Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Army Formations

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Unbowed Unbent Unbroken Member Lazy O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,046

    Default Re: Army Formations

    I acutally dont get it, if you have 3 lines, your getting much more depth then length, i.e possibilty of a repeat of Cannae,

    Why the hell would you wait for the hastati to break? why not use all units together? Again Plain stupidity.

    Someone please enlighten me, i can see the sense of 2 lines, but 3 just escape me.


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 





    [21:16:17] [Gaius - 5.115.253.115]
    i m not camping , its elegant strategy of waiting

  2. #2
    Guitar God Member Mediolanicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    On the banks of the Scaldis.
    Posts
    1,355

    Default Re: Army Formations

    2 lines refreshing each other

    1 line in reserve
    __________________

    --> - Never near Argos - <--

  3. #3
    Klibanophoros Ton Rhomaioktono Member Duguntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Iasi, Romania
    Posts
    766

    Default Re: Army Formations

    As sweboz, no army formation. i disperse mt troops in forests "randomly" (though not as randomly as it looks as each unit is set close to another one, though far enough not to get discovered if the unit closeby enters in combat) so that can create many "mini" ambushes in a more big planed one. surprise effect is devastating on anything but elite. even solduros rout sometime when they're entangled in a melee and warriors spring from two directions at the same time XD
    Opinions are like bacteries : we all have, but it's better to keep them for ourself... (By me!)

    generously given by Nachtmeister
    generously given by Macilrille for Sweboz combat tactics
    Generously given by Brennus




  4. #4
    Member Megas Methuselah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Prairie Grasslands
    Posts
    5,040

    Default Re: Army Formations

    Quote Originally Posted by Duguntz View Post
    As sweboz, no army formation. i disperse mt troops in forests "randomly" (though not as randomly as it looks as each unit is set close to another one, though far enough not to get discovered if the unit closeby enters in combat) so that can create many "mini" ambushes in a more big planed one. surprise effect is devastating on anything but elite. even solduros rout sometime when they're entangled in a melee and warriors spring from two directions at the same time XD
    Wow.

  5. #5
    Klibanophoros Ton Rhomaioktono Member Duguntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Iasi, Romania
    Posts
    766

    Default Re: Army Formations

    Quote Originally Posted by Megas Methuselah View Post
    Wow.
    hmmm, it's quiet close to how our ancestor used to wage their battle also, well, at least in Quebec, due to our heavily forested geography! Mohawks were very fierce and indeed, invisible in their ambushes on french colonies and troops. Their only defect is that they were allied with those british. the algonquin were allied with the french, but were no match for the iroquois. They were more pacifists I guess :) At least they were allied with the right guys!
    Opinions are like bacteries : we all have, but it's better to keep them for ourself... (By me!)

    generously given by Nachtmeister
    generously given by Macilrille for Sweboz combat tactics
    Generously given by Brennus




  6. #6
    Sandwich Maker Member Kikaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The land of many lakes
    Posts
    155

    Default Re: Army Formations

    Recently, I've been using a "flower formation" that literally blooms. I haven't perfected it yet, but it allows me to basically phase out cavalry (for some reason I've developed a hatred for cavalry in EB). You'll have to see the formation..


  7. #7
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,195

    Default Re: Army Formations

    Quote Originally Posted by Kikaz View Post
    Recently, I've been using a "flower formation" that literally blooms. I haven't perfected it yet, but it allows me to basically phase out cavalry (for some reason I've developed a hatred for cavalry in EB). You'll have to see the formation..
    you can't say "for some reason". you have to explain why they-to you-are tactically annoying. I can learn from ye y'know
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  8. #8

    Default Re: Army Formations

    They didn't wait for the Hastati to break. They waited for the enemy to become tired and worn out and for enemy morale to weaken.

    Many enemy armies like Celts would arrange their best, bravest, strongest and most heavily armed warriors up front. These were the leaders, the nobles who led by example and inspired the lesser levies to bravery. Once these became tired and dispirited as the enemy refused to give way after a longish slog, they would be much more vulnerable to renewed attack than they would be at the start of the battle.

    Holding large parts of their army in reserve probably allowed the Romans to mount aggressive charges and continued attacks for far longer than forces who simply arranged their armies in a big block. In a big block the rear ranks provide cohesion and boost morale, but as Cannae and other battles demonstrated they did not exactly make the formation that much stronger. (Pike phalanxes aside) Even though it's mostly the front-ranks fighting, the rear ranks would tire out physically and psychologically from incessantly being under threat of (missile) attack and uncertain of what is happening up front. A fresh line would not suffer from these issues.

    All these reserves must also have allowed far greater tactical flexibility. Weaker points can more easily be reinforced, breakthroughs exploited, etc. Keeping three lines seems like an insanely large quantity of reserves, but if we accept the school of thought that said battles for the most part were rather tentative affairs with fierce hand-to-hand combat occurring only in shorter bursts or locally, until one side gained the advantage and the other broke, then it becomes far more believable.

    In the game engine it doesn't work like exactly like this, but fresh troops do have a huge advantage in killing rates. If you deploy your army in a thinner line on guard-mode, fight until the enemy gets tired and then move your fresh second line in, you can get the advantage a deeper single-line would not have gotten.

    Admittedly, in my Roman armies I mostly use the third line to intercept cavalry attacks. And I don't play multiplayer, I don't know if historical Roman tactics stand any chance there. I suspect not.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Army Formations

    Quote Originally Posted by Randal View Post
    They didn't wait for the Hastati to break. They waited for the enemy to become tired and worn out and for enemy morale to weaken.

    Many enemy armies like Celts would arrange their best, bravest, strongest and most heavily armed warriors up front. These were the leaders, the nobles who led by example and inspired the lesser levies to bravery. Once these became tired and dispirited as the enemy refused to give way after a longish slog, they would be much more vulnerable to renewed attack than they would be at the start of the battle.

    Holding large parts of their army in reserve probably allowed the Romans to mount aggressive charges and continued attacks for far longer than forces who simply arranged their armies in a big block. In a big block the rear ranks provide cohesion and boost morale, but as Cannae and other battles demonstrated they did not exactly make the formation that much stronger. (Pike phalanxes aside) Even though it's mostly the front-ranks fighting, the rear ranks would tire out physically and psychologically from incessantly being under threat of (missile) attack and uncertain of what is happening up front. A fresh line would not suffer from these issues.

    All these reserves must also have allowed far greater tactical flexibility. Weaker points can more easily be reinforced, breakthroughs exploited, etc. Keeping three lines seems like an insanely large quantity of reserves, but if we accept the school of thought that said battles for the most part were rather tentative affairs with fierce hand-to-hand combat occurring only in shorter bursts or locally, until one side gained the advantage and the other broke, then it becomes far more believable.

    In the game engine it doesn't work like exactly like this, but fresh troops do have a huge advantage in killing rates. If you deploy your army in a thinner line on guard-mode, fight until the enemy gets tired and then move your fresh second line in, you can get the advantage a deeper single-line would not have gotten.

    Admittedly, in my Roman armies I mostly use the third line to intercept cavalry attacks. And I don't play multiplayer, I don't know if historical Roman tactics stand any chance there. I suspect not.
    Exactly. Also quite often troops would not be continuously engaged for hours fighting the same enemy, The enemy would withdraw and attack again. Clearly this kind of fighting was more common in certain cultures than other however. Remember that the Romans "three" lines were just the heavy infantry, all the other support troops that were brought to battle were designed to tire the enemy out before even the hastati were engaged. (Although this was rarely successful). Many of Hannibal's greatest triumphs against the Romans early on in his campaign were because he was able to engage the Romans so fast that they had not got themselves set to fight a patient battle. He could attack and defeat the Romans as they arrived and they did not have the advantage of being fresh.

    Cannae and Zama are of course exceptions to this, each in their own different way.

    In game Ive found it best to let the velites fill the gaps between the Hastati maniples and hold their ground. The Principes are close behind. Certainly not behind the back ranks of the Hastati. When the battle has progressed a little and the enemy is tiring, then I charge the principes in and then withdraw the velites and use them to harrass the flanks.

    Starting with your cavalry behind your lines rather than deployed on the flanks means the AI makes less effort to send troops to chase them around the battlefield in an annoying and unrealistic manner. Instead he will come at you much more head on - his flanking forces will fall on your second line (often allied spearmen on the edges for me). At about this stage it is a good idea to send the cavalry out to do their job. Often in history the cavalry fought first, but this is never a good idea in EB.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Army Formations

    Quote Originally Posted by Cambyses View Post
    Exactly. Also quite often troops would not be continuously engaged for hours fighting the same enemy, The enemy would withdraw and attack again. Clearly this kind of fighting was more common in certain cultures than other however.
    Since I'm a huge fight fan (I was even a wannabe UFC/MMA fighter from high school until a few years ago), I picture this process (where each side in a pitched battle would basically make an on-the-spot gentleman's agreement to break off and stop fighting in order to take a little time to catch their breath) by remembering pretty much every fistfight I've witnessed (well, those that weren't over realy quick or broken up, anyway), whether from when I was a kid, in high school, college, or those I've seen as an adult. They're usually 2 chest pounding idiots swinging wildly at each other, rolling around on the ground, etc, for a maximum of a minute or two before both are obviously so exhausted they can barely lift their arms up and/or look like they might vomit any second.

    At this point, it is not uncommon to see two people, in a fist fight, either agree to call it even, and act all buddy buddy (the level of buddy buddyness is inverse to how drunk they are), or to take a break (which is also something that never stops being hilarious) before they make asses out of themselves again for a few minutes.

    Now, imagine that you're a hoplite, legionarius, or any other infantryman in ancient or medieval times--you have 30-50 lbs of armor on, it's pretty hot out, you're holding a large, awkwardly shaped shield that probably weighs 5-10 lbs (and an awkward shape or large volume makes something seem like it's oh, I don't know, about A ZILLION TIMES HEAVIER than it really is!), and you and another guy have been hacking away at each other in vain for a good part of 15-20 minutes. Agreeing to a little truce, or maybe even taking a break AND trying to find a weaker dance partner, seems totally plausible...

  11. #11
    Member Member NoHelmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    89

    Default Re: Army Formations

    Quote Originally Posted by Lazy O View Post
    I acutally dont get it, if you have 3 lines, your getting much more depth then length, i.e possibilty of a repeat of Cannae,

    Why the hell would you wait for the hastati to break? why not use all units together? Again Plain stupidity.

    Someone please enlighten me, i can see the sense of 2 lines, but 3 just escape me.
    Indeed.
    My first baloon, generously given by Arthur, king of the Britons , for nice Casse and Pahlava empires

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO