Punch through the center, yao

[Parallel Pain]

No according to Goldsworthy the African came in and attacked the troops that came through the center from two sides, effectively containing the breech and at the same time outflanking the Romans. Mago and Hannibal were then able to rally the Gauls and throw them back into the fight, surrounding the Romans that had broken through on three sides.

But remember Hannibal had left reserves to this purpose.

[chenkai11]

No according to Goldsworthy the African came in and attacked the troops that came through the center from two sides, effectively containing the breech and at the same time outflanking the Romans. Mago and Hannibal were then able to rally the Gauls and throw them back into the fight, surrounding the Romans that had broken through on three sides.

But remember Hannibal had left reserves to this purpose.

Yeah, and the poor Roman general thought that he can smash a human wall with human bodies. But if he did manage to protect his flank, may be, just may be the Roman legions could win that battle.

[QuintusSertorius]

Hmmm, I checked back and stand corrected. Now it's bugging me which battle featured a breakthrough where the troops in the centre just marched away.

[duncan.gill]

Gaugamela: did a "punch through" actually occur? From memory didn't some of the Persians actually break through Alexander's lines but then ran off to loot the baggage train, leaving a gap in their own lines which Alexander exploited by directly charging Darius?

[Parallel Pain]

At Gaugamela Bessus' flank move on the Persian left created a weakness where his detachment joined with Darius at the center, a weakness Alexander exploited by punching through it.

And yes a Persian detachment did run through the Macedonian center and go loot the baggage train. If they instead swung right or left to hit Parmenion or Alexander in the rear, which was the entire point of punching through, who knows if history would have turned out different. But they didn't.

Quintus I think you're talking about Trebia, where the Roman center, after both flanks collapsed, broke the Carthaginian center. But with both Carthaginian flanks now free to pick new targets, there's no way the Roman center could have exploited the hole they created. So before getting surrounded, they marched forward on the double and escaped.

[chenkai11]

Check out the 1st formation.

[QuintusSertorius]

Quintus I think you're talking about Trebia, where the Roman center, after both flanks collapsed, broke the Carthaginian center. But with both Carthaginian flanks now free to pick new targets, there's no way the Roman center could have exploited the hole they created. So before getting surrounded, they marched forward on the double and escaped.

Sounds like what I was thinking of. For some reason I attributed it to Cannae in my mind.

[General Appo]

Yeah, and the poor Roman general thought that he can smash a human wall with human bodies. But if he did manage to protect his flank, may be, just may be the Roman legions could win that battle.

Not true, Hannibal came very close to losing. If only the Gauls and Iberians hadn´t hold out for so long or would have completely broken not the Romans would likely have won the battle.

[LorDBulA]

Is it just me or is the entire game too focused on flanking? What happened to the ever-useful punching through the center?

Cavalry, flanking all the time. You just cant punch through thick inf line head on.
If I dont have heavy cavalry hammer I punch through enemy line head on with infantry ( no always through center, you have to find weakest point in the line )

[chenkai11]

Not true, Hannibal came very close to losing. If only the Gauls and Iberians hadn´t hold out for so long or would have completely broken not the Romans would likely have won the battle.

But the center line was intentionally thinned by Hannibal, with his season veterans of libyan infantry on the flank.

Hannibal intentionally set a trap for Romans to strike hard at the center.

[Apgad]

If you punch through the centre then you end up fighting in 3 directions. Flanking lets you concentrate 2 or 3 units on 1 of the enemy, and pick them off 1 by 1. It produces very good local superiority, which is why it's often a winning formula.

[QuintusSertorius]

But the center line was intentionally thinned by Hannibal, with his season veterans of libyan infantry on the flank.

Hannibal intentionally set a trap for Romans to strike hard at the center.

Point is if that intentionally weakened centre hadn't held for so long, the Romans might still have managed to break through and not end up exhausted when the Libyans engaged.

[chenkai11]

Point is if that intentionally weakened centre hadn't held for so long, the Romans might still have managed to break through and not end up exhausted when the Libyans engaged.

That is why timing is important, and Hannibal actual gamble on that strategy.

If he decided to reinforce his center, he will be outflank by the numbers of Romans.

[Cartaphilus]

All that I read about Cannae (ancient texts mainly) appoints to an intentional weak centre.