Printable View
Thing is, the Brutii have senate missions that focus largely on taking Greece ealry on. Unless you stop them, they will keep coming for you.
Im still debating whether to attack Italy, especially as like your, I have trouble in the north with Dacia and Thrace.
Its funny though, I never seem to have so many factions working against me when I play the Greek Cities, yet they are pretty much in the same position as Macedon.
Strange indeed, maybe because the Greek Cities never get a chance to get up north without killing the Brutii and Macedon first, so by the time they do get to Thrace and Dacia, its not as bad.
Thank god I haven't had to deal with chosen archer warbands yet, but I am shipping some Cretan Archers to assist my invading army in Italy. I'm in trouble, my general died, leaving only hordes of levies and phalanxes in Tarentum. In the meantime, I think I'm gonna go with the Teyls strategy and get thrace and Dacia as my protectorates, thus effectively forcing them to expand west, while I take over Turkey and Rhodes, along with all those beautiful wonders.
Do you think it is possible to get the other romans to call of the war once I eliminate the Brutii?
In my experience as Macedonia or Greek Cities the Romans never called off war with me. Instead, once I land in Italy and take Croton and Tarentum and kill off the Brutii, the remaining Roman factions gang up on me and I become their primary target. That keeps the Julii expanding into Gaul and the Scipii rarely get to Africa - which makes for interesting games because then one has to deal with a strong Gaul and/or Carthage after slugging it out with the Romans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glaucus
I'm not sure there's much benefit from getting Dacia and Thrace as protectorates. Outright occupation seems more useful, especially to get more cities to train troops to throw at the Romans.
Getting Dacia might be a strategic necessity because the Julii sometimes send armies down both sides of the Adriatic. Containing the Julii is important - fighting Romans with scrappy macedonian phalanx pikemen is NOT fun at all, especially on more than one front.
A side remark on the Greek Cities: I recently played a Brutii H/H campaign and the Greek Cities wiped out the Macedonians, going all the way to Bylazora. I guess that only happened because I left them alone for a while.
Interesting, and as you said the the Julii will advance into Illyria as well as Italia, thats why I thought getting thrace and Dacia as my protectorates would be better, then I have a shield between myself and the Julii who are up in Gaul and Aquinicum.
Yes, you will have a shield, but it is only a temporary one. Both Dacia and Trace will fold quickly, even if the lowly AI is in charge of the Julii.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glaucus
Many others stated this in the past: protectorates are pretty much useless because you cannot control the protectorate diplomacy and military actions.
Dealing with the Julii:
I find it very effective to put together a fleet and move a big army (with siege weapons) up the Adriatic to take Patavium. That fleet needs to be big enough to survive pirates and multiple Julii attacks! Without Patavium the Julii economy falters quickly, especially if you can also take Mediolanium and then block the bridges. This should relieve some of the Julii pressure on Croton and Tarentum.
building my Invasion-Julii fleet right now...
Im starting to hate my Macedon campaign. Keep getting attacked, especially by Allies.
Yeah I'm starting to agree with that. Though it does make it a bit more interesting. If my allies want to start a war, then I shall smite their capitals to the ground beneath my calvary and pikes!
Dont forget your ongaers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glaucus
How do I unlock Macedon? Could someone give me in-depth instructions as to which folder i need to infiltrate?
Go to Data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign\Descr_stat.txt and move Macedon from unplayable to playable-list. You can do that with other unplayable factions as well, but I recommend not doing it with the slaves and the Senate. These factions were never meant to be played and chrashes can occur when playing them.Quote:
Originally Posted by diablodelmar
Fellow Org-sters, a little help please. :gah2:
I am in the endgame of a Macedonian campaign. It's actually an interesting one since the Scipii, which own everything South and West of Carthage (including Carthage itself) have decided to break their alliance with me and assault Lilybaeum, pretty much catching me with my pants down.
The bulk of my forces are in the East (Nile, Sidon, Antioch, etc.) finishing off Egypt. They are obviously en route to North Africa now but it will be some time before they arrive. Here is the situation:
-Carthage is their capital. Large stone walls, full-stack garrison inside, another full-stack standing nearby. Thapsus is well-defended too.
-Their armies are in the Marius transition phase. Mostly the archers are Marian, infantry leans slightly towards pre-Marian. Lots of Triarii.
-A full-stack is heading toward Siwa, which will not be able to hold. I have an army en route to intercept, but it might not make it in time.
-I have around 3 high-tech armies heading towards the action, and am close to completing a fourth in Greece.
-They took Lilybaeum and may go for the other two settlements in Sicily. I'm beefing up the defenses and am fairly confident that I can repulse an assault.
If you kind souls could give me some battle tactics for dealing with the Roman threat it would be much appreciated. My armies have 1-2 generals, 5 Royal Pikemen, 3 gold-weapon archers, 4 Macedonian/Companion Cavalry, and 1-2 Onagers. I've dealt with Romans before but not this many.
Thanks in advance. :charge:
Your basic army is pretty solid, but you have two disadvantages against early Marian romans -- the range of the AAs and the mix of legionary swords and triarii.
Pikes hold the infantry off pretty well, but must be in dense blocks to do so, leaving you prone to being flanked. If you have the transport, you might grab 2-3 units of Bastarnae to add as a second line with your pikes. That way, you can put the pikes in 4-5 row lines but feed the Bastarnae into the melee once the legionaries start breaking up the front of the Phalanx. Their armor is crap, but if the pikes take the rush, they can feed in nicely.
Cretans lose to AA, so I'd stick with your gold archers, but back them up a notch. Drop the onagers except for siege trains, add a couple more cav to hammer the AA's.
You know the tactics already, this is just to add a bit of robustness to your field force.
Hey, i am playing macedonian and i realised a few things.
1) A good economy is important, most of my campaigns against greece involves bribing. Greece and Macedonian share a few units.
Peasants (duh)
Milltia Hoplites (ok..)
Greek Calvary (something)
Peltast (not sure with this)
2) Kill of the Romans, Never let them Expand into Greece
3) Watch your back at the start, Thrace isnt exactlly a nice neighbour.
4) My most important point, Time. In battles, Light Lancers are very important, I have tested the speed and it is around three times faster than roman equites.
Also roman post marius is quite a pain. Anyone have good strategies against it ?
In my Macedon Campaign I didn't encounter many Post-Marian armies but against the few I did I just used the usual tactics...pinned their infantry with Royal Pikemen while having Macedonian or Companion Cavalry go around a flank and hit the Romans from the rear. I always used some archers for support as well, either 2 Cretans or 3 standard. You can upgrade your standard archers to gold weapons if you retrain them in a Large Temple of Artemis which makes them very good.
Basic rule with Marian Romans is:
Use the same approach but have better troops.
Marian armies field well-armored swordsmen with pila all of whom have a 10 morale v. the 4 of your standard phalangite.
ANYTHING but a frontal assault that stays at spear range is going to turn against you. Their morale means that they'll take the casualties coming in and then cut you up and your sarissa boys will run. If you have a 2-4 chevron advantage in quality, however, your lads will be able to hold on long enough to allow you cav to hammer them from the sides/rear.
Remember to hit their cav hard as you begin your flank sweep, and use your best. Roman Cav and Legio Cav are high morale and decently armored, so you have to hit them hard to make them route out of your way. They aren't great attackers -- but then again your lancers arent' well armored so...
Don't bother fielding generic archers against the Marian Romans except as:
a) sacrificial lambs to draw his cav onto your pikes.
b) flank attack support who start well behind the line.
Regular archers against AA only serve as a way to get them to target your archers instead of your spears.
In general, you can beat them the same way you did the Republican Romans -- but you are going to take casualties. Marian armies have too high a morale to just melt away. So have your replacement forces coming up to fill the gaps in your ranks.
Seamus,
Your advice sounds very reasonable to me. I'm assuming you usually play RTW on vh/vh and h/h? (not my favorite levels) May I impose on you for a couple questions? Which, in your opinion, is the faction that handles the Marian Romans the best? Do you have any special tactics of your own that you use? The reason I ask is - the Marian Romans scare the crap out of me when I'm taking Seleucia or Egypt. When I'm taking a faction that's geographically close to Italy, I usually HAVE to deal with the Romans early, which means I'll knock them out before Marius. So far, I've had almost no experience fighting Marian armies with non-Roman factions.
In my own games, I tend to finish off the Romans before they get to Marian stages. But, I live in fear and trembling that I won't get to them before they start producing these "super" units. To me, the best strategy against Marian Romans is - kill them before they get to Marius. :)
Sounds to me like this would be a good subject for some experiments in the Custom Game option -- trying a few 'Marian heavy' armies against the best Macedonian units available. Macdonia's strength/depth in RTW is its cavalry. But even its best falls short against Marian cav units. The Mac phalanx units are adequate against most standard opponents, but they are not quite as good as the Greek's best. And I would think that for the most part they're going to be inadequate against the Marian Romans except in a nose-to-nose encounter, as you say. And even then, you'd better handle them judiciously - guard their flanks, probably with cavalry swarms. The trick is to get close enough to allow for the close encounter face off. The Marian Romans have so much depth that generally a Roman army doesn't meet a serious opponent (tech-wise) until they start having to fight each other in the Civil War phase of the game.
Just curious about your battlefield approach, Seamus. Again, forgive me if I'm imposing.
Varies depending on faction, of course, but I "turtle" my games so its fairly common for 1 or more Roman factions to survive to Marian levels -- often all 4 if I'm starting way out East.
Some basics:
Let them lay siege, but then sally from the stone walls. Only, don't sally with much -- just a unit or two that they can't resist coming after. Of course, atop the walls, you have your entrenched missile units to greet them. Do not let any significant hand-to-hand develop. When you run out of ammo, stop the battle. Repeat. This is one type of attrition that you can almost always win, and you have a great chance to deal out casualties regardless of experience level. I've broken the fighting strength of whole factions this way.
Set up on a narrow front. You can't envelop the computer unless you have
a lot more units. Crazy AI will set up one line 16 units long just dreaming of you matching it and creating a one-on-one unit engagement against its swords. Keep you cav/flankers behind the line and spring sideways as they close. If you start out to the flanks you will be met head on out at the flanks -- waste of good cav.
Use lots of cavalry -- though be careful not to use light cav frontally against marians. Creates a lot of steaks with plenty of Romans left to eat them. Remember, your "anvil" units will be taking a beating, so don't delay your flank strike for long. If they route and the Romani turn-to-face in time, all you do is make steaks.
Use Elephants (war+) to break their formations -- and then quickly add in some cav and/or light infantry. Keeps the hefalump casualties down and takes advantage of their shredded formations. Careful with the ele's, when tired, Romani cut them down pretty quick.
If spears are your primary infantry, have a thin screen of peltasts or cheap slingers in front of them, formation loose/no skirmish, to absorb the worst of the leader cav charges and pila shots. They'll break, but this usually leaves your Roman opponent at pike range with most of the steam off the charge.
Use cavalry against archer auxilia -- they'll be shooting your line, but that's the price you pay -- strike after they've stopped in a firing position. Sometimes, if there's only one or two, a jav-cav unit can lure them out of the fight for a while.
DON'T chase Roman routers until most of them are routing. They often return to discipline just as you catch them up again, and they you're in a fight in their rear with your flanks unguarded and no support -- risky position. However, feel free to chase with surviving missile at range, a few backshots and they may keep on running.
On siege assaults, always group towers together for firepower and hammer the wall defenders. Use ladders (if possible) on other undefended points to steal towers and gates that they're not actively defending. Slingers and such that shoot well from walls are a good tool here.
...so much more, but mostly type specific to nations/units...
Sounds like Carthage is a favorite of yours for a Marian Roman opponent.
I have definitely noticed how the AI likes to spread it's infantry (and sometimes even its skirmishers) into one long line. If it's skirmishers holding up the ends of the line, I sick the doggies on them. It distracts the edges of the line enough that I can slip the cav by them or simply run the cav over top of them. That weakness usually costs the AI the battle as once the cav gets behind the line, I'm going to get the AI infantry in the rear.
I will have to do some practice runs in the Custom game on some of the siege tower tactics you mention.
I tend to favor Cretan archers as a main support behind my frontline, (when I can get them), whereas I move Balearic or Rhodian slingers onto the frontline with cav just behind them to move forward if the AI tries to run them down in a frontal charge. My guess is - against Marian Romans the slingers will have a limited effectiveness.
I've noticed that if the AI has it's best infantry on the walls, it's going to be tough sledding - lots of casualties. Once I get a section of wall though, I rush archers or peltasts up the siege towers and onto the walls. They can clear out the units just below the walls, then I can rush cavalry through the gates (assuming I've secured the gateway.)
"Turtling" - sounds like you're very methodical and deliberate in your campaign taking a slow pace. At vh/vh or h/h I think that's probably a good choice.
I took my own advice from my previous email and tried a Mac attack against a Marian Roman army. Gave both sides two units of archers and two units of javelin skirmishers. Gave Romans 3 Praetorians, 2 legionary cohorts, 2 infantry aux, 2 legion cav and two Roman cav. Macs had 5 Royal phalanx and one militia hoplite, 2 companion cav, 2 of the better Mac cav. Both armies had generals. I let the AI have Rome, set the difficulty on medium and I took the Macedonians. It wasn't easy, but I pulled off the win. the Roman AI tried to swarm my right with their cavalry. So I had to meet them with three of my cav plus my general. I didn't wait on them to attack me but hit one of the Roman cav units with all four of my cav units on the right. Then I sent my phalanx units one on one against the Roman infantry. My Cretan archers were a big aid.
I lost control of the battle from time to time. Had one phalanx rout. I lost about half my archers. (I think the Roman archers were concentrating on my Cretans.) Once I decimated the first Roman cav unit on the right, I started swarming the remaining cav with my cavalry force. (I think the AI was confused about my concentrating my cav force on one unit at a time.) I have tried as a rule when I'm dealing with a formidable AI cav enemy unit to swarm attack with 2-3 cav units. It cuts down on casualties and prevents my own units from routing as easily. I can usually pull it off even if my cav units are inferior to the AI opponent's cav.
Once I got most of the Romani cavalry out of the way, I could slowly turn the tide on the infantry battle. The royal phalanx units can hold the praetorians in place as long as the Praetorians don't get around their sides too much. (Where I had the most trouble on the line was where there were gaps between the royals. the preatorians and legionairies could pour around the side.) I'm not sure it would be wise as a rule to force the royals to hold for too long, especially if you play at the harder levels. Once I got the Roman cav out of the way, (and not without moderate casualties), I sent two units of cav to hit the archers and javelin skirmishers. I grouped two cav units to hit the Praetorians from behind. Even without cavalry support, the Praetorians have to be respected. Not so, necessarily, with the Royals, as phalanx are slower moving and can easily be maneuvered around to get hit in the "behind."
In the end, my royals had about 50% casualties. My cav about 40%. My archers 55% roughly. It was bloody. I was lucky, too, I didn't lose my general.
I have to call it an evening, but I shall reread your post and ponder on some of your counsel. I want to experiment with some tactics some more. And you all have motivated me to maybe try a Mac campaign here for my next RTW round.
Thanks for the return post, Seamus.
I love Cretans too -- especially as Mac has no choice for LR firepower otherwise. Have to set them to "counter-battery" the AA of a Roman force to keep them from getting chopped up too badly, though.
Never field 1 or 2 Cretans, always use 3-4 in squares, and take them off fire at will after the first 2-3 shots. You choose their targets -- and those targets should generally be one unit at a time to maximize the smackdown effect. Do not set up a fire group and assign targets that way, they'll simply go to fire at will regardless of what the gauge reads. The computer's goal is to have you kill your own phalanx line from the rear -- by targeting the closest romans and shooting through their backs (pet peeve).
Running Macs I try to field:
5 Phalanx, 2 Peltast/Illyrian/Sling, 2 Flanker (Bastarnae, Thracian, Spanish), 4 Cretan, 1 General, 4 Heavy Cav, 2 Lancer.
---Pelt(4 lines, loose, no skirm)----Pelt(4 lines, loose, no skirm)-----
Phalx (5 lin)--Phalx (3 lin)--Phalx (3 lin)--Phalx (3 lin)--Phalx (5 lin)--
Flanker (square)------------------------------------Flanker (square)
-------Cretan (sq)---Cretan (sq)---Cretan (sq)--Cretan (sq)-------
-------------------------------Gen-------------------------------
-HC---LC-----------------------------------------------LC----HC-
-HC----------------------------------------------------------HC-
Heavy Cavalry comes out wide to either side as Romans commit, pushes forward as they do, comes in double-envelopment style. LC follows, going wider and deeper to handle routers/kill archers/support the heavies. General acts as reserve and chases routers in the general chase phase. Peltasts take one for the team, route, hopefully return to discipline and then support the infantry flankers to either side.
A tactic I have long wanted to try with a Phalanx-based army is the following:
Have at least six Phalanx units, preferably pikes. Set up two groups of three each, have these form a half-hexagon. Keep a gap in between them. Have the two middlemost units not yet engage Phalanx mode. Keep skirmishers, slingers etc. up front, tending to the middle. When the enemy approaches them, run them to the centre of your formation and through the gap between the two Phalanx half-hexagons. The AI, already committed to chase them, will end up between your two mini-formations.
.....................ssssssssssssssss..........................
......................................................................
............PPPPPPP.................PPPPPPP..................
.........PPP........PPP..........PPP........PPP................
.......PPP.............PPP....PPP..............PPP.............
Like this at the beginning. Once the enemy runs into the gap, advance your Phalanx from both sides, keeping the outermost Phalanx units facing more or less forward still, in case the enemy inf line is long and not all committed. Skirmishers and slingers can duck behind the two buckles of your Phalanx and be drawn out to the flanks. Cavalry protects flanks and comes around to take the enemy from behind. Enemy troops should by this point be either in the meat grinder between two Phalanges or congested in a clump in front of them, so they're easy pickings for cavalry. For this to work the enemy must be drawn out by slinger/skirmisher fire, and you can expect to lose some of these, but they're cheap. The Macedon army would be perfect for this kind of trap, as their Pikemen can hold out long and have tough morale, so they will stay in formation even when separated into two mini-formation-blocks.
Even if the enemy overloads on one flank and tries to get in behind your Phalanx half-hexes, they can hold out until relieved. I have found mini-formations of three Phalanx units in half-hex to be a very durable, and, what is more, self-sustaining, compound, especially when supported by one or two archer (Cretan) unit inside.
Thanks Seamus and Empirate. I printed your posts for future reference.
I tried a couple experiments last night in the custom game. I took five Praetorians and had them face off with five royal pikemen, and another match of 4 vs 4 units. Medium difficulty setting. Without support, the pikemen just can't stand alone against the prateorians. In only one situation did I get a prateorian unit to rout and that was because I had the pikemen facing downhill and the praetorians were trying to charge uphill into the sarissas. It's the gaps! If the Praetorians get around the sides, they win every time. Amazingly, however, the royals show very good stamina against their opponents. The fights did not end quickly. So, the royals can "hold" if you can just get something around the Roman line to flank or hit them from the rear.
I usually try to grab 2 cretans for my standard army formations. But in one recent game (can't remember which faction I was playing) I had an army with four Cretan archer units. The Cretans just showered the enemy armies from long range. It was butchery. :skull: I decided from that moment that in future games I would try to make 3-4 Cretans a standard for future formations. You can't do it for every army in your faction, just not enough opportunities to buy so many archers. But they are very, very effective. So, I concur, Seamus, with your Mac formation content.
Thank you, guys, for your posts.
Seamus,
Interesting last few posts.
Am rereading Empirate's post now. There are some nuances to combat tactics possible in RTW that I am still discovering. I'm rather "thick" at times in my thinking. It's been helpful to contrast my tactics and impressions with the experiences of other Guild members.
I definitely need to get back to a Mac campaign.
Phalanx troops, especially Pikemen, can hold out much better if you don't leave any gaps between the units...in my Macedonian campaign the Royal Pikemen could hold their own against Praetorians since I didn't leave any gaps between them. While this reduces their frontage I didn't find that to be a problem since I would fold back one or both flanks and always had the advantage in cavalry.
P -
Very true. In my staged trial in the custom game the AI showed a little cleverness. It shifted the praetorian units around so that they didn't approach my line in a straight line. One unit broke out alone to my right, two units approached my center and one unit broke off to my left. The one on my left was the one that had to approach my royal phalnx uphill. That was the one that routed that I mentioned in a previous post. The AI held one praetorian in reserve. My right posted royal pikemen broke first. The center held and I tried to bring my victorious left wing in to support the center. But the "victorious" praetorian hit my right. In spite of that, the center held for a long time before it finally routed. Praetorians do not have to hold formation with the same discipline as a phalanx unit, so they do tend to flow out around your pikemen. Definitely my line discipline could stand improvement.
It's wise, even with phalanx armies, to hold a reserve so as to plug gaps or press an advantage. A tactic that I have tried to employ more in my own combats.
I can only second Phoenix! You must not leave gaps in your Phalanx line. Rather, deploy them so they overlap slightly. This way, even gentle bends and corners in your formation don't matter. If I use a Phalanx-heavy army, meaning at least six P units, I like to have them in one huge, continuous Phalanx, all abreast of each other, leaving absolutely no gaps. The two outmost units are bent back a little, so they're less easily flanked. Cavalry or whatever mobile units I have are deployed either a bit back or far out on one or both flanks. The center right behind the Phalanx is taken by archers.
Slingers, if I have them, pose a problem: They can't stand out in front because getting back through the Phalanx is tricky. I've had some success with putting a unit of slingers right before a unit of Pikemen that was not in Phalanx mode. When the enemy approached, the slingers retreated (with time to spare), and the Pikemen were put in Phalanx mode as soon as the last slingers had passed their front rank, nicely spitting the unsuspecting enemy on six yards of spear. But timing is tricky with this scheme. Deploying slingers out on the flanks, on the other hand, can draw the enemy there and lead to them flanking your Phalanx more easily. So normally I try to take archers/Onagers for missile troops and skip slingers, saving these for armies that are built around a more mobile infantry core.
Empirate,
you can use more efficiently with a little more patience; I use this tactic playing as Carthagenians but Macs can do do it with Rhodians slingers.
Place your slingers on the flank behind your phalanx line (usually near the cav), and wait for the opposing army to engage your line, then have your slingers run and place them in the back of the opposing melee units. From there on , you can:
1) "gunsling" the shield-less melee ennemies
2) draw the opposing archers' attention until the cav arrives (loose formation)
3) if the enemy general is not in combat already, slingers make the perfect bait to hold him and have your cav trample him
... of course, switch skirmsih mode off (I forgot and learned the hard way)
Yes, they'll take heavy casualties, but that's their job; drawing the attention of free-to-move enemy units so that your more precious units make it.
Slingers are easily refit in any practice range, Rhodians are more problematic but I don't mind sacrificing them... (unlike Cretians archers; those guys are just too valuable to have one of them die)
Placing slingers in the outflanking force solves the problem of having them run to safety behind your own line. However, I don't use this tactic for my campaigning army; it is usually too far from my cities to retrain immediately after battle, every man counts when you're 2 turns or more from home.
Thanks for the tip. Slingers as flanking infantry might work well. However, I don't tend to use any units as bait. I just don't like my men dying on me in the worst way. Besides, whenever I use slingers at all, it will be Rhodians or Balearics, not generic ones. Generics are not worth building at all imo. And Rhodians / Balearics are hard to resupply after taking casualties.
Rhodians have actually performed well for me in my recent Seleucid campaign. But they're for more specialized duty, not easily incorporated into my main field armies. They can be killers whenever they have a height advantage, meaning they're good on city walls (shooting inside, so a great unit when attacking cities!) and in the mountains. If the enemy have no cavalry, they're also very good against melee infantry. THE job for slingers is taking out Thracian Mercenaries, Bastarnae, all kinds of Gladiators, and Falxmen - dangerous melee infantry without much of a shield. Slingers can totally devastate them in mere moments.
Still, these troops don't pose much of a challenge to a decent Phalanx, so I'll go without slingers with Macedon, Greece and so on.
Emp & Poulp -
Actually when I think about it, I don't use a lot of slingers in my phalanx armies. I have used Balearics a great deal when I'm playing Carthage. But, in the early Carth game, you aren't managing phalanx armies as much as infantry armies - Iberians, Libyans, etc. Then, I do station slingers on the front line, but to one side. I usually bring the two from Palma and combine them with the one in Corduba to make three. When I station them on the line, I place them all together as if they were one unit. I always have them backed-up by a cavalry unit in case the AI decides to go after them. My general is in support too. Balearics embedded three deep are devastating and give similar results as having 3-4 Cretan archers. Unarmored infantry are decimated against them. I've not found slingers very useful storming inside cities. I can use them on stone walls to good effect. But I never drag them through city streets. They're just too vulnerable. Truly, slingers are a specialized tool. They can't be used in every circumstance.
Poulp's tactical suggestion on slingers has merit. And, I have actually done that a couple times. But it's not a regular tactic. My phalanx armies are never without cav support, except in rare circumstances when they are simply replacement armies hanging behind my General's spearhead army ready to feed replacement units after a combat. I tend not to commit unsupported phalanx armies unless the enemy is also unsupported. Thankfully, I haven't been ambushed much. [Spies, spies, spies!]
I agree - Rhodians & Balearics are the only truly good slingers. I, too, avoid building the generic slingers for Carthage. They just aren't worth the waste of money to me. And, too, I hate sacrificing my guys as "cannon fodder" or sacrificial lambs to an enemy army. It spoils part of my fantasy as being an ancient army general. [In truth, if I really was an ancient army general, my soldiers would probably cut me up for kabobs for the war dogs for my incompetence. :) ]
I get into ruts in my tactics and troop handling. So, I've appreciated the independent observations. I shall tighten up my phalanx discipline. One of the reasons I like the bowed line idea that Emp mentioned earlier and showed in his diagram is that it curves the edges of the phalanx line giving added flank protection. The units in a concave line, once they make contact with the enemy, collapse together making the gaps disappear. Excellent idea.
I experimented with a one-on-one in the custom game pitting a royal pikeman vs. praetorian. Without upgraded weapons or experience differences, the praetorian won the mano-a-mano. But if I gave the royal two experience chevrons, they kicked butt decisively. Chances are in the late game, the Romans will be cranking out praetorians with upgraded weapons and/or experience chevrons. But it's nice to know the royals can perform against the Roman's best. And if you give them some kind of edge, they might be able to win on their own. With the Macs, [and I started a game yesterday], it's getting the city populations up so I can crank out the Macedonian and Companion cav units.
All-in-all I've successfully managed my phalanx armies in past games, but I have not been happy with my line discipline in some combats. I get in a hurry, and then suffer more casualties than needed. If these were real men I was mishandling, I would weep instead of sleeping at night.
Good posts.
Yep, taking casualties because of your mistakes is vexing -- but it also represents some of the game's fun. It does hammer you for some mistakes.
Don't dismiss generic slingers too quickly. The have too little range to do well in the open field, and the low morale/armor typical of 1st level missile troops, but they have LOTS of ammo, outrange peltasts, and do surprisingly well as firepower from a stone wall defense. In the field, I use them as my expendables -- they sit with skirmish off, in loose formation, just in front of the spears. Adds some firepower to the line, draws enemy missile fire away from my main line, and sometimes the enemy cav will go after them -- crashing all the way through their formation and arriving at slow speed right on the points of my phalanx.:2thumbsup: