Just for fun: How would the different EB factions fare against AoMs "Myth Units"?
I'm sure most of you have heard of the old spiritual successor to Age of Empires and Age of Empires II called Age of Mythology, but for those who haven't, here's the Wikipedia article...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Mythology
Anyway, my younger brother's been playing this game alot lately and at the same time, I've been playing EB and naturally, my fiercly over-active imagination just can't resist putting the two together, which results in me wondering how realistic ancient armies (as opposed to the downright ridiculous depiction of them you get in AoM) would fare against the "Myth Units" from that game (which range from cyclopses to dragons) and how such armies might adapt to fight such foes (much as the Romans adapted to fight the elephants of Carthage). For me, this sort of thing, wacky as it is, is an oppertunity to examine unique tactical situations and think about the armies fielded by our ancient ancestors in entirely new and oftentimes unexpected ways. However, that said, feel free to pass over this thread if you feel it's too trivial and stupid to bother with, but for those still interested, here's a list of the Myth Units from the four factions in that game...
http://aom.heavengames.com/gameinfo/units/greek/myth
http://aom.heavengames.com/gameinfo/units/egyptian/myth
http://aom.heavengames.com/gameinfo/units/norse/myth
http://aom.heavengames.com/gameinfo/...its/mythunits/
As you can see, the above lists have an enormous variety of units, but they tend to be very large (generally ranging in size from just larger than a human to absolutely ludicrous size), very powerful, very scary and few in number, which is why I drew the earlier comparison to elephants. Some of these units fight in close combat, whilst others use bows, spears or even ballista-grade quills. Most can be killed with normal human weapons, but some would require siege equippment or a whole lot of ingenuity to take down. Since there is a lot of territory to cover, I'll start with some general observations...
Hellenic phalanx armies (Makedon, Selukia, etc.) vs close combat myth units:
How easily a given myth unit can be dealt with by a phalanx-based army really depends entirely on the size and capabilities of the unit in question. Against smaller units like Minotaurs and Einherjars, a bristling wall of sarissias will likely keep them at bay as surely as they would any human, but the larger myth units (such as the Hydra and the Mountain Giant) are going to be able to rip the phalanx to shreads from outside of sarissia range (or even sidestep the formation entirely, which would of course be a tactic open to any myth unit just as it is with any human army) or else crash straight through it, relying on its heavy armour to fend off the heads and its weight to crush the shafts (Behemoth, Scarab, Battle Boar). Against such foes, effective use of the peltastai would be essential, with a steady hail of javelins likely being key to taking down a hydra just as much as an elephant.
One of the more, perhaps, more interesting wildcards in this equation, though, is the Anubite, which has the capability to make absolutely ridiculous leaps and could easily clear an entire phalanx wall and come down on the heads of the first couple of rows of men, hacking through helment and linothorax with its scythed (and therefore armour piercing) blades. One possible defence I can think of against this would be to have the sixth and further lines of the phalanx lower their spears further than they ordinarilly do, providing the front rows with an "umbrella" against such leaping attacks.
Sauromatae vs Centaurs and Colossi:
It occurs to me that a missile exchange with Centaurs would be pretty much just another day at the office for the average Sauro horse archer who is used to fighting Scythians, as a single Centaur from AoM is pretty much an unarmoured horse archer in one being. It's possible the co-ordination of a given Centaur is going to be better than that of a horse archer, but weak Centaur leadership (they are known in myth and tale as being vagabonds and troublemakers, not a cohesive fighting force) and the existance of armoured Sauro would probably make up for that.
As for Colossi, I picked the Sauros to talk about fighting these things because they are, I reckon, in the best shape to simply up-stakes and get the Hell out of the way when a Colussus comes knocking (whereas one could level a Roman or Greek city in hours), giving them time to devise a plan to get rid of it (such as the classic pitfall trap, luring the thing into an unstable pass and hitting it with boulders , etc.). Indeed, even though the attacks would be ineffective against the metallic monster, the mental image of Sauro horse archers giving a colossus the (literal and figurative) run-around, perhaps to confuse or lure it, is quite a cathartic one.
Well, due to intervening circumstances, I'm afraid that's all I have time for at the moment. If you can stomach the concept, then please, feel free to share your thoughts.
Reply With Quote
this will goin to be a tough Challange! Maybe EBNOM can become EB NOM NOM NOM with addition of these creatures (should we made them into Greco-Roman myth units?)
From Frontline for fixing siege towers of death
x30 From mikepettytw for showing how to edit in game text.
From Brennus for wit.
Originally Posted by Fluvius Camillus
Bookmarks