Results 1 to 30 of 277

Thread: Hoplitai too weak ?

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Byzantine-hellenistic General Member Flavius_Belisarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Near Vieanna in Austria
    Posts
    60

    Default Re: Hoplitai too weak ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Watchman View Post
    That was centuries ago when they were mainly fighting each other. Them newfangled pike phalanxes, as it happens, were a *lot* better at the "frontal pushing match" business...

    Adapt or perish.
    Uhm...Exactly that i wanted to say. The hoplitai was inflexible but still an offensive infantery man. If they hadnt got surrounded they would have been still a very though opponents, and for sure they would have beaten a barbarain horde with axe etc which only charges in the front of the phalanx. But new tactics like the macedonian syntagma rised and so the hoplitai phalanx had got outdated.

    Maybe the example was out of the Eb timeframe but there is only one thing which changed if you compare the classcial hoplitais of the pre alexander time with the ones of the post alexander time. And that was the equpiment. The tactics of the classcial hoplitai were still the same and they were still effectiv in a direct combat.

    And in MP they are still useless. They cant face against heavy cavalry charges if a human always retreats them and charges again. They cant face against any heavy infantery, it doesnt matter whether naked swordsmen of the gauls or heavy armored pretorian guards and moreover hoplitais are very expensive. Especially KH is very poor on mp. There only really advtanges are there hoplitais but these units cant stand against any other unit, excepted ligth cavalry and infantery.

    But thats only in Mp, i didnt played Sp that much, probably in Sp they are quite reliable like you said.


    Edit.:

    @Mikhail Henkst

    Its fact that the macedonian syntagma was way more flexible than a hoplitai phalanx. At least it was in the time of alexander and his father. In this times the phalanx was highly flexible. Phalangits where highly trained and only lightly armored. Each square could turn the directon of their spears tremendously fast in a other direction.

    BUT after the dead of alexander the phalangits became unflexible. Mainly there are two reasons. The first is that the successors gave the phalagnits much more armor and the second is that they changed the squares of the phalangits back to more like a line. And such a line of heavy armored warriors is unflexible, they were slow and had been easily outmanvoured. This and the reason that macedonia couldnt rise such a numerous and strong cavalry like in alexander times were the reasons why the romans defeated the macedonians quite fast and easily.
    Last edited by Flavius_Belisarius; 06-26-2009 at 14:52.
    Fear is the enemy. The only one. - Sun Tzu

    Online names: AustrianGeneral / FlaviusBelisar

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO