Roman tactics?

[Kevin]

Okay, well I'm currently arround 210 BC on my Romani campaign and I've destroyed both Gallic factions and now I've been betrayed by the Sweboz. After several battles with them, I realize that a lot of their units are stronger than the Gauls. Before, I was use to my units being a lot better than the Gauls (besides their Gaesatae) but now I realize I need to change how I face the Gauls, and later the Greeks. So what I'm wondering is what are some tactics (such as the Hammer and Anvil for Makedonia) that you use not only against the Sweboz, but throughout the entire Romani campaign?

EDIT: I've reached the Polybian reforms if it matters.

[Macilrille]

Of course the Sweboz are stronger than the Gauls, they have not been softened by the contaminating ways of civilisation, but hardened by the eternal cold and hard land!!! As Tacitus says no one would live there except if born there.

I have not fought the Sweboz much as the Roman, as I keep them allied, I like them But I have fought the Romans much as Sweboz, and those battles were definately the hardest; my other opponents were Gauls, Lusos, Carthage and Greeks owning all East Europe and the Balkans.

Anyway, I would think the tactic is basically the same. If you want to cheat, have a lot of Toxatai Kretakoi, Sweboz are low on armor, but I never have more than four missile units, usually two or three, too keep somewhat historical. When I have faced the Sweboz I have set up with close to historical armies in Triplex Apex formation. Let them come to you if they want, and if not march close enough in formation so your Cretans can shower them with missiles while sending two flanking Campanian or Ligurian or Gallic Merc cav round behind them. This will probably make some of them charge and you can gang up on those, while others will hunt the cavalry and get showered with javelins without catching the Skirmishing Cavalry. Thus defeating the enemy piecemeal and in detail. If they rout (that is their strength- they often do not rout, Sweboz has temples that coupled with Game fields give 3 silver chevrons in experience), let them run and only if they get behind their own lines still routing should you hunt them by letting the cavalry run them down- remember to turn FaW off. Keep the rest of the army in formation and keep shooting till you are out of missiles.

At this point you will have killed 10 % + of them if they do not charge en masse.

If they charge your situation is more difficult for that is what they are good at. Let the first line of your formation hold them, only using the second line's flanks to join if you are getting flanked.
Always let your general stand behind the line and as the lines clash, turn on his Leadership ability to counter the scary hairies.
Instead let them either throw their javelins in support from where they stand or, better, try and flank the Sweboz attacking your Hastati and stand on their Right side throwing your Pilae. This will hurt the unarmoured Barbarians a lot. Meanwhile your Skirmisher Cav and Velites should definately do the same. In fact they may be the only ones that can if the Sweboz attack in strength and all your infantry necessary to hold the line.

In the battle itself, see if you can create local superiority by flanking a few selected enemies with one of yours while another holds it in place, even if your flanker is only a Velites out of Javelins. Charge with Cavalry from behind and always- always try and throw as many Pilae as possible before engaging hand-to-hand.

That would be my tactic, but the situation has been opposite, with me as Sweboz, in my games. Perhaps I should attack them in my current Roman campaign- we are neighbours and I am at war with AS, Pontos, Luso, both Gauls, so why not another enemy? ;-) I am allied with them though, and they have kept it for now...

[Julius Augustus]

In my current Romani campaign, I am fighting a lot of barbarians, and I have discovered a good way to deal with unarmoured troops. I use a historical army makeup of 1 general,1 equites exraordinarii, 1 campanian cav, 2 triarii, 4 principes, 4 hastati, 4 velites, and several mercenary units. These would probably be longswordsman, as you are based in Gaul and near Gaul. As my strategy depends in a large part on javelins, it is imperative that you claim the high ground. Put your units in the checkerboard formation, with the velites filling in the gaps between the hastati. Put your mercenary longswordsmen in a good flanking position. Have all units except for them have fire at will on. Put your cavalry in good flanking positions. If your general in very experienced, consider using him to flank also. The enemy will most likely charge your center. At this point, make certain that the velites have skirmish mode off and defence mode on. As the enemy draws near, your velites will start throwing javelins. The hastati will join in, and then the principes. At this point the enemy has probably already engaged your velites. Don't have them retreat. Have them keep throwing javelins into the fray. After all of the hastati and principes have thrown their pila, tell them to charge. You can commit the triarii at this point also. The combination of javelin hail+massive charge should have inflicted massive morale penalties. In weaker armies, a rout may have started. If not, flank the enemy with your mercenaries and cavalry, and charge. Victory is yours.

As this tactic relies heavily on javelins, I'd is only suitable for battlesagainst lightly armored foes.

[The General]

As this tactic relies heavily on javelins, I'd is only suitable for battlesagainst lightly armored foes.

Pila are AP though, now innit...

[Mediolanicus]

Pila are AP though, now innit...

Yes, but they don't do their work any worse against unarmored units...

[Weebeast]

I rarely change my starting formation except for arranging a bit by putting weak troops in center and strong ones on the side. I'm normally pleased using only one cavaly (my fm) but for Sweboz sometimes I bring one extra either extraordinarii or merc because they usually are numerous for my fm to flank alone. Of course I use infantry to flank too but cavalry looks cooler so...they usually get first bite.

I also build up Helveti as lightly romanized province (gov't III). I should've developed the one on the right instead for Rhaetic Axeman but oh well it's too late. Helveti provides me with archers, axemen and psedo-phalanxes. While they're not the best on the map they get the job done. Not only that but they can put up a fight against Sweboz even without the help of my factional troops.

[Julius Augustus]

Pila are AP though, now innit...

Yes, but as the whole point is to destroy morale with javelins, and as most of the javelins thrown will be the kind thrown by velites, which are not ap, heavily armoured units will hardly be affected.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Use the standard manipular tactics of the Romani. I have a modified version, though, without gaps because having gaps allows the enemy to go through the line and breaks the morale of your men. Instead I line up the Hastati on the front, Principes on the second line, Triarii behind, with allies on the flanks all in line. I tire them with the Hastati and by the time they face the Principes they rout.

But then I don't know why people say that the Sweboz are stronger than the Celts. Actually it's the reverse: against even Bataroas the Sweboz line stands no chance, let alone against Solduros or Gaesatae. Only Casse have a problem because their units tend to be sucky and of militia quality.

[Macilrille]

But then I don't know why people say that the Sweboz are stronger than the Celts. Actually it's the reverse: against even Bataroas the Sweboz line stands no chance, let alone against Solduros or Gaesatae. Only Casse have a problem because their units tend to be sucky and of militia quality.

Try a game as Sweboz, they wipe Gauls as effectively as Romans with much cheaper units, but with start exp of 3-4...

[antisocialmunky]

Try a game as Sweboz, they wipe Gauls as effectively as Romans with much cheaper units, but with start exp of 3-4...

Javelins > Sweboz online.

[Macilrille]

Yes, as unarmoured barbarian you need to close quickly ;-)

[antisocialmunky]

Barb vs Barb is pretty interesting online since its a game of who can missile who's decent troops. So he who charges first loses.

On the other hand, any barb faction with scary dudes results in a massive frontal assault taht decides the game in about 10 minutes.

:-\

[mountaingoat]

been placing an entire stack of units in a small portion of woods again?

[Kevin]

So against the Sweboz, just get a lot of ranged units. What about the Greeks?

[antisocialmunky]

What about them and which Greeks?

[Flavius_Belisarius]

Just saw that skirmish units continue firering, even if the enemy is already in melee with them. So even akonistai defeat without great problems units like the falx infantery.

[Kevin]

The Macedonians, Epeiros, Getai, and Koinon Hellenon

[fallen851]

Anyway, I would think the tactic is basically the same. If you want to cheat, have a lot of Toxatai Kretakoi, Sweboz are low on armor, but I never have more than four missile units, usually two or three, too keep somewhat historical.

Something tells me, that if the Romans knew missile units would be so effective against the Germans, they wouldn't have worried about what future generations would have thought, and just would have used them. This is of course premised on the idea that EB accurately reflects history when it comes to combat. I do not believe it does, so I have my own EDU modifications, but that is a whole different story.

You can play EB however you want, but I think it is most fun to rewrite history, not try to relive it.

[Kevin]

Something tells me, that if the Romans knew missile units would be so effective against the Germans, they wouldn't have worried about what future generations would have thought, and just would have used them. This is of course premised on the idea that EB accurately reflects history when it comes to combat. I do not believe it does, so I have my own EDU modifications, but that is a whole different story.

You can play EB however you want, but I think it is most fun to rewrite history, not try to relive it.

Me neither, thats why my entire roman army is made of elephants and pedites extroadinarri (hah funny name)

[Lanceari]

As Roman, I managed to grab most Germany without much pain. First I used a lot of spies. I made sure I knew exactly where were the enemy troops. I also used forts extensively. Once I chose to attack a city I would use forts and bridges to block enemy stacks, and move to siege the particular city I had selected. As a result, almost every battle I fought was either in a city or bridge... I only had to fight in the forest once or twice.

[antisocialmunky]

Something tells me, that if the Romans knew missile units would be so effective against the Germans, they wouldn't have worried about what future generations would have thought, and just would have used them. This is of course premised on the idea that EB accurately reflects history when it comes to combat. I do not believe it does, so I have my own EDU modifications, but that is a whole different story.

You can play EB however you want, but I think it is most fun to rewrite history, not try to relive it.

Missiles don't work if you can't get an angle on the target and the Black Forest is not very conducive to parabolic arcs.

[moonburn]

Something tells me, that if the Romans knew missile units would be so effective against the Germans, they wouldn't have worried about what future generations would have thought, and just would have used them. This is of course premised on the idea that EB accurately reflects history when it comes to combat. I do not believe it does, so I have my own EDU modifications, but that is a whole different story.

You can play EB however you want, but I think it is most fun to rewrite history, not try to relive it.

as antisocial said

romans didn´t had enough woodcutters and missiles are almost uselless in dense forests like the one´s in germany

as for the above strategy spy´s caught in german forests wouldn´t survive very long, so their knowledge of the geography and the hability to see marching warbands 50 miles away wasn´t available back then

also no german would fight a bridge batle they would ambush when half the army had just crossed and if need be they would swim undetected to the other shore and catch the romans in crossfire

furthermore rtw engine doesn´t allow it but in the night the wolfwarriors would grind down whatever roman´s could send at them, and forts are extremly weak against fires and trust me no matter how high you build your fortwall there´s always a tree next to it high enough and to build the fort and a perimeter around it it would take days while being constantly harassed by wierdo lunatics dressed in wolf clothes that appear and disapear like if they where gosths

it´s a bit like calling the saba weak and ignoring that anyone foolish enough to attack the saba would be fighting in the midle of a desert if they moved they would get shoot if they didn´t move after 1 or 2 hours they would start dehidrating (not even considering stuff like malaria or the poor knowledge of the terrain)

furthermore to subdue all the tribes of germania one by one would cost something that today would mean billions and for a very litle profit cause most germans where actually very scatered and had a fighting feral spirit that an example like what happened in numantia wouldn´t work it would only make the german tribes fight with more fury

for that same reason it took the romans so long before they decided to conquer gaul and even then it took one of the roman world greatest mind (not just military but also political and somewhat economical) 10 years to subdue it and after killing or enslaving half of the gaulish/belgium population they still had problems (and i must remind you that even then the senate was against such an endeavour cause they knew how much it would probably cost)

[fleaza]

well i wouldnt call slave trade unprofitable. julius caesar made quite a few pennies from what ive read from the gallic wars

[Macilrille]

as antisocial said

romans didn´t had enough woodcutters and missiles are almost uselless in dense forests like the one´s in germany

as for the above strategy spy´s caught in german forests wouldn´t survive very long, so their knowledge of the geography and the hability to see marching warbands 50 miles away wasn´t available back then

also no german would fight a bridge batle they would ambush when half the army had just crossed and if need be they would swim undetected to the other shore and catch the romans in crossfire

furthermore rtw engine doesn´t allow it but in the night the wolfwarriors would grind down whatever roman´s could send at them, and forts are extremly weak against fires and trust me no matter how high you build your fortwall there´s always a tree next to it high enough and to build the fort and a perimeter around it it would take days while being constantly harassed by wierdo lunatics dressed in wolf clothes that appear and disapear like if they where gosths

it´s a bit like calling the saba weak and ignoring that anyone foolish enough to attack the saba would be fighting in the midle of a desert if they moved they would get shoot if they didn´t move after 1 or 2 hours they would start dehidrating (not even considering stuff like malaria or the poor knowledge of the terrain)

furthermore to subdue all the tribes of germania one by one would cost something that today would mean billions and for a very litle profit cause most germans where actually very scatered and had a fighting feral spirit that an example like what happened in numantia wouldn´t work it would only make the german tribes fight with more fury

for that same reason it took the romans so long before they decided to conquer gaul and even then it took one of the roman world greatest mind (not just military but also political and somewhat economical) 10 years to subdue it and after killing or enslaving half of the gaulish/belgium population they still had problems (and i must remind you that even then the senate was against such an endeavour cause they knew how much it would probably cost)

I am sorry, but there seems to be quite a bit of hearsay, fantasy and myth passed on in this post. Sources???

[Macilrille]

Something tells me, that if the Romans knew missile units would be so effective against the Germans, they wouldn't have worried about what future generations would have thought, and just would have used them. This is of course premised on the idea that EB accurately reflects history when it comes to combat. I do not believe it does, so I have my own EDU modifications, but that is a whole different story.

You can play EB however you want, but I think it is most fun to rewrite history, not try to relive it.

Historically missile units did not seem to be as effective against unarmoured units as in EB, but Tacitus Annals tells us of germanicus' campaign to re-conquer the province lost to Varus, and archers are mentioned here and there as part of the army.

However, there is another point called national military doctrine. You might think that the Romans would drop legions and go all-archer, but Rome was a "heavy-infantry" military doctrine state, just like the various Hellenes were if in a different way. That was the mainstay of their armies and their tactics and training as well as thinking was built around it. Even in the late Empire when they confronted Cataphracts and HA they only adjusted and created their own (Cataphracti and Clibinarii at least), but still the heavy infantry was the core of the Roman Army until at least Chalons where it is said they did nothing but cover under their shields. Roman doctrine was heavy infantry, probably determined by their geoploitical location.

[athanaric]

But then I don't know why people say that the Sweboz are stronger than the Celts. Actually it's the reverse: against even Bataroas the Sweboz line stands no chance, let alone against Solduros or Gaesatae. Only Casse have a problem because their units tend to be sucky and of militia quality.

Actually, Bataroas win because of their unusually large unit size (202 on huge settings). Stat-wise, Xerunoudozez are definitely superior (Milnaht are still the best of this "group", though).
In matters morale and discipline, Swêboz units win against Gallic ones, apart from the elites.
Gauls have lighter javelins with a superior range, which is an advantage against the Swêboz (and no doubt one a good player can make use of), but a disadvantage against the Romans.

Fighting Suebi is therefore different for a Roman player than fighting Gauls: Their units are far less likely to rout (yes, even without the crazy Deiwoz temples) and have very stingy javelins. On the other hand, they have a crappy range and even less armour than the Gallic ones.

I think the fact that the Gallic factions have some of the best infantry units in the game makes some players overlook their shortage of disciplined line troops and some other weaknesses. Because those few unit types (Solduros, Gaesatae, Carnute Cingetos and possibly Neitos) are not very likely to be numerous in a realistic army.

[Lanceari]

as for the above strategy spy´s caught in german forests wouldn´t survive very long, so their knowledge of the geography and the hability to see marching warbands 50 miles away wasn´t available back then

also no german would fight a bridge batle they would ambush when half the army had just crossed and if need be they would swim undetected to the other shore and catch the romans in crossfire

furthermore rtw engine doesn´t allow it but in the night the wolfwarriors would grind down...

I was describing the way I conquered Germany in EB. I never claimed it would work in real life.

By the way, I should add I did not use a single legionary unit to take Germany. I used triariis and pedites extraordinary supported by cretan mercenaries for city fighting. For patrolling the countryside I used celtic units supported by javelin throwers (Roman or Greek).

[moonburn]

well i wouldnt call slave trade unprofitable. julius caesar made quite a few pennies from what ive read from the gallic wars

thus the reason why juliues cesar made a profit out of it cause he only needed 55000 legionaires but one must admit that considering the census of the time that to conquer and vanquish 4 million gauls and 2 million belgae in 10 years with a 55000 army was at best considered impossible even if they where divided as they where (the reason why the senate avoided to get pulled into a massive war on gaul and instead prefered to play it´s political cards at keeping the regions status quo)

gaius julius played not only his best military thump cards but also several great political victories like when he went to britania and then to germania to show that anyone rebelling and plotting against him would be punished. his hability to mantain the remi on his side, his continous anihalition of one tribe after another 1 at a time

and finally the hand cutting of 4000 gauls(?)

@epi sorry i guess i felt a bit insulted on the personal level for calling sweboz weak when infact they where amazing warriors perfectly adapted to their native land and would hardly be defeated in their native land.

@Macilrille i feel alot of hostility from you so as not to make this personal:

- visit the blackforest and imagine how it would be like not being able to see 5 meters in front of you and looking up and 30 meters above you there´s only darkness in the mid summer day

- read some of the units description in eb

- germania from tacitus

- even you must admit that germania was a non profitable region and there was no unity in germania in terms of politics and you would have to defeat one tribe at a time cause none would surrender

so these are my sources the blackforest (in some parts it´s still almost as wild as before), eb (and i´m sure you´re not calling the eb team an inproper source ??), germania from tacitus (altough i find it wierd that it was such a small book), and some common sence (and yes i admit this source is very biased)

[athanaric]

- visit the blackforest and imagine how it would be like not being able to see 5 meters in front of you and looking up and 30 meters above you there´s only darkness in the mid summer day

You have to remember though that forests back in those times were sometimes very different from what they look now. Different climate and different land (and wood) use being some of the main factors. Most notably, the abundance of spruces in German forests is a very recent development (they were planted to facilitate wood-harvesting and to increase the yield).
IIRC, in Germanic times the woods were not as dark, nor as dense as most of our forests today. Still, they were likely dark and tangled enough to impede efficient archery.

[Conradus]

- germania from tacitus

For information on the germans of old, germania probably isn't the best source. Tacitus wrote it and describes the germans as what romans could be. Tacitus' point was to attack the decadence to which his countrymen had fallen.