The sword is a secondary weapon, when one drew it out it didn't mean that he went out of formation and went berserk at the front rank.:inquisitive:
I am not suggesting any going berserk. I just maintain, that to use a long sword you need a room around yourself, otherwise you will be either confined to prodding (sensless when you have a spear as well and more effective for such fight), or you will injure your buddies around you, or be unable to perform attacks and parries at all and be killed quickly. In fact, you do yourself recognize that in confined space of hoplite phalanx there is not enough room for long blades:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
After all in the Phalanx the best weapon is a short dagger like the Spartans eventually used.
Yet the Massilians do have longswords, therefore they cannot have close order phalanx at the same time in RTW engine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
In earlier times Hoplites also had long swords, thats no reason that you aren't able to form a Phalanx. (...) Some Hoplites also used axes, would they also need more space?
This is something different altogether. In real life the phalanx will be able to switch between close order and loose order - either purposefully or involuntarily due to melee. Therefore in real life it was only sensible to have a backup weapon (sword, axe, dagger, etc.) in case that things went wrong and the phalanx was broken.
However it is not happening in RTW engine (or if it does, it is buggy) and most EB hoplites are therefore represented as "spear-only" units. That is all right and they SHOULD have their spacing adjusted accordingly.:yes:
BUT for some units using those "secondary" weapons was considered so important that these were designed as "spear-and-sword" units. Now it is for these units (and most notably the Massilians) that I am arguing that making them "hoplite-phalanx-pure-and-dense" is inappropriate, because they would not be able to use their swords in a realistic manner in so dense formation.
It is a matter of balance really: making them dense would make them more effective hoplites but totally unrealistic swordsmen...:juggle2:
************************
Another option which should be considered in connection with the overall purpose of better balancing the hoplites is to increase a bit their unit mass. That should give them more push through the enemy formations, which is, I think, what they were actually doing and which might help to achieve the objective without too much undesirable effects. :idea:
03-03-2009, 16:00
Zett
AW: Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
Also another unit for the density is the elite Phoenician-Lybian unit of Carthage (those with the axes on their shields).
I heard, I thought, I rejected. Even if their unit description sacy that they are "great phalanx spearmen". They are "half Punic and half African" and a elite assault infantery.
We should only give Hellenic Hoplites a lower density to represent the Hoplite phalanx. All other units (barbarians and so on, that have no directly link to Hoplites) should wait.
And about the Basilikon Agema (Royal Guards), the description says nothing about fighting as Hoplites therefor they should not get a lower density (IMO). That the Basilikon Agema and the Torakitai Hoplitai share the same model and have a similar equitment doesn't say that they fought the same way.
Massaliotai...I saw that comming, really...:wall: ... :dizzy2: ... :wall: ... :idea2: , ok 0.3!
All other Hoplites with a secondary weapon (except the Iphikratous Hoplitai and the Thorakitai Hoplitai) shouldn't get a lower density. Bye bye Hypaspistai:clown:. No, really, we should think about that, if a Hoplit switches to sword he is no longer able to stay with his shield in the phalanx formation. He have to move his shield away to slash. So the minimum for all units with a secondary weapon (except Iphikratous and Thorakitai Hoplitai, because they are native Greeks) such as Hypaspistai, Massaliotai, Baktrion Agema and Indohellenikoi Eugeneis Hoplitai, should be 0.3 (IMO).
03-03-2009, 16:07
SwissBarbar
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Didn't greeks train carthaginian soldiers (I had somewhat like that in mind, isn't there even a charthaginian FM who has Spartiatai Hoplitai as Bodyguard?).
I think the carthaginian phalanxes can be given a more dense formation too
03-03-2009, 16:13
Zett
AW: Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissBarbar
Didn't greeks train carthaginian soldiers (I had somewhat like that in mind, isn't there even a charthaginian FM who has Spartiatai Hoplitai as Bodyguard?).
I think the carthaginian phalanxes can be given a more dense formation too
But the Greeks have a longer tradition in fighting as a phalanx, that shopuld be represented.
03-03-2009, 16:23
SwissBarbar
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
but if even the Celtic Massaliotai have lower density... ? ^^
03-03-2009, 16:56
Phalanx300
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Then I gues I wont use this minomod(right?), it has way to many densities which I disagree with and alot of units not being given it who should definately have it.:dizzy2:
Quote:
I am not suggesting any going berserk. I just maintain, that to use a long sword you need a room around yourself, otherwise you will be either confined to prodding (sensless when you have a spear as well and more effective for such fight), or you will injure your buddies around you, or be unable to perform attacks and parries at all and be killed quickly. In fact, you do yourself recognize that in confined space of hoplite phalanx there is not enough room for long blades:
Yet long blades have been used in a Hoplite Phalanx in earlier times, I don't see why a looser Phalanx would be a result, it makes no sense.:sweatdrop:
Quote:
Yet the Massilians do have longswords, therefore they cannot have close order phalanx at the same time in RTW engine.
Ofcourse they can, a side arm doesn't change the formation. :whip:
Quote:
This is something different altogether. In real life the phalanx will be able to switch between close order and loose order - either purposefully or involuntarily due to melee. Therefore in real life it was only sensible to have a backup weapon (sword, axe, dagger, etc.) in case that things went wrong and the phalanx was broken.
However it is not happening in RTW engine (or if it does, it is buggy) and most EB hoplites are therefore represented as "spear-only" units. That is all right and they SHOULD have their spacing adjusted accordingly.
BUT for some units using those "secondary" weapons was considered so important that these were designed as "spear-and-sword" units. Now it is for these units (and most notably the Massilians) that I am arguing that making them "hoplite-phalanx-pure-and-dense" is inappropriate, because they would not be able to use their swords in a realistic manner in so dense formation.
It is a matter of balance really: making them dense would make them more effective hoplites but totally unrealistic swordsmen...
Not really, a great line of Hoplites wouldn't be able to switch between loose and close 123. The units using secondary weapons were included for the fact that they were armed special. They would be able to use longswords in a shield wall. Just look at the vikings if you don't believe me.
And Hoplites aren't intended to be used as swordsmen in the first place...
Quote:
But the Greeks have a longer tradition in fighting as a phalanx, that shopuld be represented.
The Hellenes shouldn't be the only ones with a good density, thats not realistic.
Quote:
No, really, we should think about that, if a Hoplit switches to sword he is no longer able to stay with his shield in the phalanx formation. He have to move his shield away to slash.
Ofcourse not! In a real Hoplite Phalanx don't think that you had room to maneuvre that much. You would have to hack at your enemy, how else would axes also be used?
03-03-2009, 17:57
Zett
AW: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
I uploaded the EDU files (both Multiplayer and Singlerplayer) for everyone who want to try it, give me your opinion about it: link
I want to represent hoplites that locked their shields together, thats why I don't want to give all Carthagian units lower density. I don't want to represent a dense formation, I want to represent the Greek Hoplite fightingstyle.
03-03-2009, 18:45
C.LVCIANVS
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
I' ve reworked personally the EB stats altering totally the EDU & descr_projectile new, rebalancing all the game for the bi.exe, using the short_pike and shield_wall ability.
My first aim was to increase the effectiveness of artillery and missiles (from a min value of 7-ap attack of simple slingshot levy unit to a max value of 26.5-ap for cohors praetoria's pila). Then I've changed all units' spacing and training. Added the shield_wall to some units, warcry, berserk to units who deserves it, according to their description and role on the battlefield. I've put to classical hoplite units the short_pike attribute, only to "pure" ones, those without secondary weapons. Changed from "light_spear" to "spear" for "pushing" units, like phalanxes, hoplites, Helvetians, Arjos and similar. Changed all units' number of turns to build, from 0 to 3-4, depending on how many weeks were needed for training or mustering. I've also modded navies, from cost to train, upkeep, turn to build and number of soldiers per unit.
:7blacksmith:
The last problem are all those "hybrid" units, like Agema, Iphikratean, Hipaspistic, Syracusan, Massilian, Indogreek, Sacred Band, Persian, Helvetian, Getic, etc. Not enough phalanxes, not enough hoplites, not enough loose or dense, static or mobile, I' ve left them as they are.:stars:
Altering density seems very good. I'm thinking also about dense sword-fighting units, like gladius infantry: I've always hated the way legionaries break formations in melee, spacing each other without the guard mode. I want to see them holding the line, at least the post-marian ones...
:2cents:
03-03-2009, 18:47
soup_alex
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissBarbar
Didn't greeks train carthaginian soldiers (I had somewhat like that in mind, isn't there even a charthaginian FM who has Spartiatai Hoplitai as Bodyguard?).
I think the carthaginian phalanxes can be given a more dense formation too
Yup, Qarthadastim get a scripted general (non-FM) ca. 255BC; Xanthippos (Spartiatai Hoplitai), who was recruited as a tactical instructor or somesuch.
Excellent work, Zett! I will definitely be testing your EDU in the near future (but not just now, I'm about to start a game of Hannibal (board game))!
03-03-2009, 19:02
Zett
AW: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Perhaps Phalanx300 could make a list which units he want to use with lower density and give me also the exact density for each, so I could make a second EDU.
Or I could do something like this:
1. all Hoplites get 0.23 density (from Hoplitai Haploi to Epilektoi, including Hypaspistai, Indogreek Hoplitai with Hoplo, Triarii, Libians with Hoplo)
2. all 'semiphalanxes' get 0.25 density (Ihpikratous Hoplitai, Thorakitai Hoplitai, Basilikon Agema, Hoplitai Indohellenikoi, Sacred Band, Germanic Pikemen, Mori Gaesum, Alpine Phalanx)
3. all other units that should get a lower density get 0.3 (pherhaps Noricene Gaecori or polybian Triarii)
03-03-2009, 19:11
C.LVCIANVS
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by soup_alex
Excellent work, Zett! I will definitely be testing your EDU in the near future (but not just now, I'm about to start a game of Hannibal (board game))!
O.T.- "Hannibal: 218-211 b.c. The second punic war" ? ~:doh:
My brother likes it very much, I 've played with him sometimes... He has always beaten me, he uses only the romans... :rolleyes:
03-03-2009, 19:29
Phalanx300
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Sure, and I'm personally more a fan of 0.2 as I see Hoplite warfare as very dense as seen in these two videos:
I guess Indohellenikoi Eugeneis Hoplitai 0.2? I have done the Multiplayer EDU so far, but I can not find the Dorkim Leebi-Feenikim Aloophim (Elite Liby-Phoenician Infantry), does someone know which number they have in the EDU files?
Oh, I forgot one unit in the Density Mod 0.1 files. I gave the mecenary Mishteret Izrahim Feenikim (for the Eleutheroi) a lower density, but forgot the 'normal' Mishteret Izrahim Feenikim (for Carthage).:oops:
03-03-2009, 21:14
Woreczko
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Guys, are you sure, that "radius" doesn`t affect missile resistance? I had some doubts, after using javelins on a small radius unit. They seemed too resistant for their stats. Perhaps smaller radius made individual men harder to hit... But I`m not sure.
03-03-2009, 21:18
SwissBarbar
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
I think IF it had any effect, then a negative one. Loose formation is better against missiles, so dense formation should be worse...
03-03-2009, 21:25
Woreczko
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Nope. The attribute you are changing is "radius" (just look in the EDU documentation). A radius, that a single soldier occupies. The smaller the radius, the thinner the target...may be. It works in melee, but I`m not sure if it works for missiles too. Just asking :)
03-03-2009, 22:25
Phalanx300
Re: AW: Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zett
I guess Indohellenikoi Eugeneis Hoplitai 0.2? I have done the Multiplayer EDU so far, but I can not find the Dorkim Leebi-Feenikim Aloophim (Elite Liby-Phoenician Infantry), does someone know which number they have in the EDU files?
Oh, I forgot one unit in the Density Mod 0.1 files. I gave the mecenary Mishteret Izrahim Feenikim (for the Eleutheroi) a lower density, but forgot the 'normal' Mishteret Izrahim Feenikim (for Carthage).:oops:
Yes 0.2 as they were noble elite soldiers, my bad:sweatdrop:.
On the Leebi-Feenikim Aloophim, I wouldn't know. Though all units are directed into spots like Germanians Hellenes etc. Also some units ingame don't match the name in the EDU or the site which can get annoying. Like those Belgian spearmen:whip:.
Quote:
Guys, are you sure, that "radius" doesn`t affect missile resistance? I had some doubts, after using javelins on a small radius unit. They seemed too resistant for their stats. Perhaps smaller radius made individual men harder to hit... But I`m not sure.
I wouldn't know about missle resistance, a real Hoplite Phalanx would basicly be close to invurnable to arrows and javelins. But I don't know how it works out with shorter radius.
Shorter radius decreases the room that the units takes in, overlapping units would kindoff proove that they aren't getting thinner or anything.
So to keep it short: I wouldn't know.:sweatdrop:
Quote:
I think IF it had any effect, then a negative one. Loose formation is better against missiles, so dense formation should be worse...
That depends, old sources say that the pilum was close to useless against Phalangites. And Hoplites were close to invurnable to missles as well (then again which part of the body is not good protected?).
03-03-2009, 22:33
Dutchhoplite
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
I'm tempted to use these changes, looks interesting.
03-03-2009, 22:36
mcantu
Re: AW: Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
after much testing in RTR-XXX i have come to the conclusion that 0.2 for hoplites makes them too powerful. what i'm doing now is setting all hoplites at 0.3 and all phalangites at 0.2
03-04-2009, 00:52
soup_alex
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by C.LVCIANVS
O.T.- "Hannibal: 218-211 b.c. The second punic war" ? ~:doh:
My brother likes it very much, I 've played with him sometimes... He has always beaten me, he uses only the romans... :rolleyes:
(Apologies in advance for not resolving this communication via PM, but I can't feel bad about promoting an excellent game like Hannibal; I would definitely recommend it to anyone with an interest in strategy and/or that period in history.
/advertisement ~;))
Indeed! At least, it sounds a lot like it: the version I know is subtitled "Rome vs. Carthage", but after a few games with my own brother (no mean strategist, who also plays Rome), I've had some fair degree of success with Carthage (poor luck with battle card draws, Numidian defectors and "Hanno counsels Carthage" notwithstanding...)
03-04-2009, 04:36
Βελισάριος
Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissBarbar
I think IF it had any effect, then a negative one. Loose formation is better against missiles, so dense formation should be worse...
I haven't tested the EDUs yet, but in my sincere opinion... if it makes them invulnerable to missiles... bloomin' finally!
I don't know about you, but when a unit of arse-wipe Hastati decimates a unit of Hoplitai with javelins, then I know something's not right... somebody vomited in the petunias there.
On the other hand, if the missile attack is from behind that'd be near devastating... which it should be, after all.
03-04-2009, 09:55
Woreczko
Re: AW: Re: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
I wouldn't know about missle resistance, a real Hoplite Phalanx would basicly be close to invurnable to arrows and javelins.
You have a point here. AFAIK "phalanx" ability coubles the effectiveness of the shields against missiles. It`s quite logical, for classical hoplites to also get similar bonus... by means of smaller radius for example.
Quote:
Shorter radius decreases the room that the units takes in, overlapping units would kindoff proove that they aren't getting thinner or anything.
Units overlap, because of graphics but I believe that the engine cares more about abstract numbers (i.e. radius), than the unit`s skeleton and skin. One of the reasons, why hoplites in vanilla EB don`t perform that well, while in guard mode, may be - that large radius and close spacing causes soldiers to get in the way of each other. I suppose, that may be the reason, why only some of the guys in the first rank seem to really engage in combat, while others are watching...
03-04-2009, 14:08
Zett
AW: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
So nobody knows which number the Dorkim Leebi-Feenikim Aloophim (Elite Liby-Phoenician Infantry) have? Or which name they use in the EDU? I want to upload Phalanx300 edu files, they are the last unit that is missing.:help:
Quote:
;536
type carthaginian infantry picked libyphoenician
dictionary carthaginian_infantry_picked_libyphoenician ; Picked Libyphoenician
category infantry
class heavy
Gaizoz Frije, unit description says nothing about shieldwall, they are Levy Spearmen "lacking in the organized training of the warbands that serve in a more regular capacity"
Druhtiz Herusku (Cherusci Swordsmen) nothing about shield wall, and they fought with swords.
Dugunthiz (Germanic Spearmen) "work in close or open formation" and they have javelines
Herthaganautoz (Germanic Bodyguard Infantry) are bodyguards and not line Infantery, also the unit description says nothing about shieldwall
Thegnoz Drugule (Germanic Heavy Infantry) swordmen, I dont think they were able to fight in close formation and use their swords like the Romanii, they would fight individually.
Herunautoz (Germanic Swordsmen) swordmen and javeline, the unitdescription says "dense formations" but if they throw a javeline, they need space
Dugunthiz Hattisku (Chatti Spearmen) they have javelines too
Gaizoz Alje (Celto-Germanic Spearmen) description says nothing about shieldwall or dense formation
Milnaht "Aside from their charge, they form an impressive, tight 'shieldwall' type of formation, to resist opposing charges." that can be better represented with guardmode, they would not charge in a dense formation
If you would give all those units lower density, you would need to give it all Romans too. I think only those units that fought in a very dense formation nearly all the time of a battle (no sword or javeline), for example all units that lost their phalanxability in 1.0 (not sure could be 1.1 too) should get a lower density.
-----------------------------------------------------
Density Mod 0.2 link
I'm wondering what's best to do download this mod or change by hand. Only i have to know what to change :sweatdrop:
Change it yourself or give me your unitlist and the density for each unit (but please not too many). You can do it easily, just open the EDU, search for the unit you want to give a lower density and add the density (for example: , 0.23) to the 'soldier' line.
Gaizoz Frije, unit description says nothing about shieldwall, they are Levy Spearmen "lacking in the organized training of the warbands that serve in a more regular capacity"
Druhtiz Herusku (Cherusci Swordsmen) nothing about shield wall, and they fought with swords.
Dugunthiz (Germanic Spearmen) "work in close or open formation" and they have javelines
Herthaganautoz (Germanic Bodyguard Infantry) are bodyguards and not line Infantery, also the unit description says nothing about shieldwall
Thegnoz Drugule (Germanic Heavy Infantry) swordmen, I dont think they were able to fight in close formation and use their swords like the Romanii, they would fight individually.
Herunautoz (Germanic Swordsmen) swordmen and javeline, the unitdescription says "dense formations" but if they throw a javeline, they need space
Dugunthiz Hattisku (Chatti Spearmen) they have javelines too
Gaizoz Alje (Celto-Germanic Spearmen) description says nothing about shieldwall or dense formation
Milnaht "Aside from their charge, they form an impressive, tight 'shieldwall' type of formation, to resist opposing charges." that can be better represented with guardmode, they would not charge in a dense formation
The Germanics were known to fight in very dense formations. The levy units were from childhood introduced to war, and being Germanics they would have a closer formation then most other levies.
On the spear and swordsmen, they were known to form a shieldwall/very dense formation, at the very least a very dense formation. They have javelins yes, but that does not change that they fought in the shieldwall as well. The Germanics were all around troops.:2thumbsup:
The bodyguard units would essentialy be the heavy form of the spear and swordsmen.
On Milnaht, then we might as well give Hoplites just guard mode at well. I don't really like this preference for Hellenic units.:whip:
After all, this is EB, all factions should get equal treatment:yes:.
Quote:
If you would give all those units lower density, you would need to give it all Romans too. I think only those units that fought in a very dense formation nearly all the time of a battle (no sword or javeline), for example all units that lost their phalanxability in 1.0 (not sure could be 1.1 too) should get a lower density.
Not really as all those units I posted fought in a Phalanx/Shieldwall/Dense formation.
03-04-2009, 20:33
Zett
AW: Hoplitai and 0.2 density
I don't think that all Germanic units fought in dense formation, so if the unit description says nothing about it we should not give them a lower density. In doubt leave it out. And about the bodyguards, to give them lower density only because thei are elites makes no sense. If we have no sources about them fighting in dense formation we should leave them at they are. They also have small shields which would be less effective if used in shieldwall then other shields. There for we should represent them as assualt infantery.
And about swordfighting. I think to hold a dense phalanx like formation while fighting with a sword is only possible if you stab. But if you want to slash with full power you need more space, same goes for javelines. Because we can not change the density in battle to represent the switching between javelin and close combat spear we should leave them at thei are, thats more realistic then let them throw their javelines in dense formation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
Not really as all those units I posted fought in a Phalanx/Shieldwall/Dense formation.
Even if they fought in dense formation, that doesn't mean that they always fought in that way. And if they carry javelines, they would not throw them while in close formation. (fighting in close combat with spear in loose formation possible, throwing a javeline in close formation...dangerous:clown:).
