hastati's pila won't kill a single hoplitai haploi in frontal phalanx attack

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paullus

Historically inaccurate? We can talk reconstruction, sure, but I haven't seen the "historical" argument yet...

That said, I agree that hoplitai haploi shouldn't be impervious to the pila, though I suspect (and someone who knows game mechanics better than I should confirm or deny this) the pila lower morale and make the battle end more quickly.

You could test this by doing that custom battle twice, once with the legionaries firing pila before impact, once with them waiting until impact to begin sword combat. See if the battle lasts longer the second time. I'd wager it does.

---

You're right. I was wrong to say it's historically inaccurate, but it is unrealistic.

Quote:

---

Apart from that: may I take it that the hoplon shield was coated with layer of bronze? If so, then there's just one more question to answer: could contemporary arrows penetrate such shields?

If not then you may conclude that the pila wouldn't have hurt those guys very much: a pilum would need far more kinetic energy to penetrate the shield than an arrow would - and a skilled archer can 'provide' his arrows with much more kinetic energy per mass than any javelin throwing guy is able to 'provide' for his javelins.

You'd have much more succes 'striking' those guys at their helmets...

---

I don't know for sure, because I don't have any hard data to back that up, but I would imagine that arrows could pierce the hoplon, but not penetrate it. And as far as hindering the soldier's shield, piercing is all the pila needs to do.

Quote:

---

I'm not upset. It's just ho hum, another day of defending ourselves against baseless accusations. Somebody makes the bogus statement that pila don't kill ANY hoplites, and does anybody out here actually test it to see if it's true? Did you? Why of course not, it just validated your theory that our EDU is completely messed up. And almost everyone else just immediately assumed the statement was true. "What pila can't kill any hoplites? Well EB has gotten it wrong again!" What a load of horse hooey.

---

To be fair, others came out do defend not having any hoplites killed by two volleys of pila as well, which is what drove me to respond.

Quote:

---

And TA is correct to remind people that we are under no obligation to provide ANY answers to ANYBODY out here. And certainly not when it is couched as a demand ("so where are those stat people anyway?!?!")

---

I think EB is by far the best RTW mod out there, and definitely the closest to being historically accurate, and I derive a lot of enjoyment from it. Is it so wrong to want to make it as accurate as possible?

Quote:

---

Yeah, I got ticked off, and I still am. I just posted that we (talking to the other EB members who had posted) should let the stat guys answer it - and immediately (within two minutes) our new friend posted "well what is their reasoning?". If they don't get around to answering something (not just them, but anyone) inside EB after a couple of days, it's not a really big deal, but we ask for something again then. But two freaking minutes is too long to wait - there had to be a response "well..." within that two minute window. If I say we will let the stat guys respond, then posting TWO MINUTES LATER "well what is their reasoning" is going to really irritate me and is not going to get them to post.

---

The reason I posted "what is their reasoning" is because you said:

Quote:

---

Let the stat guys handle this. Not like this hasn't been raised before.

---

So I thought by you saying "it's not like this hasn't been raised before" that it was a topic that you were familiar with and could explain because it had been brought up several times before. I'm sorry if it sounded like badgering.

Quote:

---

None of that matters to a few folks zonks. It makes coming to the public forum a lot less interesting to me though. My interest in constantly defending the mod from post after post of complaints from about two or three people total sure has dwindled.

---

I find it very ironic that you say in the FAQ that:

Quote:

---

The project was born over a year ago, when the thought was that the team could provide as much historical information as possible to help CA portray the barbarian factions as more than just a bunch of drooling, naked neanderthals. When it seemed clear that CA wasn't accepting outside help, the team became determined to turn this research into a mod.

---

And here people are trying to provide more information about historical accuracy and you get very defensive about it.

Quote:

---

Just out of curiosity: are there any other units that used the RTW phalanx in 0.80 but wich get the same make-over as Hoplitai Haploi?

---

I may be wrong, but the result may be hugely influenced by the RTW Phalanx settings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

But it's clearly not realistic to have two volleys of pila result in no casualties, and isn't the goal of EB to provide historical accuracy?

---

Dude, over the past few weeks it seems as though you have begun to systematically question the historical accuracy of every aspect of the mod, including our base assumptions and some hard decisions we had to make related to the limitations of the game engine. If "historical accuracy" means "what MeinPanzer says," then no, the goal of EB is not to create what you say is right.

We have explained the reasons why we made the choices we made. You are free to disagree with them, but if you truly care about making this more historically accurate and want to pitch in, I highly recommend you work on how you are presenting this information. The manner in which you are presenting your case appears to be aggravating some of the team members, and aggravating those who you are trying to convince generally means you have already lost the argument. Check out the "important advice on feedback" in my .sig as that explains it a bit more and in-depth.

I'd pitch in on the historicity stuff but personally I'm more of a systems guy. I like to make things go. I know that the difference between an argive and an argyle is that only one is a type of sock, and depending on the time of day you ask I have a 50/50 chance of being correct. I've seen huge arguments over whether a type of legging was worn by a particular bodyguard unit in the 3rd or 2nd century BC, and could probably make all the participants very sad were I to say "the bodyguard units differ by faction?" which I nearly did after nine months as an EB member. However, I'm pretty comfortable messing around with the guts of the building structure and the various game engine limitations we have on building complexes.

My point is that EB is a lot of different things to a lot of different people on the team. We aren't monolithic and are at varying levels of knowledge about a lot of different things. A lot of the stuff you're asking about should really be answered by the people who created those units or those processes, and as some of those folks currently unavailable due to travel or real-life non-Internet-capable job stuff you might not be able to get an instant answer. Until that happens, beating the horse to death isn't going to resolve anything, no matter how soon you want to get an answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

And here people are trying to provide more information about historical accuracy and you get very defensive about it.

---

It's all about presentation, mang.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blacksnail

Dude, over the past few weeks it seems as though you have begun to systematically question the historical accuracy of every aspect of the mod, including our base assumptions and some hard decisions we had to make related to the limitations of the game engine. If "historical accuracy" means "what MeinPanzer says," then no, the goal of EB is not to create what you say is right.

---

I've only questioned what I've found to vary from the historical record, so it's not so much "what I say" as "what I've seen in archaeological evidence and read in primary sources and what that says."

Quote:

---

We have explained the reasons why we made the choices we made. You are free to disagree with them, but if you truly care about making this more historically accurate and want to pitch in, I highly recommend you work on how you are presenting this information. The manner in which you are presenting your case appears to be aggravating some of the team members, and aggravating those who you are trying to convince generally means you have already lost the argument. Check out the "important advice on feedback" in my .sig as that explains it a bit more and in-depth.

---

In this case, the argument was a misunderstanding. The only reason I responded questioning EB's results were after this comment:

Quote:

---

Hoplitai comes from hoplo or the round shield. Made from Bronze reinforced from within with single or mostly double skin, mostly that of cow. Arrows couldn't penetrate it. Pilae didn't either. Pilae worked on the wooden shields with the iron boss that Lusotannan, Iberians, Averni etc, but rarely on hopla. It would have to be a very strong, really near and applied to exactly the right angle to achieve armor piercing status.

EB's results are fine.

---

Which was very clearly wrong.

Quote:

---

I'd pitch in on the historicity stuff but personally I'm more of a systems guy. I like to make things go. I know that the difference between an argive and an argyle is that only one is a type of sock, and depending on the time of day you ask I have a 50/50 chance of being correct. I've seen huge arguments over whether a type of legging was worn by a particular bodyguard unit in the 3rd or 2nd century BC, and could probably make all the participants very sad were I to say "the bodyguard units differ by faction?" which I nearly did after nine months as an EB member. However, I'm pretty comfortable messing around with the guts of the building structure and the various game engine limitations we have on building complexes.

---

Fair enough- everyone has their strong points and contributes in different ways.

Quote:

---

My point is that EB is a lot of different things to a lot of different people on the team. We aren't monolithic and are at varying levels of knowledge about a lot of different things. A lot of the stuff you're asking about should really be answered by the people who created those units or those processes, and as some of those folks currently unavailable due to travel or real-life non-Internet-capable job stuff you might not be able to get an instant answer. Until that happens, beating the horse to death isn't going to resolve anything, no matter how soon you want to get an answer.

---

I'm simply responding to those who respond to my questions, and by looking at the "Seleukid Hetairoi" thread, I'd say there are many on the boards here who are prepared to answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonny

I may be wrong, but the result may be hugely influenced by the RTW Phalanx settings.

---

Camillan Hastati vs Classical hoplites: 5 battles with me playing hastati, 5 battles with me as hoplites.

Me Hastati: 6- 20 dead hoplites (+ morale impact) from 2 throws. (Hoplites charging)
Me Hoplites 4-10 dead hoplites from 1 throw. (Hoplites standing still with shield raised).

I dont think you are wrong..:beam:

Classical hoplites are a little buggered in the current build. Some odd stuff going on there, still trying to work out exactly what's going on.

Quote:

---

-This for me is unrealistic. The phalanx was a very static formation and the shield didnt cover all the body. So if the pila cant penetrate shield, why they dont do damage on other parts?? ( pila can hit other parts of body like the heads not cover by shield, and a pilum in the head (also with helmet) is not a nice thing

---

The rome total war engine works by applying the shield value in a direction (front and apparently left though I get more casualties from hits to the left so maybe not left)

It doesnt count how much of the body is covered, it expects the modder to work that out with an appropriate defensive value (e.g 1 for a really tiny shield and 5 for a full body one is how this game (EB) seems to be set).

So even if the shield is tiny the game thinks it is protecting the entire body, just very penetratably.

So there is no way to simulate bodu parts being hit)

Quote:

---

-for the second - yes, it could, but chance was rather small. Some minimal increase in attack may be considered but it have to be very carefully balanced, to prevent turning romans into RPG infantry

---

Yeah a bunch of briton headhurlers who can then punch it out fairly well would be terrifying.

Quote:

---

-That said, I agree that hoplitai haploi shouldn't be impervious to the pila, though I suspect (and someone who knows game mechanics better than I should confirm or deny this) the pila lower morale and make the battle end more quickly.

You could test this by doing that custom battle twice, once with the legionaries firing pila before impact, once with them waiting until impact to begin sword combat. See if the battle lasts longer the second time. I'd wager it does.

---

The Pila dont lower morale from experience mainly fighting the romans, however the pila volley in close combat will shorten a battle as up that close the pila cause very good casualties, this is offset by your men being more vulnerable while reloading and aiming though.

Quote:

---

-To me, more annoying still with phalanxs is the way that they can immediately turn around or to the side and present their spears that way, or higher-end units ( in EB pezhetairoi and above), are able to resist direct hits ( charges from cavalry or shock infantry) frm behinf, while engaged from the front. But that has more to do with the way the phalanx formation is coded in RTW engine than anything else.

---

A well trained phalax could present its arms quickly in any direction, watch medievel reconstructionists doing pike drills and look for yourself, the actions involved wont be much different.

Quote:

---

-Third, I hate the way elite units are. Some are just too powerful, particularly any unit with 2hp. Finally, cavalry is poorly balanced. Cataphracts are too powerful, particularly against other cavalry. Since they have armor all over, they can't see or move well, and another rider would easily be able to defeat them. Maybe you don't agree, doesn't really matter, but as Alexander the Pretty Good once said on the Guild about Vanilla "if you have to use strategy, you don't have enough elite units." That rings very true for EB. How many people went into a battle with great tactics only to lose to Gaesatae?

---

1) There are few 2hp units in the game (Geasati and tinderland (something like that) hillmen are the only ones I know of)

And Gaesati are p*ss easy, hell a triarii phalanx with a flank from some principes destroyed a full strength gaesati unit a hour or two ago on very hard.

2) Cataphracts will destroy and other cavalry they can catch (all that armour will make them slow) simply due to thier very heavy armour and skill at arms.
Plus they didnt always have armour all over, some cataphracts only had front facing armour (to save wieght I suppose)

Quote:

---

-The problem was the tone of what was typed :) it came across in a non constructive manner that probably wasnt intended.

---

Yes I can vouch for that :/

Quote:

---

-Oh yeah, sure it is not exactly accurate, but then again is a phalanx made up of 240 men at most quite... historical accurate? The few kills involved would be dwarfed by the scale adjustments needed...

If not then you may conclude that the pila wouldn't have hurt those guys very much: a pilum would need far more kinetic energy to penetrate the shield than an arrow would - and a skilled archer can 'provide' his arrows with much more kinetic energy per mass than any javelin throwing guy is able to 'provide' for his javelins.

---

256 men (a syntegma) was the macedonian phalanx equivelent of a modern company from what ive heard so 240 men is about right.

And not really, a pila is heavier than an arrow, so even though it can't be thrown as fast the force is still generally superior to modern arrows, and certainly to contemporary arrows, and the contact area isnt much bigger (it may not be bigger at all) so a pila will penetrate more.

Quote:

---

-Ancient hoplites, especially those in Thermopylae despised archery and archers, as they couldn't really be hurt by arrows, especially when in phallanx style they interlocked their shields(Hopla).

---

Quite simply not true, hiding behind the aspis would lessen casualties but they are still vulnerable.

Quote:

---

-The "heavy" Argive shields you mention are almost definitely parade shields. The weight of such full shields would have been prohibitive on the battlefield (even for hoplites used to carrying a full bronze panoply). The norm, at least according to the archaeological record, was for Argive shields to be coated in a fairly thin sheet of bronze.

---

Yes from what ive seen from hoplite info sites and whatnot the shield was always made of wood and would have either leather, bronze fabric or sometimes paint covering on the front side of it depending on available funds, current trends and other things.

Quote:

---

-I wouldn't trust the penetration figures for a scutum when discussing Argive shields; scuta weren't faced with bronze, after all.

---

The bronze from everything ive seen would only be a really really thin layer, so I dont really know how much effect it would have, not much though would be a guess.

Quote:

---

-The big difference in this battle seemed to be that Roman units have two extra officers - a general, a captain, and a standard bearer. My single General helped hold one flank steady, but their three were able to collapse the other and once those three Roman Officers got behind my men and started chopping away, it was impossible to overcome. It was a very interesting battle for a while though. I had lost almost 20 guys to their 5, but then began whittling away until the differential was only eight. The messages talked of victory for me, but the differential held even for another 20 losses, after which their officers collapsed my right flank, and victory fled.

---

I think what difficulty he is on will matter more to be frank, I tried on VH and got the same results hes talking about and has a massacred hastati mainple.

But when i tried on medium I got a few less kills than people here say I should get and it was a closer fight (130 something hastatii left after routing the phalanx)

Quote:

---

-The same question was asked a couple of weeks ago, and the answer is that no-one really knows, but they almost certainly have multiple hitpoints, and a high lethality, which means every succesful hit is a kill. (I initially didn't believe the latter when QwertyMIDX told me, but after watching them in combat I must admit it's true.)

---

Ive always noticed my flag bearers and officers dieing about as quick as all the other units myself.

Quote:

---

-There's no shortage of instances where entire cataphract squadrons were flanked and broken of course, but really, what cavalry formation does survive getting hit in the flank or rear in any case ?

---

Please state one as I dont know of any, dont get me wrong i know its possible I just dont know of any and want to learn.

The Palmyrenes immediately spring to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreysCraig00

The bronze from everything ive seen would only be a really really thin layer, so I dont really know how much effect it would have, not much though would be a guess.

---

The bronze probably would have been close to as thick as a helmet, so it would probably provide similar defensive strength.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreysCraig00

Please state one as I dont know of any, dont get me wrong i know its possible I just dont know of any and want to learn.

---

a good example of a squadron of kataphraktoi flanked and demolished by foot soldiers is in one of the wars of the Romans against the Armenians. I have a big assignment due tomorrow, so I can't look it up, but maybe someone else will point out the source. Sorry that's not much help cheers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paullus

a good example of a squadron of kataphraktoi flanked and demolished by foot soldiers is in one of the wars of the Romans against the Armenians. I have a big assignment due tomorrow, so I can't look it up, but maybe someone else will point out the source. Sorry that's not much help cheers!

---

Tigranocerta or Artaxata in 69 BC maybe?

yeah, i think so, i just don't recall which.

Tigranakert is the battle Paullus is talking about, I suppose. Appian and Plutarch are the ones that mention the campaing, though I don't feel like going after the exact quotes.

EDIT: Livy might have something on it too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

The bronze probably would have been close to as thick as a helmet, so it would probably provide similar defensive strength.

---

I had got it in my mind that it would be fairly thinner than a helmet from somewhere, cant remember where though, incorrect informarion floods easily into my little brain :/...

I will look up those battles after ive had a couple of hours nap.

-an aside

Its funny, RTW's ai is semi retarded when using phalanxes uphill so im getting constant heriocs as epirus

-another aside

How do I change the word below my name from member, as I want to change it to a dick joke, when I think of a decent one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paullus

yeah, i think so, i just don't recall which.

---

This is from Plutarch, Life of Lucullus 28, on Tigranocerta:

Quote:

---

Saying this, and bidding his men be of good courage, he crossed the river, and led the way in person against the enemy. He wore a steel breastplate of glittering scales, and a tasselled cloak, and at once let his sword flash forth from its scabbard, indicating that they must forthwith come to close quarters with men who fought with long range missiles, and eliminate, by the rapidity of their onset, the space in which archery would be effective. 2. But when he saw that the mail-clad horsemen, on whom the greatest reliance was placed, were stationed at the foot of a considerable hill which was crowned by a broad and level space, and that the approach to this was a matter of only four stadia, and neither rough nor steep, he ordered his Thracian and Gallic horsemen to attack the enemy in the flank, and to parry their long spears with their own short swords. 3. (Now the sole resource of the mail-clad horsemen is their long spear, and they have none other whatsoever, either in defending themselves or attacking their enemies, owing to the weight and rigidity of their armour; in this they are, as it were, immured.) Then he himself, with two cohorts, hastened eagerly towards the hill, his soldiers following with all their might, because they saw him ahead of them in armour, enduring all the fatigue of a foot-soldier, and pressing his way along. Arrived at the top, and standing in the most conspicuous spot, he cried with a loud voice, "The day is ours, the day is ours, my fellow soldiers!" 4. With these words, he led his men against the mail-clad horsemen, ordering them not to hurl their javelins yet, but taking each his own man, to smite the enemy's legs and thighs, which are the only parts of these mail-clad horsemen left exposed. However, there was no need of this mode of fighting, for the enemy did not await the Romans, but, with loud cries and in most disgraceful flight, they hurled themselves and their horses, with all their weight, upon the ranks of their own infantry, before it had so much as begun to fight, and so all those tens of thousands were defeated without the infliction of a wound or the sight of blood. 5. But the great slaughter began at once when they fled, or rather tried to fly, for they were prevented from really doing so by the closeness and depth of their own ranks.

---

Quote:

---

A well trained phalax could present its arms quickly in any direction, watch medievel reconstructionists doing pike drills and look for yourself, the actions involved wont be much different.

---

While fighting at the same time with an enemy at the front or the sides ? Don't really think so... Besides, why do you think protecting the flanks of the phalanx ( or whatever battleline you want, any age) was / is so important ?

In part I can understand this, as a way to lessen the AI shortcomings which can't hold a line together or protect its flanks adequately, but in some cases this gets a bit exxagerated with higher end phalanx units blocks fighting for minutes against enemies on all sides.

Besides, the basically square Medieval pike formations were designed for omnidirectional combat to begin with.

Wow, what thread. Are pila useless? Are hoplitai overpowered? Blah blah.
Me, I am grateful for a nice mod and never question the reason or stats of EB, simply because I enjoy JUST playing and not looking for "how many hoplitai were killed by volley of pila".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tretii

Wow, what thread. Are pila useless? Are hoplitai overpowered? Blah blah.
Me, I am grateful for a nice mod and never question the reason or stats of EB, simply because I enjoy JUST playing and not looking for "how many hoplitai were killed by volley of pila".

---

You must have really enjoyed vanilla RTW then :laugh4:

Anyway, most tests here seem to get about 1-2 kills for the first volley, that isn't so bad is it?

Quote:

---

While fighting at the same time with an enemy at the front or the sides ? Don't really think so... Besides, why do you think protecting the flanks of the phalanx ( or whatever battleline you want, any age) was / is so important ?
In part I can understand this, as a way to lessen the AI shortcomings which can't hold a line together or protect its flanks adequately, but in some cases this gets a bit exxagerated with higher end phalanx units blocks fighting for minutes against enemies on all sides

---

mostly true...
although the ''higher end'' initially means that they would fight pretty much to the end

Yeah, but for any phalanx unit engaged with their sarissas forward, being hit by a charging enemy in their back, their end would come very quicky!:beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreysCraig00

Ive always noticed my flag bearers and officers dieing about as quick as all the other units myself.

---

In my experience, the officers only start to go down if the unit has been engaged in close combat for quite some time. I have never seen them die in the first few seconds of combat, even though a heavy cavalry charges knocks them of their feet as often (if not more) than other soldiers. This suggests to me that a single succesful hit is not sufficient to kill them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarcasm

Tigranakert is the battle Paullus is talking about, I suppose. Appian and Plutarch are the ones that mention the campaing, though I don't feel like going after the exact quotes.

EDIT: Livy might have something on it too.

---

M. Chahin reports that Tigranakert most probably didn't happen, raising some good arguments against plutarch and appian, including a speech given by cicero on the subject, within which he fails to name the city (which is odd), and instead refers to the looting of a "much venerated temple", which Chahin concludes was most likely the Temple of Anahit at Acilisene, which housed, amongst other treasures, a massive gold statue of the goddess. Obviously his critical approach is far more extensive than what I've given here, but if you can get a hold of it I would recommend reading "The Kingdom of Armenia".

Sorry, a bit off topic.

Foot

Quote:

---

-While fighting at the same time with an enemy at the front or the sides ? Don't really think so... Besides, why do you think protecting the flanks of the phalanx ( or whatever battleline you want, any age) was / is so important ?

In part I can understand this, as a way to lessen the AI shortcomings which can't hold a line together or protect its flanks adequately, but in some cases this gets a bit exxagerated with higher end phalanx units blocks fighting for minutes against enemies on all sides.

---

Ive never seen a phalanx in rome total war turn to face another direction while engaged, does this happen?

And I was talking about while unengaged, and finally when do high end phalanxes carry on fighting for ages? A quick charge to the rear when engaged against infantry and they rout (except for the spartans in vanilla) for me.

And in EB everything routs when charged in the rear by cavalry or heavy infantry for me.

Quote:

---

-Besides, the basically square Medieval pike formations were designed for omnidirectional combat to begin with.

---

Yes but the actions involved are the same (from the drills ive seen its lift pike, pivot in place to face new direction and ready pike and thats it), so I dont see why a sarissa phalanx couldnt quickly turn to face another direction, when unengaged.

Quote:

---

-Yeah, but for any phalanx unit engaged with their sarissas forward, being hit by a charging enemy in their back, their end would come very quicky!

---

Why? the men at the back arent actually engaged themselves and turning with the sarissa isnt hard, Ive tested with a barbel with 20 kg on the far end and no wieght on the close end, which means it will be much harder then turning with a sarissa, and I could do it quickly (5-7 seconds from facing front with barbel down to facing back with barbel down with going into set positions, if I just swing it over my shoulder its quicker), so a well drilled professional, or even just well drilled part time, force should find it a piece of p*ss.

So the only real limiter would be are they brave enough to not attempt to run away when theyre being attacked from 2 or more directions.

Quote:

---

-In my experience, the officers only start to go down if the unit has been engaged in close combat for quite some time. I have never seen them die in the first few seconds of combat, even though a heavy cavalry charges knocks them of their feet as often (if not more) than other soldiers. This suggests to me that a single succesful hit is not sufficient to kill them.

---

My officers generally get stuck well in and die quickly, they may take more hits before dieing but theyre being attacked by alot of people at once so the high number of hits happens quickly I suppose.

But officers and captains in my experience are always killed by flank charges, both when I do them to the enemy and when the enemy does them to me. So I dont know how your guys can survive it :)

There is so much based on the use of the personal pronoun here its rediculous.

Can I suggest from an objectivity point of view you seek out the sealed knot and watch them, or talk to them in a pub about use of pikes. Thats the closest you will get to men handling long weapons. They are generally found in pubs ...from my experience :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HFox

There is so much based on the use of the personal pronoun here its rediculous.

Can I suggest from an objectivity point of view you seek out the sealed knot and watch them, or talk to them in a pub about use of pikes. Thats the closest you will get to men handling long weapons. They are generally found in pubs ...from my experience :).

---

Why is it ridiculous?

Surely even a quick experiment is better than just saying it without basis?

And I have already stated that I have seen recreationists do it (and it backed up my change facing is easy and quick argument) so I dont see the point of your second bit...

Quote:

---

Ive never seen a phalanx in rome total war turn to face another direction while engaged, does this happen?

---

Well we must have different experiences, I've seen them turning their pikes backwards a lot. When they were engaged from the front.

Quote:

---

es but the actions involved are the same (from the drills ive seen its lift pike, pivot in place to face new direction and ready pike and thats it), so I dont see why a sarissa phalanx couldnt quickly turn to face another direction, when unengaged.
Why? the men at the back arent actually engaged themselves and turning with the sarissa isnt hard, Ive tested with a barbel with 20 kg on the far end and no wieght on the close end, which means it will be much harder then turning with a sarissa, and I could do it quickly (5-7 seconds from facing front with barbel down to facing back with barbel down with going into set positions, if I just swing it over my shoulder its quicker), so a well drilled professional, or even just well drilled part time, force should find it a piece of p*ss.

---

Have you done it in the middle of hundreds of guys trying to do the same, after possibly hours of wearing armour, in the midst of a battle, surrounded by people who want to kill you, maybe even with projectiles raining on you ? Target shooting in a competition is also very different from marksmanship in a battlefield...


But again if in reality if phalanxes were so easily maneauvrable in the battlefield, why so much emphasis on protecting their flanks with lighter, more nimble troops?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spectral

Well we must have different experiences, I've seen them turning their pikes backwards a lot. When they were engaged from the front.

---

As I said, never happened for me, they dont change facing for me unless they are attacked and then they do it with thier swords.

Quote:

---

Have you done it in the middle of hundreds of guys trying to do the same,

---

That is where the factor, they were welll drilled, comes into play, they will have practiced alot at this, form evidence I have seen (although only a couple of tv documentaries admittedly ontop of a couple of little tries myself) changing facing in a dense formation is quick to learn.

Myself though, I did it in a small space where I had to get the movements just right or I would smash my lights, my tv or my fridge, and I could do it with a less wieldy thing than a sarissa so...

Quote:

---

after possibly hours of wearing armour, in the midst of a battle,

---

If you really want I'll tire myse;f out and then try again, though it wasnt very hard so I dont think it will effect me that much.

Quote:

---

surrounded by people who want to kill you, maybe even with projectiles raining on you ?

---

Again this is where the drill and discipline comes into it, both of these will cause most people and formations to run (or attempt to) but if it is a phalanx well drilled enough not to peg it then I think they will do fairly well.

Quote:

---

Target shooting in a competition is also very different from marksmanship in a battlefield...

---

It depends on what type of target shooting you are talking about.thoygh battle will always be more complicated due to it being more dangerous.


By the way niether of us have experienced this sort of thing so we cant say how it would effect us, ive read from alot of modern soldiers that being in action you actually stick to your drills and such without either thinking about it or realising you are, I dont know if this is true (one of the ex military guys who posts here will correct me) but its what ive read

Quote:

---

But again if in reality if phalanxes were so easily maneauvrable in the battlefield, why so much emphasis on protecting their flanks with lighter, more nimble troops?

---

Because the majority of men will try to flee when they are being surrounded, and those that dont try to flee will inevitably be killed quicker when being atacked from all sides.

You seem to think that phalanxes are the only formation that needs its flanks secured... Which is a fallacy

By what I've read of it the phalangites could do a full about-face (although this had the side effect of leaving the file-leaders in the rear rank), but didn't handle smaller turns well. Apparently the formation had to wheel properly to do any finer facing changes.

Anyway, if I've understood correctly the phalangite pike-blocks were basically rectangular - ie. wider than they were deep - and therefore by default far weaker at the sides. Less frontage, easier to overlap etc. (Their Medieval colleagues fought in unflankable squares by default.)

And that it was quite difficult to perceive surrounding event too well within the somewhat claustrophobic confines of a pike formation, nevermind one already engaged; if it got flanked or taken in the rear most of the soldiers probably first realized the matter when someone poked a sword in their side... at which point the enemy was already within the ranks anyway and the pikes were useless.

Imagine a hundred blokes with 12 foot poles all trying to bring them up from horizontal to vertical at the same time, through the same bit of space, and probably with people tangled in the front end. Then lowering them all in the opposite direction, to end up with them all facing the same way, at the same height, with no gaps. I can imagine it being bloody hard, if not impossible. It only takes one person to screw up and get his pole going sideways to stop everyone withing 12 feet being able to do anything at all. And even if the majority manage to flip theirs round and get them pointed in vaguely the right direction, if there are any gaps in the line of spears, you might as well not have bothered - the enemy will simply go between. Far more logical would be that the back ranks simply drop their spears, draw their swords and hope that they can outfight the enemy in melee. At that point though, the formation is in big trouble. It would take superhuman discipline for the front ranks to hold onto their spears and hold the line while they can hear a big swordfight going on behind them...