The Tip of Alexander

I read 'Alexander' by Valerio Massimo Manfredi.

in a particular passage (page 138) alexander met the cav. he will be commanding at Chaeronae.
Phillip explained to Alexander that the Phalanx was the Anvil and the cav the hammer, and at the top of the hammer you had the tip/point ( dutch:punt).

the tip was not the hetairoi, but they had magnificent horses. according to the description they had two javelins, a shield and where designed to deliver the fatal blow in combat.
so they where elite and a mixture of companion cav and militia cav.

sounds historic and something new. but since macedon already has a lot of units...

please read after me, I only have one source and no scanner. So explain why I am wrong, or maybe even include it.

EDIT: the book is in no way a history book, it is a novell written by a historian, so any location where there is little info, he just made shit up.
he had an explanation for teh destruction of Persepolis and much more things only ALexander could have known. like a scene in wich Alexander meets the ghost of parmenion wich says its al right.... ~:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

I read 'Alexander' by Valerio Massimo Manfredi.

in a particular passage (page 138) alexander met the cav. he will be commanding at Chaeronae.
Phillip explained to Alexander that the Phalanx was the Anvil and the cav the hammer, and at the top of the hammer you had the tip/point ( dutch:punt).

the tip was not the hetairoi, but they had magnificent horses. according to the description they had two javelins, a shield and where designed to deliver the fatal blow in combat.
so they where elite and a mixture of companion cav and militia cav.

sounds historic and something new. but since macedon already has a lot of units...

please read after me, I only have one source and no scanner. So explain why I am wrong, or maybe even include it.

EDIT: the book is in no way a history book, it is a novell written by a historian, so any location where there is little info, he just made shit up.
he had an explanation for teh destruction of Persepolis and much more things only ALexander could have known. like a scene in wich Alexander meets the ghost of parmenion wich says its al right.... ~:confused:

---

Although i enjoy occasionaly reading Valerio Massimo Manfredi i get the sense that he is trying desperatelly to write a book that will become movie scenario. So dont get his words to be valid as historical source. He sure knows history very good but he often mix it too much with imagination to get the result he wishes. At least thats my opinion after i read most of his books. Offcourse i cant say that i dont enjoy reading them to relax. Same goes for Steven Presfield another famous historic novel writer. He is more ''in'' history than Valerio Massimo Manfredi but he still keeps to use some anachronisms and give modern characteristics to ancient people like making for example other Greeks call Macedonians ''Macs'' in a typical american way. Beside that little details his ''gates of fire'' is one of my favorite novels.

well, you're right, the movie rights for 'alexander' have indeed been sold.
but still will there be some sort of elite jav.cav thathas a tremendous shock bonus and one/two javs?
sort of mix between companion and militia cav. w

If you liked this book you will also like "The Virtues of War" by Steven Pressfield (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...12912-6623853).

This is a novel on the campaign of Alexander written from the first person perspective of Alexander. Because of that perspective, it is fictional. Despite this, it is a very engaging book. The author details some interesting info from a tactical perspective, such as the use of the "dragon's teeth formation", a line of cavalry units each formed in a wedge.

Because of this book, I have changed my tactics in RTW completely. I always take two generals to a battle, and three if I have enough. I have my center line of five or so basic infantry (legionaries, sarissa pikeman, armoured hoplites, etc.) who are supported by a secondary general. I place two units of elite units on the left of this main body, and two on the right.
Behind each of these two units is another general, with my Commanding General on the right. If I play as the romans, I have two units of Cavalry on each flank. These are a heavy cavalry and a light cavalry on each wing. Behind them is an archer or so and maybe a catapult to cover my approach.

If I play as a greek faction, I need no additional infantry, instead using additional cavalry in the "dragon's teeth" formation.

Thus:

Romans:

^ ^ ## ***** ## ^^
$ $ $

(^=cavalry, #=elite infantry, * = regular infantry, $ = general) Note there are four empty slots. These are augmented dependant on the objective and enemy whom I face.


Greeks:

^^^^ ****** ^^^^
$ $ $

Not the three empty slots. Again, this is the basic formation that may be augmented for flexibility.

The Roman formation allows me to use the (I think it is called this...) "maniple" advance. The greek formation is very clearly "hold and shock" or "hammer and anvil" as you called it.

I noticed that adding Generals has significantly decreased my losses. I win either way, but this makes it less costly. Even in the Roman formation, almost half (7) is cavalry!

Great in campaign mode, but I wonder how I would fare in multiplayer?

Regards

Divinus Arma

P.S. had to edit, the generals should be centered on their respective squad of command. For some reason, I am unable to correct the appearance.

wow, thanks.
-so why is it called dragon's teeth?
-I understand your moves with greeks ( don't move inf, cav flank) but what do you mean by maniple, and how do you move? and what is so special about teh roman formation?

I'll be happy to oblige, although I cannot say that I am the author of these formations. There is a thread on this site somewhere that provides a beautifully drawn application of the maniple against a line of pikes or hoplites.
Unfortunatley, I cannot find it.

However, to address your questions. If you line up five or ten units of cavalry, each in a wedge formation, what does the line look like? A row of sharp teeth. Hence, "dragon's teeth". Incidentally, this is the author's terminology. I am unaware of historical evidence of that exact term, although I would like to hear of it. The idea is to multiply the combined shock effect of multiple cavalry wedges. DO NOT put your units in this formation and simply attack one unit. They will all group together and the results will be ugly as they are worthless. Instead, place them in formation and have them run through the enemy by clicking on a point behind the enemy army. If you so choose, as they advance towards the enemy, you may then have them attack selected units of your choosing. I would draw it here, but that type of detail requires that I submit a picture, something I have not yet figured out how to do here.

As for the maniple, that too requires a drawing. I will see if I can figure how how to upload a drawing and get that to you. Both are excellent tactics.

p.s. Including multiple generals in one army also provides an excellent way to increase each general's valor (and in consequence, his survivability), as well as a way to "teach them " if you will. Depending on the coming objective, I withdraw the senior general and allow a younger general to earn his stars in the coming battle. This allows all of my generals to gain a little combat experience before I shoot them off to a city to govern. It seems this keeps vices down that may ordinarily appear if you simply place a 16 yr old in command of a city from the get-go. I guess it models history, where military service contributes towards political success.

ok thnx.
now I know how to use the wedge, in my testing the wedge always gets bogged down if I order to charge, but if you make em run trough, it wil certainly split.

oh wait, is maniple the same as teh echelon? the \ type formation that teh roamns used as wel against the greeks?

Kind of. The echelon was used prior to Rome. It was a development of the phalanx formation, actually. If I remember correctly, Phillip I was one of the first to use it, Phillip the II used it to gain predominance in greece, and Alexander relied on it in his campaigns.

The echelon was a response to line-on-line fighting. Initially, the two lines of phalanx faced each other and each line shifted right during the battle. This occurred for two reasons: One, each man was protected by his neighbors shield. The closer he could get to the shield, the more protected he was. Thus, the guys on the left moved right for greater protection and this affected the whole formation. Secondly, the best troops would be placed on the right of line. Each army would attempt to destroy their opponent's left wing and wrap around.

The echelon was response to this. Instead of evenly distributing troops, one wing was given greater emphais with depth of men. Then the army would be slightly angled, so when first contact was made, the power of one flank could be brought to bare against the opponent's weaker flank. Meanwhile, the attacking army's weak flank had not even made contact yet!

I'll see if I can draw this here. I f I cannot, I will edit it and remove it:

Initially:

-----------

-----------


In Echelon:


-----------

..............--
...........---
.......----
....---
.--

The dots are substitues for spaces. Otherwise this would come out all funny.

This is a crude drawing, but it should make sense. This is why a stagnant defense is always weaker. An immobile defense can be shaped at the will of the attacker. Therefore, you should always attack. Even when defending, attack the enemy and seize the initiative to shape the battlefield.

Also, a little FYI: The echelon is still used in American Military tactics today.

wow, thnx. so when/how do I implement this in my game?
oh, I heard something about using echelon nto to get envelopped ( spelling, i know. i'mm mean flanked/surrounded) what do they mean?

While the possible application of various tactics are almost without lmit, there are a few that have stood out for me:

Legend:
- = unit of troops
/ = unit of troops facing in echelon
\= unit of troop facing in echelon
. = empty space (this is the only way I can format this since I can't load a picture of this stuff

The Maniple (I think it's called): Best tactic against pikeman and hoplites. And you better have cavalry if you expect the enemy to have cavalry.

1) As you advance your amy North in line against the enemy army: (North^)

......................................
......._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _...........
......................................
......................................
......._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _...........
......................................

2) You break off a small contingent of men for a weak flank:

......................................
......._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _...........
......................................
..._ _...._ _ _ _ _ _............
......................................

3) The enmy is now faced with a dilemma in their battle line as you present them with this tactic. Do they turn their units to face the flank, or do they continue against the main force?

......................................
......................................
...\..._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _...........
....\....._ _ _ _ _ _.............
......................................
......................................

4a) IF they turn a small contingent from their flank to fight your flanking force, you will easily be able to pick them apart from the side. You are then in a better position to continnue with your flanking manuever.

......................................
..../.................................
......I..._ _ _ _ _ _ _...........
....\......_ _ _ _ _ _.............
......................................
......................................

4b) IF INSTEAD they turn a large portion of their force to face you, move a large portion of your battle line to your flanking side. Leave two units on the other flank to continue the tactic from the opposite end:

.......................................
...........\...........................
.............\.......................
....\..........\......................
......\..........\.....................
........\..........\...................
..........\..........\.................
............\..........\...............
..............\..........\.............
......................._..../..........
........................................

I tried to add color but I think I screwed it up.

I will post the other tactics in a minute.

Another good movement is the essential "hold and flank" or "hammer and anvil" as you called it.

Same legend but with horse in wedge= v or ^

1) Approach em:

...................................
...................................
....._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.....
...................................
...................................
...^^^..._ _ _ _ ...^^^...
....................................
...................................

2) Spread your horse to the far flanks. If they have horse, they will probably try to intercept. Sometimes they will even throw their general at you. This is why it is iomportant to support each contingent (battle line and flanking elements) with a general. They offer power and will recharge in between turns (yes it's cheating but it is kind of like real life. The general wants protection and he will get it damnnit). So, if the enemy cavalry intercepts, fine engage from every direction and throw your general at them first. They usually route or die.

As I said, spread out your horse:

.........................................................
.........................................................
.............._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _..................
^^^.........................................^^^...
......................_ _ _ _..........................
.........................................................
.........................................................

3) As you can see, your main force is pretty outnumbered. No big deal. Shift to one flank on your approach and go into echelon as your horse circle wide:



Note: Do not angle your echelon this much. It should be just a light slant.

4) They enemy will approach your main contingent and begin to angle and meet your echelon. They may very well begin to engage. Just as they do so, stirke at an angle from outside with your cavalry. picture a clock on the wall. Your left horse should come from10 O'Clock and aim for 5 O'clock. Your right horse should come from 2 O'clock and aim for 8 O'clock (sorry I am unable to depcit the proper facing movement) The enemy's rear is always 12 O'clock:





5)Now Strike!






Well. That is a giant cluster, but I hope you get the idea and that you can tell what is what.


This came out all jacked up, but you get the point I hope.

thnx, i'm learning something.so if you're surrounded you just take one flank in echelon to counter, interresting. but the primary use is to form the field to you're own mind.