Review my Pergamene army

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm at 217BC in my Pergamon game, and now firmly established in Asia Minor and the Thracian coast.



I've got three armies which are formed along a standard pattern. The idea behind them is to be plausible as a force Pergamon would raise, and also making battles challenging. The former is achieved by some cursory research on what Pergamon’s armies were like (Stele 6 for EBII was a great help in this regard). The latter by capping stacks at 14-15 units and a limit on the number of slingers and cavalry.

Composition goes thus:

Cavalry (4 units):
2 x Family Members
1 x Gallic Light Cavalry/Thracian Medium Cavalry
1 x Eastern Light Cavalry/Thracian Light Cavalry

Line Infantry (6 units):
3 x Classical Hoplites
1 x Thureophoroi
1 x Celto-Hellenic Hoplites
1 x Galatian Wild Men/Karian Warband

Light Infantry (3 units):
1 x Mercenary Kretan Archer
1 x Gallic Slingers
1 x Peltastai/Thracian Peltastai

Deployment thus:

--GalSl

GWM/KW-----KelH----ClaH----ClaH----ClaH----Thur----TPel/Pel

FM-----------------------------KrA------------------------FM
GaLCav----------------------------------------------ELCav/TLCav

There’s a good mix of Hellenes and Thracians/Gauls which I think is pretty authentic. It is pretty effective even against a full-stack phalanx army. Though if there are decent quality phalangites at the centre my hoplites get chewed up pretty badly.

I’m wondering if I should add another couple of units to increase survivability. One option is to take both types of Peltast, Thracian and Hellenic. That adds versatility without making things too easy, more skirmishers who can function as medium infantry. Should I include some Galatian Shortswordsmen or the like as a second? Again they’re not heavies who will add massive killing power and make the army a lot more effective.

Thoughts?

[william weedzor]

Disband mercenary archers and slingers and send one FM home.Hire one more peltast unit and thureophoroi.

...........-----------2xcheap mercs--------------
............----KelH----ClaH----ClaH----ClaH----............................--FM--......................--2x Skirmish cavalry--
--Thur----Pelt-----------------------------Pelt----Thur--

Reinforce Thureophoroi on each wing by any unit u want,but something with AP attack will be just fine.
Never keep your cavalry behind your main line and never ever keep cavalry skirmishers close to your army.Find some cover for them or use them for big flanking move from start.Same for heavy cavalry.

[Ravenic]

Yes I'd definitely use more thureophoroi or hoplites to beef out your infantry. No Hellenic army ever had an equal ratio of cavalry + skirmishers to infantry.

[QuintusSertorius]

Disband mercenary archers and slingers and send one FM home.Hire one more peltast unit and thureophoroi.

I'm puzzled, why remove the entirety of my long-range skirmishing power? Archers and slingers are great for removing enemy javelin-infantry before they get in range. It's a minor concession to effectiveness, tempered by only having one of each.

Send one FM home and I've basically got no heavy cavalry (and pretty much no use for FMs, since only one is a governor and I only have three armies). Again what's the value in that?

...........-----------2xcheap mercs--------------
............----KelH----ClaH----ClaH----ClaH----............................--FM--......................--2x Skirmish cavalry--
--Thur----Pelt-----------------------------Pelt----Thur--

Reinforce Thureophoroi on each wing by any unit u want,but something with AP attack will be just fine.

What are the cheap merc units doing? Thacian peltastai are good for AP flankers. That's sort of why I was considering adding them regardless.

Keltohellenikoi really aren't durable enough to stand in the centre of the line (especially not against phalanxes); that's why I've effectively got them playing as "Gallic Thureophoroi" on the opposite flank to the regular Thureophoroi.

Why stagger the flankers off the centre of the line? Is that the authentic way of deploying them?

Never keep your cavalry behind your main line and never ever keep cavalry skirmishers close to your army.Find some cover for them or use them for big flanking move from start.Same for heavy cavalry.

Why move the cavalry away from the main body where they can be singled out for attack? If they're distant they also potentially cause the AI to do stupid things when trying to "match" them.

I tend to wait until the enemy line engages mine before looping the cavalry around, unless I need them to drive off their skirmishers/skirmishing cavalry. Even then, they rush back to shelter and rest behind the main line when they're done.

Yes I'd definitely use more thureophoroi or hoplites to beef out your infantry. No Hellenic army ever had an equal ratio of cavalry + skirmishers to infantry.

I'm a bit loath to add more line infantry, it has a tendency to make battles too easy against all but the biggest AI armies. That's why I'm thinking more peltastai, who as medium infantry can flank but won't make the main line even tougher. Or some non-Hellene lighter line infantry.

Unfortunately the other alternative is to reduce my light component which might make things a little too tough. Hmmmm.

[william weedzor]

Cheap mercs units will protect your main line from missiles much better then archers and slingers,also if u fight phalanx u can simply put them into more deep formation and move them forward.Or use them to attack center of the enemy phalanx line.Two things may happen,whole line attack them and this instantly cause victory for you.Or only some units from center and the rest will continue to your lines.This mean two more wings for you to attack,so u can use center of your line as flankers:) Imho best unit for sacrifice purpose are galatian shortswordmen.

About cavalry,when the battle starts rush your cav.skirmishers into nearest wood or just move them away.But this all about personal taste and timing.Ofc u dont have to move them too far away:) Two FMs with heavy cavalry make battles pretty easy,one unt is enough and betwen you and me its waste of slot,because one day they die and their uber unit die with them.So if u experience lack of heavy cavalry hire some real or medium cavalry.

Why stagger the flankers off the centre of the line? Is that the authentic way of deploying them?

Because more flexibilty,because if the enemy engage your whole line they are no more flankers but part of the line and this is not compatibile with idea of flanking enemy by light infantry:).Separated they can charge and broke enemy unit morale,or throw javelines from side.Also if they are separate u can use them to extend your line to twice lenght without touching center and do a proper encirclement.Instant Canae:).And after all they work as reserve if something went wrong.And if the enemy unit attack flank of your main line he will have - to morale from not secured flanks,receive javelin shower from side and must deal with counter-charge.With one solid line none of this happen.

Keep peltastai behind your main line,this is perhaps not most effective place,but it will keep them out of fight and free for any action,help to flank,help for main line and again they can charge and break enemy morale.Especially Thrakian pelt. are great as light infantry.

In short separated lines (as i show) offer way more flexibilty and more control over battlefield.U can concentrate your peltast with one wing of the flankers in the middle of battle,mass them and simply overun and route enemy flank.

Btw im great fan of archers,but having two long range units and two light cavalry in same time is not smart.Especially if u are reasonable guy who wants some fun from game and his army numbers are limited for RP and fun purpose.

[QuintusSertorius]

Cheap mercs units will protect your main line from missiles much better then archers and slingers,also if u fight phalanx u can simply put them into more deep formation and move them forward.Or use them to attack center of the enemy phalanx line.Two things may happen,whole line attack them and this instantly cause victory for you.Or only some units from center and the rest will continue to your lines.This mean two more wings for you to attack,so u can use center of your line as flankers:) Imho best unit for sacrifice purpose are galatian shortswordmen.

I don't really see the merit in this, to be honest, why would the AI target them? Does it simply shoot the guys at the front? If that's the case, I'd prefer they shoot ineffectively at my heavy-armoured front line. Furthermore, slingers out front tend to annihilate their archers and slingers before they can threaten anyone else. That removes any late-flanking threat from light troops on the other side once they've expended their ammo.

Throwing individual units forwards piecemeal tends to result in ragged battles with my line split up into two or even three parts. Given I'm aiming to be outnumbered that's a bad position to be in.

As a general rule, hoplites have a wider frontage than phalangites, meaning the flankers can move around as soon as the lines meet. Followed by the light infantry and cavalry wings. The formation is one that's worked time and again (though with the original AI formations). No "sacrifice" units, low casualties overall is the usual result.

About cavalry,when the battle starts rush your cav.skirmishers into nearest wood or just move them away.But this all about personal taste and timing.Ofc u dont have to move them too far away:) Two FMs with heavy cavalry make battles pretty easy,one unt is enough and betwen you and me its waste of slot,because one day they die and their uber unit die with them.So if u experience lack of heavy cavalry hire some real or medium cavalry.

I didn't mean two FMs and heavy cavalry, but two FMs as my heavy cavalry (no additional units). I haven't lost a single FM (except deliberate suicide of two especially useless ones) yet doing this. They fulfil the role of cheap medium-heavy really well. Plus it means they also occasionally get some good traits from being fighters. They're the point of the spear formed by my skirmishers when they've used up their ammo.

I often find just walking the skirmishers behind their line throwing javelins into the backs of their heavies does the job for morale. Plus lance-armed Curepos actually have a very powerful charge.

Because more flexibilty,because if the enemy engage your whole line they are no more flankers but part of the line and this is not compatibile with idea of flanking enemy by light infantry:).Separated they can charge and broke enemy unit morale,or throw javelines from side.Also if they are separate u can use them to extend your line to twice lenght without touching center and do a proper encirclement.Instant Canae:).And after all they work as reserve if something went wrong.And if the enemy unit attack flank of your main line he will have - to morale from not secured flanks,receive javelin shower from side and must deal with counter-charge.With one solid line none of this happen.

Keep peltastai behind your main line,this is perhaps not most effective place,but it will keep them out of fight and free for any action,help to flank,help for main line and again they can charge and break enemy morale.Especially Thrakian pelt. are great as light infantry.

In short separated lines (as i show) offer way more flexibilty and more control over battlefield.U can concentrate your peltast with one wing of the flankers in the middle of battle,mass them and simply overun and route enemy flank.

Btw im great fan of archers,but having two long range units and two light cavalry in same time is not smart.Especially if u are reasonable guy who wants some fun from game and his army numbers are limited for RP and fun purpose.

As above, the wider frontage of hoplites means against phalanxes the flankers are rarely drawn immediately into the main line. Or if they are, it's against the enemy's flankers, not main line-holders. I'm not convinced staggering the line does anything except delay engaging their flanks. Lacking the armour of Roman troops, breaking their line up like that isn't going to go so well for me.

Peltastai are good flankers or wingers, they're well-armoured enough to hold for ages. I prefer them on either flank rather than together on one, for double-envelopment.

I don't think two long range and two light cavalry are especially abusive. Especially when one of the long-ranged are archers (basically useless against armoured targets), and the cavalry are all light (and not horse archers).

[bobbin]

Line Infantry (6 units):
3 x Classical Hoplites
1 x Thureophoroi
1 x Celto-Hellenic Hoplites
1 x Galatian Wild Men/Karian Warband

Why no Phalangites? AFAIK they were a pretty common occurance in their armies.

[QuintusSertorius]

Why no Phalangites? AFAIK they were a pretty common occurance in their armies.

As I was reading, they were an exception amongst the Successor armies in having no elephants and not making much use of phalangites. The former because of lack of supply, the latter because of low population volumes making it hard to recruit such large bodies from the Hellenes.

[Ludens]

As I was reading, they were an exception amongst the Successor armies in having no elephants and not making much use of phalangites. The former because of lack of supply, the latter because of low population volumes making it hard to recruit such large bodies from the Hellenes.

True, but IIRC that changed once they conquered several Seleucid territories in Asia Minor (and the military settlements therein), as you have done. You also have sufficient wealth to recruit many mercenaries, and access to Ionia and Hellas proper, so recruiting Hellenes is not going to be a problem for you.

In any case: Pergamon starts as a wealthy and influential city-state, but they attempted to transform into a real successor Empire. That would have required a different type of military as well. Phalangites have proven to be a winning model, and in the military settlements you have men trained as such. Why not use them?

[QuintusSertorius]

Naked Galatians messing up the AI is a good point. Kluddolon are a less exploitative replacement.

I'm less convinced with formations geared around making them split their line; again with smaller armies that's asking to be locally outnumbered.

True, but IIRC that changed once they conquered several Seleucid territories in Asia Minor (and the military settlements therein), as you have done. You also have sufficient wealth to recruit many mercenaries, and access to Ionia and Hellas proper, so recruiting Hellenes is not going to be a problem for you.

In any case: Pergamon starts as a wealthy and influential city-state, but they attempted to transform into a real successor Empire. That would have required a different type of military as well. Phalangites have proven to be a winning model, and in the military settlements you have men trained as such. Why not use them?

Hmmm, you might have a point here. Perhaps the expansion should be to add two phalanx units and remove one of the hoplites, so they form the new centre. A couple of levy phalanx units, perhaps? Or perhaps mercenary mediums?

That would give me:

Cavalry (4 units):
2 x Family Members
1 x Gallic Light Cavalry/Thracian Medium Cavalry
1 x Eastern Light Cavalry/Thracian Light Cavalry

Line Infantry (7 units):
2 x Levy Phalanx/Mercenary Medium Phalanx
2 x Classical Hoplites
1 x Thureophoroi
1 x Celto-Hellenic Hoplites
1 x Kluddolon/Karian Warband

Light Infantry (3 units):
1 x Mercenary Kretan Archer
1 x Gallic Slingers
1 x Peltastai/Thracian Peltastai

With the flex if I wanted a bigger army in the either/or of Galatians/Karians and Peltastai/Thracian Peltastai becoming an and.

Deployment thus:

--GalSl
-------------------ClaH----Phal----Phal---ClaH----
GK/KW-----KelH-------------KrA---------------Thur----TPel/Pel
FM---------------------------------------------------FM
GalCav----------------------------------------------ELCav/TLCav

[william weedzor]

I dont get it,why do you keep your cavalry behind and such splited.IF the enemy mass his cavalry on left wing u will still need reorganize your FMs into group or just put them together and move them somewhere forward.Dont tell me only reason for this is your hobby for grouping troops in the battle.Because this is only reasonable answer why you do such thing.

Same for javeliners.Why they are on different side of line?Together they do much better bussines and why they are behind.Again no reason for such deployment,because u will need to move them.

This is not about effectivity of your army,but you have deployment phase to deploy your troops.Such kind of battle formation is only for effect and perhaps look good,but when the battle start u will still move them to better position.So why they can start in better position grouped together by their purpose?Less managament for same performance.

Seriously tell me what happen if u see cavalry massed on one wing?what will u do?U will put them together....fail because u have deployment phase for this....and move them a bit out of your line to have clear field for charge.......again fail because u can do this in deployment phase.Do you get my meaning?Spliting cavalry on each wing and behind everything before the battle even start without knowledge of the enemy deployment is just fail of your deployment stategy.Not big fail,because u have plenty of time to redeploy in battle,but why?And now imagine doing same pointless cavalry move in 50 battles in row.And only because it looks so fine......

Btw did u see many ancient battle plans where is cavalry comfortably hidden BEHIND the flanks?

Chaeronea:Makedonian cavalry is in very left wing and a bit forward.
Issus:Both sides have cavalry on the flanks in same line with first line.
Gaugamela:Try guees where is cavalry:)
Granicus:Yap on the wings

Let jump to future

Cannae:Cavalry on wings
Lake Trasimene: cavalry on wing
Trebia: Both sides have cavalry on wings and bit separated
Zama: Again both sides have cavalry on each wing

No offense mate,but Alexander and Hannibal was battle hardened veterans who know their job and none of them put his cavalry in such sick position:).Btw Hannibal face some not so exactly good and skilled generals and even this guyz put their cavalry in right place where cavalry have to be.