my thoughts on Rome

[mattep74]

I miss one big thing with the legions. They cant form a square. IRL Romans were exellent at forming squares.

At one time i had 150 roman cavallery going up against 400 men. I lost 40 men, 2 men of the other army escaped

When i am on the defending side there isnt any use in standing and defending since my troops will spread out and it will be a one on one fight and they dont fight like a unit.

I am going after the whole map before taking rome, but the sente demands that i comit suicide, am i to popular for them then?

Thank good i dont have to fight numerous bridgebattles like in shogun or medieval total war when crossing rivers cost almost the entire army

Would be intressting to play the other total war games on this kind of map

[nokem]

I miss one big thing with the legions. They cant form a square.

Right click on individual units and drag the mouse to reform them into a square. Or right click on a destination and drag to move and reform at once. Or am I missing something?

[lars573]

That's a column your describing. A square is just that a hollow square of men with the strongest units forming the square with weaker units in the center.

[nokem]

I get you. Could you split a unit 4 ways and arrange it around another - group the 5 and see what happens?
Cumbersome, but would it give you the benefits of the original square formation?

[lars573]

That could work but the real benefit of a square formation is that no flanks are exposed to attack by the enemy. The technique your describing would leave are corner of some units open to attack.

[econ21]

Lars, I understand your point but of course all squares have corners and in real war these were the weak spot of square formations. I think the British used to put guns on the corners of squares when fighting Dervishes in the late 19th Century. I would imagine squares were particularly vulnerable before gunpowder, as the corners would not be protected by fire from the two adjacent lines.

[Malbulga]

Your question about whether standing still when on the defending side is answered somewhat in one of the advisor messages (I kept the advice on high during my first two campaigns, because there are so many little things I hadn't quite picked up on, i.e. I don't think it was till my third campaign I found out about placing my archers on the left to fire into the exposed rights of the enemy). I remember the advisor telling me that when charged by cavalry it is better to hold formation... not countercharge and not get caught on the move... as it allows the soldiers to brace themselves for the charge and form a solid line against it...
Also, I've noticed that when my units are on fire at will, and throw their pilas before charging in, that if attacked, the front line or two will engage with their swords, while the lines behind will continue to throw their pilas...

[lars573]

Lars, I understand your point but of course all squares have corners and in real war these were the weak spot of square formations. I think the British used to put guns on the corners of squares when fighting Dervishes in the late 19th Century. I would imagine squares were particularly vulnerable before gunpowder, as the corners would not be protected by fire from the two adjacent lines.

Actually the square formation has all the troops in it face out from the center. So there are no corners.

[chemchok]

So it's a circle formation.

[discovery1]

Actually the square formation has all the troops in it face out from the center. So there are no corners.

But wouldn't that leave the one guy on the very corner vaulnerable to double teaming? Thus the corners are slowly eaten away until they collapse?