Printable View
Playing a Hayasdan campaign, I've noticed Seleukid phalangites take quite a few arrows before they die, even if they're shot in their backs, using Persian archers with composite bows.
Now, is this supposed to be this way?
I find it a bit weird for a densely packed formation to survive volley after volly of flying pointy sticks.
i dont know what armor theyre wearing but if its a linothorax, arrows rarely penetrated it :)
Yeah, but I still think it would cause panic and the phalangites would trample themselves to death
I don't have experience using Persian Archers...but using Greek Slingers (shooting from behind) they die like flies...and rout easily....are you sure you are shooting exactly in the back?
When I played my Hayasdan campaign with 0.8 I found that horse archers were able to decimate argyraspidai, and I dont think phalanxes come much heavier than them. The trick with HAs is to hold fire, let them advance, then when you skirmish away they try to retreat. At that point shoot them in the back. Generally only a fraction of the unit makes it back to their lines...
There's a big difference between piece damage and shock damage and its represented in the game well. Rocks crush what's under the armour while leaving the armour intact while arrows have to pierce the armour to do damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Domitius Ulpianus
But yes, I've seen Eastern Horse archers SHRED foot units of all kinds. Heavy infantry usually gets decimated by HA. Perhaps you should retry the encounter in custom battle.
phalangites have a high shield rating, to represent their high foward defense.
Yes but this is Total War not Inflict 10% Casualties War :juggle2:Quote:
horse archers were able to decimate argyraspidai
Quote:
Originally Posted by antisocialmunky
I understand there's a difference...but I think it would be reasonable to think that from behind rocks or arrows would do a maximun damage to any unit and the difference between the two would be minimized.
Why ? The armour's still in the way isn't it ?
I agree that they are quite difficult to kill with horse archers. Even properly surrounded it can take ages to kill them and I find that often two units of HA's can empty all their ammo into a unit of phalangists without causing the unit enough damage to rout or be susceptible to a charge from both sides by both units.
On the other hand, HA's vs pretty much any medium or light troops are able to massacre their enemies with ease. Against heavier troops, speed and manouverability are your best weapons, better to avoid the well armoured phalanxes and target the weaker enemies. It is easy to exhaust heavy armoured foes, so use this to your advantage; tire them out and make them easier targets for your better able troops (cataphracts, armenian heavy infantry).
If HA's could do massive damage to well armoured enemies, then they would be overpower totally as nothing could stand up to them (except maybe slingers :p)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
All I am saying is if you shoot (or for that matter attack in any way) from the back I expect it to have maximun effect, why? because you don't have a shield in the back or a buddy watching your arse. if this isn't true why bother flanking in the first place?
This has nothing to do with the armor ...it's just that that as I am sure you will agree any warrior...ANY is more vulnerable if you attack from the back. And the game reflects this...
The shield value only applies to the soldier's left and front, so there you go. Shoot him up the arse and all you have to deal with is the armour value.
Exactly. Now, I'm not sure about it but in Phalanx formation the front has some sort of bonus due to the formation, right? and again this bonus isn't present if you attack from behind. I'm I correct? or I'm just imaginign things?:dizzy2: . Please someone better informed throw some light here thanks.
I stopped using archers all together for offensive action. Slingers are much more effective I am finding out in EB.
Eastern-Type archers are good too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Suraknar
Do you also find that Pantodapoi Phalangitai are total über-soldiers? I don't know why but I have had many problems with them, more than with other phalangites. It FEELS like Argyraspidai are more difficult to kill than theese poor guys with their funny phrygian helmets. Or am I just underestimating them and therefore having troubles? Fact is, you can charge in the back of a moving pantodapoi phalangitai unit in phalanx formation with your Hetairoi, and instead of cutting them into pieces, they regroup and turn their sarrissas against you and cut YOUR cavalry.
What do you think? Any problems with them?
They die pretty easy for me. The only time they didn't was when a double gold chevron unit climbed up some ladders, and just murdered the full unit of Saka Hoplites waiting for them at the top.
AP axes can be hurty. :smash:
I find that sometimes I run into unbreakable low-grade type phalangites that refuse to break and manage to bleed my men fairly well. It may be all the moral bonuses they get from where they get trained.
Anyhoo...
The whole 'rotate spears' things happens fairly often, to reduce the likely hood of it happening:
-Only cavalry charge engaged units.
-Have more than two units already attacking it
-Pull your cavalry out to reform and recharge
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by hoom
I don't mind the rotate spears thing too much. Cavalry tend to do much more damage on their charge than after getting into melee anyway. Then I can pull my cavalry away while the infantry units that were attacking them from the front get a chance to attack them from behind.
About phalangitai...
They do have more units than other spear or hoplitai units too...I found them hard to break aswell...which is historical...the phalanx was like the modern equivalent of a tank...but in mechanical terms of the game ..sending 80 men vs 120...is more difficult to break.
Just to nitpick, but tanks are mobile shock units (succeeding to the mantle of heavy cavalry) and phalangites, well, not quite. "Clunky lineholders" is the standard designtation; the roughly closest modern parallel would be unmechanised heavy infantry in hastily erected fieldworks.
in my current hayasdan campaign, i use slingers more then archers, but i do have a army with four slingers unit and four thanvabara and they complement each other quite well, infact i just took babylon in my campaing
Yesterday I had to fight a tiny army of 2 units pantodapoi phalangitai and 1 unit persian spearmen. I attacked the pantodapoi ph. with my argyraspidai and...
The first unit did well. My silvershields caught the p-ph from the side, and theese didn't move, so they were slaughtered in a hetairoi charge with no losses.
The second silvershield-phalanx had to sustain heavy losses. They fought the p-ph slightly from downhill, and lost 30 men. And they were aided by galatian nakeds. At least I didn't loose any hetairoi...
Btw, do you also encounter the funny "sarissa-ballet" sometimes, when the phalangites can't decide wether to go in phalanx-mode or not?
Erg... sometimes it gets messy when they try to reform. They can swing their pikes around a little bit or even attack backwards and die hardily.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
Hehe, its a free forum nitpick all you want, for me it does not change anything.
I see history, as an art, not only a collection of specific knowledge and dates.
Of cource, technically speaking, the tank is exactly what you descibed. Yet part of a historical journey or analysi if you will, is also the ability to put one's self within the context of the subject of studdy. Looking at things from the inside out not only from the outside in.
You are very good technically, you are very specific and fast to point out technicalities in several replies.
But like art, having technical excelence, does not necessarilly make someone an artist.
~:cheers:
Oh, I've no artistic aspirations; that would be my little brother (who's often kinda annoyed at the way I'm actually somewhat more talented than him, but never bother honing my skills through hard work like he does). I'm the one who studies Political Science at the Uni and reads thick and analytical history books for fun. :book:
No, not really. If the Romans at Carrhae could withstand hours of HA fire without routing, why would the professional phalangites do the same?Quote:
Yeah, but I still think it would cause panic and the phalangites would trample themselves to death
One problem with missile combat was the fact it was pretty poor at actually routing people. You could totally decimate helpless units with extended fire, and the survivors still stood their ground. Which is of course why it was very rare for anyone to rely solely on firepower - pretty much everyone had or developed some proper shock arm to charge and break such shredded and dispirited formations which would nonetheless have taken ages to entirely reduce with missiles.
I'm playing sauromatae and in fighting selukia I have trouble killing 3 phalagites (medium or heavy) with 6 units of horse archers without running out of ammo. I even restrict firing to their backs, even still I can only reduce them by half through missile fire, after that I have to use hit and run chargers to finish them off. Still, I appreciate have some challenge, I still decimate selukid armies when the computer calculates odds such as 1:2 or I think 9:40 was my best when I used 120 horse archers to kill 800 selukids(5 phalagites + support). I was even unhappy with myself because I took 27 casualties that battle. I think the extra armor as well as the cohesion and professionalism of the phalagites is appropriate and realistic, and without it certainly battles against phalagites using nomadic factions would be way too one sided.