How effective was the Pilum?

[Julius Augustus]

Hi guys. This question has been bugging me for a while now. How effective was the Pilum? I have often wondered if it is underpowered in EB. Elite Roman units like the Praetorians have only 5 missile attack, while elites from other factions have missile attack of 8 or so. This seems a bit odd to me for several reasons.

First of all, the natural qualities of the Pilum. The Pilum is designed with a long metal shaft and point at the end. This gives it incredible penetrating power, having been able to punch through curiasses in tests.

The ability to stick into shields. In reality, Pila were able to stick in shields and not come out. This would have forced the bearer of the shield to fight without his primary source of protection. As this cannot be implemented due to engine restriction, it seems to reasonable to make up for that with an increased attack stat.

Disorganization. All javelins cause disorganization in a line when they hit, but Pila caused much more than a normal javelin. By sticking into shields of charging enemies, they caused those enemies to trip, pause to try yank out the Pilum, or pause to drop their shields, and this caused mass mayhem. Entire charges have been reported to have fallen apart after Pila volleys. Again, this cannot be replicated and calls for an increased attack stat.

Weight. Pila are heavy, as much as 10 pounds with an added lead weight. This, combined with the metal tip, explains the AP attribute. However, a heavy javelin is also more effecive than a light javelin against and unarmored foe, which is not displayed in EB with the Pilum.

Training. Legionaries were constantly trained, and javelin throwing was part of that training. They would not have been any less accurate than anybody else, as I have heard it said that Legionaries were innacurate.

All these factors combine to show, at least in my opinion, that Pila are grossly underpowered. I'd say that the average legionary should get a missile attack of 6, and that elite units should get 7 or 8 missile attack. I know that this makes them brutally powerful against armored units, but weren't they historically really strong? Right now Pila are crap against all but the most heavily armored units, in comparison with other javs.

What do you guys think? Are Pila underpowered?

Edit-Watchman, this is aimed at you, as you came up with the unit stats, unless I'm mistaken.

[antisocialmunky]

Pilum are AP. They are fine, other javelins are a little underpowered.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Pilum are AP.

Aye, my own rascals they are. Sweet little sons they are, but pack a punch, like their daddy!

[gamerdude873]

I was wondering when this was going to get posted.

I agree, javelins on the whole are hella nerfed, especially the pila. I mean, why whould they use them if they only caused one or two casualties a volley? I'm not saying that the whole enemy unit needs to roll over and die (even if it would be hilarious), but javelins seem to do even less damage than the even lighter and smaller arrow. I'm no expert, but the bow and arrow's main drawback was the arrow's lack of mass behind it, so it didn't have enough punch. The javelin, later replaced by the longer ranged crossbow, had the mass and power, if lacking in distance, to handle heavier armored soldiers.

If you wanted, it's not difficult to edit the EDU on our own and post it as a mini mod.

[Andy1984]

I mean, why whould they use them if they only caused one or two casualties a volley?

There always is a psychological impact of being under fire and being unable to throw something back. If nothing else, the soldiers would at least feel comfortable to know they could return fire, and against non-javelin equiped units this (killing and psychological effect) may even have had a devastating effect.

[Apázlinemjó]

If you want to kill heavy armored units with pilums, position your troops on the right flank of them and throw the pilums from there, because they won't get the shield bonuses. Right?

[The General]

I mean, why whould they use them if they only caused one or two casualties a volley?

Ugh, my javelins tend to cause casualties in the dozens (I play on huge settings). As Lusotani, the battles are just brutal in Iberia, with hundreds of javelins in the air and soon dozens of men on both sides lay slain...

I'm no expert, but the bow and arrow's main drawback was the arrow's lack of mass behind it, so it didn't have enough punch.

Longbows? Composite bows are quite effective too, afaik.

If you want to kill heavy armored units with pilums, position your troops on the right flank of them and throw the pilums from there, because they won't get the shield bonuses. Right?

Aye, rear is a good place from which to throw, too. Skirmisher cavalry, eg. Equites Campanici, especially can do nice morale damage to an enemy, all the while killing foes. Follow this with a charge to the flank/rear and just watch the panic spread...

[keiskander]

What i experience the pilum is that its more of making the enemy distracted before the clash. As it said it had ability to penetrate heavier armor at close range or stuck in shields. But if it is so leathal im not all convinced about. I stick to my distraction theory which follows by the heavy roman infantry clash that followed after the throw was more affective and decisive.

[NeoSpartan]

If you want to kill heavy armored units with pilums, position your troops on the right flank of them and throw the pilums from there, because they won't get the shield bonuses. Right?

X3!!!!!!!!

no shield defence from right side or back

[gamerdude873]

Bow was the weapon in the east. Massed archery was practised by peoples like Persians and Chinese, and horse archery was the primary form of combat in the steppes.

Woo-wee! I must have been smokin' somethin a little differnet than the usual when I said that! I was still thinking apparently about the composite bow's use in the west, and not in the east. (Blame that new weed) But however:

Composite bows weren't used in the West because the heavier rains there caused the glue holding the bows together to dissolve, and the bows would literally fall apart.

Go figure, you learn something new everyday. So if the climate had been that much different, our ancestors would have been fighting with a lot more bows and arrows? Apparently then, this is what the long bow and the crossbow solved. These held up much better in the climate, or at the very least didn't frickin' fall apart when you needed them most.

Anyways, does this mean that my case for the javelin is completely screwed? Was the javelin just a fire and forget weapon that everyone could carry that might kill someone or at least scare the poop out of them when it lands on their shields in a cloud with many sharp pointy ends?

Missiles do cause morale damage - as do the casualties caused by them.

Hell, you got this all figured out. Another thing I didn't know about RTW. Maybe more morale damage would be better than more actual damage.

Still, the original question was about the Pilum. Shouldn't that at least have more damage? It seems kinda nerfed from my Point Of View. Maybe the real question here is this: How innovative was the Pilum historically? Was it merely something that did just what every other javelin did, except that it's spear head broke when it landed, and that it's piercing capability was just as good as the next javelin, and it was highly popularized because the Romans carried it and they tended to win a lot? Or was it a truly devastating piece of hardware? Or thirdly, was it the kind of javelin that was far better than the standard pointy throwing stick, but in comparison to all other things, it was just okay? If we can answer this, it might give us an idea on how exactly to tweak it, or if it needs tweaking at all. As mentioned, the Pilum was damn heavy for a javelin, but them men using it were skilled at using it and very strong from their training. I think the real root of the problem is, we can't exactly convince a bunch of people to stand in a tight formation and let us throw heavy sharp sticks at them and see what happens, to know exactly what sort of damage a javelin is supposed to do, then turn that around into a computer game. You say it's just fine, while I think it isn't enough (for the pilum), but there's no real way we can really resolve it to find what is really "enough casualties".

About the current in game effectiveness, Foot says

We are happy with the performance of javelins in EBI, you can expect to see the same results in EBII as you did in EBI. We would love to include some sort of penalty to units that have been struck by javelins to represent their primary use before a charge as a device for disrupting a formation. However, we cannot, and it would be inappropriate to have them as some sort of killing machine instead.

Still, the fact that Pila have lower damage, despite their AP, makes it seem kind of inaccurate historically. I've been wrong before though. Just look up a few posts and you'll see.

[TKaz84]

Concentrated fire from 2-3 units will break up and rout most charging infantry. Otherwise try to manuever your legions so that they are thrrowing into the side or rear of a unit. This will increase casualties. Do this with other javelin-throwing units as well (jav cav are great for throwing at the rear of a unit)

[Stycks]

I would say that the pila in EB is well balanced. These things were quite heavy and understandably hard to throw. This made it very powerful against anything it hits *if* it hits pointy side forward. I'm sure if several thousand guys were charging at you no matter how much discipline you had, you'd still have a tough time throwing a heavy stick and making sure it would hit properly...

So yeah.... pila were heavy things....
hard to chuck....
and to aim....
but when used by experienced troops (ie: those with chevrons) it would definitely be more effective