Divinus Arma's Illustrated Guide to Basic Tactics

[Divinus Arma]

DIVINUS ARMA'S ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO BASIC TACTICS

!!WARNING!! These are textbook applications. Use these as foundation of knowledge and modify them liberally and often as necessary.

Introduction:

The purpose of this guide is to present some basic information for beginning or intermediate player seeking a little advice on basic battlefield tactics. While this guide is in no way an ultimate authority, it may help those who need it in some basic warfare. This guide will primarily focus on Roman tactics, first addressing the republican army before advancing into the army of the Empire. To faciliate a beter understanding of this, I will present a little hsitory and include phalanx tactics. An understanding of tactics as it developed historically will aid the warfighter in quick decision making on the battlefield. After all, most plans fall apart in the beginning; the successful general is able to make rapid changes before the enemy does.

This guide is intended to support the hard/hard setting of Rome: Total War or greater without necessarily relying on pause to slow down the action. There have been comments made by members about the kill rate and slowing down game speed as much as possible. I do not seek to argue the choice in this, instead offering some methods I have useful in seamless uninterrupted game-play. It is important to point out that until you MASTER the tactics, use pause. After all, armies of antiquity drilled for a lifetime to get their tactics right. So why shouldn't we spend a little time drilling ourselves?

Historical Reference Note:

I encourage all those who have an affinity for this time period to do there own research on the topic at hand. There is a wealth of information available, and that information will in fact make you a better gamer. Much the information in this guide will be supported by historical fact where available as provided by the works of Lawrence Keppie, Professor of Roman History and Archaeology at the University of Glasgow. Most references will be made to “The Making of the Roman Army: From Republic to Empire” (Keppie, 1998). Enough! On to the good stuff…

********************PART I********************

THE PHALANX ARMY OF THE OLD REPUBLIC

The Creative Assembly was absolutely correct in their creation of the Republican army. The failure is in the lack of immediate access to all unit types. The Sixth King of Rome, Servius Tullius, (580-530 b.c.) is credited with the initial formation of the Republican Army organization as we are familiar with it today. The ‘Servian Constitution’ broke the populace into centuries for voting purposes as well as to establish classes for military service. The highest class comprised the Equites, followed by five classes of non-equestrian class, and a bottom class, the capite censi, who without property were exempt from military service. It should be noted that during this time, military service was seen as a duty, responsibility, and privilege. It was actually during this time that the Roman Army embraced Greek hoplite style tactics, which the Romans claim were borrowed from the Etruscans with whom they shared the peninsula. In 390, the Gaullish invasion, and loose fighting order began to show up weaknesses in the hoplite style fighting used by Rome. It was Livy who wrote of some of the first recorded introduction of the Hastati, Principes, and Triarii in his account of the year 340 in the later stages of war against the Samnites.

I think it is important to note that during this time period of the introduction of the HPT (Hastati, Principes, Triarii) style army, Rome favored using equally sized contingents of Socii (allies) to compliment their forces. These forces gradually assumed the Roman style of fighting until they were virtually indistinguishable and became completely absorbed. More on that later. Anyhow, the creation of the HPT republican army signaled the close of the roman hoplite era and hailed the emergence of maniple tactics.

Before I continue, I will give a brief description of phalanx warfare. Those players who favor Greek factions may like to take note. Either way, it is important to understand from all perspectives, since phalanx warfare is a major component of this game.

Figure 1 details the concept of a basic phalanx unit:

FIGURE 1
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/PHALANX1.bmp

As you can see from the illustration, the phalanx is made up of plates and seams. The phalanx was dominant throughout ancient Greece, the Peloponnesian War, the expulsion of Persia, and before. In the beginning of phalanx warfare, there were no horses. The phalanx armies fought each other face to face. As you already know, the phalanx, comprised of overlapping shield and tightly packed men created a strength on one side and weakness on the other. Figure 2 illustrates this:


FIGURE 2

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/phalanx2.bmp


Now, as is known, the ancient Greeks simply hammered at each other in these formations until one called it a day or was destroyed. During the fight, the two formations would rotate in battle, as the men on the left tried to shift right and under the protection of his neighbor. This was made worse by the fact that the lead troops on the right were always trying to destroy the enemy’s left, as shown in Figure 3:

FIGURE 3

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/phalanx3.bmp

As you can imagine, the importance of maintaining unity and reducing vulnerable seams was made more important with the size of the army. While I cannot recall the specific battle, it was during the Peloponnesian War that one army was split in half and destroyed by the enemy. It is easy to see how. The strength of the phalanx is also its weakness.


https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/BasicPhalanx1.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/BasicPhalanx2.jpg

Long after the war, when Macedon would make its play to power, the Sarissa and Echelon formation were introduced. The Sarissa gave the using army a distinct advantage in the number of spear brought to bear against the enemy. The echelon, illustrated in Figure 4, allowed for an aggressor to secure a distinct advantage. The echelon exploits the weakness of a “static defense”.


FIGURE 4

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/phalanx4.bmp

Because the defense is usually in a tactically advantageous position either on high ground or locked on side to a natural barrier, they are static. The echelon exploited this by turning the weak-side away, thinning the ranks there slightly and using those men for depth on the right flank. Thus, when battle was engaged, the attacking army secured the initiative and exploited critical vulnerabilities.

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Echelon2.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Echelon3.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Echelon4.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Echelon5.jpg

Now, enter cavalry during the time of the phalanx. You can imagine how devastating a cavalry charge to one side would be! This is where Alexander excelled. Some have called it the “hammer and anvil” or “hold and strike”, either way the concept is the same: Hold the army with your phalanx and strike with the cavalry. There are two way that I will cover this for this portion of the manual: #1: The flanking strike with a frontal engagement (F.S.F.E.) and #2: The Echelon with the Gap exploitation (E.G.E).

Figure 5 illustrates the basic F.S.F.E.:


FIGURE 5

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/phalanx5.bmp

Screenshots:
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Flank1.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Flank2.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Flank3.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Flank4.jpg

One Historian whom I read on Alexander called the lines of Cavalry “Dragon’s Teeth”. They were a line of cavalry units each placed in wedge formation. This provided maximum penetration over a wide area, as opposed to standard formation, which would not have been as disruptive. I have used it in commanding Greeks factions and found it effective.

Figure 6-8 details the E.G.E., Echelon with gap exploitation. I believe Alexander used this against Darius in Persia, although I am not entirely sure. One thing is certain, this tactic is best used against much larger armies where flankning would be difficult or impossible.

FIGURE 6

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/phalanx6.bmp

As figure 6 details, you must first engage at echelon. I recommend engaging at the point where the enemy General is. The goal is to take him out and route the enemy, not destroy the enemy by attrition. Figure 7 shows one option for creating the gap in you r enemy’s line. I am sure I will get some flack for this one. It is just one option of many; the key is to break your enemy’s unity by separating to plates to expose a seam. You must be Johnny on the spot to get it right. Practice will help. Use pause during practice until you have this down.


FIGURE 7

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/phalanx7.bmp

FIGURE 8

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/phalanx8.bmp

This leaves the enemy with a HUGE dilemma: Turn and protect the rear, or continue fighting the enemy in front? Either way they are screwed because you are going to kill the general and then decimate their routing army.

Screenshots:
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Seam1.jpg

LOOK AT THE OPENING IN THE LINES IN THE SCREENIE BELOW! THAT IS AN EXPOSED SEAM BETWEEN TWO PLATES:
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Seam2.jpg

CHARGE!
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Sem5.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Seam6.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Seam7.jpg
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Seam8.jpg


While each of these tactics is useful, the successful general will know when to make a change and when to stay put. You must be able to rapidly adapt. The tactics as illustrated and demonstrated in this guide are textbook. It usually won't go this well.

********************PART II********************

TACTICS UNDER THE SERVIAN CONSTITUTION

Prior to the reforms ascribed to Marius, the army of the Roman Republic was comprised of the “ala sociorum, equivalent in size to a legion of Romans” (Keppie, 1998, p.22). The ala sociorum was comprised itself of cohort-contingents, and these each of maniples of hastati, principes, and triarii. Thus, the cohort was a small version of the ala sociorum as a whole.

The early Republic legion, or ala sociorum, was comprised of 4200 men. This was divided as follows: 10 maniples of Hastati (each maniple of 120 men), 10 maniples of Principes (each maniple of 120 men), 10 maniples of Triarii (each maniple of 60 men), 10 maniples of Velites (each maniple of 120 men, though these maniples were largely organized together as a screen before the main advance), and 10 turmae (30 men) of Equites also referred to as Extraordinarii.

So now that we have the historical background, let us delve into the game application and put use to the histories that Polybius has provided us. As it applies to RTW, we have equal maniples of each troop type, with 5 troop types total. Limited to only twenty units within our RTW army, we must make some exceptions. This is completely open for your personal adaptation to serve the tactics I will outline ahead. At the very minimum, if you seek to be historically accurate, I recommend losing one unit of Velites to be replaced by your general. I prefer a minimum of velites and a minimum of equites, adding the extra units to my inantry. The choice is yours of course.

As the armies approached, the Roman lines were formed in what has been referred to as the quincunx, lines of maniples with gaps of equal length in between them. The equites are not spoken of much, though these were probably used most to chase down routing enemies or to protect the flanks. Figure 9 provides the historically accurate tactical base configuration as applicable in RTW.

Figure 9: The Servian Foundation
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/RomanLine1.jpg

It is debatable whether or not the lines engaged with these gaps, since they would create a critical vulnerability for the Republic army, simply because of the obvious ease for the enemy to flank from within the line. More likely, and this is the commonly held belief, the lines of engaging troops would extend upon engagement, filling the gaps. First the Velites would engage the enemy, ahead of the main force, as Figure 10 illustrates:

Figure 10: The Velite Screen
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/RomanLine2.jpg

Following this engagement, the Velites would retreat behind the legion through the gaps in the lines, and the Hastati would extend their lines to meet the enemy. Figure 11 shows this:

Figure 11: Retreating Velites and Closing Hastati
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/RomanLine3.jpg

The process would be repeated again between the hastati and principes. It is important to note that historically, the hastati did not route first or fight until destroyed, they simply retreated when worn out enough. This is important in RTW, because if you intend to use the same tactics, you should allow your hastati to retreat long before they reach 50% casualties. You will find that this happens pretty darn quick. As Figure 12 shows, the hastati would retreat between the open ranks of principes and triarii before the principes would extend to cover their gaps.

Figure 12: Retreating Hastati and Closing Principes
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/RomanLine4.jpg

If the principes were unable to finish the job, they too would retreat between the open gaps. The triarii, who fought in closed ranks as in a phalanx with the hasta spear would represent the final push, and be supported by the remaining hastate, principes, and velites. This process is detailed in figures 13 and 14.

Figure 13: Retreating Principes and Closing Triarii
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/RomanLine5.jpg

Figure 14: The Final Push Together
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/RomanLine6.jpg

**HISTORICALLY RETARDED!**Since RTW is not a historically perfect game, I recommend staying away from the quincunx. After all, the gaps are unnecessary, so why make it harder on yourself? Just fill the gaps ahead of time and have your maniples in line already. Further, I have found that retreating causes a route, so the concept is somewhat ineffective unless you retreat your hastati almost immediately. Instead, send your principes in to back up your hastati shortly after the hastati engage. Better yet, screw the hastati. Use two lines of principes instead. Whatever. It's not like you have to deal with the class society of ancient rome with different levels of property ownership. Just build the freakin' principes instead of the hastati. But like I said: whatever.

Moving on:
280 saw the year that manipular tactics would be tested against phalanx tactics, when Roman expansion in southern Italy brought the Republic into conflict against Pyrrhus of Epirus, from Greek origin. It is critical to note that phalanx tactics at this time were at their peak, benefiting from the trials and successes of Alexander’s success in Persia. According to Keppie, “Pyrrhus had fought in the wars of Alexander’s successors and was familiar with the latest refinements of military thinking” (p.23). Thus it could be said that the first engagements between the Republic and Pyrrhus represent the passing of the torch from Hellenistic domination to budding Roman domination. At first, Pyrrhus saw success, with a route of the Roman army. Early into the campaign, however, the costs of success proved too great, and Pyrrhus was subsequently forced to withdraw from Italy. This opened the door to the wars with Carthage.

What development in tactics could be so great as to prove superior to the phalanx at the peak of its development? What army could directly face down ranks upon ranks of sarissa pressing forward with absolute purpose and deadly weight? None… so long as the phalanx maintains its formation and fights upon its preferred ground. Thus, it is the disruption of the phalanx that enabled the Romans to conquer.

The Romans did not charge directly upon the phalanx army with a force of equal size; they instead divided their own army, with a contingent to fight, and a contingent in reserve, using their cohort and maniple in such a way as to create a dilemma for the phalanx. This dilemma subsequently caused the critical disruption of the phalanx formation.

As Polybius (Trans. Shuchburgh, 1889, p.226-230) wrote in the Second Century BC: “Now, whether the phalanx in its charge drives its opponents from their ground, or is itself driven back, in either case its peculiar order is dislocated; for whether in following the retiring, or flying from the advancing enemy, they quit the rest of their forces: and when this takes place, the enemy's reserves can occupy the space thus left, and the ground which the phalanx had just before been holding, and so no longer charge them face to face, but fall upon them on their flank and rear.”

For us in RTW, the first thing we must do is establish and send out this cohort to engage, while leaving our reserve. Tis is illustrated in figure 15:

Figure 15: The Initial Cohort against the Phalanx
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple1.jpg

From here, we push our cohort to an angle as illustrated in Figure 16:

Figure 16: Angle the Cohort.
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple2.jpg

This creates the dillema for our phalanx opponent. Shall he divide his army to meet the threat, or will he turn the entire army? The first choice is detailed in Figure 17. If he does so, move your principes and triarii further to the flank.

Figure 17: The Enemy Breaks Formation
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple3.jpg

Now, as the enemy drives forward against the hastati, retreat your hastati and draw the phalanx out as detailed in figure 18. Engage with principes and triarii to the flank. If he goes for the principes and triarii, engage with the hastati. Either way, that unit of phalanx is screwed.

Figure 18: The Bait is taken
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple4.jpg

Now, the other option is if the enemy tries to negate the flanking threat by moving the entire force. If he does so, you must move your entire force as well, retreating to the original line. This is detailed in Figures 19-21.

Figure 19: Ready to engage the flank.
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple5.jpg

Figure 20: The Enemy moves in response, the Republic retreats to original position in a new location
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple6.jpg

Figure 21: Shift your units and find your battle line again
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple7.jpg

Now you are essentially in the same position as you were before. Do it again from the opposite flank. Rinse and repeat.

Figure 22: Shifting to engage from the opposite flank.
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/divinusarma/Maniple8.jpg

**HISTORICALLY RETARDED!** Using this tactic with a Hastati, Principe, and Triarii cohort against a large army of Phalanx Pikeman or better is stupid! You will get your butt kicked! Sure Rome did it against the best of post-Alexander military tactics, but so what... the game is screwed up on this one. How the hell does a phalanx turn around in less than a second? Answer: It doesn't unless it is historically retarded! That said, you must match equivalent troops against equivalent troops. This is an effective tactic when you employ Republic infantry against Levy Pikeman, Militia Hoplites, and Hoplites. If you plan to stand against large forces of Spartans, Phalanx pikeman, Royal Pikeman, or Silver Shield; you absolutley must use a post-marius equivalent. Period. And you will still die if you go face to face no matter what. Phalanx are just good for that kinda thing.

COMING NEXT: Screenshots, resizing of current pics, and a modification of the listed tactics to further compensate for the historically retarded.

ALSO: Part III- Tactics of the Post-Marius Republic, followed by Part IV- ?wait and see.

References:

Keppie, L. (1998). The Making of the Roman Army: From Republic to Empire. Oklahoma Press: London, England

Polybius, The Histories of Polybius, 2 Vols., trans. Evelyn S. Shuckburgh (London: Macmillan, 1889), pp. 226-230.


Updated on 13 April, 2005:
Added Screenshots.
Made text changes.

Last Updated on 18 April, 2005
Added most of Part II

[The Stranger]

but what do you try to say us, cause how you play is your discission and not CA's.

[Divinus Arma]

but what do you try to say us, cause how you play is your discission and not CA's.

What do you mean?

[The Stranger]

i don't get your point, are you explaining us how to play phalanx or how to play with legions or are you telling us CA screwed up tactics

[Kekvit Irae]

Question: Do you play DBA (De Bellis Antiquitatis)? The tactics or Figure 4 and onward look strangely familiar to the general style of play

[Kekvit Irae]

i don't get your point, are you explaining us how to play phalanx or how to play with legions or are you telling us CA screwed up tactics

He's showing us general strategies on how to fight and win, taken from Real Life® tactics that are tried and true. Ignore them at your own risk.

[Divinus Arma]

He's showing us general strategies on how to fight and win, taken from Real Life® tactics that are tried and true. Ignore them at your own risk.

Yep. What's the ® ?

[Kekvit Irae]

Yep. What's the ® ?

Real Life® is a registered trademark of Reality Bites 2005.
:tongueg:

[*Ringo*]

Good useful info, will give it a go if i ever get round to playing a faction with Phalanx units! ~D

I find this sort of military tactics fascinating but hard to find decent sources on; could you recommend any other books/websites that contain this type of pictorial descriptions?

Emperor Umeu 1 have you taken your pills today? :dizzy2:

[screwtype]

The FSFE is a no-brainer for RTW, although frequently complicated by the presence of enemy rearguards or cav.

The "echelon" attack is a clever solution to the phalanx defence, but I have my doubts as to how useful it would be in a game like RTW. Worth a try though, especially for suprising people in multiplayer ~:)

[Kekvit Irae]

Good useful info, will give it a go if i ever get round to playing a faction with Phalanx units! ~D

I find this sort of military tactics fascinating but hard to find decent sources on; could you recommend any other books/websites that contain this type of pictorial descriptions?



http://www.alphalink.com.au/~nwa/dbx/dbatacts.html

It's primarily for DBA, but the general tactics can be used for RTW

[Marcus Maxentius]

Those tactics I've seen in history books on ancient battles. I love the slant formation or as you call it the echelon. I usually put elite units on the leading edge for maximum impact. It's really good agaisnt the computer since it seems prepared for you to attack in a straight line. You should also say that as you make contact with the enemy, gradually bring all of the other units into line.

Also, the charge through the middle with the cav move might work, but I tried it before and my cav panicked a bit.

[Colovion]

Very good post.

I can't wait until tactics actually have a bearing in battles won or lost. Are you in the wrong forum?

[Divinus Arma]

Question: Do you play DBA (De Bellis Antiquitatis)? The tactics or Figure 4 and onward look strangely familiar to the general style of play

I have never heard of DBA. These tactics were taken from historical reference and are beautifully applicable to RTW.

[Divinus Arma]

Just to address some of the questions here:

1. This will be an ongoing Guide and I intend to make edits and updates on a regular basis when I have time. The history adds flavor since this stuff was really used. I will also be adding tactics with no historical relevance.

2. Please read the intro. The TACTICS WORK. I use them regularly. They are very effectie for RTW. The key is in knowing WHEN to use WHICH tactic.

3. Never heard of DBA.

4. Tactics have a huge bearing on battles. The echelon is very effective, but you MUST create the gap in the seams for it to work. I will update soon with option for exploiting gaps (critical vulnerabilites).

5. If you say tactics have no effect, then from now on just let the AI do the work for you. Watch the madness.

And thanks for the kudos so far!

Regards

[HarunTaiwan]

Screen shots of echelon in action would be cool.

[Kekvit Irae]

I have never heard of DBA. These tactics were taken from historical reference and are beautifully applicable to RTW.

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/guides/index.html :happyg:

[Colovion]

Nothing against your admirable grasp on tactics. Your ideas would work great in MTW or RTW if it was slowed down to a normal pace. Sorry, I'm just using your thread to vent. That was wrong of me. My point is that tactics is cheating when battling the current AI. I even feel rotten when I win a battle because I flanked their army with a cavalry wing because I know that there's no way that they'll ever beat me when I play using tactics even as primitive as those.

If you want to use morale as a tactical advantage, destroy one unit and it'll send the rest of the army running for the hills. But that's kind of an AI exploit.

[Marcus Maxentius]

I would like to see it also. Just to know if I've been doing it right

[marcusbrutus]

That's a great guide, I'd never have thought about using an echelon formation. Thanks.

[Spino]

Lovely strategy guide Divinius, newbs can learn alot from it.

Now this kind of guide would actually come in handy if RTW's tactical AI wasn't so inept in handling its troops. Roughly 90-95% of the time all you need do is keep your army in a sensible formation and either hold good ground when defending or when attacking, creep your troops to within 100-200 yards of the enemy. Once your troops are withing a certain range the AI will then ruin its chances for victory and make a general mess of things. Its favorite thing to do is send its units against your troops in a piecemeal fashion so you can slaughter them at your leisure. This is not to say that AI doesn't win, it does, but it's just so damn rare and those victories are generally attributed to vastly superior numbers, superior morale or an unusual number of elite units. I cannot recall a single battle in RTW where the AI handled its troops in a sensible manner once both battle lines were within 200-300 yards of each other.

[The Stranger]

neither can i. in my current campaign i have 600 victories vs 27 defeats. of wich 22 are naval defeats. i lost a fewe times when outnumbered by more than 1500

[The Stranger]

oh almost forgot they had onagers and lots of them

[Marcus Maxentius]

I had a blistering hard time facing a Roman Legion as the germans in custom. 5 hastati, 5 principes, 5 triiari, 2 velites, and 2 equites were almost inpenetrable. They're was too much pila fire going on and the AI charged with the triiai first and I couldn't crack their armor.

[Divinus Arma]

I will also be posting screenies of tactics in use.

As always, thank you for the comments and suggestions.

More will be coming soon.

[jerby]

wow, great. i've tried it differently. but this is a great way.
with teh Last the EGE, what is teh use of cavalry? what happens in battle?

does it turn like -----/\-- ?with the / and \ representing the leaders of teh echelon and ---representing teh enemy lines...is teh main goal to seperate the army and go for the gen?

[Raijer]

Excellent guide so far - I'm looking forward to many more installments! Great work Divinus Arma!

[Divinus Arma]

wow, great. i've tried it differently. but this is a great way.
with teh Last the EGE, what is teh use of cavalry? what happens in battle?

does it turn like -----/\-- ?with the / and \ representing the leaders of teh echelon and ---representing teh enemy lines...is teh main goal to seperate the army and go for the gen?

The sguares are the unit, representing the individuals soldiers combined into one unit. The goal is to create a gap in the seam between two plates. Remember, as figure 1 showed, the unit is a plate (a hard surface, or strong point). By throwing your cavalry into this one gap, you will exploit the gap.

In the process, you will end up routing at least the unit on the right, and hopefully the general. Surround the general with your cavalry and kill him. Now your horse are behind the enemy lines and the enemy units will have to choose between turning to face them or continuing against your infantry. Eitherway, they are screwed.

[Ellesthyan]

Am I wrong in supposing that hoplite warfare was quite different from sarissa warfare? I thought that hoplites did not use their spears to push, but rather to stab overhand in the weak neck area of their opponent. Naturally the formations would be a lot closer to eachother, each trying with their large shields to push the other away. The Macedonian pikemen used such a large pike, that the "hoplons", the shields used earlier, were unpractical, and they switched over to a very small shield, using their weapons with two hands. The shift around as you've shown seems to me a little ridiculous as sarissa armed troops wouldn't have that problem. It is possible though that hoplites would move in such a way, but probably they'd be positioned very close, if not shield to shield!

[Divinus Arma]

I am not a historian, but this is my understanding of this type of engagement. Yes, the sarissa was a drastic change to phalanx warfare. However, I believe that this type of movement still occcured for other reasons I did not mention.

Someone may correct if I am wrong, but I believe that as the forward ranks fell in combat, they were filled in by the back and left ranks. The gaps in the unit were continually being filled in towards the front and right of the line.

[The Stranger]

He's showing us general strategies on how to fight and win, taken from Real Life® tactics that are tried and true. Ignore them at your own risk.

seems a bit like a challenge to me, i'll think i'll also start a guide with phalax/legionary defence tactics

[The Stranger]

Am I wrong in supposing that hoplite warfare was quite different from sarissa warfare? I thought that hoplites did not use their spears to push, but rather to stab overhand in the weak neck area of their opponent. Naturally the formations would be a lot closer to eachother, each trying with their large shields to push the other away. The Macedonian pikemen used such a large pike, that the "hoplons", the shields used earlier, were unpractical, and they switched over to a very small shield, using their weapons with two hands. The shift around as you've shown seems to me a little ridiculous as sarissa armed troops wouldn't have that problem. It is possible though that hoplites would move in such a way, but probably they'd be positioned very close, if not shield to shield!

the shield of the phalangites weren't very small just smaller than the big argive shields. and strapped over their left shoulder

[Old Celt]

I have a question about the echelon attack. Would you have other units to the right of the echelon unit? The illustration makes it look like they would exploit a seam, but then be vulnerable to a flank attack on their own right as they penetrated the line. I assume you keep your units in phalanx throughout this procedure?

Have you ever tried exploiting the gap created through echelons with heavy infantry like falxmen?

Thanks for the guide, it's very interesting so far!

[Marcus Maxentius]

I havent tried going for the center of the line with the slant yet. It seems easier to try for the wing. That's what Alexander did in one battle against the Persians. His rightmost 2 phalanxes had pushed two mercenary hoplites back. Alexander charged his heavy cavalry through the gap in wedge formation and went straight for Darius. One of the right phalaxes disengaged when it's enemy was basically done for and attacked one of the other hoplites in the rear.

It would be pretty risky to attack the center, flanking and all. The kill rates/routing for phalanxes seems slow against other phalanxes. You'd need other phalanx units to the side or some more protection on the wing to screen the attack.

Is anybody reminded of the Battle of Trafalgar with this bold attempt to attack the center with a line of troops?

[Marcus Maxentius]

[QUOTE=Ellesthyan I thought that hoplites did not use their spears to push, but rather to stab overhand in the weak neck area of their opponent. Naturally the formations would be a lot closer to eachother, each trying with their large shields to push the other away. /QUOTE]

It's up to debate, but I read that the Spartans favored thrusting underhand whereas the other Greeks favored charging with the shield while holding the thrusting spear overhand. I love those pictures of one phalanxes spears going through the other's helmets. Ouch! And I don't know if they switched to underhand thrusts rather than overhand stabs after initial contact.

[Divinus Arma]

UPDATED 13 APRIL 2005

-Included screenshots of phalanx tactics.

[drone]

Nice pics!

The echelon gap exploit must take some good timing. I'm not really disciplined enough to play phalanx factions, but it looks like I'll have to give them a try with this.
~:cheers:

[Marcus Maxentius]

An alternative way of doing the echelon on one of those tabletop figure battle sites is putting the phalanx in a stairstep pattern like this:

P
P
P
P
P
P
P

When just tipping a straight formation on an angle and approaching the enemy diagonally, the AI often moves and lines itself back up with you, negating the effectiveness. So, just use the stairstep and move forward might be easier. This will force the opposing phalanx to take its units out of line to engage yours. As this happens gradually engage the rest your line, turning your slant formation back slowly into a straight formation. And during al this time have cav and missles and flankers do their magic as well.

[Marcus Maxentius]

Whoops. Well I hope you can imagine what my faulty diagram was supposed to look like.

[Divinus Arma]

I have a question about the echelon attack. Would you have other units to the right of the echelon unit? The illustration makes it look like they would exploit a seam, but then be vulnerable to a flank attack on their own right as they penetrated the line. I assume you keep your units in phalanx throughout this procedure?

Have you ever tried exploiting the gap created through echelons with heavy infantry like falxmen?

Thanks for the guide, it's very interesting so far!

As you can see by the screenshot, the units on the right are the most vulnerable. You can double the stack of supporting units on the right to counter this. Generally, you want your elite troops with the highest morale for this section of your battle line. They must be able to hold the line long enough to get your horse through the gap. NEVER put your general in this spot. I have really bad luck doing that.

You absolutely should keep your units in phalanx. The supporting unit on the right and to the rear is NOT in phalanx until he shifts right to draw open the seam. He should run to the right and then quickly take up the phalanx in the direction indiciated. He is kind of like bait. This is why the genral should not be used, as the bait will be way too tempting and too many enemy units will be drawn there, which clutters your open seam.

This formation is not restricted to phalanx, and my guide will go into this more later on. I do not recommend infantry to exploit the seam; it is really only best for calvary because they can charge through the gap so well. They get through very quickly and create that "dillema" I was talking about. Remember, this is the textbook version. A good general will manipulate it as he or she finds effective to accomplish the mission.

Thank you for the comments.

[runes]

this is the problem i see


echelon works great if going like this:


| \ (| is enemy \ is you)


but what happens if the enemy has any sense at all and just moves to support the attack like this:



\ \


you're assuming the opponent will stay in a static line and not move to meet his opponent properly.

[Divinus Arma]

you're assuming the opponent will stay in a static line and not move to meet his opponent properly.

Read the guide. Pictures are pretty, but they only serve to illustrate the point of the writing.



Thank you for your comment.

DA

[Divinus Arma]

The echelon, illustrated in Figure 4, allowed for an aggressor to secure a distinct advantage. The echelon exploits the weakness of a “static defense”.

Like I said. Read the guide.


Thanks again runes.

[runes]

interesting as it displays a certain amount of historical accuracy, but apparently has no application to the game.

neat.

[Divinus Arma]

As the guide states, these are textbook applications. They are modified slightly by the player using them as he or she sees necessary. Just as "Vanilla RTW" provides a base for modding, so to do these tactics provide a base for alteration.

I will modify my guide to make this clearer.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Welcome to the community.

DA

[pezhetairoi]

Wonderful guide. I recommend reading 'the generalship of alexander the great' by J F C Fuller and 'Fighting Techniques of the ancient world' by Simon Anglim, Rob S. Rice, Phyllis G. Jestice, Phyllis Jestice. They make great reading, and yeap, Divinus, I've used your tactics based on my reading of those books when I started playing Macedon, with phalanx pikemen as my backbone :-D Works like a charm. May I come up with a solution to the weakness of the right wing--some light mercenaries will do the trick very well, I recommend, specifically, Illyrians. They can hold their own for just the amount of time you need to develop the battle. This comes from Alexander's conduct of operations at Gaugamela/Arbela.

At that battle, Alexander was outnumbered 1:5, if the histories are correct. He formed his main phalanx in line, his companion cavalry just behind the right end of the main phalanx, and the main phalanx was joined either end with peltasts and agrianian archers, as well as all his remaining cavalry, stretching in an arc facing approximately the flanks. Like so.

/------------------\
| C | c= companion cavalry, \|/ = light troops + cavalry
\ -----------------/

He left a small portion of his phalanx stretched out in a second line rather to the rear, facing outwards, such that his 'line' was really more of a 'box'. He opened the battle by advancing the leading edge of the echeloned phalanx towards the centre (yeap, the Persian line was so long that his right was their centre), and seeing that coming at them, the Persians tried to outflank Alexander's pathetically short line with their massively superior (in numbers but not quality) cavalry, opening a small gap in their line which happened to be just in front of Alexander, so he charged his cavalry through the light troops that were engaging the cavalry with missiles and agility into that gap, turning around to strike Darius' chariots (Darius had been in the centre, like any AI general worth his salt) and routing him, sending the rest of the army packing.

My point? Your echelon can be much improved if you take along some light troops with you. They can guard your flanks, provide extra firepower, and even play melee or flankers of their own. They are especially essential when you are badly outnumbered. You need to keep the enemy off your back awhile.

Okay, that was a long ramble. Hope I didn't waste your time reading it... I'm looking forward to seeing your addition on legionary and barbarian tactics! (or maybe I should create one for the Germans, the faction I'm best at :-P)

[pezhetairoi]

Augh, let me try that diagram again.

/-----------------------------\
| = |
\ ------------------------ /

Where = stands for the Companions, the slashes stand for light troops and cavalry, and the hyphens for the phalanx.

[pezhetairoi]

That SO did not turn out well. I give up.

[Divinus Arma]

pezhetairoi,

Thank you for the comments. If the battle you describe between Darius and Alexander is the one I am thinking of, then it should be represented in the Echelon with Gap Exploitation (EGE) as I described in the guide. As you described,


He formed his main phalanx in line, his companion cavalry just behind the right end of the main phalanx...He opened the battle by advancing the leading edge of the echeloned phalanx towards the centre ...opening a small gap in their line which happened to be just in front of Alexander, so he charged his cavalry through the light troops...turning around to strike Darius' chariots (Darius had been in the centre, like any AI general worth his salt) and routing him, sending the rest of the army packing.

Although I paraphrased your comments, the EGE is the 'essence' of what Alexander accomplished that day, and is in fact based upon that same battle. Very good comments.

BTW, I suggest you try uploading pictures to clarify your points. I used to try and do the same thing you are doing, but it is hopeless because of the autoformat on this text. In the entrance hall, check out this thread:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=45193
and this thread:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=45748

The light troops are useful, but I prefer heavy infantry. I need someone that can take a good beating from two sides if it gets messy. I see your point though, and it is a good idea. The formations shown are basic tactics that should be used as a foundation for advanced tactics such as what you are speaking of. Archers set to 'flaming arrows' firing on the gap just before, during, and after the gap exploitation can facilitate the transition to a route much faster. Great points. I will incorporate these suggestions when I follow up the basic tactics with variations.

Warmest Regards,

Divinus Arma

[Divinus Arma]

BTW, I'll check into those books. I recommend "The virtues of war" (a novel of alexander the great), the "Emperor" series (such as 'Emperor: The Field of Swords'), "The Pelopenessian War" (sic), and "The making of the Roman Army: From Republic to Empire".

All of which are great books and provide varying points of view on different types of tactics, some being historical fiction and others being straight-up history.

Regards

[jerby]

abotu the 'stair' is doesn't really work for me. they dont push trough or angel in anyway. the only thing that happens is áll your untis gettin gmicro-infatry-flanked because teh ai just charges to get its bonus..

abotu the cav in divinus's echelon. what is the point. you open up hole in teh line to rush the towards the general?
whatever the point, wedge is pretty broken in rtw. just click and attack doesn't work and clicking behind it negates teh charge bonus..

[Marcus Maxentius]

I think I understand what your describing and if the unit next to the one defending the left flank decides to flank the atttacking unit, move the next unit to the left and hold him up and take the heat off and so on down the line. Time it right and he'll be stuck at an angle while trying to flank.

It also helps to use high quality or upgraded units for the right so they kill quickly and step around to flank.

[Marcus Maxentius]

Attacking the gen is only one option. You can also slam into the back of another phalanx unit for a rout.

[Divinus Arma]

Exactly.

[The Wizard]

It takes a lot of micromanagement of your phalanxes, but there is another way one could use phalanxes. However, it is recommended to, preferably, stick to the hammer and anvil tactic against other phalanx-based armies; it is what the Successors did, after all.

It is the simple principle of a supported cavalry charge: find a gap or weak spot to exploit, send your cavalry in while sending your infantry to follow them up very closely, and watch as the pressured enemy unit is broken immediately when the shock of a cavalry charge is followed up by momentum from a phalanx. Philip and Alexander seem to have used it against enemies not of Greek warfare (Gaugamela is a wonderful example).

Now, how to do it in-game. Note that this is a phalanx-based army.



1. Form your units into an echelon, choosing the weakest of the enemy's flanks to center your attention on. This works well on armies containing many different types of troops, as is usual in the campaign. In this case you would choose the flank with the weakest troops in the army, such as eastern infantry, hastati, or just plain an enemy unit with quite a few less chevrons.

2. Start to position your cavalry for a good attack. If the enemy sports cavalry, annihalate them with a concentrated effort. Remember, you are using the echelon -- all your cavalry should be on one side.
In terms of position, it is most favorable to make sure that the different units of cavalry attack the enemy from different directions. This does not mean that they should try and charge them in the flanks and frontally at the same time, but for more effect and confusion, cavalry charging in from slightly different directions will help. It's not 100% necessary -- you usually don't have the time for such micromanagement.

3. All the while, you should have kept your phalanx units nearby the enemy and poised to strike. Keep them out of the phalanx formation. You'll need the speed they gain from being out of it.

4. Once you are in position, charge your cavalry into the enemy unit which holds the outer flank of the enemy's formation. Watch your cavalry: in an attack as this, cavalry should absolutely not be bogged down, so repeatedly withdraw them and charge them back in again.

5. Now comes the tricky part: when your cavalry charge in, you should immediately order your phalanxes to charge in as well. What happens next, is imperative for victory. Once your hoplites come in spear-range of the enemy, order them to take on the phalanx formation. This is the only way you will be able to simulate the real thing, and it will of course allow the hoplites to fight on their full potential.

6. The combined pressure of your cavalry charge (shock effect) and the phalanxes (momentum plus attacking a temporarily disorganized enemy) will break the enemy unit.

7. Your cavalry, after the units on the outer flank have been routed, can come to the help of those phalanx units engaged with enemy units closer to the center. From the destruction of the outer flank on, the tactic switches over to hammer-and-anvil.

8. The role of the outer flank is the same as with the normal echelon: to protect the flanks of the attacking units. One could also opt to carry out a refused flank* to stop the enemy from outflanking or destroying your own formation.



This tactic takes a whole lot of micromanaging and is risky. As a result, a lot can go different from what you want. As Divinus Arma stated before, a good tactician is defined not by his tactical ingenuity, but by his ability to react to the changing fortunes of a battle.

I'd like to remark as well that this is at best a tactic for variation, used often in reality (a supported cavalry charge is one of the simplest tactics; however, simplicity is usually effectivity). The nature of RTW's tactical system, with its phalanx formation on/off button, makes it harder than it really is supposed to be.

Also, I realize I do not follow Divinus Arma's rule of being able to perfectly carry this tactic out without having to pause -- this needs a lot of coordination. If you are not quick enough in micromanaging your phalanxes, your cavalry will get bogged down and be massacred, while your outer units will be in great danger of being outflanked or overpowered. But if the different units used in this tactic are properly micromanaged, one can gain victory quite handily.

Lastly, I'd like to stress again the fact that this tactic is best not used versus other phalanx-based armies. The whole stereotype of phalanx warfare equals hammer-and-anvil stems from the Age of the Diadochi, when sarissa-armed phalanxes often faced off against each other, with a general lack of heavy cavalry such as hetairoi. Tactics became pretty static again, and the replacement of the heavy cavalry, the elephants, were best used in hammer-and-anvil. In this way the Successors lost Philip and Alexander's aggressive style of command in favor of battles so similar to those of the Peloponessian War.

* A refused flank is bending off the outer units of your echelon (those not supposed to engage the enemy offensively) downwards, if one views the move from above:

+++++++++++

+++++++++++

+++---------+

+++------\+++

++++++++\++

+ = empty space
- = enemy line and your own attacking line
\ = refused flank

P.S. I might add some screenshots to add to clarity later on.

P.P.S. This is a very good thread, chapeau to the author!



~Wiz

[Leftenant Moley]

Hey Nice work!! ~:cheers:

Can you post replays as well, or are they too big?

[Divinus Arma]

Hey Nice work!! ~:cheers:

Can you post replays as well, or are they too big?

Thank you.

I am not sure. I have never tried. I assume that a link could be posted to an outside site, but I have never seen a replay on this forum.

[tibilicus]

Cool phalanxe tatics. Should have more threads for different things cav e.c.t

[jerby]

quesion: the 2 units forming the main attack (left/front) are the ones penatrating the line. wil they than stand back to back and 'open a hole' for ,perhaps, charging cav towards gen? or will they both start fighting to the left/right?

[Divinus Arma]

quesion: the 2 units forming the main attack (left/front) are the ones penatrating the line. wil they than stand back to back and 'open a hole' for ,perhaps, charging cav towards gen? or will they both start fighting to the left/right?

What are you referring to, the echelon? Look at the pictures and read the text that applies to them. It should be explained...

Please clarify so I can update the guide to make the intent clearer.

[jerby]

ok, the two front units standing behind each other. those two are youre best untis. they will try and open up the line. the one on the left side ( fig 8) will get flanked. so teh question is: would it not be better if they were back to back? one phalanx pushing to teh elft side and one pushing to teh right side? that woudl open up even faster/further.

btw. the example of echlon with 4 phalnx+ 1 cav vs 5 phalnx is crap since the enemy always keep the gen in reserve.. you can just as easily take the far left out of phalanx to do an infatry flank from teh left..

[Divinus Arma]

The unit size and amount of units within the army is for illustrative purposes only. This is a basic guide with some useful historically accurate tactics; this is NOT "Divinus Arma's advanced guide on tactics guaranteed to win every battle because DA is the best player in the world".

I am just another player throwing out some basic info because I can. Some may find it useful, others may not. At the very minimum I hope some will find it interesting.

Thanks for the comments Jerbs.


As for the back-to-back, I will give it a go. As the guide said:


Figure 7 shows one option for creating the gap in your enemy’s line. I am sure I will get some flack for this one. It is just one option of many; the key is to break your enemy’s unity by separating two plates to expose a seam.

Thus, your suggestion is every bit as valid is mine. If it works better, I will replace my suggestion with yours and credit you for the update.

DA

[Marcus Maxentius]

If I understand what he suggested clearly. If you have two phalanxes go at opposing sides of a unit, that could result in unpredictable facing of your units that the enemy could do a reverse trap on you. With this manouver you're trying to end up flanking and attacking from the front simultaneously while exposing a seam for faster troops to exploit. It's easier to manage if both units are facing the same direction(i.e the left if using a rightward slant) A variation of my own that I've just started experimenting is taking the two main attacking units and narrowing them until they're the width of one unit. It's kind of ghetto since you're not able to merge units on the battle map. Now with these two deeper units you attack one unit. I don't know if it's more effective than what's been said so far, yet.

[Divinus Arma]

If I understand what he suggested clearly. If you have two phalanxes go at opposing sides of a unit, that could result in unpredictable facing of your units that the enemy could do a reverse trap on you. With this manouver you're trying to end up flanking and attacking from the front simultaneously while exposing a seam for faster troops to exploit. It's easier to manage if both units are facing the same direction(i.e the left if using a rightward slant) A variation of my own that I've just started experimenting is taking the two main attacking units and narrowing them until they're the width of one unit. It's kind of ghetto since you're not able to merge units on the battle map. Now with these two deeper units you attack one unit. I don't know if it's more effective than what's been said so far, yet.

Congrats on your upgrade to member status, Marcus.

The important point of the EGE tactic is to seperate two units and expose a hole for your cavalry to charge through. I 'll try and post new screenies with a larger unit size when I get a chance. I'd like o get Part II posted first.

Part II will tend to focus on tactics used by early Republic Roman Armies: the maniple and its resultant flexibility; more important for us is how maniple tactics were historically used and how these tactics can be applied to RTW.

[Leftenant Moley]

Roman tactics?

Cool i'm looking forward to it already.

[pezhetairoi]

Heya DA, I'm finding this quickly becoming my favourite thread in the forum. Well, it's a pity I don't have any pictures I can post, my Macedonian campaign was some time in the past. All I've got are my memories. Well, I suppose heavy infantry is useful for the flank guard of the gap exploiter units, but then, if we're doing a phalanx/phalanx fight heavy infantry would be pure folly, since they'd die on the spears of the hoplites, while a hoplite flank guard would be rather too unmanoeuvrable (I'm playing on huge scale so wheeling phalanxes around is considerably more difficult), and ranged missile troops can delay the enemy and wear him down much earlier than heavy, who must rely on shock combat.

Ah well. I suppose enough's been said on gap exploitation, so I shall leave off... If I have time (doubtful since exams are coming up) I will create a guide to how a balanced, no-HA army can beat a scythian HA army :-) Go Macedon! I won two memorable battles with those tactics, once. Tough, but bet you never knew phalanxes could do nasty things to HA :-)

[HarunTaiwan]

I want to see that for sure!

[The Wizard]

Heya DA, I'm finding this quickly becoming my favourite thread in the forum. Well, it's a pity I don't have any pictures I can post, my Macedonian campaign was some time in the past. All I've got are my memories. Well, I suppose heavy infantry is useful for the flank guard of the gap exploiter units, but then, if we're doing a phalanx/phalanx fight heavy infantry would be pure folly, since they'd die on the spears of the hoplites, while a hoplite flank guard would be rather too unmanoeuvrable (I'm playing on huge scale so wheeling phalanxes around is considerably more difficult), and ranged missile troops can delay the enemy and wear him down much earlier than heavy, who must rely on shock combat.

Ah well. I suppose enough's been said on gap exploitation, so I shall leave off... If I have time (doubtful since exams are coming up) I will create a guide to how a balanced, no-HA army can beat a scythian HA army :-) Go Macedon! I won two memorable battles with those tactics, once. Tough, but bet you never knew phalanxes could do nasty things to HA :-)

Sounds interesting.

Perhaps you could post it in this thread, so as to make this a general database for tactics, as well as not to clutter the Colosseum with many threads on as many tactics?

Unless DA doesn't want that, of course (not sure about my post on alternative phalanx tactics either; it was more of an impulsive post).



~Wiz

[Marcus Maxentius]

[QUOTE=Divinus Arma]Congrats on your upgrade to member status, Marcus.

Thanks a lot. I'm just happy that I can actually EDIT my posts now. ~:confused:

This is a great idea for a post. I really like recreating history at the same time as winning a game. I'm kinda disappointed there aren't more historical battles or campaign feature.

For post-marian tactics, I really hope to see how to carry out the seven formations described by Vegetius. I've been testing those out to some good effect.

[Divinus Arma]

Hey all,

I am grateful to see such an enthusiastic response to this thread. For those of you that would like to contribute tactics, please send me a PM and we can discuss that. You will be credited for your contribution, of course.

For those waiting for the next installment, please be patient. I work 50 hrs a week and I carry 18 credits a semester in business school. That means I am slammed! As soon as I have the time, I promise a good posting. The Org is my favorite site, after all.

Thank you again for the kudos and discussion.

Warmest Regards,

DA

p.s. way to go on the upgrade to member, Lt. Moley

[Leftenant Moley]

p.s. way to go on the upgrade to member, Lt. Moley

Yes its great being able to edit posts, and i can go into the backroom( but its a bit scary there).

As for the next part to the guide, i would love to see how the roman's used their cavalry effectively. My cav, the faction leader no less, just charges into the enemy, stands for a sec then falls over. No matter if i get them on the flank front or rear. He just dies. But then i dont think the romans were famous for the cav.

[Divinus Arma]

I want to see that for sure!

See what, exactly?

[Divinus Arma]

Update coming tonight 18 April 2005. USA

[pezhetairoi]

See what, exactly?

See my tactic manual on how a Macedonian no-HA army beats one with HA. (we are, of course, not assuming full-stack scythian armies, since there is no such thing with the AI.) :-D

Looking forward to your updates, let's make this a shared thread if others have tactics to contribute, yeah?

Oh, and, um... *embarrassed* how do you take screenshots in the game?

And... Marcus, I can edit my posts even if I'm only junior member... o_O

[pezhetairoi]

alright, not here, but in some other threads. Hmm.

[Divinus Arma]

See my tactic manual on how a Macedonian no-HA army beats one with HA. (we are, of course, not assuming full-stack scythian armies, since there is no such thing with the AI.) :-D

The purpose of this guide is to provide basic tactics that are applicable across faction lines. Although I am showing the roman perspective at this time, the reason is to be historically relevant and RTW applicable. A "faction1 vs faction2" type of guide is not really what I am going for here. There is a guides forum with advice on how to play each individual faction. I think that would probably be a more appropriate spot for your recommendations. Not to say that your tactics aren't good, just that this is not what I am going for exactly. However, if you would like to PM me your tactics, I'll be happy to look at them and include them in this guide if they fit my scope of purpose.


Looking forward to your updates, let's make this a shared thread if others have tactics to contribute, yeah?

Again, the guide portion is for basic tactics that are historically applicable and relevant to RTW. I am more than happy to see this thread engaged in healthy discussion and debate. Beyond the opening "Guide", which I intend to edit and expand upon, you are of course free to post anything you see fit. If you would like your specific tactics included in the opening guide, please PM me.


Oh, and, um... *embarrassed* how do you take screenshots in the game?

I'll post the information again:

In the entrance hall, check out this thread:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=45193
and this thread:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=45748

Regards,

DA

[MajorFreak]

i always wondered why people would talk about boldly attacking the centre. it seemed mad. Now i understand.

actually, it's pretty humbling to know what i called the "hammer and anvil" was exactly what was used back then...it's amazing such an effective tactic was seen as an "ingame exploit" when it is exactly that which makes Sun Tzu and everyone else so famous.

And the echelon to wedge the centre. never thought of that when outnumbered - heck, never thought i'd be able to visualize how the CENTER would be vulnerable. sounds BRILLIANT! good ol' alex.


to the creator of thread: thank you. very nicely done. though, please PLEASE edit the title to say "part1" or ":Alexander"

[Divinus Arma]

18 April, 2005

First component of Part II added. Please review the opening post for these changes.

DA

[Divinus Arma]

Changes made again. Most of Part II posted. Some text chnages and disclaimers added to disuade the fervor.

[Ginger]

Fantastic guide DA.

I totally agree with the current part 2 conclusions. So far the only sure fire anti phalanx roman formation ive found is the double flanking with skirmishers in the centre suggested by hexagon.

I, for one, hate how quickly phalanxes can respond to your maneuvers. It defeats the whole point of roman tactics.

Keep up the good work!

[Conqueror]

I can see how the tactic of sending the cohort to threaten the phalanx line's flank would work against a pure phalanx-based army, but it seems that it'd be calling for trouble if the enemy is also fielding cavalry. Especially if their cavalry is superior to yours. Separated from the main body of your army, the lone cohort would be vulnerable to being surrounded and charged by cavalry, even with the triarii unit there to protect it.

[Lord Preston]

thanks for this,

i like trying to use the orginal tactics in the campaign... adds a challenge to it.

[Ginger]

I can see how the tactic of sending the cohort to threaten the phalanx line's flank would work against a pure phalanx-based army, but it seems that it'd be calling for trouble if the enemy is also fielding cavalry. Especially if their cavalry is superior to yours. Separated from the main body of your army, the lone cohort would be vulnerable to being surrounded and charged by cavalry, even with the triarii unit there to protect it.

When using this tactics against armies full of companion cavalry this tactic will probably fail as you suggest. However in all but the most extreme cases If you separate your army in two and assault either end of the enemy line you can generally:
a) have enough concentrated infantry to defeat most cavalry
b) locally overwhelm the Phalanx units
c) force the phalanxes to open their formation in response to your maneuvers, creating flanking opportunities.

Generally i place velites in the centre supported by cavalry to draw the enemy centre onwards, however opposition heavy cavalry concentrations have a field day with your centre if your not careful.

[Marcus Maxentius]

Fantastic guide, DA!
I, for one, hate how quickly phalanxes can respond to your maneuvers. It defeats the whole point of roman tactics.

Keep up the good work!

It's because the computer knows what your doing immediately after your order the action or movement. I encountered the same thing with enemy phalanxes realigning themselves with me. I think you've got to mask your movements, more so than in real life. I've been thinking of adding cavalry or skirmisher manouvers to screen my phalanx when it goes into echelon.

Of course you can exploit this to create mass confusion in the enemy. Divide your advance, by issuing orders to different groups rather than for the whole army. The enemy will scatter to counter each order seperately, instead of seeing them as a part of a much larger whole.

[Marcus Maxentius]

It wouldn't prevent these tactics from being used, I think. It might slow it down, seeing as you have to deal with taking out the cav, before the phalanx. The Roman Republican legion is a big box of infantry which is a nightmare for cavalry. Keep in mind that you can still field cavalry of your own too. And you can still attack the phalanx with pila while dealing with the cav.

[Ginger]

Divide your advance, by issuing orders to different groups rather than for the whole army. The enemy will scatter to counter each order seperately, instead of seeing them as a part of a much larger whole.

Nice idea, ill give it a try

[Marcus Maxentius]

Yeah, see if it works. I dunno, the AI has been acting pretty unpredictable lately.

[pezhetairoi]

...I am in awe. Period.

[Divinus Arma]

...I am in awe. Period.

In Awe of what?

[Divinus Arma]

From a PM with Marcus Maxentius:


Check out the diagram on this site talking about the Roman Legions. It shows the organization of the roman phalanx, manipular legion, and cohortal legion. It's got drawings of the soldiers too. It's interesting that the early phalanx has hastati, principes, and triariis all with hastas and square shields. I think it might add some polish to your guide. It's up to you if you want to use it or not.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/legion.htm

Marcus,
Thanks for the PM!
Two points on this:
(1) The phalanx is brought up in my guide precisely for this reason. Prior to the Servian constitution, Romans fought in the phalanx, since the italian peninsula and Sicily were primarily influenced by Greek military tactics.
(2)There were no phalanx of Hastati, Principes, and Traiarii. The Triarii were the only ones who fought in phalanx, and they did so with the Hasta.

An additional point on the Hasta: Prior to the Spanish campaign in the punic wars against Carthage, The hastati primarily used the Hasta (From where they derive their name). It was after the spanish Campaign that Hastati and Principes took the Gladius as their primary weapon in addition to the Pila.

I'll throw the reference in the discussion, though. The site is good, although Roman legions initially had a variety of animal standards before the eagle became the one used for all legions.

Thanks again,

DA

[Leftenant Moley]

The Guide is coming along nicely

Is this going to get stickied and moved to the guides section on completion?

[MajorFreak]

(2)There were no phalanx of Hastati, Principes, and Traiarii. The Triarii were the only ones who fought in phalanx, and they did so with the Hasta.

An additional point on the Hasta: Prior to the Spanish campaign in the punic wars against Carthage, The hastati primarily used the Hasta (From where they derive their name). It was after the spanish Campaign that Hastati and Principes took the Gladius as their primary weapon in addition to the Pila.I believe the gladius simply made an earlier sword design obsolete. I seriously doubt the hastati/principes used any spear-type object other than javelins. As for the Phalanx? hmmmmm...there's been some discussion, here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=46428), that points to the romans seriously dropping "true" phalanx functions (debatable)


:duel:

[Divinus Arma]

I believe the gladius simply made an earlier sword design obsolete. I seriously doubt the hastati/principes used any spear-type object other than javelins. As for the Phalanx? hmmmmm...there's been some discussion, here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=46428), that points to the romans seriously dropping "true" phalanx functions (debatable)

Most of my information comes from: Keppie, L. (1998). The Making of the Roman Army: From Republic to Empire. Oklahoma Press: London, England

Professor Keppie is the Senior curator for the Hunterian Museem, University of Glasgow. He is a distinguished Roman historian and archaeologist and has a specialization in the development and organization of the Roman Army.

I pretty much take his word as gold. As for the Hastati, he wrote that they initially carried the Hasta. As for the phalanx, Keppie wrote that the very early Roman republic fought in the phalanx, but that it was abandoned for maniple style tactics after battles with northern tribes proved the phalanx inefficient.

I'll check out the thread, though.

Thanks,

DA

[Divinus Arma]

The Guide is coming along nicely

Is this going to get stickied and moved to the guides section on completion?

Thanks.

As for the sticky, that isn't up to me. A sticky in the guides forum would be an honor.

DA

[pezhetairoi]

I'd say it's an honour you surely deserve. The amount of effort and research that went into creating this thread is truly admirable. THAT'S what I'm in awe of.

[Divinus Arma]

I'd say it's an honour you surely deserve. The amount of effort and research that went into creating this thread is truly admirable. THAT'S what I'm in awe of.

Thank you. Your comments are kind indeed.

DA

[pezhetairoi]

Yes, because you're deserving of them :-) And I certainly look forward to reading more of your work.

[marcusbrutus]

This is becoming a really really good guide/military history lesson. Keep up the good work. ~D

[Divinus Arma]

Thank you. :bow:

[Divinus Arma]

I noticed some requests for Basic tactics. I thought I would resurrect this old thread since it never got posted to the guides section.

I might even update it agin if I find the time. (50 work week plus 18 units of college studt per semester tends to take alot of time). :hanged:

[Mongoose]

He's showing us general strategies on how to fight and win, taken from Real Life® tactics that are tried and true. Ignore them at your own risk.


With romes AI, i am prepared to take that risk ~D

That said, i do think that those are useful strat's for those who are new to the game. How ever, i think your time would be better spent on an MP guide. You know, the part of the game where you have to actaully use some tactics...

[Divinus Arma]

This is several months old. I was having fun. Don't piss in my punch rat. lol.

[pezhetairoi]

lol good to see you again DA! Long time no see...

[Mongoose]

Divinus Arma


No offence meant. Just saying that if you changed your guide a little to make it work better for MP, it would be 3X more useful.

[pezhetairoi]

Nay, mongoose, it works for Mplayer too, but you have to be VERY flexible indeed to make it work in application. it's tough. :-\

Another person who lives in Bartix, I see... well met! :)

[Divinus Arma]

No sweat rat, there was never any offense taken. Hence the "lol". I guess I should have put ~D instead.

And Pez, I have been around. I've been hooked on the backroom for awhile. Thanks for the warm welcome though. ~:cheers:

[Mongoose]

Nay, mongoose, it works for Mplayer too, but you have to be VERY flexible indeed to make it work in application. it's tough. :-\

Another person who lives in Bartix, I see... well met! :)

I don't "Live in Bartix" I am the lord of bartx! second to none except the all knowing God of smiles and rambling abokasix!



Divinus Arma

~:cheers:

[Afro Thunder]

Ah, more Bartixians I see. Glad to meet you!

[pezhetairoi]

What is this, a strategy consultant forum turned Bartixian Reunion? XD

[Zizka]

I realise that this thread is very old, maybe we can bring it to life a bit.

The battle that the first major echelon manuever was preformed was the Battle of Leuktra, Boeotia in 371 B.C., where in the Theban commander, the innovative Epaminondas, massed against the Spartans a deep formation of 50 ranks or more (agreed at fifty or thereabouts I believe) and then his line shunk along the line as it faced the weaker Lakedonnian allies. This wasn't a static battle both sides were seeking confruntation, so there was no angle of attack by opposing lines, it was merely strengthening one side of the line in order to break that part first.

[pezhetairoi]

But...but...there was angling of lines! This was the first refused flank battle, meaning that the Theban line had angle of attack... but really, if you want to see the real thing, look at Gaugamela. That is the height of combined arms operations using refused-flank echelon technique. Although recently I have been finding it hard as Alexander's successor to get the enemy to take my bait and allow me to use the echelon. Most times I just outflank and win.

[Viking]

I don't "Live in Bartix" I am the lord of bartx! second to none except the all knowing God of smiles and rambling abokasix!

Hah! You don`t live in the lands you`re lord over? I do, so you better be carefull then or there will be a civil revolt! :alien:

[NodachiSam]

Holy ****! Kudos to you! ~:cheers:

[marcus aquila]

Great Work! Thoroughly enjoyable and informative- Ave Divinus!




'Fear not death, only shame and dishonour'- Uesugi Kenshin

[HarunTaiwan]

I used these tactics in a horrible battle I had to fight to relieve a siege. I only had about 1,000 men and had to attacked two big macedonian armies (one was reinforcing the other.) The goal was to kill these two armies enough to allow the besieged army a chance to break the siege against a third army of Macs.

The echelon tactic worked well, especially as I was outmanned. It really broke up their lines and allowed nice victory, IIRC over 2500 Macs dead to my 300 - 500.

[Strappy Horse]

Great stuff, very interesting read, especially the part on the echelon, given my preference for phalanx warfare).

[Franconicus]

Respect, Divinus!

[Redleg]

Respect, Divinus!

I concur - an excellent job of providing some basic informatin and tactics

:bow:

[rs2k2]

I thought about the echelion formation and how the right side would be extremely vulnerable to a flank and thought about how to protect it and 2 things came to mind:

1. going into a (pardon my disney movie allusion) "flying V"

xxxx__
xxx/S_S\
xx/...C...\
x/...CGC...\
/..AA..AA...\

x, . = placeholders
/, |, \ = infantry
C = cavalry
G = General (if cavalry)
S = skimishers
A = archers

basically you have all ranged units with fire-at-will disabled and skirmish mode disabled, then pick your gap and throw everything but the kitchen sink at them...

...actually for more effect throw that kitchen sink...

thus the unit being peppered should wittle away into nothingness for your cavalry to charge in

basically two echelions placed together i think...but im worth jack...

note: skirmishers must be able to throw above your own infantry or you'll be friendly-firing a gap in your infantry so big that you could fit an elephant through it...and not the kick and screaming types either...


method 2: just leave some light infantry/cavalry in reserve to meet up with the flanking attack

xxxx__
xxx/
xx/.._
x/..._

[jerby]

that really looks like an authentic RTW strategy.
i think it wouldn't hold long against a human player/ real life archers.
archers shoudl be powerfull enough to obliterate one place in a line. and on Custom battle, a couple of things:
-lots of money spent on archers. money other players can spent on cav to outflank. or moere infantry to wash away your inf.
-it's very static, once the line is breached, there's not much to do other than break it up competely
-if the front infantry breaks ( the "__ ") your pretty mcuh screwed (with equal armies)

still very creative!

[Divinus Arma]

Wow. Who has been digging this up? Postings in July? And now again in August?

You guys rock! Thanks for the love! :bow:

I might as well sticky this to my sig since no mod ever found it good enough for the guides forum...


Maybe I'll even work on it again. After all, it is an exciting time for RTW. Great mods coming out with RTR 6 and EB. Not to mention our expansion here soon.

Good times, lads. No. Great times! :medievalcheers:

[rs2k2]

that really looks like an authentic RTW strategy.
i think it wouldn't hold long against a human player/ real life archers.
archers shoudl be powerfull enough to obliterate one place in a line. and on Custom battle, a couple of things:
-lots of money spent on archers. money other players can spent on cav to outflank. or moere infantry to wash away your inf.
-it's very static, once the line is breached, there's not much to do other than break it up competely
-if the front infantry breaks ( the "__ ") your pretty mcuh screwed (with equal armies)

still very creative!

well if the front infantry breaks then you did something wrong since your ranged units were supposed to kill everything that approaches it short of the unstoppable panzer tank followed closely by a unit of me (1 soldier in the unit, max armor and attack, fast, can sap, very good morale, may die without orders).

well theres a second line between the skirmishers to patch up and breaches but the main point is to focus fire all ranged units onto one point for the cavalry to charge in and split them. now obviously depending on faction, there could be changes such as an extra infantry unit. However, this strategy depends mainly on whithering away the center of an army, basically an "army in wedge formation" so to speak. I think with the infantry slanted so far back that only an extreme flanking maneuver would work in which case your cavalry should then go intercept.

barring an army of cavalry only in which case you close the triangle and wait it out.

[jerby]

well, it will be very succesfull versus a static defense. but with equal armies (exact same units) it will be a lot harder.
as a defender I'd target my archers at your archers, an infantry unit obviously dies (center) but your archers are pretty screwed as well, my velites will be targeting a: your velites, or b:your cav. In thsi way, the inside of the wedge is practically neutralized.

another option would be to double my center (to units, deeper in rows) and concentrate all My missile fire on your frontline, to do ruhs in my inf to your center, and will a lot of you unit turn to teh insdie, to fight my "center" teh rest of teh units get flankedby teh rest of my army. This ofcourse, if your ligne buckels before mine does ~;)

[Casmin]

[QUOTE=Ellesthyan I thought that hoplites did not use their spears to push, but rather to stab overhand in the weak neck area of their opponent. Naturally the formations would be a lot closer to eachother, each trying with their large shields to push the other away. /QUOTE]

It's up to debate, but I read that the Spartans favored thrusting underhand whereas the other Greeks favored charging with the shield while holding the thrusting spear overhand. I love those pictures of one phalanxes spears going through the other's helmets. Ouch! And I don't know if they switched to underhand thrusts rather than overhand stabs after initial contact.

Spartans marched into combat. Other Greeks charged underhanded then switched to overhand once in a melee.