width and depth) but in the openings of the Hastati. Thus the frontline was kind of toothed with big square teeth.
Behind the Principes the Triarii would form up in half the depth of the others, but agan in the openings of the Principes.
There would not be any cohorts really, these were invented to deal with situations that demanded a force lesser than a legion but bigger than a maniple (came about around the time Scipio Africanus got sent to Spain, some even credit him with this 'invention').

The layout you menion is from the professional marian legions. The three lines were a leftover from the old manipular formation. But this time the first line was the strongest with the first cohort in it and it being 4 cohorts strong while the others were 3 strong. An abandonment of the somewhat weaker Hastati frontline.

[TheDuck]

Duck, you have actually mixed up the good old Manipular formation with the Marian one (I only call it that since I don't know when it was introduced).

The Manipular formation was indeed made up of maniples (duh) cosisting of two centuries. But where it differs from your presentation is in the layout.
The Manipular formation was simple enough. The first line was the Velites out front (ahead you might say), the Hastati would then form up in maniples with openings one maniple wide between them. The maniples themselves were the two centuries behind each other. So if the centuries were 10 wide (only a hypothetical case here) and 8 deep the maniples would be 10 wide and 16 deep blocks. Behind the Hastati line would be the Principes in an equal setup (same width and depth) but in the openings of the Hastati. Thus the frontline was kind of toothed with big square teeth.
Behind the Principes the Triarii would form up in half the depth of the others, but agan in the openings of the Principes.
There would not be any cohorts really, these were invented to deal with situations that demanded a force lesser than a legion but bigger than a maniple (came about around the time Scipio Africanus got sent to Spain, some even credit him with this 'invention').

The layout you menion is from the professional marian legions. The three lines were a leftover from the old manipular formation. But this time the first line was the strongest with the first cohort in it and it being 4 cohorts strong while the others were 3 strong. An abandonment of the somewhat weaker Hastati frontline.

Thank you! That clarifies things quite a bit.

I free admit my utter ignorance of pre-Marian legion composition.

And note I did say.. 'Post-Marian' in my post (since I know I'm WAY ignorant of the pre-Marian way of doing things)

Thanks again.. seriously rockin info!

And p.s.... this is why I like the ORG.. I can ask a general question on Military History and get an answer! !!

[master of the puppets]

my favorite pre-marian formation is adapted (aka stolen) from scipio africanus's battle formation against a straight assault

p=pricipes
h=hastati
v=velites
t=triarii
c=cavalry

tttttttttt hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ttttttttttt
tttttttttt hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ttttttttttt
pppppp vvvvv pppppp vvvvvv pppppp vvvvvv
pppppp vvvvv pppppp vvvvvv pppppp vvvvvv
pppppp vvvvv pppppp vvvvvv pppppp vvvvvv


c c
cc cc
ccc ccc
cccc cccc


velies hit enemies from behind hastati. when hastati's formation crumples (it will...sissy bastads ) then the enemy imediatly engage principes , velites still pounding them, and then (if all goes well) the triarii turn in to flank the enemy
cavalry mainly there to stop flanking of any formation also good to get around the enemies backs
this is best aganst enemies who outnumber you especially greek and carthaginians what do you think

[master of the puppets]

HOLY CRAP THE COMP RUINED MY FORMATION OK OK OK disragard that last formation competely this is the real one
p=principes
h=hastati
v=velites
t=triarii
c=cavalry
.=empty space

......ttttttttttttt.................................................tttttttttttt...................
......ttttttttttttt.................................................tttttttttttt...................
.................................................................................................... ....
................hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...........................................hhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...........................................ppppppvvvvvvpppppppvvv vvvvpppppppvvvvv...........................................ppppppvvvvvvpppppppvvvvvvvpppppppvvvvv... ........................................ppppppvvvvvvpppppppvvvvvvvpppppppvvvvv...................... .....................ppppppvvvvvvpppppppvvvvvvvpppppppvvvvv......................................... ..ppppppvvvvvvpppppppvvvvvvvpppppppvvvvv............................................................ ..............................................................................c..................... ...........................................................c....................cc.................. .............................................................cc..................ccc................ ..............................................................ccc................cccc............... ..............................................................cccc.............ccccc................ ............................................................ccccc.........


blah blah blah look up and see the stuff i am to lazy to write again


-------------------------------------------------------------------------- weep not for the victorios dead but find vengence
any comment on how to get the real little message down here would be of much use thanks

[master of the puppets]

[SIZE=7]JESUS CHRIST IT SCREWED UP MY FORMATION AGAIN OH damn i give up forget i said anything

[Kraxis]

Thank you! That clarifies things quite a bit.

I free admit my utter ignorance of pre-Marian legion composition.

And note I did say.. 'Post-Marian' in my post (since I know I'm WAY ignorant of the pre-Marian way of doing things)

Thanks again.. seriously rockin info!

And p.s.... this is why I like the ORG.. I can ask a general question on Military History and get an answer! !!

Well, you are welcome, and should it be another time.

But yeah I saw you mentioned that it was post marian, but you also mentioned manipular, so I figured you were perhaps a little confused? So it wasn't really a fullfledged correction, more of a little addon to your post to put it into perspective.

[TheDuck]

Well, you are welcome, and should it be another time.

But yeah I saw you mentioned that it was post marian, but you also mentioned manipular, so I figured you were perhaps a little confused? So it wasn't really a fullfledged correction, more of a little addon to your post to put it into perspective.

Ah, very good! I've learned something here today. I always thought 'manipular' referred to the cohort composition and its use of maniples to cover multiple directions.. It really refers to the 3 line setup and how it was used pre-Marian.

I didn't understand that.. so thank you EVER so much! :)

heh heh.. I was confused (but being ignorant of all the facts, didn't even know it!)!

[KyodaiSteeleye]

so... just to stay off topic - what was the function of having a maniple-sized hole between each maniple?

[Ellesthyan]

Kyodai, I assume, using the mighty powers of logic, that the maniple-sized hole was exactly the width the unit behind or before would have. The units would set up behind the gaps left by the units before them, in that way creating a perfect checkerboard.

[Gunboat]

nothing new here, but I go this basic form:

v a v v

h p h p h
x e e e



I lose missile troops (a,v) as they do not all run away fast enough from the bad guys - and then swing cav (e) wide to sweep in.

[aw89]

i dont get the pre-marian thing, aren't the hastati in a solid front line? if somebody could post a picture or do something in paint it would be greatly Apriciated.

[Kraxis]

i dont get the pre-marian thing, aren't the hastati in a solid front line? if somebody could post a picture or do something in paint it would be greatly Apriciated.

Well, there is a great dispute about this really. Peter Connolly takes the solid line theory, while Adrian Goldsworthy keeps to the open line theory.
Basically the solid line theory is based on the assumption that the maniples would line up and all that. Then before combat is joined, the back century would march out and fill the gap, creating a solid line. Then when/if the Hastati can't break the enemy they would in one of the lulls fall back behind the first century again and the Principes could now march up. Whether the Hastati vould have time to pull out completely or they would have fight another round is uncertain, but in any event the frontline has been strengthened. The Principes then mirrors the Hastati. If they to are getting nowhere they would fall back behind the Triarii (who would have moved up close behind the Principes. The Triarii would then also close the gaps and do a fighting retreat, or at least see off the initial enemy attacks. Possibly the Hastati would now have rested enough to join battle again, and the entire circle restarts.
The problem lies in the rotation of the lines and the fallback, it simply takes too long.

The open lines theory is a little more complex. It relies on the enemy to not file into the gaps for several reasons. Firstly most enemies would engage the Romans in formation, not as a mob, so the open lines are of little risk there, it might in fact break up phalanx style formations. Even the barbarians formed up in formations. Further, if some enemies did flank the Hastati the Principes would be close at hand to help them out.
The Hastati tires a bit and the Principes moves up and fills the gaps. Now the whole line is suddenly much more powerful, while the enemy has been gradually weakened by the Hastati.
The problem lies in the fact that at the end the Hastati would be utterly exhausted but still at the front.

[Parmenio]

I'm not sure I buy either Peter Connolly's or Adrian Goldsworthy's theories.

Having gaps in a battle line is a potentially lethal flaw, while rank changes which open such gaps is equally dangerous.

Multiple battle lines were used by a great many armies through out history, to replace or relieve exhausted or broken front lines. I imagine the Romans were no different and replaced Hastati with Principes as and when a lull in the fighting gave them a chance to do so, or to quickly fill gaps created by broken Hastati maniples.

[aw89]

I think i'm with the solid line, it could work like this:

H H H H
H H H H
H H H H
H H H H

P P P P
P P P P
P P P P
P P P P

when they are supposed to change, the principes move forward to the back of the hastati and change the line by line

H H H H
H H H H
H H H H
P P P P
P P P P
P P P P
P P P P
H H H H

to

H H H H
P P P P
P P P P
P P P P
P P P P
H H H H
H H H H
H H H H

and when they get to the last line they sound the horn/flag for front change and the pricipes are at the front, this ends with this:

P P P P
P P P P
P P P P
P P P P

H H H H
H H H H
H H H H
H H H H

Get it, or should i explain better?

[TheDuck]

Pre-marian, I would tend to think that 'solid lines' were used, post-Marian.. checkerboard. The common use of tactical reinforcements was introduced by Scipio Africanus, which I (believe) lead to the use of checkerboard arrangements during maneuver up to contact with the enemy.

As such, here are my comments on 'checkerboard' formations, which I only think came into common use in the years after Marian's reforms (and Scipio's victories).

I would also like to stress (as before) that my comments below only apply to Legions that existed in 100BC and after (i.e. post-Marian).

This may be a case of maneuver vs. 'joined battle'.

The real problem of any battlefield is deciding where to commit reserves and then actually getting them there. What is clear about all battlefields until very recently is that communication was tough, and local control was key.

Julius Ceasar in his 'Gallic Wars' makes many references to local cohort commanders making key decisions without the Legion commanders input that helped win large battles, which further emphasizes this.

My belief has always been that gaps were indeed left in the line by the front (post-Marian) cohorts to allow for reinforcement as necessary (since you could see what was coming much better and speed of even the fastest unit (cav.) was not all that fast.) Once battle was joined things would 'even up' to fill the gaps.

That 'evening up' could take two different forms: If the rear cohorts were reoriented to different places in the line due to more pressing needs somewhere else, you could fill in the gaps with rear maniples from the front line cohorts. If things were particularly hot there, the rear cohorts would step into the gap.

And note.. a tactical reserve to be used as reinforcements was introduced by Scipio Africanus, and in common use by 100BC.

The great power of roman formations (at least IMO), is the vanilla structure that allows this to be done. Since the 3 maniples of a post-marian cohort work as cooperating and cohesive teams inside the framework of a larger cohort, then can all assume front line duties as the needs arise.

This in many ways is matched by modern military organization, which stresses flexibility of role for infantry, and has as its heart the idea of quick reinforcement at points in the line that are being hit the hardest.

I do believe there are arguments to be made for a 'cohesive line' being presented to the enemy.. these are just my thoughts as a long time student of Military History (both modern and ancient).

And something to note about all of this.. Ancient soldiers and modern soldiers use very different technology in their work, but the problems they face on the battlefield have never changed.

Surprise, deception, flanking, courage in the face of death, timely and accurate communication, good and quick decision making in local situations, all these elements are faced by all soldiers past and present. I tend to take Adrian G.'s broader point of view. Ancient soldiers had more in common with modern soldiers than some folks like to think. The same basic human issues remain on the battlefield, and the solutions to them in ancient times varied more due to technology than anything else. If Adrian G. also suggests that the checkerboard pattern saw use before Scipio Africanus, I tend to disagree, since I think that those ideas grew out of a desire for more battlefield flexibility based on the idea of using tactical reserves on the battlefield.. but I could be wrong!

D.

[KyodaiSteeleye]

Interesting stuff Duck, thanks.

Span.

[TheDuck]

Interesting stuff Duck, thanks.

Span.

You're welcome! History and Gaming, two fascinating hobbies!

[metatron]

Interesting, you tried to pluralize "triarii".

[Nigel]

Yes, very interesting read, Duck.

I have always wondered about the advantage of the checkerboard formation. Didn't seem to make sense to leave gabs in your front line where one "unit" would potentially have its flanks exposed.

So if I read you right, the checkerboard was only for maneuver before battle (closing the front as battle was joined). And perhaps an open checkerboard behind the closed front line allowed quick and effective allocation of reserves to lokal hotspots where help was needed.

Makes much more snse now.
Has anyone tried this in RTW ?

[Jacque Schtrapp]

Good information on Roman manipular formation here