Phalanx bug

[Antalis::]

Well the phalanx units are really nice, BUT they have a serious problem:

Very often when they are fighting they are walking continiously to the side: To the right side.
So if you want to defend a gate as example, they often will let the enemy in after a short time of fighting!

Why can´t they stick at the position where they were at the beginning of the fight?

[Ellesthyan]

Try setting of guard mode, when I do that they stop drifting and start fighting

[Magraev]

The right-step is a feature and not a bug. It seems this is historically accurate - they actually did sidestep (to stay behind the shield of the guy to theis right in the phalanx). To solve keep two units - one in front of the gate and the other behind and to the right to "pick up the slack".

On the other hand it seems a bit silly, that the phalanx will eventually be facing the wall next to the gate rather than the gate itself...

[The_Emperor]

This has been said many times and this is not a bug but a feature...

Historically a man in a Phalanx would be trying to get protection from the shield of the man to his right from missiles, so a Phalanx did have a natural tendancy to slide to the right as men bunched up.

This also helps explain why in ancient warfare a tradition was developed (from classical times) that the best units were always placed on the right, this is because in Hoplite warfare they would see combat with the enemy first.

[hoom]

A welcome historical feature yes, but like several others an overdone one.
30seconds & most of your phalanx is standing around doing nothing while the legion that hit you head on is rolling up your left flank

[The_Emperor]

True but thats only if you don't use the Phalanx with any other unit covering the flanks.

Also when your Phalanx sidesteps too far, it sometimes pays to move them into standard formation to continue the fight... Hoplites seem to be ok at this. You can always reform the Phalanx when your men are properly facing the enemy.

[R'as al Ghul]

The phalanx needs micromanaging like HA did in MTW.
But they respond quite good and seem to profit from rearrangements
during melee. This sounds odd, because in MTW it would be the safe death
of your unit.
What I occasionally do is to change/rotate the facing of the phalanx via "," and "." keys. The phalanx erects their spears (dissolves the phalanx), wheels around rather fast and puts the spears down again. If you're engaged in melee with cav , your phalanx will often crush those horses in the middle of the phalanx (that have jumped over) during this procedure. At the end of this your phalanx will be positioned better and grind down the last cav in front of you.
As the Emperor said, turning the phalanx off is a good option when already in melee and the enemy is closer than a spears length or when the enemy has disturbed your phalanx. No point in keeping the phalanx mode when it's already disordered. Switch to standard formation, wait a while and switch back to phalanx.

R'as


This phalanx-thread explains it all

[LittleRaven]

I don't know if it's a bug or a feature, and honestly I don't really care. Right now, it's baggage the Phalanx doesn't need.

Speed is king in Rome. Flanking and charge bonuses so outpace everything else that it's already very, very hard to use infantry tactics effectively. No unit suffers from this more than the Phalanx. Slow to move, slow to turn, and very vulnerable from anything but the front, the Phalanx is the most vulnerable unit on the battlefield. Cavarly crush them. Archers rape them. Even other infantry units engaged from the front tend to bleed around the side and inflict hurt, because as currently implemented, the Phalanx is a defensive tool that doesn't serve as an offensive meatgrinder.

The deck is already massively stacked against the Phalanx. Their only hope is careful positioning. Is it really fair to take even that away from them via 'drift?'

[Red Harvest]

The drift is certainly too fast when it gets going. Every third step or so is to the right. It seems to happen worse in guard mode when they are less likely to engage when ordered. I use the "march through" attack with my phalanx so I don't have much trouble with it.

Kraxis has said he is not sure that the historical interpretation of phalanx drift to the right is accurate. A lot has been written saying it happened but from what he has read, he doesn't think it happened during actual engagement. I'm still sitting on the fence, however, the combination of shield effect, and the spear position would tend to force one to move a little to the right to engage and defend.) I don't think it fits with the character of RTW battles, so it should be either slowed dramatically, or eliminated.

[Mori Gabriel Syme]

Kraxis has said he is not sure that the historical interpretation of phalanx drift to the right is accurate. A lot has been written saying it happened but from what he has read, he doesn't think it happened during actual engagement. I'm still sitting on the fence, however, the combination of shield effect, and the spear position would tend to force one to move a little to the right to engage and defend.) I don't think it fits with the character of RTW battles, so it should be either slowed dramatically, or eliminated.

As I've understood it from my reading, it tended to happen most extremely while engaging another phalanx. It would happen to some extent while engaging troops with missles, including the pilum, but engaging troops weilding swords wouldn't cause such defensive worries that you would be shifting so far to the right. When engaging troops whose spears are just as long as yours would be a different matter; being impaled would be a constant worry for both sides.

[Ulstan]

"It seems this is historically accurate - they actually did sidestep "

I disagree. Certainly to the extent to which they sidestep. It's ridiculously noticable. It should occur as the troops were marching to fight getting shot at by missiles, not once they were engaged. You just *couldn't* shuffle off to the right like that once two phalanxes were rammed together, with a press of men from behind you and spears on both sides.

"This also helps explain why in ancient warfare a tradition was developed (from classical times) that the best units were always placed on the right, this is because in Hoplite warfare they would see combat with the enemy first."

Actually, that would be a reason to put your best units on the left. The units on the right would be in combat for a very breif time then they'd shuffle off and be fighting no one!

If RTW mirrors history, then you would want your best units on the left, as they would get to slowly shuffle across the entire enemy line and do the most fighting.

I don't really see how rightward drift = the right side moving faster than the left.

I know some battles were fought where the lines were deliberately slanted, so that the right came into contact with the enemy first, but that's a separate issue from the rightward drift.

[Akka]

I disagree. Certainly to the extent to which they sidestep. It's ridiculously noticable. It should occur as the troops were marching to fight getting shot at by missiles, not once they were engaged. You just *couldn't* shuffle off to the right like that once two phalanxes were rammed together, with a press of men from behind you and spears on both sides.

In fact, no, it was precisely DURING the fight that the sidestepping happened.

Actually, that would be a reason to put your best units on the left. The units on the right would be in combat for a very breif time then they'd shuffle off and be fighting no one!

Wrong again. Soldiers sidestepped on the right to be better protected by the shield of their comrade. If the weakest soldiers are on the right, and the last one find no one on his side to protect him, then he would be prone to fall back, starting a chain reaction.
Veteran warriors would stay firm and not flee.

[hoof]

One of the biggest issues I had with the sidestep was that the unit didn't change orientation to keep their "aim" at the enemy. Once I found out the wonders of the "guard" button, this went away. Phalanx units start the battle in "guard" mode, and one of the "features" of this is the unit will try to maintain facing. This is probably to allow automatic maintenance of infantry lines (if units rotated, they'd open up gaps in the line).

Turning Guard mode off causes the Phalanx to constantly change it's facing. And it does this *without* the annoying "raise your spear, turn, then lower it again" problem that can get your guys killed.

Try it in a custom battle. Send a phalanx against another phalanx, with the human phalanx having "guard" mode off. During the shuffle, the AI will keep its facing, but the human Phalanx will rotate as it slides, eventually positioning itself on the flank of the AI phalanx, with spears pointed at the flank. Very different behavior between guard "on" and "off.

[hoom]

The problem with the historical accuracy as far as I can see is that it is a thing which happened to all shield wall type units & thus Legions, Barbarian Warbands & all manner of other units should be doing it too.
The problem with the game play is that the effect is dramatic & requires significant micromanagement if you don't want your phalanx to present its left flank to the enemy.

I actually think its more likely that cav will win head on in medium difficulty than hard/v.hard.
So far as I can tell cav in general is stronger in medium.

[Slaists]

I actually think its more likely that cav will win head on in medium difficulty than hard/v.hard.
So far as I can tell cav in general is stronger in medium.

it depends WHOSE cavalry :) of course, your cavalry against AI's will be weaker on H/VH since the AI will be one getting the bonuses. just, in the case you were using cavalry against AI phalanx, the pike-men would get a wooping +13 bonus in terms of attack and +6 in terms of defense against your poor horsies :) it would be a different story if it was your phalanx against AI's cavalry though.

:)

[Red Harvest]

One of the biggest issues I had with the sidestep was that the unit didn't change orientation to keep their "aim" at the enemy. Once I found out the wonders of the "guard" button, this went away. Phalanx units start the battle in "guard" mode, and one of the "features" of this is the unit will try to maintain facing. This is probably to allow automatic maintenance of infantry lines (if units rotated, they'd open up gaps in the line).

Turning Guard mode off causes the Phalanx to constantly change it's facing. And it does this *without* the annoying "raise your spear, turn, then lower it again" problem that can get your guys killed.

Try it in a custom battle. Send a phalanx against another phalanx, with the human phalanx having "guard" mode off. During the shuffle, the AI will keep its facing, but the human Phalanx will rotate as it slides, eventually positioning itself on the flank of the AI phalanx, with spears pointed at the flank. Very different behavior between guard "on" and "off.

This sums it up pretty well. I was using guard mode with my spear warbands and ordering a "march past" style attack. With that I was not getting problematic side step. If I turn off guard mode, they do pivot (and turn to pursue if they rout someone, although they won't go far.) This exposes flanks if there is a 2nd line. So if you want to maintain a cohesive line, guard mode is preferable even if it kills slower. It is a problem though if you want to turn/pivot and attack. This is usually what you want unengaged units to do, so these particularl units need to be taken off of guard so that they will "get busy." This is what I have been doing in the "2nd phase" of the engagement.

[katar]

The problem with the historical accuracy as far as I can see is that it is a thing which happened to all shield wall type units & thus Legions, Barbarian Warbands & all manner of other units should be doing it too.

nope, a lot of it has to do that hoplite shields, while big, are not really the best shape to protect the hoplite.

a roman shield is nicely curved will protect an indivdual soldier well, but the hoplite shield doesn`t really protect the right side of the body, so to remedy this he gets closer to the man on his right... which leads to them all doing it and you eventually end up with the whole formation drifting off to the right.

in several real battles the formations on both sides swung round by 180 degrees.

so while the implimentation of this in the game might be a bit extreme to some, it is historically accurate.

source of information: "The Western Way Of War" by Victor Davis Hanson.

[hoom]

So why would the unshielded Pharoes Guards shuffle then?

[katar]

So why would the unshielded Pharoes Guards shuffle then?

buggered if i know man, ask CA.