Quote Originally Posted by faisal
thanks for the info guys really informative posts

I also have another gripe about the game, it may be for balance, but the triarii should be a bit tougher than the carthaginian poeni infantry, i mean historically carthaginian citizenry were very unreliable and Carthage had to rely on mercenaries for their military, yet in the game they seem to be tougher than roman units (ie triarii who are the most experienced in the legion prior to the marian reforms).
I disagree on both counts. If you test the demo units one on one, the 60 man Poeni are crushed by 100 man Triarii. The problem is the size of the units. A 60 man phalanx does not make much historical sense to begin with since it needs to have deep ranks. Comparing 100 man to 100 man the Triarii are narrowly beaten. The phalanx arms are probably more appropriate for this kind of match up so the Triarii have an inherent disadvantage. With maneuver allowed, the phalanx will lose to the Triarii.

Hastati and Principes go down more easily in head to head with 100 man units on each side, but they should since they are not properly armed for the *front* of a spear wall. However, when you start using multiple units, the Hastati and Principes can force openings in a phalanx wall allowing other units into the rear. Or they can hit the flanks. In those cases the phalanx rolls up. It comes down to the way you use them.

From what I've read, phalanx usually failed for reasons such as terrain or maneuver, rather than because the troops/equipment were inferior in a head on match up. The advantage or the Roman units and system was flexibility. They had fewer major inherent weaknesses. Hannibal's phalanx were usually greatly out numbered, yet they held for the most part. If they were instead inferior, they should have crumpled rapidly under the masses of the legions they faced. Hannibal used them to crush the legions at Cannae (again on the flanks as the enveloping force.) One of the things that could be different in the game engine is that a phalanx should probably take very few casualties--until it becomes disordered, is flanked, or breaks due to morale. Once something like that happens it would be taken out rapidly and offer little resistance. Unless a phalanx broke it lost relatively few men facing other infantry. However, the nature of the game engine is for a head to head match to slowly grind down each side.

A sort of phalanx was even used by William Wallace and other Scots much later. It was highly effective in a fixed battle, but it was very vulnerable to archers and being outflanked.

If someone has a better grasp of all this, please step in and give us more detail. I've been trying to get myself up to speed on all this. So I've been re-reading info about phalanx use.