[EB] Online Historical Battle Poll

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Ok, this is solely designed as a poll guys. Place your vote and take the discussion to the other thread. I'm gonna limit this poll to a few battles so we can get this going quickly. We'll limit this to some Hellenistic battles and if this is successful, maybe visit another theater next time:yes:

[TheShakAttack]

I think it would be best to limit poll to about 4-5 battles of your and Lazy's choosing.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I think it would be best to limit poll to about 4-5 battles of your and Lazy's choosing.

I'm exercising supreme authority here. There will be no say from Lazy but I'm sure he has no problem with that. After all, he's from Pakistan :p

[The Celtic Viking]

Lets go, Raphia!

[Lazy O]

No u !!!

[Arjos]

I'm all for Raphia aswell, very close match-up and most of all: no romans! :D

[Lazy O]

You dissapoint me my fellow Baz Baz Baz 's

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

On a side note, I will close this poll around midnight EST tomorrow evening. So make sure you vote before then.

[Kival]

The Battle of Cynoscephalae is not really possible with the eb units, it's too early.

[Arjos]

It's a small world Kival, but Greece is even smaller :P
There was one during the macedonian wars...
But honest mistake, Thebans were quite cool ^^

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

The Battle of Cynoscephalae is not really possible with the eb units, it's too early.

Are you thinking of Chaeronea?

Cynosecphalae was fought between the Macedonians and Romans during the Second(?) Macedonian War.

Asculum is a little earlier, 10-15 years I believe, but totally feasible with EB's unit roster.

[Kival]

I meant this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cynoscephalae_%28364_BC%29 though if I had looked it up in wikipedia I'd have seen the reference to the other battle ;-).

[Yavana]

Hmm raphia seems more balanced whereas Magnesia is more interesting. I will vote for Raphia just to make poll more interesting. I dibs on captain of AS in both choices! He he he

[Vega]

Hmm interesting choices here, i mind about Magnesia and Cynoscephalae, wanna see Polybians on duty :D

[TheShakAttack]

Why the hellenophilia? No baz baz baz? Or carthage?

[Yavana]

Veg go cysposphalesomething! I wanna that one too!

[antisocialmunky]

Why the hellenophilia? No baz baz baz? Or carthage?

They wrote stuff down.

[TheShakAttack]

So did romans:-P

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Yeah but armies of say, the Gallic tribes weren't so neatly divided into contingents like Hellenistic or Roman armies were. We don't have army lists such as 1,000 Belgae infantry and 400 heavy cavalry, or 20,000 spearmen and 5,000 swordsmen etc. With Hellenistic armies we have somewhat specific compositions of armies for certain battles, same with the Romans. I was thinking the next battle would be Punic in nature perhaps. We can do some barb battles but they'll be limited to Telamon, Vosges, etc. Alot of battles like Alesia, Gergovia, some of the Dacian campaigns that I can't think of atm were siege battles (or involved siegeworks) which are too imbalanced for MP unless the attacker has an incredibly distinct advantage. Similarly, I wanted to include a Seleucid-Parthian battle but a quick search yielded no names of battles other than results such as the Seleucids were defeated near Ecbatana and lost Media and Persia to the Parthians and so on, certainly no basis for forming armies.

Invariably, a lot of these battles are going to feature Rome as a participant because we simply don't have accounts of the others. I may throw a siege concept out there eventually though. Numantia seems like it would be fun. Those Celtiberi were ferocious.

[antisocialmunky]

I wouldn't mind if we made an approximation of the Celts vs Germans. It is a matchup that highly favors Celtic sword units but Germans have great cav to compensate.

[|Sith|DarthRoach]

Hi all!

Some of you may know me, some may not, but I'm Lazy O's clanmate. On topic - I voted for Magnesia.

[TheShakAttack]

Nice try Lazy -_-

First post; just joined.

[Lazy O]

You cannot make alt-accounts at the org.

[|Sith|DarthRoach]

Ask Gaius, whom I played yesterday, if I am the same guy as Lazy.:laugh4:

Or ask TCV - we just played a 2v2.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Yeah he's not Lazy. We have records of Roach playing one match in June as Pahlava and I saw him once or twice on Hamachi. Welcome!


I wouldn't mind if we made an approximation of the Celts vs Germans. It is a matchup that highly favors Celtic sword units but Germans have great cav to compensate.
This is fine because historically, Celts relied mainly on spears and swords were much more few and far between. This would mean majority Gaeroas/Galaiche units though and neither of these preform particularly well. I wish there was a more mid/upper tier Celtic spear unit.

[TheShakAttack]

Yeah he's not Lazy. We have records of Roach playing one match in June as Pahlava and I saw him once or twice on Hamachi. Welcome!


This is fine because historically, Celts relied mainly on spears and swords were much more few and far between. This would mean majority Gaeroas/Galaiche units though and neither of these preform particularly well. I wish there was a more mid/upper tier Celtic spear unit.

My apologies Roach :)

Something smelt fishy, that's all.

Germanian cavalry being good is a misconception. Their cavalry was terrible: though the dudes sitting on horses were crazy, the mounts were of notoriously poor quality, and cavalry tactics almost non-existent. Celtic cavalry, especially from Gallia Belgica on the other hand, was quite well developed. I am talking about the regions rather than ethnicities here since that is how a lot of Roman authors who recorded these things wrote. The Ubii who performed marvellously under Caesar were remounted with Hispanic horses iirc.

Very, very close poll so far. I haven't voted yet since I'm not particularly fussed which battle we fight, as long as we do fight!

[gamegeek2]

The individuals on the horses had significantly higher fighting skill than their opponents. In a prolonged mounted melee, this is what counts, and is what let them defeat the good quality gallic cavalry on multiple occasions.

Germanic cavalry were rightly feared for their javelin attack by their roman opponents.

[TheShakAttack]

The individuals on the horses had significantly higher fighting skill than their opponents. In a prolonged mounted melee, this is what counts, and is what let them defeat the good quality gallic cavalry on multiple occasions.

Germanic cavalry were rightly feared for their javelin attack by their roman opponents.

I don't think they are recorded as having SIG higher fighting skill; I think the word crazier is a more accurate description. Certainly they were awesome in cav vs cav melee, but that is not the only thing cav is used/good for. Unforutnately RTW cant really represent the lack of manoeuvrability and crappiness of mounts.

I'd be interested to know the instances where their jav attack was so "feared". The only distinguishing feature of their jav is that it was very long, almost spear-ish in length. and in fact, the fraemae was technologically inferior- due to a shortage of iron and metal-work technology. The framae was known to be a weapon that they could either use as a spear or throw- depending on their mood.

"rightly feared" is an interesting way to put it. You sound like an old crippled veteran who suffered from their jav attacks :clown:

[Lazy O]

Why this thread ?

[TheShakAttack]

good point :)

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Ok, assuming everyone interested has voted already, I'm closing this poll....somehow. I'm not sure how I can so Ludens, feel free to close this thread. We'll be using Magnesia as our initial test dummy. Discussion will continue on the other thread.