What's the point in elite units?

[The Stranger]

i could do with swordsmen vs swordsmen, i doubt it would change alot. there is no clear elites are not or are worth it answer. some are, some arent. some regulars/levies are overpriced and some are extremely underpriced (most notably the roman and hellenic ones)

tried 2 kluddargos vs 3 galatikoi klerouchoi.

the klerouchoi got completely massacred, alot worse than the hoplites for some reason. The kluddargos just chewed through them. i dont know why because their shield and armour stats are similar to the hoplites.

i clicked away the result before i could write it down, but it was like 25% lost for the kluddargos and over 70% for the klerouchoi. I think 2 kluddargos could take on 5 klerouchoi easily. and klerouchoi have good stats.

i guess this is more about armour piercing being really good than elites though. but the other sword elites often have a spear as secondary weapon which makes them less effective imo because they switch to the spear in close combat, oddly enough.

2 cordinau orca vs 3 klerouchoi was pretty close, if the cordinau attacked they lost, if they defended they won. both pretty close.

[moonburn]

the orcas are unbeatable in a wall they can take on an entire army

in a street nobady can pass by them may them be hetaroi romans or most incredably they pinned down my elephant squad and made the elephants rout ... i mean they went amok 1st and then routed on my epirote campaign ofc they where tired already and had been pelted by a few machinegun towers but still those cordinau scordiscii are trully the toughest of the toughest warriors i´ve ever seen

never saw them against rompharoi but could be fun

[d'Arthez]

There are simply too many variables to consider. It is not like these isolated Tests prove much. For every unit is part of the battle. Maybe the two units of regulars would beat the elite in two-on-one-combat. Sure. However, how does that impact on the battle-lines? If that would leave a massive hole on one of the flanks, the two units might return to a decimated army by the time they are done with beating the elite. Alternatively if an elite unit takes on the center of your line, that may create space on the flanks for the enemy cavalry.

The battle engine also plays its part. An experienced Pahlava / Sakae player can decimate a full stack of elite phalanx units. They'll lose the battle, simply because they might have to retreat since they are all out of arrows, despite wiping out 50% of the enemy army or run out of time. A loss without casualties is hardly a loss in most cases.

Then of course there is the issue of counters. A single unit of Gaesatae is easily countered by two units of anything that offer missile fire. However, the other (possibly 19) units determine how effectively those Gaesatae can be shielded from those counters, and thus greatly enhance or inhibit the potential of the Gaesatae to inflict mayhem. In the occasional campaign with the Gallic factions, I don't use them as front line troops, I use them as support troops because they have the fear effect, and can really make a difference to enemy morale. On average I lose about 3-4 soldiers per battle (per unit of Gaesatae), and I play on huge.

Problem is of course that it is not easy to determine the effectiveness of a stack. Sure, we know that a stack of 20 units of Pantodapoi won't get you far, but it is less clear how much staying power a more balanced stack has, as each unit will have its own specialised role on the battlefield. While the army Quintus uses in Magna Graecia is effective there, it is a fair assumption that it would struggle to last long in horse-archer country, even though unit replenishment is not much of a problem in the Crimea.

Sometimes space is scarce (for example bridge battles and sieges). Then you might be better of having the concentrated power of elites. Other times, space is abundant, or formations are so favourable that you don't even need the elites. If you have a few units of sphendetorai or toxotai on top of a steep hill, they'll decimate the Cretan Archers before they can even get into firing range. However, you cannot count on having advantageous terrain, unless you have established a defensive chokepoint for you to exploit.

It is a bit like chess. It is not about creating big threats that can easily be parried. It is about creating weaknesses in the opposition's position, and creating threats that increasingly stretch the oppositions defences, until (simple) threats cannot be parried anymore. Even the seemingly most secure position may have a weakness, that can be ruthlessly exploited. Elites may help in creating a multitude of threats / defences, that regular units cannot counter or exploit effectively.

[The Stranger]

There are simply too many variables to consider. It is not like these isolated Tests prove much. For every unit is part of the battle. Maybe the two units of regulars would beat the elite in two-on-one-combat. Sure. However, how does that impact on the battle-lines? If that would leave a massive hole on one of the flanks, the two units might return to a decimated army by the time they are done with beating the elite. Alternatively if an elite unit takes on the center of your line, that may create space on the flanks for the enemy cavalry.

Thats true, but I'm trying to show that atleast some elites can hold their own vs regulars or levies in a two-on-one-combat. And that even when they lose, they don't lose as hard as some people think.

Problem is of course that it is not easy to determine the effectiveness of a stack. Sure, we know that a stack of 20 units of Pantodapoi won't get you far, but it is less clear how much staying power a more balanced stack has, as each unit will have its own specialised role on the battlefield. While the army Quintus uses in Magna Graecia is effective there, it is a fair assumption that it would struggle to last long in horse-archer country, even though unit replenishment is not much of a problem in the Crimea.

Sometimes space is scarce (for example bridge battles and sieges). Then you might be better of having the concentrated power of elites. Other times, space is abundant, or formations are so favourable that you don't even need the elites. If you have a few units of sphendetorai or toxotai on top of a steep hill, they'll decimate the Cretan Archers before they can even get into firing range. However, you cannot count on having advantageous terrain, unless you have established a defensive chokepoint for you to exploit.

yup, roles are important, and i think some roles suit elites better, simply for the nature of the unit, they pack more power in a tighter space, and they have more morale so can keep fighting in situations where other units would rout.

It is a bit like chess. It is not about creating big threats that can easily be parried. It is about creating weaknesses in the opposition's position, and creating threats that increasingly stretch the oppositions defences, until (simple) threats cannot be parried anymore. Even the seemingly most secure position may have a weakness, that can be ruthlessly exploited. Elites may help in creating a multitude of threats / defences, that regular units cannot counter or exploit effectively.

there is no decisive answer, context matters as you say, and ofcourse each elite and each regular is different. but atleast for me its clear that while some elites may be less cost-effective and would lose to the ratio-balanced equivalent of regulars, the difference isnt very big. And some are more cost-effective, but again if they win vs the regulars, the difference isn't that big. And still i think that in chokes, elites can pull of stuff you can never do with regulars or levys, no matter how many you have.

[QuintusSertorius]

While the army Quintus uses in Magna Graecia is effective there, it is a fair assumption that it would struggle to last long in horse-archer country, even though unit replenishment is not much of a problem in the Crimea.

I did find an effective counter-horse-archer army, without having to recruit horse archers myself. It was still one easily replenished with mercs/regionals. It comprised 2x Hoplitai, 2x Thureophoroi, 2x Thraikioi Peltastai, 1x Kretan Archers, 1x Bosporan Heavy Archers, 1x Scythian Foot Archers, 2x Family Members and 2x Thraikioi Prodromoi for cavalry.

Heavily armoured enough that the horse archer's bows have little impact, with enough longer-ranged archery to decimate the unarmoured horse archers. Plus FMs and Prodromoi to hunt down any horse archers who come too close/charge when out of ammo.

[The Stranger]

the ai is unable to use any missile units properly so its fine. i usually just recruit mass phalanx and autoresolve. but with that army vs a player, i doubt you will do well. you have too few units that can stand up to a charge of a heavy cavalry archer unit such as the FM of saka rauka or sarmatians.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Against the AI, I find a sensible mix of Klerouchoi & Pantodapoi phalangitai is actually very effective when backed up with some heavy cavalry and plenty of missile units of your own.

Some careful maneouvering allows you to create a "crescent" (with plenty of gaps, mind you) of phalanx moving around. The AI will be largely preoccupied with the mass of pikes and spend its arrows on them, but the Klerouchoi are relatively well armoured enough to survive the worst of it and easily replenished anyway. The pantodapoi are useful as moderately armoured axemen that can stand up to most cavalry and medium infantry, even when flanked.

The heavy cavalry must deal with the enemy general, and as the AS you get what is arguably the best cavalry for that job as part of your FM bodyguard forces (Hetairoi). The masses of missile units are there to whittle down the enemy, and again easily replaced.

You'll suffer losses, but you should be able to replenish them fairly easily and also fairly cheaply. Also, you can essentially replace all of these units with the local mercenaries which means a two-stack army can hold out for quite some time.

Ironically, though, this army would never work without its elite component: the heavy cavalry. It's extremely doubtful that you would get lucky enough to see all enemy generals die quickly as opposed to a protracted melee while they attempt to hack their way through your infantry. And to avoid the worst of that, or at least speed up the melee significantly and reduce casualties on your side you need EB's most versatile elite cavalry: the hetairoi. Fast enough, good stammina (and they'll need it), vicious in a melee, with a good shock impact, and crucially: their effect remains even when their unit is downsized. Even in your small 30 men unit configurations, they continue to be simply the most reliable tool to open up and tear apart those 70 men cataphract units that the AI gets for bodyguards while still being fast and resilient enough to chase down light horse archers.

[The Stranger]

hetairoi are really nice, but the sarmatian FM are the best. too bad that their overal campaign is a bit dull. parthia is a good 2nd, but once you get the hang of it, theyre also pretty easy :P in the end ive always liked AS the best