Roman Manipular Formation

[TheDuck]

Yes, very interesting read, Duck.

I have always wondered about the advantage of the checkerboard formation. Didn't seem to make sense to leave gabs in your front line where one "unit" would potentially have its flanks exposed.

So if I read you right, the checkerboard was only for maneuver before battle (closing the front as battle was joined). And perhaps an open checkerboard behind the closed front line allowed quick and effective allocation of reserves to lokal hotspots where help was needed.

Makes much more snse now.
Has anyone tried this in RTW ?

Thanks!

This is both a) my take and b) based on commentary by some modern military historians who where actually in the modern military.

Remember that the ancient historical record is very short on detail on these matters, since the things of importance to historians living in ancient times had very little to do with military tactics, and the level of consistent military leadership just didn't exist as it does today.

Adrian Goldsworthy comes under some criticism as being 'too theoretical' by academic historians, but is generally well respected by military historians that have an understanding of modern military science. This is why I tend to think the way I do about the checkerboard, but am also careful to say 'its my take'. Its based on a lot of reading/homework by me and all the historians I've read, but nothing said about military matters in ancient times can be said to be truly 'accurate'.. the detailed record is just too vague.

And finally, yes.. you understood my points correctly. Even with my understanding, I don't do this in RTW since a) Its just too much micro to hold a checkerboard; and b) at the unrealistically fast speeds of the cav units, and the generally close quarters that the fights occur in (distance wise vs. speed), most battles start 'at the point of joining' where I believe a legion would be transitioning to a cohesive frontal line anyway.

I do maintain a 2-4 unit reserve behind the line (in keeping with what I believe are good, if ancient tactics) so that I can reinforce where things are 'hottest'. I do this even pre-Marian, even though the common use of a tactical reserve didn't come into common play until after Scipio's victories against the Carthaginians. It might not be historically accurate, but I'm playing to WIN, not be accurate.

Another important point is that RTW doesn't penalize you for having two infantry units fighting 'in the same space', which is actually a severe departure from reality (but one which I like, since the game is more fun that way). One aspect of melee fighting by Roman cohorts that is important to keep in mind is that room is required for fighting.. and the idea of 2 cohorts occupying the same space during fighting just didn't happen. In the modern military one of the most dangerous things you can do is pass one unit through another.. too many opportunities for friendly fire mistakes during a heated battle. The same goes for ancient times.

When the god of chaos visits the battlefield, consistency and simplicity are the best ways to manage that chaos. And the god of chaos always visits.

And yet another thing that occurred to me.. the idea of a 'cohesive front line' is not something that has been abandoned in modern times! It carries forward to today! Breaks in modern lines of combat result in just the types of problems you might expect.. flanking/envelopment issues and the like. The speeds of this happening are faster, but the concepts are exactly the same.. And that is yet another reason I tend to think of the checkerboard the way I do.

[TheDuck]

Good information on Roman manipular formation here

Wikipedia rocks. It also has good basic information on government magistrate positions and basic government institutions in use by Rome during late Republican and early Imperial times. Good info there for sure!

Good starting point for magistrate info in wikiPedia

A good starting point on the different goverment assemblies in Rome..

[dedmoroz]

I have one formation for attacking and one for defending.
Legend:
V= Velites
H= Hastati
P= Princepes
T= Triariii
E= Equites
G= General
WD= War dogs

Defending formation:

...............H........H........H........H.........H.....................
E.......T.....V.......WD.......V.......WD.......V.........T........E
....................P..........P........P.........P.........................
....................................T.........................................
....................................G..........................................


In most cases the fights will go like this:
Enemy line closes.
I am sending both WD to slow the enemy down in the center at the point where my Hastati can hit them with the pila. Good timing needed indeed. After releasing the dogs, I always withdraw manually both units.
Hastati on Fire at will use the pila and then absorb the initial charge.
Velites on hold ground hitting the enemy in front from behind Hastati. When ammunition is finished, I send them back behind Princepes.
Meanwhile Equites charged around the enemy flanks.
If enemy trying to flank with cavalry, I send Triarii to make a short work on them.
Princepes will go in as needed to support the first line.
Equites charged in the rear or flank from both sides.
Usually at this point the enemy starting to rout and I send my general in to cut some ears.
Chasing all over the place with cavalry units and dogs.

Result in most cases: 1000+ dead enemies with less than 100 losses on my side.
I am playing on VH…

[KyodaiSteeleye]

[QUOTE=TheDuck]Thanks!



Another important point is that RTW doesn't penalize you for having two infantry units fighting 'in the same space', which is actually a severe departure from reality (but one which I like, since the game is more fun that way). One aspect of melee fighting by Roman cohorts that is important to keep in mind is that room is required for fighting.. and the idea of 2 cohorts occupying the same space during fighting just didn't happen. In the modern military one of the most dangerous things you can do is pass one unit through another.. too many opportunities for friendly fire mistakes during a heated battle. The same goes for ancient times.


Is this really so? - in MTW (and STW i think) you got quite nasty problems stacking units on top of one another - especially with spears, as their formations were disrupted - but i think there was a general morale penalty for overlapping units as well. Bit of a bugger if this is another feature that has been taken out as part of a mickeymousisation process.

[TheDuck]

mickeymousisation process.

LOL nice word! And yes, I think its true. I haven't noticed any penalty for doing it (that said, I haven't specifically tested it either..). It certainly doesn't result in more friendly casualties, which is what I would expect in the real world.

Also note that if a unit is already engaged, I don't think you can pass one through another.. but if they are already intermixed, then they can fight together. At least this is how I normally see things happening.

[djsway]

You guys have it all wrong... even though I only played this game for 2 weeks I have figured out the best formations. Here it is,

/////////////// //////////////////

xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PPPPPPPP PPPPP PPPPPPPP
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$


Then I hit control A then clickee on the enemy unit and "ATtack!! !" Just like Command & Conquer.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I love the manipular formation, I even use it as the Byzantines in M2TW!

I tend to vary the formation depending on where I am fighting. If I am fighting against a phalanx army, I will put the Velites in the front line, as they should have enough time to shower the enemy with javelins before they reach them. If I am fighting against barbarians, I put Velites in between the infantry in the first line, as it makes it much easier for them to retreat, and even if they get caught there will be two units of infantry flanking the enemy attacking them. When I do this, I sometimes hire Illyrian or Spanish mercenaries since their tighter formations make them easier to fit between the units of the front line.

Behind the Hastati of the main first line, I put some Principes. And in the third line I put any Triarii I have (which tends to be that one unit the Julii start with), plus some more mercs or Principes. I like to keep some cavalry at the flanks, and maybe keep some Wardogs behind the back line to charge in if I think their morale damage will rout the enemy.

After the reforms I tend to replace the Velites with Archer Auxilia rather than Light Auxilia. Hastati are replaced by Early Legionary Cohorts, Principes by Legionary Cohorts, and Triarii are replaced by Praeorian/Urban Cohorts.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

I've used the manipular formation, but I've never really even been able to locate its effectiveness. I'm probably doing it wrong, but I've always preferred a classical long straight line of infantry with, depending upon the size of enemy forces, a couple of re-enforcements behind for in case things get a little on the risky side. The advantage of the straight line is mainly the way that it can close around a small force, and can make it more difficult for a large force to successfully flank due to the larger area a long line can cover.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I find the manipular formation provides my pila units with plently of time to unleash their javelins with a relatively clear line of sight to the enemy. Plus the protection it offers to skirmishers is excellent. Its also ideal for routing enemies, since the gaps in your line mean you basically flank every enemy unit, and you can choose when to send in the fresh reinforcements from the second or third lines to cause that chain rout.

[RLucid]

I'll just add that I've seen Roman infantry units, automatically partially refuse a flank, so soldiers on the side are effectively fighting, in a way that spear phalanx cannot.

The whole point of using the chequer board is for manoeuvre, the gaps mean flexibility, and allow skirmishing style troops to retreat, and fresh troops to charge in, with maximum effectiveness, whilst the enemy troops are being held by a broken front line. Flanking by enemy is less of an issue as the squarer formations, can turn quickly to directly face those who attempt to engage after a long march around side.

Any front infiltrating opposition troops (often cavalry in practice attempting to hit archers or similar, can be held by basic units, and then counter attacked), face a huge problem as they are surrounded on 3 sides, with only a small exit gap as during fighting, inter unit gaps naturally tend to reduce after contact, so if routing few escape to regroup.

[salemty]

hi i must say there seems to be a fault with both the solid line formation and the one with gaps. for example if you a fighting an equally matched army and you and your enemy both have 6 units of infantry and you set up in a double line and the enemy sets up in a single line like he always does. the enemy will have 3 units engages and he will flank your formation. he will also kill your cavalry unless you respond with some infrantry in your second line. can someone plz explain how the double line works in this situation.

[caravel]

I've used the manipular formation, but I've never really even been able to locate its effectiveness. I'm probably doing it wrong, but I've always preferred a classical long straight line of infantry with, depending upon the size of enemy forces, a couple of re-enforcements behind for in case things get a little on the risky side. The advantage of the straight line is mainly the way that it can close around a small force, and can make it more difficult for a large force to successfully flank due to the larger area a long line can cover.

You're not doing it wrong, it's more so that the game engine doesn't really support doing it right. I've always found that "Total War" formations work better than historical ones. Trying to apply historical formations to a strategy game doesn't necessarily work. The main issue is that in RTW Triarii are represented as spearmen which means they would be more useful nearer to the front of the formation. The Principes and Hastati are really the same thing and could have been better represented as one unit allowing the player to pick his own front and second rank according to unit valour. IMHO a straight and unbroken front line of Hastati and Principes with a second line of Triarii is best, with Velites skirmishing up front, a bank rank of archers and cavalry on the flanks. This way you can hit your enemy with a punishing javelin volley once the enemy are in range by taking the formation off fire at will.

This is roughly the type of formation I use for pre-marian legions:

-----------V---V---V---V-------

-----P---H---H---H---H---P-------E--E
-----------T---T---T---T---------
--------------A---A---A----------
--------------G---WD------------

[RLucid]

You have to sort out things, so the spearmen can counter enemy cavalry. Having them back but near enough to centre if a gap may be attacked by enemy, or wings is vital.

The whole point of chequer board, is so you don't have your troops committed statically, I frequently will retreat units, and fight in mobile way with heavy use of javelins, pila and arrows.

It is possible to do it, you just have to be quick on the controls.

[salemty]

i dont mean to be annoying or anything but i would really aprreciate if someone would help me with my problem as posted earlier in this thread

[RLucid]

X X X
X X
X - Reserves

If enemy units are 6 str8 across, then they won't all be in contact, and you can manoeuvre 2nd / 3rd line units about. But using such armies, you're not actually having forces really suitable for chequer board, part of the reason for gaps is to allow skirmishers to fall back, and then re-engage.

[salemty]

what army should the manipular formation be used for?

[RLucid]

The point is to have a balanced army. That means :

MIssile troops - Javelins, Archers and slingers operate at a distance
Front line Infantry - Hold and fix enemy, swords better against enemy infantry, spearmen for enemy cavalry
Cavalry - harass enemy, take opportunities to charge rear/flank of engaged enemy, fight opposition cavalry

Reserve Infantry - deployed during battle to maximum effect, possibly flanking, or a trap for enemy cavalry, baited by a retreating unit, counter-attacks against infiltrating enemy etc etc

The lines held back, put enemy units that attempt to engage in a box, because the Romans have pila, they may also have opportunities to attack from range, and then charge in on tiring enemy units, who are close enough to be fatigueing due to stress, but not effectively engaged.

The AI does not really cause too many problems flanking, also I've found against British chariots, a deeper formation, heavy with Javellins works far more effetively, with shallower formations they'd chew up one wing, and rout many units, sometimes changing outcome of battle.

[MajorFreak]

he cohorts were further sub-divided into three maniples, which in turn were split into two centuries of about 60-100 men each
***
the 'posterior' century would march to the left and then forward so that they presented a solid line, creating a solid line of soldiers.

So that's the checkerboard theory in practice when it came to "what happens on the FRONT line then?" question. Kinda difficult to do with RTW because i read a rumor on these forums somewhere about 5 ranks being perfect for boosting morale (which is apparently waaaay more important than fatigue) - although i can see widening the formation an equivalent version i've never tried...i just tended to pick a formation type before battle and went with it throughout.

hmmmm...oh, and my current pick for legionary armies is checkerboard.

<-----SS-----> (single line, loose & hold)
V...L...L...L...V
..U...L...L...U..
<---AAAA---> (single line)
C..G...*...G..C

2Spear Auxiliaries
2Velites
5Legionaries
2Urban cohorts
2Cavalry (legionary)
4Archers
2Gladiators

I still believe in the Cannae tactic working just fine. If the archers don't deal with it, and the front legionaries with velite flankers fail to break the enemy, i depend on the second line being able to crumple just enough so the superior urban cohorts envelope the enemy. Personally, if i'm in that sort of situation it's pretty desperate and my cavalry are definitely needed to help attack the rear of the enemy while engaged.

LOOSE and HOLD with pila enabled only when the unit is itself engaged is key to dealing with Phalanx...otherwise i think loose and hold is counterproductive for legionaries. Although for my spear auxiliaries it's the name of the game for them at the front (i swear by them especially when they have temple of Ares morale boosts)

--------------
a while ago i swore by a blobbed formation in the center using hoplites, arcani and peasants for dealing with cavalry charges that had a tendency to break up the hoplites...worked great! except, well, we're talking about legionaries here aren't we? lol...so enough about me and my hoplite, cretan mercenaries and those yummy merc elephants

[Big Bear]

Hi, I did a little research into this a few years ago. The maniple was divided into two along the lines of it's century each actually eighty strong, these were prior front and posterior (unfortunate name) which meant rear. When lining for battle one was placed behind the other, but they would close together for combat Posterior moving forward to fill the gap. The reason for the formation was to allow other troops to pass quickly through the line. Either skirmishing Veletes or other Legionaries. In the time of the mid-republic when it operated, it was normally lined up 12, deep 1200 strong for Hatati and Princepes, and 6 and 600 for the Triaria, who in theory, were the older men and were to cover a retreat, for the younger and less likely to have had a family members of the legion. So three lines of equal width. The three Legionary lines were in a chequer board? formation with the preceding line facing the gap in the line in front. Though they were used in other ways as commanders thought fit. It could be used as a tactical unit, but normally it's function was as above.

The common misconception was that each line had large gaps when closed for combat, which would lead to tragic consequences. in fact it presented a single battle-line and stems from omitting the function of the Centuries, Prior and Posterior in to an analysis of things. And it was a system designed to allow movement through the lines rather than to fight with gaps in the line. It was used tactical occasionally but infrequently, it's main effect was as above.

It started to fall out of use during the later republic when the Cohort (Originally a recruiting unit, which had little relevance on the battlefield) came to the fore. Truncating initially the Hastata. Princepes and the Triaria into the same unit, though they remained defined as part of the Cohort system but within the same battlefield unit. This took place round about the time of the Marian reforms, actually predating it in effect by some years. The Velites were eventualy incorporated in the same way, but lingered on for a few more decades after, because they were A. The Legions main source of light troops and B. Their training was different and more difficult to incorporate into a single unit.

In terms of RTW, perhaps, two lines of 6 deep Hastata and Princepes, with a 3 deep line of Triaria, Veletes out front, Cavalry on the flank. There were battles where the Maniple acted independently, but I think this would be difficult to represent in the game, effectively the game only allows 20 units, which would have to be very small. The only other thing, I could think might work was if it was done as a formation thing, the units lined up in small groups behind each other, then hit a formation change button and they start to form a single line with the forward of the two groups.

But as general comment lining the Roman's up in multiple lines works a treat anyway and is close to the way the Legion of the Maniple system worked. So the game is pretty fair anyway.

Big Bear

PS excuse the spellings if wrong a case of dyslexia rules KO