Spear and pike units with good defense values, especially with bonuses against cavalry should not have high charge bonuses. These units deployed in tight formation and if they charged this would disrupt their own formation which would spread out the forest of spear-points and negate their defense against cavalry. Hopefully someone can mod/patch/change it in an expansion.
Provided discipline was maintained, a unit euiped with spears or pikes was very powerful on the charge. It would be like a moving wall of spikes.
Obviously if discipline, training or the terrain was bad, this wouldnt work.
Hmmm... You both have a point.
I think it is ok right now, but I would not object if a spear/pike unit had its charge be low at Valour 0, and then just like with attack and defence, it grew with each Valour until it reached its current value.
Starting at a point 4 lower than now would be fitting, so that in MP game you could only get the full charge if you gave it full Valour.
------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
Spears/pikes are only effective in tight formation. This renders them fairly immobile. This is why the Greek phalanx was defeated by the Roman legion. Nowhere in history is it recorded that spear/pike units charged. A charge is running at full-tilt, it is imposible to keep a tight formation doing so. Spears shouldn`t beeffective against cavalry unless the spear is ``set`` or brced in the ground. But this would probably be too tough to impement in the game. Spear-armed units that have a more fluid type of attack are referred to as auxillia by wargamers in deference to the troops used by Rome when the tight legion formation was disrupted by the dense forests of Germany.
Spears/pikes are only effective in tight formation. This renders them fairly immobile. This is why the Greek phalanx was defeated by the Roman legion. Nowhere in history is it recorded that spear/pike units charged. A charge is running at full-tilt, it is imposible to keep a tight formation doing so. Spears shouldn`t be effective against cavalry unless the spear is ``set`` or braced in the ground. But this would probably be too tough to impement in the game. Spear-armed units that have a more fluid type of attack are referred to as auxillia by wargamers in deference to the troops used by Rome when the tight legion formation was disrupted by the dense forests of Germany.
The Swiss did charge, and were quite successful at it might I say.
So it is not all that wrong...
------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
Perhaps a solution would be to split the current spear-armed units into those with long spears used in a defensive fashion and those with shorter spears that are used overhead and thrusted which would have haigh charge value but poorer defense and poorer bonuses against cavalry.
Swiss pikemen were renowned for their speed of movement. Alexander's pikemen were pretty nippy too.
The game mechanism reflects the loss of effectivenes of spears and pikes as their formation breaks up. But if they stay togehter, it seems reasonable that a solid wall of spears and shields should have a considerable impact.
Charged with what, Halberds or two-handed swords? The Pike-armed unit`s success was when cavalry charged into them. Even so cavalry lances lengthened which permitted Polish Hussars to break infantry squares (infantry armed with pikes BRACED for a cavalry charge).
Alexander`s heirs were defeated by the mobile and flexible Roman legion. Throw pilum, push away pike with gladius, get between pike, hack away. Imagine if the soldiers in the phalanx were farther apart from each other because they were running as fast as they can. Once the pike missed the target it`s curtains for the pikeman.
That`s another thing, spears and pikes should be very slow moving units if they are to keep their formation. If a spearman is running with a spear held over his head he should be clobbered by a knight on a huge galloping horse with his lance couched. The stirrup is what helped cavalry transmit the impetus of their mount to their weapon. The anti-cavalry benefits of the pike is similar to the philosophy of Judo: use your enemy`s strength against him. The pike had to be set/braced/implanted in the ground to be effective against cavalry.
Beavis, the Legions won against the Macedon Phalanx because they were actually losing in the beginning, then the Macedonians began to advance and crossed over rugged terrain, where their formation was broken up (hard to stay in formation over rugged terrain).
The better than rabble Legions rallied and attacked the now vulnerable Macedonians.
So it has nothing to do with them breaking up in charges. They did it and nearly won, but the Romans were more disciplined than they had expected.
------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
Your source didn`t say a Macedonian phalanx charge made the Romans retreat, did it? Your last post supports the points I`m trying to make:
1. A charge is running at your enemy full speed (hard to stay in formation when you`re running as fast as you can).
2. This act inevitably loosens your formation
3. A loose formation of spears is useless against cavalry.
BTW my source has it that the Romans easily outflanked the phalanx and defeated it before the cumbersome pikes could be reoriented.
Like I said, perhaps there should be two types of spear units one armed with shorter spear and used in an overhand fashion like a javelin and be more offensive (ie the auxillia) and the other type should be more defensive, limited to tight formation, slow, but have anti-cavalry benefits.
[This message has been edited by Beavis (edited 09-12-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Beavis (edited 09-12-2002).]
Almost all the sources I have read, seen or heard about, including the description from a centurion, has the Macedonians doing very well until their advance (not charge) had them come over the rugged terrain.
They loosened up a bit and had to reform before they could turn (since they worked in something comparable to squares they could actually turn quite fast). Also, the terrain opened the formation in between the individual units. That way the Romans managed to outflank them easily.
It was not the Macedonian charge that opened their formation...
How do you think the Romans got heir 5000 losses in that battle? Not from running around cutting down routed Macedonians. And we all know that the Romans were far better equipped to do close combat. So at some point they had to engage the Macedonians head on, or else those casualties would never have amounted to that.
The Romans were used to fight the enemy head on. They did this against the Etruskans and the Cathagenians (with obvious results). They contiued to rely on the Legionaires superiority in combat and let the cavalry do the outflanking bussiness.
------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
There were 2 battles of "Classical" Roman pila/sword armed infantry vs Pike - Oydna and Cynocephalae.
At Cynocephalae the Macedonians were in 2 groups - the left group was caught before it was properly formed and routed - it was some way behind teh right group, and an unknown Roman Tribune ordered 20 maniples to attack the right group in the rear.
The Right group had been pushing teh Romans back until then with no great problems.
At Pydna there was simply a head-to-head pushing match, and the Romans again were bewing pushed back. However after a while the Macedonian pike formations began to lose cohesino because some troops advanced further than otehrs. This enabled the Romans to get past the pikes, and again, it was all over from there.
So it was a matter of cohesion and discipline for both sides.
Earlier battles vs Pike (such as vs Phyrrus) occured when the Roman army was more equipped with spear than Pilum.
Quote Originally posted by Beavis:
Alexander`s heirs were defeated by the mobile and flexible Roman legion. Throw pilum, push away pike with gladius, get between pike, hack away. Imagine if the soldiers in the phalanx were farther apart from each other because they were running as fast as they can. Once the pike missed the target it`s curtains for the pikeman.[/QUOTE]
Nope, totally wrong. You forget that the phalanx was so deep with the very long pikes that each Roman on the front line had up to six pike points facing him. Avoid one, you still have 5 to go before you can even get into sword range. Face to face, Roman legions took terrible losses - at that point of the battle.
But what the legion was able to do was exploit the unwieldyness of pike formations. If they didn't stay aligned, the Romans would surge around them, got on their flanks where they could do nothing - can't turn 20 foot spears around to the side in a deep formation - and just tear them up. Especially over rough or uneven terrain it was difficult to keep the phalanx aligned so that flanks were protected.
But even for the Romans, facing a Macedonian phalanx face to face was a terrible experience.
Grifman
The Romans themselves credited their victory over the Macedonian Phalanx, not with their superior Maniples (this was before the armies' reforms), but with their ability to out attrition the enemy. It was Rome's ability to field legion after legion that beat the phalanx.
This is even where we get the saying "Pyrrhic Victory". When Pyrrhus, King of Epirus stated those famous words after a victory dearly bought at Asculum, "Another such victory over the Romans and we are undone."
As far as the Swiss goes, "the push of the pike" was something few could match, both psychologically, and effectively.
"There is a true glory and a true honor; the glory in duty done and the honor in the integrity of principle."
"The truth is this; the march of Providence so long, that of the individual so brief, that we often only see the ebb of the advancing wave. It is history which teaches us to hope."
Ahhh... good to see this is settled.
But still I would not mind if the spear/pike units had to build up their charge through Valours.
It makes sense doesn't it?
------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
In the "Historical mod" I am making, spears had their charge value reduced to 1, I think that at any time, heavy infantry with spear and large shields in close formation were basically defensive units, charging would be for them very difficult, disrupting their formation. Instead, pikemen have a very high charge value, as longjohn said, Swiss pikmen were well known for their speed and running charges, sometimes literally overrunning the enemy, like in Novara (1513).
The difference between those units is the large shield, that embarassed any fast movement.
in the game, if you charge over too great a distance your unit will become "broken up" so you'll lose your formation bonus. if you keep your unit tight until the last minute charge, your formation wouldn't break so you get a bonus.
we're not talking about 500 feet runs here.
itj, you bring forth the best point.
When you said it I wonder why I didn't say it myself. The charge will literally run out and have almost no effect in the fight.
------------------
BTW, Danish Crusades are true to history.
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
You may not care about war, but war cares about you!
I have reduced the charging speed of hvy inf as well, but at the same time I have increased their defence, making them basically defensive units, the wall of shields
PAF
Lional of Cornwall
proud member of the Round Table Knights
___________________________________
Death before dishonour.
"If you wish to weaken the enemy's sword, move first, fly in and cut!" - Ueshiba Morihei O-Sensei
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks