Phalanxes in version 1.1

[Woreczko]

When they had a phalanx, they could act both as a capable line unit with an added bonus of being impervious to charges (phalanx on) and general purpose swordsmen useful for filling the gaps or flanking/flank defense (phalanx off). Now, they do their first job worse. Worse than classical hoplites, whom they are supposed to replace. They are better in killing cavalry in melee, true, but any dedicated melee infantry can do this well enough.

[Novellus]

It bothered me because historically, it seemed that the longer spears would make it a precursor to the Makedonian phalanx. That's why the phalanx formation seemed appropriate (without sarissae of course). And in terms of manuverability and flexibility, my interpretation was that the army was mobile in terms of being convertable to peltasts (which the RTW engine can't peform) and the lighter equipment meant that field battles would not fatigue soldiers as easily and running into position could be done. But I usually took my units out of phalanx mode, ran into position, then reformed. That was how I interpreted it. But please, if this is an ahistorical approach, enlighten me!

[Phalanx300]

Yeah, EB now shows them to be worse then Classical Hoplites.

Which makes me think, why change you Hoplites and make them worse? And Phillip got the idea of Phalangites from the Iphikratous like Hoplites I believe, so they would be fighting in a young version of the Macedonian Phalanx.

[Watchman]

From what I've read of it, Iphikrates' innovation seems to have been to devise a combination of kit (namely, longer spear) and training that allowed peltastai to be readily converted into close-order line infantry, ie. scratch hoplitai. So it wasn't about changing hoplites but peltasts - who were way more readily available. A way to create a "light hoplite" force on a budget, so to speak.

The attraction of this approach to the Macedonian kings is not difficult to see; they pretty much had no hoplites at all, but rather a quasi-feudal system which furnished them with lots of aristocratic cavalry on one hand and large numbers of psiloi levies on the other. There was an obvious shortage of line infantry capable of anchoring the line and creating a bulwark for the cavalry to operate around there, and it bit them in the ass often enough. Hence, Philip's further developement of the Iphikratean system to make lineholder pikemen out of psiloi skirmishers, which had the side bonus effect of allowing them to be deployed as light infantry with a simple equipement swap to boot...

[Novellus]

From what I've read of it, Iphikrates' innovation seems to have been to devise a combination of kit (namely, longer spear) and training that allowed peltastai to be readily converted into close-order line infantry, ie. scratch hoplitai. So it wasn't about changing hoplites but peltasts - who were way more readily available. A way to create a "light hoplite" force on a budget, so to speak.

Yes Watchman, that is what I understood from it too. What bothers me is that they seem a little misrepresented. It's true that they were not heavy infantry---they weren't designed to be that way. But one would think that they would use the longer spears in a formation different from their classical hoplitai brethren. And that is why the phalanx formation seemed to be a good representation.

I'm just confused about how they actually fought seeing that EB has represented them in two different ways with the first seeming to make the most sense, but the second one prevailing in the later version.

[antisocialmunky]

From what you guys are saying, it seems like we need to change the description as well.

[NeoSpartan]

Fellas...

if you search BACK enough to when EB 1.1 first came out (or right before it came out, can't remember) you find the answer. But anywho.... here is the jizt of it:

The Iphikrates, Alpines, Helvetii, Dacian, and Saka Iphikrates, were more versatile and mobile than the Macedonian Pikemen. Which is what really bothered the EB team, thats why they changed them.

With regards to Classical hoplites being better than the Iphikrates, I don't know, their stats don't differ too much. But, from my Mutliplayer expirience (which I haven't played in months now) the Iphikrates' moral was lower than the classical hoplites, as they routed easier.

But... don't mess with the Alpines, Helvetii, Dacian, or Thorakitai (KH's armored Iphikrates) version.