Results 1 to 30 of 39

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

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

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

    They certainly would have a chance against a Makedonian phalanx. Even head-on, though they would be at a disadvantage. Remember, that shield is more than capable of stopping a spear thrust, especially by big, heavy, unwieldy sarissas. Note that the Makedonian phalanx was not an offensive formation, but a defensive one (tactically speaking, I mean). It was created to be the anvil on which the cavalry sledgehammer will break the enemy.

  2. #2
    EB Token Radical Member QwertyMIDX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Providence, Rhode Island
    Posts
    5,898

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Laundreu
    They certainly would have a chance against a Makedonian phalanx. Even head-on, though they would be at a disadvantage. Remember, that shield is more than capable of stopping a spear thrust, especially by big, heavy, unwieldy sarissas. Note that the Makedonian phalanx was not an offensive formation, but a defensive one (tactically speaking, I mean). It was created to be the anvil on which the cavalry sledgehammer will break the enemy.

    Very good post! People should all remember that the Makedonian phalanx wasn't supposed to operate alone, it worked in conjunction with the cavalry and that is why it was so effective; the continual undermining of the heavy cavalry in the successor states gradually enfeebled their armed forces. This is one of the reasons the Romans were able to defeat them with the relative ease that they did.
    History is for the future not the past. The dead don't read.


    Operam et vitam do Europae Barbarorum.

    History does not repeat itself. The historians repeat one another. - Max Beerbohm

  3. #3

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

    Quote Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
    Very good post! People should all remember that the Makedonian phalanx wasn't supposed to operate alone, it worked in conjunction with the cavalry and that is why it was so effective; the continual undermining of the heavy cavalry in the successor states gradually enfeebled their armed forces. This is one of the reasons the Romans were able to defeat them with the relative ease that they did.
    Why thank you! This era has been an interest of mine, with regards to military history, though I tended to avoid the Successor states out of a sense of disappointment - phalanx versus phalanx battles are probably the most boring, even to read about, ever. Two pointy brick walls march into one another! Wait six hours or until one side or another hits its opponent with a cavalry charge! Rout! Wash, rinse, repeat! Admittedly this is because, if I remember, the various states had quite a bit of trouble affording large formations of non-phalangite units, but hey! Maybe they should have stopped building insane oar-powered dreadnaughts in favor of outfitting more cavalry.

    If it weren't for the fact I can't make heads nor tails of the RTW modding scene, I'd look into hopping on board, or even doing some modding of my own.

  4. #4
    EB Token Radical Member QwertyMIDX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Providence, Rhode Island
    Posts
    5,898

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

    EB is always looking for people to write descriptions (of buildings, traits, ancils, etc.). If you're interested there's plenty of work for you that doesn't ever invole touching a RTW file.
    History is for the future not the past. The dead don't read.


    Operam et vitam do Europae Barbarorum.

    History does not repeat itself. The historians repeat one another. - Max Beerbohm

  5. #5

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

    Quote Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
    EB is always looking for people to write descriptions (of buildings, traits, ancils, etc.). If you're interested there's plenty of work for you that doesn't ever invole touching a RTW file.
    Perhaps. I'll send a private message!

    My big limiters are twofold - A) I'm currently an undergraduate college student...B) in middle Georgia. What sources I can get are pretty dingy, until I get to Atlanta come September. Until that, it's mostly Osprey books. And the internet, but the internet does not equal a good source.

  6. #6
    Guest Dayve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,659

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

    When was the huge spear, small shield method of war developed? What date roughly? I too would love to learn more about greek history, the succesor states, carthage, all the factions of EB... Especially Rome, but the best i can do is online sources because unfortunately the library here in my town is utterly crap when it comes to history research type books... For an example not too long ago i went in to look for a book by Adrian Goldsworthy which i think was entitled simply: Rome, they didn't have it so i went to the desk and asked if they could order it from another library, and she told me no books by Adrian Goldsworthy were on their computer at all... Some library huh?

  7. #7

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayve
    When was the huge spear, small shield method of war developed? What date roughly? I too would love to learn more about greek history, the succesor states, carthage, all the factions of EB... Especially Rome, but the best i can do is online sources because unfortunately the library here in my town is utterly crap when it comes to history research type books... For an example not too long ago i went in to look for a book by Adrian Goldsworthy which i think was entitled simply: Rome, they didn't have it so i went to the desk and asked if they could order it from another library, and she told me no books by Adrian Goldsworthy were on their computer at all... Some library huh?
    The huge spear/small shield Makedonian phalanx, you mean? Sometime in the early 350s to late 340s BCE, I think - given time I can probably get you a more accurate date.

  8. #8
    EB Token Radical Member QwertyMIDX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Providence, Rhode Island
    Posts
    5,898

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

    If you mean the Makedonian phalanx, which I think is what you're getting at. Sometime shortly after 359 BC, the ascension of Phillip II to the throne of Makedon. He is credited with having devloped that style of warfare, although it was likely not something a single man did the period of it's evolution can be pretty well centered during the early portion of his regin, with some elements likely having come earlier and some changes being made both late in his reign and during the campaigns of Alexander.
    History is for the future not the past. The dead don't read.


    Operam et vitam do Europae Barbarorum.

    History does not repeat itself. The historians repeat one another. - Max Beerbohm

  9. #9
    Sovereign Oppressor Member TIE Fighter Shooter Champion, Turkey Shoot Champion, Juggler Champion Kralizec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,812

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Laundreu
    They certainly would have a chance against a Makedonian phalanx. Even head-on, though they would be at a disadvantage. Remember, that shield is more than capable of stopping a spear thrust, especially by big, heavy, unwieldy sarissas. Note that the Makedonian phalanx was not an offensive formation, but a defensive one (tactically speaking, I mean). It was created to be the anvil on which the cavalry sledgehammer will break the enemy.
    A xyston spear wouldn't be able to penetrate a shield, true. A 2 handed sarrissa could do that however, Roman scutums are known to have been penetrated.
    An argive shield with a layer of bronze (the classical hoplon shield) would fare better I think, but the whole point is that by the EB time it had been largely phased out in favour of lighter shields.

    Regarding the defensive nature of the Macedonian phalanx: as qwerty said, Macedon started relying more and more on their phalanx to steamroll over the enemy by the time the Romans fought them, and they ended up failing miserably. At the battle of Pydna, the phalanx was initially succesful, pushed the Romans back, and the Romans took some losses. What happened?

    The Romans fell back.

    The phalanx pressed forward and in doing so encountered uneven terrain, causing gaps in the line. The legionaires moved in between them, and cut down the phalangites with little problems.
    The problem here according to my interpretation was that
    A) when moving over longer distances, you have more chance of running into unfavourable terrain that will break up the phalanx. Hence a Macedonian phalanx would be better off sitting defensively.
    B) the Macedonians could not force the engagement. The maneaverable Roman legionaires simply fell back when they realised they couldn't fight on favourable terms, and when the pike phalanx moved forward and got disrupted they saw their chance. But a pike phalanx wouldn't have the same problem when dealing with a (light or heavy) hoplite phalanx.

    Now if you have two phalanxes. One is lightly equiped, but has huge 18 foot long pikes.
    The other one is lightly equiped to, with a spear of only 12 foot long. Maybe with better and larger shields, but still not much protection against the thrust of a two handed pike.
    Plus what hasn't been mentioned yet: the 18 foot spear is weilded 2 handed. You can utilise almost the entire lenght of the pike.
    The 12 foot spear is 1 handed. Since you can't hold a spear horizontally at the end single handed (*cough stupid vanilla RTW cough*), you need to hold it roughly in the middle as to counterweigh both hands. The net result is you can only project your spearpoint 6 feet forward.
    My expectation would be that the pike phalanx would roll over the hoplites.
    Last edited by Kralizec; 01-10-2006 at 09:44.

  10. #10
    EB Token Radical Member QwertyMIDX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Providence, Rhode Island
    Posts
    5,898

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

    You're failing to apply your own logic, the lighter greek hoplites were also more mobile than the Makedonian variety and were able to do things similar to the romans (although obviously they were not quite as mobile). The major issue in deciding victory between Greek and Makedonian armies was cavalry, which ever side had convinced the Thessalians to support them (almost always Makedon) was the side that usally won the day.
    History is for the future not the past. The dead don't read.


    Operam et vitam do Europae Barbarorum.

    History does not repeat itself. The historians repeat one another. - Max Beerbohm

  11. #11

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

    The current depiction has them fighting just like Macedonian Pikemen. I doubt they were anywhere near as flexible as Roman troops, as they too fought in a phalanx, a tight block of men advancing against an enemy in a head on attack. True they could fight much better individually, though their tactics were very similar to those of the Macedonians.

  12. #12
    EB Token Radical Member QwertyMIDX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Providence, Rhode Island
    Posts
    5,898

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ano2
    The current depiction has them fighting just like Macedonian Pikemen. I doubt they were anywhere near as flexible as Roman troops, as they too fought in a phalanx, a tight block of men advancing against an enemy in a head on attack. True they could fight much better individually, though their tactics were very similar to those of the Macedonians.

    Not just like it, the size of the Makedonian itself was much bigger and thus more inflexible. The very nature of the 18 foot pike made it that way (more ranks were needed to utilize the pike). As such the smaller greek phalanx was more mobile, though obviously nowhere near as mobile as the romans. Too bad RTW can't really handle that.
    History is for the future not the past. The dead don't read.


    Operam et vitam do Europae Barbarorum.

    History does not repeat itself. The historians repeat one another. - Max Beerbohm

  13. #13

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

    Quote Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
    Not just like it, the size of the Makedonian itself was much bigger and thus more inflexible. The very nature of the 18 foot pike made it that way (more ranks were needed to utilize the pike). As such the smaller greek phalanx was more mobile, though obviously nowhere near as mobile as the romans. Too bad RTW can't really handle that.
    True but BI can in the form of a shieldwall. This could be adapted for Greeks as it was very similar. It can also allow men to charge, something that could be put to good use since charge values are fixed in BI and 1.5.

    Just a note, shieldwalls can't be used in 1.5, the can only be used in BI (I've tried!).

  14. #14
    EB Token Radical Member QwertyMIDX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Providence, Rhode Island
    Posts
    5,898

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

    Yeah, sheildwall is better for the classical phalanx than the one we're talking about though.
    History is for the future not the past. The dead don't read.


    Operam et vitam do Europae Barbarorum.

    History does not repeat itself. The historians repeat one another. - Max Beerbohm

  15. #15
    graduated non-expert Member jerby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    ..your not my mother..
    Posts
    1,414

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

    that the Soutern-Penisuela Greeks couldn't convience teh thessalans doesn't surprise me.
    in some ways I got the impression athenans/Spartans/etc thought of the Thessalians as barely capable of walking on hind legs...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO