Pike pushing

[pikeman]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before.

What was all the pike pushing in the hellenistic period like? Were they like those of the swiss? What 'motivates' the front ranks to charge into each other's speartips?

[Skullheadhq]

You could stab your enemies before they could even reach you.

[anubis88]

Watch Alexander :)

[Skullheadhq]

Watch Alexander :)

Kinda hard, he's dead for 2300 years now.

[jazstl]

Good one!

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I think pikeman is referring to two lines of pikemen lined up across from one another. Would they attempt to push through each other or would they just form a static line hoping they would entangle the opposing pikemen long enough for their light infantry or cavalry to exploit the flanks?

[Skullheadhq]

They (the Diadochi) just weren't capable of coming up with a strategy of their own, and so they used the same tactics that Alexander used, not knowing that this doesn't work with an army that does exactly the same thing.

[J.R.M]

Yeah, sometimes i see mac phalanx vs mac phalanx battles as pretty stupid, "civilised" but it kinda reminds me the inflexible infantry battles of classical Greece v 2.0.
But thats just sometimes, cause i looooveeee phalanxes.

[pikeman]

:) My name maybe pikeman, but I'm referring to the swiss pikeman. Who's in for a Romans Vs Barbarian Multi-player Tournament? ROMA VICTRIX!!

[Cyclops]

...What was all the pike pushing in the hellenistic period like? Were they like those of the swiss?...

I guess sarissa clashes were similar to classic landsknecht or Switzer pike battles in that they all had long spears for sticking one another. Gangs of blokes poking each other in a more or less organised way, gradually less organised as they get tired.

Were Macedonian pike phalanxes a bit shallower than Swiss pike squares? I seem to recall the typical depths being 8 (for Hellenistic) and 10 (for swiss) but I could well be wrong.

Was the panoply different? M's may have worn the linothorax or other body armour, tall helm, short sword sidearm, I'm guessing S's wore a buiff jerkin, maybe a few wore plate? Different swords too.

Ancillary troop sets were quite different with arqubusiers and cannon niot available to the Diadochi. I think cav were less hard hitting in early modern Europe, given over more to caracoling with the fat pistols of the day. I suppose thats a bit like the javelin armed cav we see in EB? There's less "Companion" type cav at say Pavia I think.

The Swiss era also had those zweihander "lost company" chaps for pike chopping-maybe they're rhomphaioi equivalent, but I suspect there's more "sword and sheildmen" in the Diadochi armies.

...What 'motivates' the front ranks to charge into each other's speartips?

"Those behind cried "forward!", those in front cried "back!"

Why does anyone fight? Honour. Lies. Baubles. Greed. Superstition. Any pre-modern soldier was required to face danger in ways we don't see in modern warfare.

"Stand out there on the field of battle in the most visible colourful costume you can find and attract the enemy's attention. If they don't attack you at once, you're doin' it wrong."

[Apázlinemjó]

:) My name maybe pikeman, but I'm referring to the swiss pikeman. Who's in for a Romans Vs Barbarian Multi-player Tournament? ROMA VICTRIX!!

You know, it's hard to win with Romani in MP battles, it's a totally different experience.

[antisocialmunky]

Yeah Rome vs Barbarians will just be one sided. It is hopeless if you have no chevron upgrades.

Rome is pretty weak actually depending on the eras if you don't have any chevron upgrades for morale and is completely hopeless at Marian and is just annoying to play in Imperial.

[gamegeek2]

If I can get things up and running, I'll pilot some Steppe Factions, or the Getai if you prefer.

[Mulceber]

Yeah Rome vs Barbarians will just be one sided. It is hopeless if you have no chevron upgrades.

Rome is pretty weak actually depending on the eras if you don't have any chevron upgrades for morale and is completely hopeless at Marian and is just annoying to play in Imperial.

Agreed - Marian units are pretty sick if you can get them some chevrons, and I imagine that Imperial units are the same way, but by the time I got to the Imperial age, there weren't really any more enemies to fight consistantly, so I haven't really been able to improve their experience. -M

[vartan]

:) My name maybe pikeman, but I'm referring to the swiss pikeman. Who's in for a Romans Vs Barbarian Multi-player Tournament? ROMA VICTRIX!!

Where were you during the Rome vs Hellenes Tournament?

You know, it's hard to win with Romani in MP battles, it's a totally different experience.

Especially when in-game, unlike in the real world, phalanx lines are rather mobile and can change formation in a blink of an eye. During Cynoscephalae, Phillip couldn't do that. Oh how things would've been different if he had the abilities the Diadochi players have in RTW.

Yeah Rome vs Barbarians will just be one sided. It is hopeless if you have no chevron upgrades.
Precisely. That's why they all get up to 1 chev each online, remember? (=
Rome is pretty weak actually depending on the eras if you don't have any chevron upgrades for morale and is completely hopeless at Marian and is just annoying to play in Imperial.

At least they're disciplined, trained, and have great morale that doesn't deplete as fast, precisely due to the aforementioned discipline, etc.

[Cute Wolf]

as far as medieval pikemen was concerned, the structure of the pike fighting itself is quite different than in alexander's time. Swiss pikemen for example, are trained to slash enemy throats with pike tip, and landsknecht pikemen in sit down stature are trained to trip enemy foot with the body of the pike. that was possible because the later pikemen didn't carry the cumbersome shield, but it was coming at a cost of their increased vulnerability with missiles.

The front ranks "push", then, will have definitely different motives. The hellenic one will push because the men behind them are pushing them... but the medieval pikemen push because the survivability was a bit more better in the offensive ranks (where you can slash enemy body with pikes, advance under safe cover of friendly pikes and if cornered, roll under enemy pike and gut them with your short sword), compared to the defensive ranks (which only passively resist enemy push).

BTW, if you a roman fan, you should get your name as "legion" and not "pikemen"... did you are such fan of M2TW pikemen then?

[pikeman]

I'm a fan of the swiss pikemen.

[seienchin]

The Swiss Pikemen fought in a Mixed formation called Gewalthaufen, which the spanish army perfected with the Terzio. They also had lighter troops with missile and heavy troops with hellebards or two handed swords. Also they didnt use any shields. It was an incredible bloody mess, when two armies with pikemen clashed in the renaissance and early barock. The macedonian phalanx battles are believed to be not as violent by many scientists. Pikemen surrendering after their formation was broken seemed to be normal and a pike wasnt a good weapon to kill someon wearing a linothorax or bronze armour und a shield. The swiss like pikemen had nothing to protect themselves so they fought more aggressive and tried to kill the enemy as quick as possible.

PS: Off course when the swiss came up with the Gewalthaufen no enemy used it so they one some battles surprisingly easy (Just as alexander), but after most countries adopted it, it became just as unflexible as in the Diadochi times. Also there are quite a few theories about the end of the pikeformations I like the theory that cannons, advanced cavallery tacticts and the spreading of the bayonett made their formations impossible to hold and useless.

[vartan]

PS: Off course when the swiss came up with the Gewalthaufen no enemy used it so they one some battles surprisingly easy (Just as alexander), but after most countries adopted it, it became just as unflexible as in the Diadochi times. Also there are quite a few theories about the end of the pikeformations I like the theory that cannons, advanced cavallery tacticts and the spreading of the bayonett made their formations impossible to hold and useless.

It's almost always like this. Consider the older examples. The Hyksos Hittites and whathaveyou come south and invade and next thing you know, in the blink of an eye (to use a saying), you have Egyptians and Co. using iron weaponry. Assyrians use cav as a unit of battle and not just to carry supplies, and everyone follows suit. The Sumerians fight in phalanx formation presenting a wall of shield and spear, and many follow suit.
The introductory periods almost consistently see bloody victories on the part of the technologically advanced. When enemies mimic tech, things even out and victories don't kill as many people anymore. Doesn't mean there aren't exceptions. At Cynoscephalae, as far as I can remember, the Romans didn't adhere to "rules of war". They massacred many instead of accepting the sign of surrender (raised pikes) by the Makedones. Guess the Romans had larger goals and sights, more ambitious and couldn't afford a resurrection of the Makedonian professional army...

[Cute Wolf]

The introductory periods almost consistently see bloody victories on the part of the technologically advanced. When enemies mimic tech, things even out and victories don't kill as many people anymore. Doesn't mean there aren't exceptions. At Cynoscephalae, as far as I can remember, the Romans didn't adhere to "rules of war". They massacred many instead of accepting the sign of surrender (raised pikes) by the Makedones. Guess the Romans had larger goals and sights, more ambitious and couldn't afford a resurrection of the Makedonian professional army...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

That's why the Romaioi are actually bunch of cowards and barbarians, as they didn't even honour the rule of war.

BTW, it was worth thinking that the Romans' main infantry was gladius armed legionary... made them looks like an "interlude era" before the pike army rose to prominence again.

[Apázlinemjó]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

That's why the Romaioi are actually bunch of cowards and barbarians, as they didn't even honour the rule of war.

BTW, it was worth thinking that the Romans' main infantry was gladius armed legionary... made them looks like an "interlude era" before the pike army rose to prominence again.

Let's not forget the Early and "Dark" Middle ages and the armoured heavy cavalry.

[Ludens]

That's why the Romaioi are actually bunch of cowards and barbarians, as they didn't even honour the rule of war.

Maybe because they weren't aware of these rules? For that matter: even modern soldiers have been known to kill captives or surrendering enemies in the heat of combat.

[antisocialmunky]

Nothing compared to that army of a million men that was massacred by the army of Qin that one time.

[Macilrille]

I can recall no source for Romans hacking down surrendering Macedonians. What they did do in general was to not actually bother themselves with silly drivel such as rules of war. Their only rule was that they should fight only Ivs Bellvm, and even that got watered down pretty heavily over time. Apart from that, they were extremely ruthless. Some condemn it, but that is how they were. They also did not adhere to the rules of Hellenistic diplomacy and never negotiated from a point of weakness. And very rarely surrendered, that does not exactly equal cowards to me. In fact quite the opposite.

Wonder how they became supreme...

Ever-raging is the consideration in all armies and wars about rules of war and whether you can fight a monster without becoming one.

Keeley has written a good book on tribal warfare and proved that it was much more total than anything we do today and NOT the "ritual dance-battles" that idealistic and romantic antropologers of post WWII thought.

This is definately wandering off topic though.

Back on Pike Pushing.

[irelandeb]

What they did do in general was to not actually bother themselves with silly drivel such as rules of war.

The romans regularly accepted surrenders from enemies, however usually only once hte general or whoever was in charge had ordered the acceptance, until then they'd just kill anyone who came near.

[Macilrille]

They also regularly slaughtered everyone they could get their hands on. And enemy cities.

I still love them, but they were the most ruthless of the contemporary civilisations. Though of course defining civilisation can be hard.

[irelandeb]

well yes, they did, they didn't even hesitate to slaughter their own men if they failed to follow orders 9_9

[Apázlinemjó]

They also regularly slaughtered everyone they could get their hands on. And enemy cities.

I still love them, but they were the most ruthless of the contemporary civilisations. Though of course defining civilisation can be hard.

Well they got some quite nasty ones too, like Mithridates' slaughter of Roman citizens during the First Mithridatic War.

[vartan]

Maybe because they weren't aware of these rules? For that matter: even modern soldiers have been known to kill captives or surrendering enemies in the heat of combat.

I say they were well aware of the rules. It would have been foolish for the Roman Consul not to have pressed the attack on the retreating Makedones.

As for Pike Pushing, does M2TW have a phalanx feature? Since it is an advancement of the RTW engine, I would assume it takes into account code from 1.9. Pushing should be fine as long as the bug-fix for phalanxes from 1.9 is part of M2TW.

[pikeman]

If greek pike pushing was like the swiss, then I assume they either boiled down into sword brawls or a bloody mess where one side collapses and gets steamrolled...