Hoplitai too weak ?

[Maion Maroneios]

...where the potent Macedonian and Thessalian cavalry was present in force on the wings shielding them from encirclement.

Appeal rejected. We're talking of a straight infantry-infantry fight here, remember ?

Appeal rejected my arse. I'm talking about the ease with which phalangites could hold hoplites at bay. Also, you seem too over-confident with the hoplite's superiority in a same-number fight.

Maion

[Watchman]

Flanks.

Why do I need to keep repeating this ? In Chaeronea this wasn't a problem because of the Mac cavalry arm guarding the wings; but the second hoplites (or legionaries) could get into their "inner flanks", such as at Issus (and any number of battles involving Romans), they were in trouble. God forbid if they were subjected to a true double envelopement, which incidentally is AFAIK what the invading Celts did to the Macs in whatwasitnow, 279BC ?

Also, there's no particular need for the hoplites in our hypothetical "duel" to even maintain a continuous frontage. They only need to send a relatively small force to keep the much more formation-dependent and far less mobile pikemen frontally preoccupied, and then swing around the flanks with the rest.

[Maion Maroneios]

Yeah right. And that only if we hypothesise hoplites don't just form up in a single line as they used to. You're beeing WAY too certain of the truth of some things. I said phalangites would probably win, not certainly. You're taking too many things as given and talk way too hypothetically.

Maion

[Watchman]

Yeah right. And that only if we hypothesise hoplites don't just form up in a single line as they used to. You're beeing WAY too certain of the truth of some things. I said phalangites would probably win, not certainly. You're taking too many things as given and talk way too hypothetically.

We're discussing a hypothetical situation, I'll remind you. And it's kind of a given that hoplites in any relevant time period would be at least passingly familiar with the working principles of the pike phalanx; moreover, even if they for one reason or another now were obstinate enough to insist on maintaining a continuous line (anything but a given, given the changes even hoplite warfare had gone through by any relevant stage) there's very little reason why they wouldn't intentionally thin out and lenghten their line to ensure a double envelopement of the cumbersome pike block. That pike phalanxes should not be fought frontally should be something even the slow on the uptake in Greece ought to have grasped by any relevant time period, and trained soldiers most certainly.

Again, compare Marathon - where a rather similar scheme (thinning out the center to ensure the frontage was sufficient and the wings strong enough) was managed by a far less professional and poorer drilled army with quite spectacular results.

[Maion Maroneios]

Again, compare Marathon - where a rather similar scheme (thinning out the center to ensure the frontage was sufficient and the wings strong enough) was managed by a far less professional and poorer drilled army with quite spectacular results.

What? Much poorer drilled? Would you care to present me some evidence that the Persians had (on overall) better training than the Athenians?

Maion

[Watchman]

What? Much poorer drilled? Would you care to present me some evidence that the Persians had (on overall) better training than the Athenians?

The training of the Persians is actually pretty irrelevant, as I was referring to that of the Athenians.
Who, I hear, were not Persians.
And by all accounts THEIR approach to tactics and warfare around the time had all the sophistication and professionalism of "line up and charge the other guy for a six".

[Maion Maroneios]

See? You don't know so stop playing smartass and having a damn answer ready for everything. As you said, we're talking of possibilities here and you make the hoplite-win seem like something de facto based only upon hypotheses and personal oppinion.

Maion

[ARCHIPPOS]

hmmmmm, the Celts can not be used as atypical example of superiority against the phallanx ...
from what i've read they attacked during winter , when the majority of the Makedonian army was on leave tending their farms...
Stupidly the Makedonian king Ptolemy Ceraunos thought this would be yet another nice bushwar and decided to attack them with only the core of his army the full time professional royal army of infantry and cavalry elites ... his smallish bodyguard against what??? a full blown barbarian horde numbering 30000??? he must have been ridiculously outnumbered.
when the Celts moved southern and faced some regular greek armies they got their ass kicked all around... sure the Celts destroyed afew towns... that's what a raiding horde can do to minor cities...but normal adequately numbered hoplite armies???