Javelins are a bit of a shock for an MTW vet

**TexRoadkill** · 09-13-2004, 23:45

The Skirmishers are pretty weak on a frontal attack but the other Roman Inf do much more damage. Just get them close and set to Fire at Will like he mentioned. They will usually kill about 1 enemy per 10 javelins on each volley.

**Aymar de Bois Mauri** · 09-14-2004, 01:51

Red Harvest & TexRoadkill:

Ok, guys. Thanks. I'll try it like that.

**Kraxis** · 09-14-2004, 22:01

Come on guys... The pila was effective, but it wasn't an ancient machinegun. It probably kill a few, but not really many.

Since the Imperial/Marian army carried one pilum as opposed to the two of the Republican/Manipular army, there must have been some consideration into the effectiveness of the pilum at actual killing.
The adopted tactic for the Imperial troops was simple. Advance in silence, halt, let enemy scream and yell, throw pilum and right away scream warcry and rush at them (possibly at the same time).
The result would be the enemies would have to raise their shields to cover themselves (only a fool would think his luck was great enough to avoid getting hit). A highly raised longshield, such as the gaullish scutum or any other large shield, would impair the vision to the front. So the result would be that the enemies would not be able to see the Romans advance, coupled with the warcry and the impact of the charge on a foe still reeling from a heavy javelin attack... Well imagine yourself.
Anybody actually killed would just be a benefit, and any shield struck would help the Romans in the melee.

Of course this is largely my oppinion, but I think it is fair.

With regards to the 'loadingspeed' of the skirmishers... It is far too long. How long can it take to pull a javelin back to throw it? And for how long would you aim it at a big bunch of enemies? Load-aim-launch should take no more than 1-1.5 seconds from a previously unengaged situation. After the first volley it should be slightly longer (it will take time to get the fingers into the throwingstraps).

**Orda Khan** · 09-14-2004, 23:29

Very true Kraxis...
As I posted earlier, I am happy enough with the javelins and it really depends how you use them anyway. They certainly do not dessimate the enemy and neither should they. It must be said though, by cunningly targetting one enemy unit with 2 javelin units they can seriously reduce the combat efficiency of the unit they hit. If you get them in the flank or rear you can almost half them. I think their major function would be as a morale sapping unit.

I find it strange that Cretan archers can achieve kills of 100+ in most of the battles I've tried. I had one unit that amassed 197 kills yet Archer Warbands managed between 6 and 41 kills by comparison. This timeframe is not my speciality but were the archers of Crete so superior?

........Orda

**Kraxis** · 09-14-2004, 23:47

Originally Posted by Orda Khan

Very true Kraxis...
As I posted earlier, I am happy enough with the javelins and it really depends how you use them anyway. They certainly do not dessimate the enemy and neither should they. It must be said though, by cunningly targetting one enemy unit with 2 javelin units they can seriously reduce the combat efficiency of the unit they hit. If you get them in the flank or rear you can almost half them. I think their major function would be as a morale sapping unit.

Moralesapping... No, they shouldn't be intended like that. How fast don't they run out of ammo? How short isn't their range? They are far from effective in that department. If that is how they are intended to be used, I expect them to be very neglected. It is not that I either hope or expect them to be superkillers (if they ever were we would have seen many more of them in the ancient battles), but they are right now not very fitting to the fast gamplay that is the game. Faster reload and better skirmish AI would go a long way towards making them better. More kills nahh... not really.

I find it strange that Cretan archers can achieve kills of 100+ in most of the battles I've tried. I had one unit that amassed 197 kills yet Archer Warbands managed between 6 and 41 kills by comparison. This timeframe is not my speciality but were the archers of Crete so superior?

........Orda

Yes, they were very superior archers. Born, bred and living for archery, they were possibly the best archers in the ancient world.
The reason for their many kills is quite simple. You must have noticed that they have a ranged value of 10 while normal archers have 5 and the best javelineers we know of as yet (skirmishers warband) have 9... So they were significantly better than any other archerunit and even better than the best javelinnerunit we know of. Further they are not impossible in a melee either.
While we can discuss if it is warrented for them to be that good, I think we should be happy that the ranged units can have different ranged strengths. It leaves great prospects for MODs and we will not even in the normal game happen to be in a situation where we have thrown a lot of money into a unit only to see it lose out in a ranged fight with basic archers. Now superior archers are just that... And I love that.

**Red Harvest** · 09-15-2004, 02:22

Note: decimate = reducing by 10%. I believe it comes from a Roman punishment for cowardice/poor performance by a unit where 1 out of every 10 men was selected by lot and killed (by the remaining men.) That is the root of the word, although it has taken on a newer connotation of being nearly destroyed.

So the pila do indeed decimate in the traditional sense from what I have seen (about 10% losses), but they do not cause tremendous losses.

**Kraxis** · 09-15-2004, 02:45

Yup, decimate = 10% loss.

The first recorded incident of a decimation was actually Alexander the Great around the time he had Parminion killed. He suspected the troops might rebel and thus decimated them (not the entire army though only the worst units).

The Roman decimation meant that the remaining 9 guys had to club the 10th to death. Afterwards they had to camp outside the campwalls and live off barley not wheat. A rather nasty punishment.

**KyodaiSteeleye** · 09-15-2004, 14:05

Pilum - my understanding of its usage was more that it disrupted enemy formatons before a charge - the barbed head would dig into enemy shields, and the long neck was quite weak, and so easily bent, meaning the pilum was very hard to extract from your shield. You obviously can't use a shield if you've got a javelin sticking out of it, so you discard it.

So - pilum volley lodges in front rank of phalanx or shield-wall - warriors have to discard their shields - ergo, defensive formation has been disrupted and weakened for your follow-up charge with short sword and shield.

Unfortunately, guess this is kinda hard to recreate in TW.

**TinCow** · 09-15-2004, 16:02

Originally Posted by KyodaiSteeleye

Pilum - my understanding of its usage was more that it disrupted enemy formatons before a charge - the barbed head would dig into enemy shields, and the long neck was quite weak, and so easily bent, meaning the pilum was very hard to extract from your shield. You obviously can't use a shield if you've got a javelin sticking out of it, so you discard it.

So - pilum volley lodges in front rank of phalanx or shield-wall - warriors have to discard their shields - ergo, defensive formation has been disrupted and weakened for your follow-up charge with short sword and shield.

Unfortunately, guess this is kinda hard to recreate in TW.

That is exactly my understanding of their use as well. They were single-use anti-shield weapons. The head bent easily to prevent them from being thrown back and the added weight would make it very difficult to continue using the shield. Of course, they would be more lethal against unshielded enemies and I have also read reports that it was common for the pilum to go through the shield and the arm behind the shield. This would have essentially put the enemy out of the fight.

Also, in re: the Roman 'warcry' I believe it was held until after the pilum was thrown. Goldsworthy claims that while almost every army screamed and shouted warcries to frighten and intimidate their enemy, the Roman Legions were even more frightening in their silence. When nearly every other military force at the time was a disorganized mob of screaming warriors, the stark contrast of the extremely disciplined, silent Legion marching right into battle must have been very discouraging. Typically, the Romans would remain in perfect formation, advancing slowly and in complete order... armor and shields providing a formidable spectacle. When they were within range, this would be followed by a short pause, a pila volley, and then the Legions would shout loudly and charge right at the enemy. Goldsworthy claims this was often enough to rout the enemy instantly or after a very brief contact.

Such iron discipline in an age of disorder would certainly have been a frightful spectacle for an opposing force.

**Barkhorn1x** · 09-15-2004, 17:19

Originally Posted by TinCow

Such iron discipline in an age of disorder would certainly have been a frightful spectacle for an opposing force.

Disciplined troops are ALWAYS frightening to a mob. The principle remains true to this day.

Barkhorn.
(awaiting the release).

**Kraxis** · 09-16-2004, 16:00

TinCow... Nice... But I have already been there (the pilum-cry-charge issue).

The pilum wasn't designed to eliminate shields, they were meant to kill. A small barbed head on a slim long neck of a heavy javelin has a good chance of punching through the shield and it might reach the body of the target. That is what the idea was behind it, at least that is what I believe.
That the same properties resulted in useless shields, well the Romans could only rub their hands and say they had found a perfect solution. But it wasn't as if they set out to create the perfect antishield weapon.
But the impact of these weapons coupled with a furious charge of screaming men who had previously been silent (when the target had been screaming). Well, the result isn't exactly surprising.

**Oleander Ardens** · 09-19-2004, 16:39

About the origin of the pilum

I was recently able to bring some light into the origin of this famous weapon, thanks to some reading in italian collections of the "italic people". Seems that it made it's first appearence in the Romagna in the VI century BC, although weapons with a long Iron shaft have been in use as heavy javelins since the V century in Northern Italy.

Most italic (Veneti, Umbri, Romani) and non-italic people (Raetii, Celti) adopted such weapons rather fast, for example pilas are found regulary in Celtic graves in eastern Italy (Adria) since the III century. So at least some Celts fighting at Telamon should be depicted with Pila...

Cheers

OA