Peltasts vs Thureophoroi vs Iphicratous Hoplites

[paleologos]

Hello fellow guilders!

This is not so much a question about which unit would prevail in combat since, in my opinion, this would greatly depend on tactics.

The question is if these units were competing for a slot in your army would there really be a contest?

They are all in the same range of costs, with very small differences and they can all hold their ground in the combat line with pretty much equal success.

However, the peltast have six javelins each and are "very hardy".

Looking forward to reading some feedback.

[athanaric]

That depends pretty much on the enemy you intend to face.

Peltasts for wall fights, Thureophoroi against cavalry or chariots. Iphikrateans are a compromise between these units, and the best choice against skirmishers among those three. Against elephants, obviously Peltasts.

I use Thureophoroi only sparingly, because their somewhat unhistorically high armour value in connection with their other stats renders them broken (as in: too powerful for their cost). However, I believe Ibrahim has made a Thureophoroi submod with less armour.

[mountaingoat]

is this slot in single player or online ?

[Cute Wolf]

thureophoroi are better holding the line, peltastai are more flexible, and iphikratous hoplitai for holding the center with guard mode.

[paleologos]

What I had in mind is this:

Single player campaign mode, you assemble an army for an expedition and expect limited ability for reinforcements during their tour.

4 units of cavalry, 8 units of heavy infantry, 4 units of archers and/or slingers.

The cavalry can chase skimishers, the heavy infantry can hold the line, the long range missiles can take care of units with medium armor ratings.

4 slots remain available. Personally I would choose peltasts. Would I be too much off if I were to regard the Thureophoroi and the Iphicratous Hoplites outclassed given the presence of the other troops?

[Ca Putt]

they work quite well combined with each other. imho. add some psiloi and maybe a unit of cavalry and you have a fully functional and very consistent army. personally I don't like reformed hoplites very much but I often use Thureophoroi or peltastai as flankers to supplement my hoplites or haploi at least aslong the spartans control the largest faction in the League council hehe.
which one you use depends a lot on the rest of your army, if you rely a lot on celtic or similar spearmen/swordsmen you need different base units than with a classical phalanx army.

edit: i'd take 2 thureophoroi and two peltastai that is when your main line consists of hoplitai or phalangitai.

[WinsingtonIII]

If I only had one spot, I'd bring Theurophoroi. In EB, I actually find them to be more versatile than Peltastai in many respects. They kill in melee at about the same rate (because short sword lethality isn't any better than spear lethality) and Theurophoroi are obviously better than cavalry. Even though Theurophoroi get the -4 attack against infantry "light spear" attribute, they start with a base 14 attack and Peltasts start with a base 10 attack, so they are about equal against infantry in melee. Obviously, Peltasts are better skirmishers, but I think that's the only area where they really outclass Theurophoroi.

I'm only going on personal experience here, but I've generally had better luck with Theurophoroi than Peltasts. They can stand in the main battle line if they have to (because they have better armor and spears), they can block cav on the flanks much better, and they seem to do just as well as Peltasts when flanking infantry, although they won't deal out as much jav damage. As such, I tend to use them as my primary support troops in Hellenic armies (until I can get Thorakitai) and Peltasts take a secondary role.

If you have four spots, though, then I'd agree with Ca Putt and bring both Theurophoroi and Peltastai. For 4 spots, bring 2 of each. However, if there's only 2 spots, I might actually bring 2 Theurophoroi and neglect Peltasts, but that's just my personal preference. One of each type is certainly a good choice as well.

Iphikratous Hoplitai are the clear loser here. I almost never use them because they are a bit broken due to the fact that they have a sword as a secondary that they keep switching to when you want them to be holding formation with their spears. They also lack javelins and when you actually want them to use the sword and flank, they inevitably switch to spears. Rarely are they worth the hassle, stick with the Theurophoroi (who also have better armor than they do; as athanaric says, Theurophoroi may be overpowered in the armor category as compared to their real life armor).

[Apázlinemjó]

From those three the Thureophoroi is the ultimate unit in the online battles:
- Guards the flanks better than anything with the same cost
- Can pin the enemy down and hold the line till you can do a counter-attack
- They are better skirmishers than Peltastai for one reason, they have spears --> protected against skirmisher killer medium cavalry

[MisterFred]

I my Koinon Hellenon campaign, I went with the peltasts. Yes, the thureophoroi have better armor, and a higher mass. But I think the peltasts' longer javelin rang and larger number of javelins make up that difference - sometimes when flanking, pouring ranged fire on the enemy is more effective than charging in. Similar when on the flanks, even vs cavalry. I'd usually rather have two peltasts than two thureophoroi - one unit to take the brunt of the cavalry (admittedly, not as well as spearmen), the other to pour javelins on and make the enemy units pay.

So up to that point they're about even. Throw in the fact that the peltasts are actually about 10% cheaper and fight in a more open order formation (which I prefer for flankers), and I think they come out ahead. Iphikratous I've never liked. They are faster than most hellenic units, though. Sometimes they can get to the enemy's cavalry before the thureophoroi. And on guard mode they have the densest formation. Those are the only two benefits I can see.