Legion vs. Phalanx online battle analysis

[Phalanx300]

Yes, cavalry should be somewhat limited. 5 Units is a bit much compared to the other units, and I also see Rome using alot of elites.

Also I've read that for the Romans Camillan units can be used for Polybian and Marian and Polybian for Marian. Why is this? Wasn't this tourney supposed to give us a somewhat Historical look at Phalanx vs Legion warfare? All these elites and different time units mixing together isn't really helping it.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Triarii can effectively counter cavalry any day.

[Silence Hunter]

Triarii can effectively counter cavalry any day.

I was going to say exactly the same! Cavalry spam is not necessary to defeat opponents cavalry. Spearmen are much better in doing this. Btw cavalry superiority doesn't mean you are going to win. Battle of Magnesia is a fine example of this.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

It´s a very tricky situation try to limit the number of elite units/cavalary because, just like tsidneku pointed, if you reduce this units/cavalary number, you´re effectively reduce one of the strengh of the Romans( very good quality units at lower cost). Therefore, i believe, reducing the avaibable number of elites/cavalary units must be follow by a reduce of the amount of mnai since with less cavalry/units and the same money, the Greek factions can focus on their more elite troops.
Having said that my opinion is the same as tsidneku ones which is; the balance is good. For what i can tell both factons are winning battles.
Nevertheless it´s very appealing historical armies but, from what i can tell, the tournament has already started and it´s not right to change rules for either sides now.

[Gabeed]

I think (assuming that this particular tournament is going to last for the next couple weeks) that we should stick to the rules that Burebista posted until this tournament is complete.

[antisocialmunky]

Triarii are can only area deny and counter. They can't actually fight the cavalry unless the cavalry feel like it. So it turns into a merry go round of death where the Triarii constantly shift to deny an attack vector for the cavalry. However, usually at some point the cavalry end up hitting the Triarii before they can brace and kill about 20% of them before running away immediately. Then 2 more of those hits cause them to rout, then they hit the back of your lines and its game. If you're stupid enough to give chase with your spearmen, they just pull them away form your line and go around them and its game.

Now, a combined arms approach of Triarii and Cavalry does work pretty well but the enemy cavalry usually throws in infantry of its own because its so friggin slow. The best infantry to use counter enemy cavalry is probably fast spear/AP armed light infantry. I've been experimenting with using those elite Post-Marian Skirmishers and those actually do work well but they cost way too much. What usually happens is that the cavalry hit each other so the infantry aren't plowed over and then the infantry join. At this point the defending cavalry usually withdraws and tries to out maneuver the enemy. Then attacking cav usually withdraws as well to either hit the enemy's flank or counter the enemy's movements. A good example of this is Irish on Samos. It took a combination of unfair terrain features, and a whole game's length of chasing those companions around to win. And even then, he didn't win by very much.

But, there's one more thing you can do against cavalry. If you throw in some sort of long range missile unit(sligners are best) then a group of spear infantry and screening cavalry can effectively defeat superior quality enemy cavalry without resorting to ridiculous cheese. The thing is that the Romans can't do that so it is what it is.

Theres one more problem. The Romans don't have any AP Lance armed cavalry other than the Italic allied ones. If you use anything else well the Companions can literally shrug it off so it becomes a game of avoid the Companions and try to deliver one devastating charge before they catch up and destroy them.

You can try and prove me wrong and play me but I don't think I am.

[IrishHitman]

I was going to say exactly the same! Cavalry spam is not necessary to defeat opponents cavalry. Spearmen are much better in doing this. Btw cavalry superiority doesn't mean you are going to win. Battle of Magnesia is a fine example of this.

Elite cavalry can defeat unsupported Triarii with ease...

Try that and if you don't end up in the red (funds) pretty quickly, then I will even adapt use such an army. The problem is, Hetairoi and Thessalikoi are very expensive (4,000+ mnai), so you can't have another 8 phalangites on top of that. Believe me. Unless, of course, you are going to count on levies to fight the Romaioi legions. Even a fanatic Makedonian Strategos (like me ) knows that's suicide.

I'm not a fan of the 40k limit.

[Gabeed]

I wish I had saved a replay of mine against Irish from yesterday, it would show that tons of cavalry is not essential for defeating the Greeks. I was the Romans, he was Macedon. I'm a fan of levy meat shields, so I used several velites. These velites, once out of missiles, were dedicated to keeping the hetairoi away, along with some triarii. By absorbing the hetairoi charges again and again, I had enough time to dismantle his infantry with my principes and pedites while his cavalry smashed against my light troops. My troops didn't run because I keep my general near the places of the greatest need with a general's bodyguard, and his morale bonus stopped them from fleeing. The result near the end was his infantry all destroyed, and he had only his hetairoi left against a great amount of my army. My only cavalry was 3-4 units of Equites Romani, who engaged with the hetairoi very few times.

Nothing against Irish's brilliant hetairoi movements, though, if he had had Agranians on the flanks rather than hoplitai, I very well may have lost.

[IrishHitman]

I wish I had saved a replay of mine against Irish from yesterday, it would show that tons of cavalry is not essential for defeating the Greeks. I was the Romans, he was Macedon. I'm a fan of levy meat shields, so I used several velites. These velites, once out of missiles, were dedicated to keeping the hetairoi away, along with some triarii. By absorbing the hetairoi charges again and again, I had enough time to dismantle his infantry with my principes and pedites while his cavalry smashed against my light troops. My troops didn't run because I keep my general near the places of the greatest need with a general's bodyguard, and his morale bonus stopped them from fleeing. The result near the end was his infantry all destroyed, and he had only his hetairoi left against a great amount of my army. My only cavalry was 3-4 units of Equites Romani, who engaged with the hetairoi very few times.

Nothing against Irish's brilliant hetairoi movements, though, if he had had Agranians on the flanks rather than hoplitai, I very well may have lost.

Again, the Agrianians are too expensive to field en masse...
The cash limit hits the Greeks much harder than the Romans.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Antisocialmunky,

Actually the best strategy would be, theoretically, to keep the triarii braced and protecting the rear of your infantry lines all along. This way the only manner the Hetairoi can attack is to smash through their own lines, which is not good for public health.

And do you realize that the Romans have a very good selection of AP cavalry early on? Equites Campanici are faster than the Hetairoi and can mow them down well in a fight because they are done right for it. I would not waste money with expensive chargers if they will spend most of their time fighting other cavalry.

Again, the Agrianians are too expensive to field en masse...
The cash limit hits the Greeks much harder than the Romans.

Every Hellenic faction can more or less spam levy phalanxes. Phalanxes don't need to be of particularly good quality when you're not facing other phalanxes or have a good cavalry arm.

[IrishHitman]

Every Hellenic faction can more or less spam levy phalanxes. Phalanxes don't need to be of particularly good quality when you're not facing other phalanxes or have a good cavalry arm.

That's great normally, but their morale is too low when "penetration" is used...

[Tolg]

I think (assuming that this particular tournament is going to last for the next couple weeks) that we should stick to the rules that Burebista posted until this tournament is complete.

That's what I think as well. Or at least until the first round is over.

The cash limit hits the Greeks much harder than the Romans.

It only hits the Greeks. I just checked, using my standard army I still got 5007 mnai left (not ~3500 which I said earlier). But with more money or even without an limit the Romans would be utterly destroyed by Greek elites. (Imagine a 6 Hellenic Catphracts, 2 Cata. Eles, 6 Agryaspides, 2 Toxotai Syriakoi, 4 Peltastai Makedonikoi army.)

[tsidneku]

Antisocialmunky,

Actually the best strategy would be, theoretically, to keep the triarii braced and protecting the rear of your infantry lines all along. This way the only manner the Hetairoi can attack is to smash through their own lines, which is not good for public health.

I haven't played many Roman players as Romans (rather played against some Greeks practicing as Romans), but so far -- Munky is pretty much the only one I have seen that lines up his Triarii in the rear, reversed to brace for charges. It is true that this helps to negate cavalry charges a lot, but what some players will do is increase the file of their cavalry corps and punch through a mid point using sheer mass.

[IrishHitman]

It only hits the Greeks. I just check, using my standard army I still got 5007 mnai left (not ~3500 which I said earlier). But with more money or even without an limit the Romans would be utterly destroyed by Greek elites. (Imagine a 6 Hellenic Catphracts, 2 Cata. Eles, 6 Agryaspides, 2 Toxotai Syriakoi, 4 Peltastai Makedonikoi

Imposition of limits on both sides is needed, but the current situation is too far in favour of the Romans.

[satalexton]

I actually favour the current advantages the romans have against the greeks, it makes every greek victory all the more heroic. ALL HAIL MAKEDONIA!!!

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Give the players more money, and the Romans will just be able to counter the Greeks with a Cohortes Reformata spam or through sheer numbers thanks to the generally lower cost of Roman units. Give players less money, and well the Romans will still be able to field better with less.

It's something that the Hellenic player will have to live with: the Romans have a much better capacity at pumping disciplined and cost effective troops.

I haven't played many Roman players as Romans (rather played against some Greeks practicing as Romans), but so far -- Munky is pretty much the only one I have seen that lines up his Triarii in the rear, reversed to brace for charges. It is true that this helps to negate cavalry charges a lot, but what some players will do is increase the file of their cavalry corps and punch through a mid point using sheer mass.

If the player focus his entire cavalry on a single point, he can easily be ganged up by the other Triarii who will join the fray. Every strategy has its counters.

[Phalanx300]

I agree, the Greeks seem to be the only ones limited by 40k. Romani armies, and other armies I've looked all have alot of money left(when not spamming elite units). Then again, Greek units cost about 3000k. I wouldn't say to make it even higher.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

I was astonished when I discovered that Argyraspidai cost about 1000 mnai just for upkeep. This is one aspect that cannot be overlooked: ratio\cost effectiveness. For the price of a single Argyraspidai a Romani player can employ more or less 2 Cohortes, swarming the elites with superior numbers.

In practical aspects this means that any Greek elite using high amounts of money will be countered either by more Romani line infantry or even more Romani elites, which seem to be cheaper IIRC. A 80.000 mnai tournament would only allow far more Extraordinarii than now.

This is why I believe there should be stricter rules on cavalry and elite spamming, as well as for the inclusion of levy quality units. Makes for more plausible and balanced armies.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

It's something that the Hellenic player will have to live with: the Romans have a much better capacity at pumping disciplined and cost effective troops.

This pretty much says it all. It´s true that due to the cost of the greeks units 40k is a real pain in the and it´s not much of a problem for the Romans. But, if you look at the big picture, this´s countered big deal due to the fact that many limitation of the phalanks can´t be represented in EB as well as many advantages of the legions.
That said, as far as i´ve seen the battle are very nice and the tournament is being a success.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Given that the Greek Elites are just the best in the entire game, I agree that they should be expensive yes.

[Tolg]

I was astonished when I discovered that Argyraspidai cost about 1000 mnai just for upkeep. This is one aspect that cannot be overlooked: ratio\cost effectiveness. For the price of a single Argyraspidai a Romani player can employ more or less 2 Cohortes, swarming the elites with superior numbers.

In practical aspects this means that any Greek elite using high amounts of money will be countered either by more Romani line infantry or even more Romani elites, which seem to be cheaper IIRC. A 80.000 mnai tournament would only allow far more Extraordinarii than now.

This is why I believe there should be stricter rules on cavalry and elite spamming, as well as for the inclusion of levy quality units. Makes for more plausible and balanced armies.

You're ignoring the 20 units per army limit.

[IrishHitman]

I was astonished when I discovered that Argyraspidai cost about 1000 mnai just for upkeep. This is one aspect that cannot be overlooked: ratio\cost effectiveness. For the price of a single Argyraspidai a Romani player can employ more or less 2 Cohortes, swarming the elites with superior numbers.

In practical aspects this means that any Greek elite using high amounts of money will be countered either by more Romani line infantry or even more Romani elites, which seem to be cheaper IIRC. A 80.000 mnai tournament would only allow far more Extraordinarii than now.

This is why I believe there should be stricter rules on cavalry and elite spamming, as well as for the inclusion of levy quality units. Makes for more plausible and balanced armies.

Well said, although I don't entirely agree.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

You're ignoring the 20 units per army limit

Well yes but that's hard to reach even if you have 60K and just focus on elite spamming.

[Tolg]

Well yes but that's hard to reach even if you have 60K and just focus on elite spamming.

For the Romans? Not at all.

[IrishHitman]

Well yes but that's hard to reach even if you have 60K and just focus on elite spamming.

I checked out what you can get with 50k.
It seems to balance it far more, and with proper unit restrictions, would be more realistic.

[Tolg]

I experiment with the money a lot before we decided on the current 40.000. More will just give the Greeks a huge advantage or force the Romans to use even more unhistorical armies (but even with 6 Equites Extraord. and 14 Pedites Extraord. the 50000 aren't completely used up. BTW, this army composition wouldn't be allowed as it violates the 1/2 native/allies ratio rule). I think the only thing we should perhaps introduce for the second round is a 4 units cav limit.

As it was pointed out earlier, the situations appears not to be "too much in favour of the Romans" as the current score of 2:2 tells us that both sides are doing equally well.

[Phalanx300]

Irish for the Romans if you take 40k you have trouble using it all up, let alone 50k . Anyways, I always try to go for somewhat Historical armies so I wont use alot of elites so I usually come just below 40k anyways. Except for succesor armies, they are expensive.

[Gabeed]

I think the only thing we should perhaps introduce for the second round is a 4 units cav limit.

I assume the 40-man general's bodyguard I love would count as a cav?
I thought my army from the first round was pretty balanced, but it did have 4 Ptolemaic Agema and a general's bodyguard.

[IrishHitman]

I experiment with the money a lot before we decided on the current 40.000. More will just give the Greeks a huge advantage or force the Romans to use even more unhistorical armies (but even with 6 Equites Extraord. and 14 Pedites Extraord. the 50000 aren't completely used up. BTW, this army composition wouldn't be allowed as it violates the 1/2 native/allies ratio rule). I think the only thing we should perhaps introduce for the second round is a 4 units cav limit.

As it was pointed out earlier, the situations appears not to be "too much in favour of the Romans" as the current score of 2:2 tells us that both sides are doing equally well.

Use of four Equites Extraordinarii is a farce in the face of history., never mind six.
The Greeks can even form full and effective 20 unit armies with standard phalanxes, while the Romans have cash to spare to give their units a chevron!

That is a serious problem.

[Phalanx300]

I think that a max on "elite" cavalry would be better. Like Max 3 elite cavalry, then light cavalry would also be used.

I think I'm about the only one not taking huge loads of elite units all the time.