Something i don't understand... (Greek history question)

[Dayve]

Well... This Iphrikates(sp) is supposed to have reformed the Greek army, done away with the 'old fashioned' Greek hoplite armour and weapons and introduced new, lighter bling... But what i don't get is... Why give hoplites light equipment? They are going to be slow even if they went into battle naked and without a shield because of their complicated formation and way of fighting, so why not load them up with the heaviest of everything?

I mean, look... These Iphrikates Hoplitai with the light shield, light armour and no greaves... They go into battle against Macedonian phalangites... They approach the Macedonian phalangites... They get within thrusting range of the Macedonian phalangites... And then smack... Long sharp Macedonian phalangite spear straight through your thin wooden shield, straight through your light hardened leather armour and straight through your stomach...

What was Iphrikates thinking? Lightly equipped hoplites would get butchered by Macedonian phalangites head on anyday of the week, and a hoplites job is to fight head on right against the front of the enemy line isn't it...? Silly if you ask me...

In my view, the Greeks would have been better off sticking with the old fashioned gear... Muscled armour, hoplon shield layered with bronze or other hard metals, grieves and the traditional hoplite spear... Wouldn't this at least give them a chance to get within poking range of the phalangite line? Later on the large(ish) hoplon shield could have been scrapped for a smaller Macedonian-like shield and the short spear replaced with the very long two handed one to counter the Macedonian phalangites... It doesn't take a genious to think what i have just said... As i've just proved.

Scenario: I'm a Greek general and i'm going to do battle with the Macedonians tomorrow... A scout comes to me and tells me the Macedonians have a similar number of infantry phalanxes as i but they are using spears twice as long as the ones our guys have... So what do you think to yourself? I have to engage these phalangites head on with my own hoplites... I KNOW! LETS GIVE THEM A LIGHT SHIELD AND LIGHT ARMOUR!

[jerby]

iphikrates was very efective agaibgst 'old' hoplites..he made good use out of skirmishers.. he decimated some spartans iirc..
the trade-ff was lighter armor in favor of longer spears (and javs??) and more stamina.
the macedonians took it a step further. gettign an even smaller shield with bigger, 2handed, pikes...

[jedispongee]

The Iphrikates reforms were made mostly to deal with the growing popularity of the Peltast-style of warfare of the late 5th, early 4th century BC. The lighter equipment gave them more of a chance to catch up with the more agile peltasts. The reform did not happen with the Macedonian phalanx in mind. When finally faced with the Macedonian phalanx, you see the development of the chain-mailed and other heavily armored hoplites as well as other changes.

So all your ramblings about how the Iphrakates reforms were pointless against the Macedonian phalanx are moot. They were not made in counter the Macedonian phalanx, as it was not in use at the time.

[Fred]

Iphrikates reforms also made hoplites cheaper. You have to remember that each hoplite paid for his own equipment, and at the time of the reforms the balance of wealth within Greece was becoming more and more polarised. This meant that you had a lot of low class citizens who could only afford militia grade equipment, and a very small core of very rich citizens providing elite hoplites, but nearly no middle class. In classical times, the Greek middle class was the part of society that was rich enough to buy half decent equipment and large enough to form an army from. By the time of Iphrikates reforms the middle class made up a much smaller percentage of the Greek population, so the Greeks needed an alternate style of hoplite to the classical version, which was cheaper, but which could also hold the line like a classical hoplite.

However, richer Greek citizens would not have been affected by Iphrikates reforms as they could still afford the traditional equipment, and many of the Greek colonies and certain city states would not have suffered the polarisation of wealth that hit most of the Greek mainland, and thus would not have had any pressing need to switch over to the Iphrikates hoplite. Why EB decided to cut classical hoplites (and by classical I mean shorter spear, heavy armour and a hoplon, I know that certain classical items like the Corinthian helm where no longer used by the time of EB) altogether is a mystery to me. I would much rather see the option to train classical hoplites than more city specific hoplites.

[Reenk Roink]

Peltasts

[Teleklos Archelaou]

We intend to have "classical" hoplites as well available in some places, and honestly not really good. Keep in mind that the mod is actually not finished yet.

[Dooz]

We intend to have "classical" hoplites as well available in some places, and honestly not really good. Keep in mind that the mod is actually not finished yet.

I love that fact. It just makes me feel oh-so-good everytime I realize that the mod is not even complete, yet I'm doing what I'm doing in it, and seeing what I'm seeing. *happy sigh*

Oh and, what kind of classical hoplites are we talking about? I know this won't be the case due to the timeframe, but are we looking at any corinthian helms?

[Ano2]

Hmm well it would still be cool for classical hoplites. Would give players a new type of fighting. Make classical hoplites quite desirable me thinks.

[Geoffrey S]

Back to the original post, I thought Iphikrates' hoplites were designed to be cheaper and more mobile. Presumably, if you're using them to charge the enemy head-on you're using them incorrectly. They'd be more desirable when used to outflank a larger, slower phalanx or classic hoplite formation. The wouldn't and shouldn't need to face the front.

As was stated by Laundreu, the strength of the Macedonian phalanx wasn't its infantry, but the fact that it could hold the enemy in place for a devastating surgical cavalry strike. This is something never fully realised by the various Successor states, that while a phalanx is strong it cannot win without the necessary cavalry support; the long sarissas don't make the Macedonian style phalanx very wieldy and rather vulnerable to quick manoeuvering.

[Ano2]

Hmm but the Iphikrate's formation lends itself to pinning the enemy. Wouldn't be much good on the flanks.

[QwertyMIDX]

While it could obviously be very effective at pinning and forming a core battle line, it was more versitile than the makedonian phalanx. There in was the advantage, but also a disadvantage. The dual-edged blade of specialization.

[Ano2]

Damn shame they are just Phalangites with shorter spears thanks to rtw :(