The Phalanx and Moral

[Phalanx300]

I would say it takes more courage to stand fast against cavalry that charges at you in full speed then facing a phalanx unit or a cohort. The impact is more sevear then an infantry clash some people just ran away when full heavy cavalry made a charge against their lines. "Ofcourse ellies aswell"

I agree, I've seen a Horse running towards me once and it was already intimidating, let alone adding someone with a lance on top of that.


And yes the Romans and the Makedonians were both brutal, can't say so much about the spartans though .

First they sacrifice a goat and start marching towards you with what seems like unison of the entire line with their men singing their warcries and flutes and drumes playing. (this was apparantly very intimidating to see)

If you decide to face them the battle will be hard, if you run however you can run they wont persue.

I think that was important psycological warfare, since their enemies knew that if they would run they would live, yet if they would stand they could very well die (considering the reputation of the Spartans as well).

[gamegeek2]

I agree, I've seen a Horse running towards me once and it was already intimidating, let alone adding someone with a lance on top of that.

I'm sure with a large spear or pike you feel much more secure. Levies, though, would no doubt be terrified, especially skirmishers.

[ARCHIPPOS]

If you decide to face them the battle will be hard, if you run however you can run they wont persue.

I think that was important psycological warfare, since their enemies knew that if they would run they would live, yet if they would stand they could very well die (considering the reputation of the Spartans as well).

Yep and not only Spartans employed this psychological warfare

"-Iphicrates never allowed his lines to be broken in the heat of the pursuit. He continually called out to his light-armed troops to beware of ambushes. He also had a general rule, never to press the enemy too hard when they had been routed, if there were any narrow passes or rivers behind them; for if they are hemmed in, they are often forced by desperation to rally and fight again.
-When Iphicrates had forced a fleeing enemy into a narrow pass, he always tried to open a way for them, and give them a chance to escape, without making it necessary for them to force their way out by fighting. He said that there was no reason to compel an enemy to be brave."
(Polyaenus: Stratagems/BOOK 3)

of course you have to remember that Spartan omoioi (=equals) were always very few compared to the manpower of other city-states such as Athens,Thebes and so on... having a demographicaly declining pool of hoplites with which to secure the Lacedaemonian homeland from the helot threat and implement Spartan hegemony throughout Greece ... forces you to drasticaly economise on your forces shall we say???

[Ca Putt]

well he certainly was good at avoiding enemies fighting to the death :D

engaging a phalanx head on is already rewarded with loosing your units(and then they flee) and it's not like it's part of any abusing tactic to charge leives into a phalanx head on. off course people(and animals) want to avoid running into a wall of pointy sticks but so do Generals. most generals try to win with the smallest possible casualties thus only very few qwould actually try to charge non elite troops into a phalanx head on. it's a bit like damageing troops over time that stand at a stupid location or texturing a large bullseye on city walls to indicate where to attack, thus extra effort to avoid players(and the AI) acting stupid which have unwanted side effects.

Edit: ok pinning phalanxes with Haploi or the like is sort of abuseing but it's not like they kill the phalanx they rather stand there and attract agression^^. standing in front of a phalanx and trying not to get killed(provided you have a large shield) does take much less courage than actually trying to kill them.

I think we all agree with you that Phalanxes are scary yet imho this would have more negative side effects than It would make gameplay or accuracy better.

[antisocialmunky]

OT: I know I shouldn't act like a MOD but this has been really iritating me lately...

[rant]Can we stop turning random threads into Spartan wankfests already? They were interesting dudes, we get it.

If you're going to bring them up, atleast keep it on topic. We're talking about Phalanxes and psychological warfare, not about the reasons why military socialism declined in Greece.[/rant]

< Now back to your regularly scheduled programming >

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Why would the phalanx in EB need the scaring-attribute? The opponent already throws himself brainlessly against the sarissai, dies and routs, so the phalanx basically serves its purpose. Also I think about how difficult it is to get two lines of phalanxes fight each other instead of interrupting senselessly. If two phalanxes with the scaring-attribute meat each other head on, I can imagine guys like Pantodapoi Phalangitai rout after two seconds just because one side's general blows the trumpet. That would be ridiculous. I think phalanxes are quite balanced in EB.

If anything, the height advantage effect should be (drastically) reduced. I'm quite fed up with my Argyraspides getting torn apart by Pantodapoi Phalangitai.

[antisocialmunky]

Height advantage is broken and unmoddable. In those cases, get out of phalanx mode and run for the high ground.

[Ludens]

OT: I know I shouldn't act like a MOD but this has been really iritating me lately...

[rant]Can we stop turning random threads into Spartan wankfests already? They were interesting dudes, we get it.

If you're going to bring them up, atleast keep it on topic. We're talking about Phalanxes and psychological warfare, not about the reasons why military socialism declined in Greece.[/rant]

We don't enforce a strict on-topic policy because often spin-off discussions can be just as interesting as the original (unless they are spam, off course). However, if the participants wish it, I can move posts relating to the decline of Sparta to a new thread.

[antisocialmunky]

We don't enforce a strict on-topic policy because often spin-off discussions can be just as interesting as the original (unless they are spam, off course). However, if the participants wish it, I can move posts relating to the decline of Sparta to a new thread.

Well I wasn't intimating that you were, but as you may or mayn ot have noticed, this is like the second or third thread that has meandered this direction of specifics of the late Spartan state.

This has been a trend lately on the EB fora that the same people drag the same topic over multiple threads. So you had a naturally developping thread until someone mentioned "Spartans were known for ....", "Hoplites did....", or even "Romans." Then the thread would be turned into "I believe that the glory days of Sparta ended with those last 8000-9000 Spartan phalangites", "Hoplites did not do that", "Rome sucks, Macedon Rules" etc regardless of previous topic. This is not natural progression of the coversation, its dragging the baggage from a previous thread and pitching camp in a new thread all to the loss of the OP's topic. While this is certainly fine in threads where the conversation has ended, its frustrating when the thread is still going or trying to go on topic but people won't let the original conversation resume.

Of course you're opinion may differ and I'm not commenting on your modding abilities which have been quite good so far.

EDIT: Nvm, it doesn't seem to be as wide spread as I got the impression that it did. So I guess my intent was to nip this in the bud before it got to Hoplites and Rome Sucks levels. Just ignore my over reaction then.

[Marcus Ulpius]

Phalanx is already a lethal weapon against the clueless AI. I'm in the middle of my Seleucid campaign and I fight wars on every border. As I can't send equal forces against each enemy, I have to play defensively in many places. That means defending towns with cheap Pantodapoi Palangitai and it works wonders. I had I full stack of Catas and armored HA's being sent home packing by 4 nooby phalanx units, some light support and a mercenary general. Giving phalanxes "intimidate" factor would instantly rout most enemies.

Of course it would be fine that the tactic of pinning down the phalanx with some cheap cannon fodder and flanking with heavies would be rendered less effective. After all, I can't believe that poorly trained, undisciplined and unarmored peasants could be forced to throw themselves onto the pikes to allow professional troops to go round the phalanx and do their job. But I don't know how you can make that "intimidation" factor work only on levies and not on professional well equipped units.

[Ludens]

Posts discussing the decline of the Spartans have been moved to this thread. Posts responding to those without relating to either topic have been deleted.

EDIT: Nvm, it doesn't seem to be as wide spread as I got the impression that it did. So I guess my intent was to nip this in the bud before it got to Hoplites and Rome Sucks levels. Just ignore my over reaction then.

Judging by several of the deleted posts a few forum members share your opinion, at least on the recurring Spartans. I don't particularly want to enforce strict on-topic rules: that also inhibits potentially interesting discussions. However, if participants let me know when they think an off-topic discussion is taking over a thread that is still in use for the original discussion, I can split the thread.

[torongill]

I'm cheating, but against the pezhtaroi all I need to do is form the triarii/spartans in shieldwall , line them 3 deep and plunge in the forest of spears. They take it from there. I know this is cheating, but the problem is that the engine is not very good on pushing. So I use hoplites against them. Maybe against silvershields or the egema, the hoplites would do a poor job. Though it works for the armored hoplites only and only for the shieldwall formation. I wonder what are the bonii of the shieldwall?