This whole maniple thing

So I've finally gotten round to playing the age old ememies, and I must admit I'm actually liking it. I took Taras and Rhegion (as you do) fairly quickly and I am now preparing for my Po Valley campaign.

So anyhow I've been wondering, If I've got the cash for it, why bother with the maniple? I don't think I need Hastati, why shouldn't I just raise loads of Principes with back up triarii? Hastati and Principes do an almost identical job, but the latter do it better. It may hurt roleplay aspects, but for now I just want to kill things:smg: , does hastati offer any battlefield role Principes can't do better?:inquisitive:

Anyhow, thoughts?
:2cents:

I guess most of us do it for roleplaying reasons, since the romans historically used it.

At least I do, and I like some variety and divercety in my army. :)

Other that that, Prinicpes are probably better since they could afford better armor.

Not really... to be fair, hastati are crap. They'll take big casualties against even the most basic warband or levy hoplitai, i just use them for historical accuracy. They're crap troops, they're there to tire out the enemy for the next line... that is their job. If you lose all your Hastati, just levy a few warbands from a subdued province and use them as front line fodder instead. The Romans did it extensively apparently, so why not?

Of course, if accuracy isn't your thing and you just want to kill stuff simply recruit armies of those Italian swordsmen with the round yellow shields, principes and triarii.

Neah,don't use hastati.They have weak armour and will suffer much higher casualties than principes,especially due to missile fire,while having the same role:killing the othe guys.So I advise you to just use principes as the main infantry-of-the-line with triarii as reserves.That is how I did it untill i got Marian reforms and replaced principes with cohorts.Having an extra half-stack of hastati follow my main legion everywhere to replenish the high losses wasn't doing it for me.

in fact, they are really weak, the only advantage they have on principes is the lower upkeep. I think it could be nice for them to have something better than principes related to the fact they are younger, for example a little more letality, or a very good stamina trait, i dont know. Anyway they are good to keep a barrage to hold the enemy attack for a while.

I too only really use them for roleplaying. When I just want to kick some ass, I make a full stack of Pedites Extraordinarii (the yellow allies) and attack everything in sight. They´ll kill absolutely everything.
I used them to take the Po Valley, Illyria and most of Hellas, Africa and Spain´s east coast. I shipped them back to Italy to retrain every 5th turn, and that was it. I´d basically won the game.

I reckon I'll use them as garrisson troops and I'll give those italic allies a go
ty for the replies

They have a higher defense skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by konny

They have a higher defense skill.

---

Which I would translate as a better reaction time, in general and especially when tired. Makes sense for younger men. But are there situations where defense skill counts more than armor?

"When dealing with AP weapons" immediately springs to mind.

they should have 7/9/4? and principes 10/8/4?

now imagine you are fighting against AP unit, then you have

3,5/9/4 and principes 5/8/4, so i think principes are still better against AP, but im not sure about the AP dinamics, so i could be wrong

More cost-effective though. Which is sort of the point really, no ? :beam:

...as an aside, a lot of the premarian Roman stats are a bit off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

More cost-effective though. Which is sort of the point really, no ? :beam:

---

the only point is cost effective i think, nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moosemanmoo

I reckon I'll use them as garrisson troops and I'll give those italic allies a go
ty for the replies

---

You might as well use Leves/Velites as garrison troops, they have more troops per unit and i think a lower upkeep. I'm currently around the Marian reform time in my campaign and all I need is 1 unit of Velites to keep my Italian cities in line (green face mostly). As for Hastati, I keep them in just for historical accuracy, and they are, well, almost decent troops. I find them useful for running around the flanks of the enemy then showering them with pila. The Italic Allies I used as flankers and shock troops, but around 200 BC (which would be over one generation since the provinces were conquered) I stopped using them, figuring that they would be assimilated into Roman society by now.

I say ya gotta go historical...they were, after all, the youngest and most inexperienced of the front-line infantry...a hastati-free legion would smack of gamey-ness!

My :2cents:...

Every good general needs his cannon fodder. Why should I have the more expensive principes or itallic allies doing the same job as hastatii, i.e holding a line waiting for flanks when tis more expensive and less people die meaning more upkeep. Hastatii are good warriors, and they have a place in the battle just like anyone else.

Yeah that's what I think too. Besides, if it is your Hastati who suffer the most casualties in battle, you only have to focus on replenishing their ranks, which is cheaper than replenishing the principes. I always use hastati to soak casualties to my more expensive units.

This probably might not hold in the face of strict mathematical scrutiny, but, wth, it is the epitome of cheesiness not to use them.

And if you look at, for instance, the "imitation legionaries" called Pontic Elite Infantry, you'll see that they have the same stats as Polybian Hastati, with a lower morale and higher javelin damage. And those guys wear chainmail, are recruited in a level 4 MIC. Hastati are not so bad really, just normal medium infantry, with good morale. No quitters.

In a custom battle it might make sense to not use hastatii, kinda, although the money you save could be used to experience some other unit intended for massive flank damage but I'm not sure about the maths here. In the campaign map a further advantage of using hastatii is now you can afford upkeep for four or five more armies giving you more strategic options. After you reach a certain level of profecciency in EB, its no longer about whether you can get things done, but the effeciency in which you do them.

Hastati are fine. Use the hoplite paradign and stick them on guard and run around with your other units. They are quite good for an early unit but its hard to keep your perspective as to what is 'weak' and what isn't 'weak' since they get tough units right off the bat.

I usually as the romans have my whole army stretched to about 2 or three men deep with my hastati/poor half naked spearmen/awesome iberian units/some sort of hoplite/samnites in front. I have them on guard mode. The Principles are in the second row and are not on guard mode. As the battle progresses, the first line get pushed into the second line and you switch your original first line infantry off of guard mode. Now you have two units of fresh infantry, pushing into a line of tired infantry. I usually have some sort of reserve too, an extra Principles and a few Triarii to flank and get the enemy from behind.

It only really works against non-pike/HA happy factions so you have to think a little outside the box on that one. I usually have the two line setup except thicker and my whole second line concentrated along the edges to mass flank.

I have read on wiki (Goldworthy stuff I think) that the Romans tried to power their way through the Phalanx from the front, break into it, break through it etc. I think I have read it in EB in some unit description too (non Roman). Does this work? Just pile the soldiers on the Phalanx? Maybe in some triangle formation to push through? Triangle with three units.

Phalanxes are strongest when charged at from the front by uncoordinated masses. Certainly it is possible to "turn the pikes" for disciplined troops who use large shields. Once the first Romans would have been within swords' reach the phalangites have to drop their pikes and use swords for self defense. That would allow even more Romans to close in. The same would be for Thureophoroi and the like.

It doesn't work that well in RTW...

You can wedge a phalnax if for some reason its been stretched out heaps row wise. i.e

.................
.................
.................


Will get owned by a condensed chunk of swords men like this

....
....
....
....

GAESATAE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (random comment)





anyways, is it possible to destroy a phalanx by doing a left oblique on them?! that way, an "uncoordinated" mass can nullify their strength?:idea2:

-try it out...might work (I haven't yet:shame: )

It certainly is possible to break through a phalanx from the front in EB, as proven by an old custom battle I´ve told about before. I had 3 units of Pezhetairoi, all with highest upgrades and experience versus 20 units of Red Sea Light Infantry with absolutely nothing. Oh, and I was defending a fort.
So, I put up my troops in a box formation around the gate and let them break it down, only to have my front phalanx broken within 5 seconds. 5 seconds later they´ve taken the fort square/plaza/whatever and pouring through the whole in the middle of my box.
Sure, I still won the battle, but it just goes to prove that even mediocre infantry can break through heavy experienced phalanxes from the front.

I agree-though it requires great shok and mass of numbers on a narrow point to do it properly.

Which if why when attacking a phalanx from the front you should never group your units and then tell them to attack, it´s much more effective to have them all attack the same unit, that way that have at least a chance to break through.

I had a defensive siege battle the other day, where my levy phalanx was broken by skirmishers, mostly Akontistai (greek light javelin inf), and maybe one unit of Peltasts. Had a unit if Hoplites behind, so they couldn't use their breakthrough, but it shows that light phalanx can be broken into by the lightest of troops if the fight happens on the width of a gate. Heavy infantry might break into heavy phalanx the same way.

Back to the maniple thing, there is of course one opinion among historians that while the romans had gaps between their maniples at the start of the battle, the 2nd Century of each maniple would eventually move forward and sideways to plug the gap after the Skirmishers have done their work and moved through the line. The equivalent in EB would be to group two units each of Hastati/Principes together, one behind the other, and create a single line before the clash. This would allow the Velites to move to safety a little faster, and make them less vulnerable to the inevitable AI charge. Second, it would create a straight line with no flanking units in the gaps, and the replacement of the Hastati with fresh Principes might be executed more smoothly. On the other hand, it would either shorten the line or thin it considerably.

Has anyone ever tried this consistently?

a pike unit protecting a gate (or a bridge) can be pushed back and broken but if you had one unit of swordmen with the pikes the breakthrough will be nearly impossible as when the ennemy is getting close enough it fights the fresh swordmen of course you have to move back the swordmen once in a while so they dont go too far ahead of the pikes. i used this tactic at the bridges east of sardis to stop the endless egyptians stacks i used 4 makedonian levies pike and 2 thracian elite infantry not that much archers or slingers bc the egyptians were really armored (mainly elite and medium phalanx)