Hoplite units - phalangite or classical?

[Intranetusa]

Question #2

If the phalangites have a value of 5, and the shield value doubles to 10 - that would make them more than twice as resistant to arrows than even the classical hoplites with their giant bronze shields. I think the classical hoplites with the large bronze shields should have the best shield values of all the units...

As one of the posts have indicated, sarissa pikes provides little protection against arrows, and the missile resistance of phalangites may have been be exaggerated...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





I'm assuming all of these hoplite units are classical hoplites and didn't fight in the phalangite style, thus no "phalanx" attribute? I'm kinda itching to give them either a sarissa phalanx attribute or as a classical hoplite with the short pike attribute (and remove their 2ndary weapon) since they seem to fight as regular spearmen most of the time...

Komatai Thorakitai Stratiotai (Dacian Heavy Phalanx)

http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.net/index.php?mp=unit&unit=dacian%20infantry%20komatai%20thorakitai%20stratiotai&text=&ownership=any&class=any&category=any

Mori Gaesum (Helvetii Phalanx)

http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.net/index.php?mp=unit&unit=celtic%20infantry%20mori%20gaesum&text=&ownership=any&class=any&category=any

Thorakitai Hoplitai (Greek Heavy Hoplite Phalanx)

http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.net/index.php?mp=unit&unit=greek%20infantry%20epikletoi%20hoplitai&text=&ownership=any&class=any&category=any

Iphikratous Hoplitai (Greek Hoplite Phalanx)

http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.net/index.php?mp=unit&unit=greek%20infantry%20iphikratous%20hoplitai&text=&ownership=any&class=any&category=any

Appea Gaedotos (Alpine Phalanx)

http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.net/index.php?mp=unit&unit=celtic%20infantry%20appea%20gaedotos&text=&ownership=any&class=any&category=any


Some of these units have useless 2ndary weapons - ie. lethality of their sword is less than their spear, and the attack value of the sword is much lower too...


And I'm assuming Thorakitai Hoplitai/heavy hoplite with a sword lethality of .11 should be .13 in the unit cards? Iphikratous Hoplitai/light phalanx has a sword lethality of .13

[athanaric]

Some of these units have useless 2ndary weapons - ie. lethality of their sword is less than their spear, and the attack value of the sword is much lower too...
That's only the case for Thorakitai Hopltai. All others have swords with spear lethality (0.13), except for Mori Gaesum with their Celtic long sword (0.225). None of these are useless. After all, they have to fight on walls sometimes.
Especially the Mori Gaesum and Thorakitai Hoplitai would be seriously nerfed by removing their secondary weapon.



And I'm assuming Thorakitai Hoplitai/heavy hoplite with a sword lethality of .11 should be .13 in the unit cards? Iphikratous Hoplitai/light phalanx has a sword lethality of .13
No.
Iphikratous Hoplitai have a Xiphos of sorts (generic lethality 0.13), while Thorakitai Hoplitai have a Kopis (generic lethality 0.11), which, unlike the spear or the Xiphos, is armour piercing. Not a bad property at all, if you ask me.

[Intranetusa]

Ahh, I see. The Heavy unit gets AP bonus. Thanks. I was fearing a repeat of the Sacred Band situation...

I guess they're not phalangites either so I shouldn't give them the phalanx trait =/

[bobbin]

The stats were done by a "what you see is what you get" principle, each weapon type has a set lethality that is constant across all units that weild them. In the case of the Thorakitai Hoplitai they are armed with a Kopis and so have 0.11 lethality and AP.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Also Appea Gaedatos have an axe as their secondary which makes them IMO an extremely versatile unit.

[Ca Putt]

some of them can even double as decent flankers/shock troopers with their secondaries if need be, all of them need a bit more finesse when used as line infantry than the rather easy to control hoplitai, but not much imo.

[Intranetusa]

Cool thanks.

Another question - units with the 'sarissa' phalanx ability automatically has their shield defense values doubled right?

So if they have 5 shield value, they would have a value of 10 in sarissa phalanx mode?

[vartan]

Cool thanks.

Another question - units with the 'sarissa' phalanx ability automatically has their shield defense values doubled right?

So if they have 5 shield value, they would have a value of 10 in sarissa phalanx mode?
I would hope not. Do they?

[Intranetusa]

I would hope not. Do they?

No clue myself. I think I heard somewhere that phalanxes double shield bonuses. If the phalangites already have a very high value of 5 for shields, it would be an impossibly high value of 10...

I know that phalangites are already ridiculously resistant to missiles - my Certan archers can unload 20-30 waves of missiles into one unit and only manage to kill 1 soldier.

Any experts care to chime in?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I think someone did some tests with this by fighting some online battles with a friend and testing the results. If I remember correctly, phalanx mode does add some defense to the units from missile attacks. Personally, I reduced shield values to 2 or 3 for all phalangite units. Levy units get 2, professional/elites get a 3. This makes them somewhat missile resistant but not completely impenetrable.

[Ibrahim]

No clue myself. I think I heard somewhere that phalanxes double shield bonuses. If the phalangites already have a very high value of 5 for shields, it would be an impossibly high value of 10...

I know that phalangites are already ridiculously resistant to missiles - my Certan archers can unload 20-30 waves of missiles into one unit and only manage to kill 1 soldier.

Any experts care to chime in?

I'm no expert, but I can hopefully contribute:

I recently saw "ancients behaving badly", on the discovery channel-it was about Alexander. other than the inaccuracies that the show had (which isn't really that bad), they did do an interesting experiment on sarissas v. arrows. it involved half a dozen or so archers, shooting at skirmish range at a "phalanx", made of sarissas pinioned to straw blocks, representing the phalangists.

when firing, the arrows kept hitting the sarissas, making the expected sounds of impact. however, when the targets were examined, it was found that all 100% had flown into the phalanx, of whom 80% actually hit a straw block.

now I do have some issues, namely with how the phalangites might have been spaced and so on, but I have to see that scene again to tell you for sure*. overall, it might begin to give us some idea as to how a phalanx worked.

*I personally think that the whole 3 ft thing actually refers to the space a single soldier occupies; thus the radius is 1.5 ft, which sounds little, but the feet could have been Greek feet, so...then there is the fact that Prussian soldiers iirc held 2-4 ft of space themselves. but other than Prussia, my opinion is that of a layman, so..


OK, now where does that lead to in EB? well, I think that the phalangites need to ditch their shield, or have it severely reduced, possibly even just abandoning the phalanx themselves if necessary..besides, the armor already provides enough defense. and yeah, phalanxes do provide a ridiculous bonus against missiles; I've sat through entire foot archer barrages with my pezys, and only lost a couple of men, at a battle v. carthage (playing as AS).

[Intranetusa]

I think someone did some tests with this by fighting some online battles with a friend and testing the results. If I remember correctly, phalanx mode does add some defense to the units from missile attacks. Personally, I reduced shield values to 2 or 3 for all phalangite units. Levy units get 2, professional/elites get a 3. This makes them somewhat missile resistant but not completely impenetrable.

I think 2 was the original value in RTW vanilla. If the above is true, that doubles to 4.
So for more arrow resistant, preferably a shield value of 3 would be good (or 2 for levy as you said).
But the maximum shield value should be 4 so they aren't crazy missile resistant.


when firing, the arrows kept hitting the sarissas, making the expected sounds of impact. however, when the targets were examined, it was found that all 100% had flown into the phalanx, of whom 80% actually hit a straw block.


Indeed. So the sarissa's ability to stop arrows is a bit overrated?

Yeh, I recall EB members a while ago telling me that sarissas were suppose to be resistant to arrows...it's here in a forum thread somewher, but if the show's demonstration reveals that the pikes didn't provide that great of a protection against arrows.

And if the phalangites have a value of 5, and the shield value doubles to 10 - that would make them more than twice as resistant to arrows than even the classical hoplites with their giant bronze shields. I think the classical hoplites with the large bronze shields should have the best shield values of all the units...

[vartan]

I simply don't see how you can WYSWIG weapon lethality but not shield values. Purely hypocritical. A thureos @ 3 and a pikeman's @ 5? Wow.

[Ibrahim]

Indeed. So the sarissa's ability to stop arrows is a bit overrated(1)?

Yeh, I recall EB members a while ago telling me that sarissas were suppose to be resistant to arrows(2)...it's here in a forum thread somewher, but if the show's demonstration reveals that the pikes didn't provide that great of a protection against arrows.

1-that's the likely interpretation (and yeah, that's my opinion as well), but what I really want to see is a control, with straw targets minus the sarissae. its possible (though unlikely), that the sarissas may have a small effect on the arrows' hitting of the men.
then there are the possible sources of error I mentioned (spacing, length, etc), but again, I doubt the effect is signifigant.

2-I read that a lot in many a thread, and until now couldn't really say.

as you might be aware of, I am trying to make a game myself (I discussed this in the MTW main hall), and actually plan on introducing the best physics possible; perhaps we can confirm it there-if I can even get it past the concepts stage. alternatively, we can always find a company of archers, and a company of straw men to shoot at.

[Intranetusa]

aye, I think the ability of a row of sarissa pikes at stopping arrows has been greatly exaggerated...

What do you suggest as a better tweaking value? I'm thinking maybe subtracting the shield value to either 3 or 4, and add +1 to the phalangite's defense skill.

[Foot]

I simply don't see how you can WYSWIG weapon lethality but not shield values. Purely hypocritical. A thureos @ 3 and a pikeman's @ 5? Wow.

Yeah, we must be bleeding morons.

Phalangitai have had their armour value severely reduced. This emphasizes their weak rear and (right) sides. They have had their shield values upped in response to emphasize their strong fronts. All units have their shield bonus doubled for missile attacks, so I don't know what you are complaining about there. The only difference is that units in the phalanx formation have the shield value doubled in melee as well. WYSIWYG gives us the base values for our stats, special formations receive additional bonuses and penalties. We are happy with our stats as they are in EBI, given the limitations we are under. Some people may disagree and seek to change them, and we are happy for them to do that. Calling us hypocritical (a most base accusation) is without warrant and without need. How about a little respect for the team who have worked so hard on this, rather than seeking to offend through slurs and the like. If you think we've made a mistake, state so clearly and with reason (your post holds neither) and steer clear of abuse.

Or just continue as you doing.

Foot

[antisocialmunky]

Thanks for clearing it up, Foot. I hope you don't take vartan's comment personally. I think all he was trying to say is that it seems inconsistent. All us MPers have issues with phalanxes and there is a general loathing of phalanxes due to the bugginess of the mechanics involved. The missile proofness is just icing on the cake that makes them some of the least fun-to-play-with units. They'll just spin around to coutner cav charges, infantry quality makes no difference attacking them from the front, and missiles just bounce off so the only way is to surround with infantry.

Phalanxes are not really anything special since most heavy infantry are missile proof anyway.

[Ibrahim]

aye, I think the ability of a row of sarissa pikes at stopping arrows has been greatly exaggerated...

What do you suggest as a better tweaking value? I'm thinking maybe subtracting the shield value to either 3 or 4, and add +1 to the phalangite's defense skill.


I'd say leave the defense skill as is, and do one of the following:

1-reduce the shield to 2 or 3 (as one other person recommended)
2-eliminate the shield factor permanently (and just tack the [shield value /2] on the armor)
3-get rid of the phalanx, introduce my shoulder to shoulder modification (yes, I'm the inventor of it, as Gen.JamesWolfe on the twcenter (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=259415)), and maybe get rid of the sword. the result would be similar to pikemen in King or country, only they can run to a charge.*

I personally prefer the first option; that one is reasonable IMO.

*I figured this'n out when I read that people were having difficulty lining men up shoulder to shoulder in N2TW. perhaps others were able to figure this out prior to my success, but I'm not aware of them. if anyone knows about such a successful attempt, let me know.

[gamegeek2]

AtB...current plan is to reduce shield value to 2 for low-tier and 3 for mid to upper tier phalangites. Defense skill values won't get a bonus to compensate, as phalangites weren't very well trained in melee IIRC.

[Intranetusa]

AtB...current plan is to reduce shield value to 2 for low-tier and 3 for mid to upper tier phalangites. Defense skill values won't get a bonus to compensate, as phalangites weren't very well trained in melee IIRC.

Going from 5 shield to 2 shield without any other compensation is a huge docking in stats and ability. Phalangites have just fallen from grace... XD

[vartan]

I don't have a problem with how the stats have been appropriated to various units by the development team. I am using hypocrisy interchangeably with inconsistency (it falls back on the mentioning of WYSWIG model; the model was of course not used exclusively, phalangites being a clear case in point). There's nothing wrong with not using WYSWIG through and through. And it's good that people are considering various alternative ways of appropriating stats for phalangites, such as less shield, more armour, or more defence skill, or whatever may be called an alternative. Antisocialmunky makes a great point with regard to the MP issue (IMO not a real "biggie").

[Foot]

I am using hypocrisy interchangeably with inconsistency

Then you need to learn what hypocrisy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrisy) means, because it is not interchangeable with inconsistency (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inconsistency). Being a hypocrite means that your views are inconsistent, but being inconsistent does not mean that you are a hypocrite. And I do take the insult personally as I, like many, have spent a lot of time on this mod, only for us to be accused of being hypocritical, of being intellectually dishonest. Take a care with the words you write, especially about those who have invested so much time in something that you apparently enjoy.

Foot

[MisterFred]

Foot not only knows what words mean, but works on the bestest mod ever!

Edit - I just re-read that and realized it could be taken sarcastically. It was supposed to be serious. I appreciate people using correct words and EB.

[vartan]

I just re-read that and realized it could be taken sarcastically. It was supposed to be serious.
Such is the power of words. Who could ever know words could have so much effect? They are utterances, and at least for the last 5000 years or so, written (and typed as of the last so many decades). On the World Wide Web or in any written format such as a letter, it is clear that intonation is nonexistent (intonation and body language being two forms of transmission we use to determine intention of the speaker). As such it's apparent (at least in retrospect) how important it is to be specific and serious and to avoid anything that may be interpreted one way or another, ambiguous. Such is the power of words.