Does anyone ever use Spartan Hoplites? They appear to be very expensive and not overly better statwise than cheaper counterparts (although there is always a nice feeling associated with leading Spartans into battle ;)
Printable View
Does anyone ever use Spartan Hoplites? They appear to be very expensive and not overly better statwise than cheaper counterparts (although there is always a nice feeling associated with leading Spartans into battle ;)
They are much better than the standard Hoplites (you'll notice when you have to fight them), but not much better than the a little cheaper elite Hoplites. Appart from roleplaying reasons, I wouldn't recruite them: your family members do the same job for free and playing KH you need all the money for elites to buy heavy cavalry.
It's nice to have a bunch of people with a lambda on their shields. But that's about it.
I dont know why they even have them as uber elite units, by 272 bc the Spartans were a shadow of their former strength.
Having non-elite Spartans would just give us another topic having constant threads to add to the LS, KH, over/underpowered, grey/blue/yellow death, Greek should be... etc etc threads.
Plus, you can always think the unit represents "the (very) few, the (very) proud" the city still turns out that rate Elite - a local brand of Epilektoi basically. The rest are just common Hoplitai and whatnot. :beam:
Yeah, I´d rather use Epilektoi, they´re almost as good and a lot cheaper.
I did once build a army of 6 Spartans and my best FM and took Kyrene, Paraitonion and Alexandria. Completely broke the Ptolies, no Yellow Death for me.
I've modded my game to give KH two units of uber-Spartans at the beginning of the campaign - they have double gold experience, and gold shield and sword upgrades.
However, I've also made Spartan hoplites completely non-recruitable, so once the two units of uber-Spartans are destroyed in battle, that's it - the Spartans are history.
For me, this represents as accurately as possible the historical decline of Sparta as a major force in Greece.
Why? Sparta was imho stronger 50 years after EB start, under Kleomenes IIIQuote:
Originally Posted by Titus Marcellus Scato
But wiped out basically after Selesia.
Gives me the idea to try a KH game and recruit Spartans exclusively, except for Skirmishers maybe.
Huh? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubius Cato
Ah, the EB unholy trinity: SL, koine greek, and this...
The number of true Spartiates with the full agoge training declined over time. By 244 BC only 700 were left. Kleomones III restored this to a nominal 4,500 in 234 BC and won two battles with the Achean League as a result, in 228 BC and 227 BC. However five years later in 222 BC at the Battle of Sellasia the Macedonians and Achaen League crushed the Spartan army by sheer weight of numbers, and Sparta never rose again.Quote:
Originally Posted by anubis88
See: http://www.xyfos.com/articulos/Sellasia.pdf
In EB (by my reckoning) in Large Unit Size, 1 man in an EB unit = 20 men in real life. So a Spartan unit of 80 men is really 1,600 men strong. (For Huge unit size, 1 man in an EB unit = 10 men in real life).
So having 2 units of Spartan hoplites at the beginning of the game, plus Kleomones' bodyguard unit of Spartans, makes a total of 4,800 Spartan hoplites at the beginning of the EB campaign.
With gold sword and shield upgrades and double gold echevrons, they are VERY hard to kill! But the city of Sparta is still small and weak and can't afford to sustain heavy battle losses (although she can replace older men with young ones to maintain unit size.)
So the Spartan force will gradually decline in fighting strength with time, and will play a smaller and smaller role in the KH army. Eventually the Spartans will all be dead.
It all depends on whether you think the Spartan decline was inevitable, or whether they could have turned things around if the Macedonians hadn't crushed them. My own view is that Kleomones only postponed the inevitable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
What's SL???
Oops. I meant LS. Lorica Segmentata.
Lag. What's a trinity called if there are four of them?
i think there are 5
yellow death? maybe?
You mean "clouds" Tellos? :laugh4:
I think he meant the fictional lag created by EB's new oceans. :P
Personally, I prefer Spartiates to Epiletikoi because the latter tire too quickly in my experience. I don't know why, but they go tired far quicker than the rest of my army, and once they reach exhausted they perform no better than ordinary hoplites.
OK fellas... I hear a lot of talk not a lot of substance. No pun intended really.
The following is how to use Spartan Hoplites best, as used by Madmatg back when Multi-Player worked:
Spartan Hoplites are best as support for flanker units.
-Their high endurance, moral, and armor is perfect.
Here is how my man Madmatg used them:
-He deployed them to stop flanking attacks by my Gaesatae. Because of thier high moral they would never quit unless they were down to 10/62 men. (unlike Hoplites who feld after being down 35/80 and Thorakitai 45/80).
--What this mean is that his flanks would hold for a VERY long time. And they would even hold when being hit by cavarly in the rear (which would normally cause a rout)
--This also forced me to pick where my cavarly charged. If I charged Spartans it was a waster of time and effort.
-He also deployed Spartans to support flanking attacks by infantry and cavarly. The Spartans (even a lone unit) could protect the flanking units from being hit by a counter-cavarly charge. The spartans would NEVER rout even after loosing 1/3 of their men from a powerful charge of several cavarly units, and being surrounded. Any other infantry would probably call it a day.
-Also he used his Spartans to engage the best of my elites (non phalanks). One spartan unit could hold up 2-3 other elites. They would be loosing but would never quit. Thus tying up extra enemy units for a LONG time, giving you time to do other things with the rest of ur units.
Again all thanks to high endurance, armor and moral.
NO other KH unit could fufill any of the above mentioned roles. They would flee.
my2cents fellas...
p.s god I miss MP
this is meant to be cynical:
I know the advantages of the Spartiatai Hoplitai, and they are numerous and useful to an aspiring archon in achieving Hegemonia throughout the world:
1-they're too expensive
2-only 60-ish of em per unit (on large)
3-they're not as versatile as hypaspistai
4-they're outdated (can't shoot like the phraspidai)
5-did I mention that they were outdated
6-the pilos helm is so 450BC
7-they're disturbingly overconservative....
A way to make the Spartan hoplite more unique and useful would be to add very good stamina to them. Most other high armored hoplites or units have normal stamina and high heat values, such as 5 or 6.
The one advantage that a Spartan society has over other Greek cities is that professional warriors tend to be in much better shape stamina wise. While the Spartans may not be able to out perform other hoplites in terms of army cohesion or tactics, they can certainly outlast them, especially given the weight of the hoplite armor.
This way, you can justify buying Spartans over those expensive elites that get exhausted quickly and cut down. Having a heavy armored infantry unit that can actually fight for long periods of time is very valuable.
Ymarsakar.....
.....by 272BC A WHOLE lot of people had well equiped, trained, veteran soldiers.
In constrast in 500BC, Sparta was the only "city state in the Hellas" that had a well trained and equiped army.
I'm refering to the fact that any warrior culture will produce individuals through physical conditioning from childhood. While the Greeks prized physical exercise, the Spartans took it to a whole different level. That's what I mean by professional forces. Not that they are training full time, but that they have trained full time since childhood.
Now Spartan society may have changed over the centuries, but so long as they had Helots, the Spartans would have to ensure that they are ready.
Hadn't they functionally entirely reformed the whole helot thing out of necessity by the time relevant, though ? The gov't descriptions IIRC mention the oppression of the helots being a thing of the past...
And since when did being a buff athlete immunize you to heat stroke ?
Should the Spartans have Corinthian helmets instead?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrahim
<B>And since when did being a buff athlete immunize you to heat stroke ?</b>
Those that exercise as children have cardio vascular systems and muscle density greater than anyone that starts later in life. The growing stage is past by then. And for those that do start as children, the quality and quantity of exercise matters as well. Playing sports is one thing but targeted cardio vascular training would have been something the Spartans would have tried to get an advantage.
As for the Helots, I can only guarantee that the Spartans would maintain their warrior upringing so long as the Helots existed. After the reforms or Spartan society changed, Spartans would still have upheld some of their traditions, just not as universally or as seriously.
I wish!!...I know they may not go with the Spartans from this era but those are just my all time favorite helms. :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmehrer07
They still kind of cook inside closed metal armour on a hot day under the sun, tho'. Basic biology and physics that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ymarsakar
And it's not like anyone actually had a damned clue about the hows and whys of it at the time anyway. They just knew from long experience wearing lots of metal didn't go too well with hot weather.
<B>They still kind of cook inside closed metal armour on a hot day under the sun, tho'.</b>
Which is why I don't believe the Spartans should have a lower Heat value comapred to other hoplites with around their armor value.
Spartans still had a pretty impressive reputation though, I mean they still do even today. Most people would have been quite intimidated fighting them at any stage of their history. Maybe their advantage over other elite hoplites should be more psychological than physical?
Also, for the sake of the game, if a Greek alliance were ever to have succeeded in dominating the mediterranean - with an active Sparta involved - the state would surely have had to have undergone serious reforms. It's simply not practical to rule a large empire/hegemony with such a limited citizen population. I mean look at all the trouble the Romans (with a massive comparative population) had before they extended the franchise in Italy.
So, at least in my game I have assumed that some how or other the Spartans have modernised a bit... :beam:
I think they would have had to implement land reforms to fix that horrid wealth imbalance and then figure out some way of not pissing off their allies enough to steam roll them like the last time they were in charge. -_-'
Not that the Southern Greeks would have been able to stay together without a common enemy.
Agreed. A very conservative and closed minded people really. Realistically it seems almost impossible that they would have ever been able to run an empire that stretched much beyond the Peloponnese, but taking that attitude too seriously there would be no point playing the game :dizzy2:
For the sake of argument Im going with extending some form of citizenship to all Homeland provinces and not allowing any non-Spartan forms of local government. In my game I had to reconquer Athens from the Maks, so the anti-democratic revolution happened then.
I dont think it's possible to play this faction without taking a rather liberal view of historical reality. :oops: Can I say that here? :embarassed:
Depending on what you mean by liberal. Not that everything it can mean applies to what you're saying anyway.
at the one who asked about they're helmets: the spartans became famous for their Pilos helms as far back as c.450BC. the corinthian, though admittedly cool looking, is anything but cool while wearing (try wearing a 5 Lbs bronze pot on you in 90 C heat), and they constricted sight, hearing, and coordnation(sice you can't hear well in it); that's why no hoplites in EB have them; they ceased to be used by the early 4th century BC, as the hoplite started losing it's place as the near-sole form of soldier on battlefields..
and those spartans remaind me of Bush's party(the republicans); too conservative to rule the USA:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: (just kidding-no real political significance)
Not to turn this into a political battleground, but I fully agree with you, Ibrahim. Which is why Obama is the man to go.
BUT! Back to topic.
So, taking a look at the benefits of Spartans in EB. Three words, mate: battle-winning style bonus! ~D
Try using a spartan hippeis/perokoi unit to allow for degrees of spartanism
The Spartans had the disadvantage of not having adequate technological support to drive an economy that wasn't made up out of Helots. If Spartans had to farm, they couldn't then put their energy into training warriors.
What makes them different from America is that America benefits from the technological advances that made slavery uneconomical. Which means you have more people that can not only afford to become warriors but you have people that neither need to become soldiers nor farmers. An entire class of people with nothing to do except provide services to their fellows.
That brings prosperity, up to a point. That point is when society decays due to a lack of purpose and health. Too many new things tended to break apart any society's foundations.
OK fellas...
ur all talking out of your A**se now.... :whip:
So, Plz quit it with the Politics, the Sparta/US comparison, and whatnot. :focus:
Ok....anyways, I think they are outdated in a game set in a time when mobility, and range were emphazised over just pure armor and brute force...
kinda sucks too that helots have to be killed for a spartan's graduation ceremony.move helots!:whip: :whip: