Debat about time limit... THE ANSWER!!!

**Reno Melitensis** · 05-30-2009, 17:51

The time limit in Battles is no sense. It encourage you to rush your decisions and exhaust your troops. I prefer a move cautions approach to battles. And as Duguntz said, that why I love fighting against barbarian factions, they simply rush at you with all their heroism and eager to war, until they are meet with a shower of javlins from the Hestati and the Velites, by the time the Principes charge in its all over. Naked bodies butchered on the blood soaked battlefield.

Cheers.

And by the way Duguntz, I sacrified a young bull in the temple of Mars to honour your nonsense topic

**Mediolanicus** · 05-30-2009, 18:02

Battle time limit does make sense when you are playing against horse archers. Those keep running away, and nothing can catch them. Without time limit you have to quit and lose.

**Atraphoenix** · 05-30-2009, 18:09

Originally Posted by Mediolanicus

Battle time limit does make sense when you are playing against horse archers. Those keep running away, and nothing can catch them. Without time limit you have to quit and lose.

do not be so sure, when they run out of arrows, they are piece of cake, I do not mean cataphract archers, though.
Plus they are worthless in frontal arrow rain against phalanxes.

**DaciaJC** · 05-30-2009, 19:45

Originally Posted by Atraphoenix

do not be so sure, when they run out of arrows, they are piece of cake, I do not mean cataphract archers, though.
Plus they are worthless in frontal arrow rain against phalanxes.

Frontal fire, yes. However, HA can easily flank the phalanx line (providing that there isn't a great deal of missile support), fragment it into individual units, and then cut them down with fire from the rear. I did this multiple times in my first Getai campaign against the Makedonians.

**Andy1984** · 05-30-2009, 21:35

I don't think you are supposed to take all their missiles. When I face these HA's in the open, I always make sure I can outshoot them. There's little need for expensive phalangites to stop lightly armoured horses.

**Atraphoenix** · 05-31-2009, 14:46

Originally Posted by Andy1984

I don't think you are supposed to take all their missiles. When I face these HA's in the open, I always make sure I can outshoot them. There's little need for expensive phalangites to stop lightly armoured horses.

When I face them. I pin them with phalanx and massacre with medium cavalry. Because of them medium greek cavalry was formed by AS and others. also cataphract archers loves charging your phalanxes from front by AI after running out of arrows. fresh meat with metal souce

As I get tired of hit and tactics of nomads I started to play with mixed faction that has both heavy medium cavalry plus phalanx. If the macedons did not ignore their role(cavalry) they could easily vanquish romans. they ignored it then legions enveloped them. so in reality you need heavy infantry to support cavalry and vise versa .

battle should need variety, think about football no strikers just 10 defenders would be phalanx tactic while romans would be all offence and nomads would be just countrattacks

**ARCHIPPOS** · 05-31-2009, 15:50

"battle should need variety, think about football no strikers just 10 defenders would be phalanx tactic while romans would be all offence and nomads would be just countrattacks"

**Ca Putt** · 05-30-2009, 18:04

Don't forget it was part of the Germanic Strategy to disengage and regroup/reorganise/get-someting-to-drink/get-yelled-at-by-wife in order to charge again not like those Walhoz who run and flee once their charge has lost momentum.