Hoplites have been put at an unfair disadvantage because they can't form a phalanx...

[Dayve]

I know it's historical that they fought overhand and whatnot, but since the phalanx formation has been removes, Greek hoplites take huge damage against archers, slingers and ESPECIALLY javelineers...

I just started my first campaign with a hoplite using faction, the Greeks, and i notice that my hoplites get torn up by the above mentioned missle units... Even Spartan hoplites!

Now, this may be historically accurate, as i understand large numbers of skirmishers became the order of the day in the later years due to the casualties they could inflict, but this is putting the Greeks at an unfair disadvantage against phalangites, which CAN form a phalanx.

Phalanx formation reduces missle damage so much that whole units of skirmishers can loose 10 volleys into them and not kill even 1 man, despite the phalangites being more lightly armoured and having smaller shields than hoplites...

A full unit of 160 Greek classical hoplites will get butchered by a unit of akontistai... If all volleys are thrown, the hoplites will take over 1/4 losses, sometimes more, even Spartans... Whereas a mediocre unit of phalangites, if all volleys are thrown, will take around 1/20 damage, if that... The better phalangites don't take any damage at all frontally from skirmishers, or if they do it's just one or two men.

Is there no way to make the phalangites weaker to missles while still retaining their current defence valued in hand to hand?

[antisocialmunky]

I wuv my hoplites and think that they are great units. I do agree that missiles can do alot of damage against them, but they are well balanced, all around good units. The thing that you have to keep in mind is that they shouldn't be compared to phalanxes like that. Just because the phalanx gets the additional frontal missile bonus doesn't put the greeks to a disadvantage, Just look at all the advantages of the phalanx, slow, bad when the formation loses cohesion, and nearly no missile defense from behind or to the sides.

I'd just include more skirmishers and outrunner hoplites to soak up damage and slingers to take out their slingers.

[Dan_Grr]

Greek hoplites are one of the best units in the game in terms of overall usefulness and cost-effectiveness for what they offer, if not the best unit on these terms.

Hoplites have a great defense, excelent morale, being able to sap, bonus against cavalry, and a good charge bonus (6). It costs 343 of upkeep per 1 unit of 160 men. The Galatian Heavy Spearman, for eg, a unit comparable to the hoplite greek statwise, needs +600 to upkeep.

They are a fine addition to any army, and I cannot simply see their "unfair disadvantage".

[Cataclysm]

Greek hoplites are one of the best units in the game in terms of overall usefulness and cost-effectiveness for what they offer, if not the best unit on these terms.

Hoplites have a great defense, excelent morale, being able to sap, bonus against cavalry, and a good charge bonus (6). It costs 343 of upkeep per 1 unit of 160 men. The Galatian Heavy Spearman, for eg, a unit comparable to the hoplite greek statwise, needs +600 to upkeep.

They are a fine addition to any army, and I cannot simply see their "unfair disadvantage".

I agree with Dan on this one. At first, in my current Mak campaign I didn't bother recruiting them since the Macedonian phalanx is, of course, the preferred core of their forces.

But on a whim I substituted them for Theuroporoi and used them to anchor the flank of my pike line. Usually setting them on guard mode. They did a great job securing the flank and their performance was on par with the theuroporoi.

I've found they are also capable troops when assaulting/defending stone walls. As a result, I now include them in almost all of my armies.

[Kralizec]

A full unit of 160 Greek classical hoplites will get butchered by a unit of akontistai... If all volleys are thrown, the hoplites will take over 1/4 losses, sometimes more, even Spartans... Whereas a mediocre unit of phalangites, if all volleys are thrown, will take around 1/20 damage, if that... The better phalangites don't take any damage at all frontally from skirmishers, or if they do it's just one or two men.

Is there no way to make the phalangites weaker to missles while still retaining their current defence valued in hand to hand?

The bolded part is almost certainly an exaggeration. I've seen Akontisai cause some nasty casualties against armoured troops but that's a rare, random occurrence.

I agree that phalangites are a little to durable, most probably due to their high shield bonuses. Shield points are more effective against missiles then armour points, especially slingers. These shields would be pretty durable (I understand they're partly bronze, just like argive shields) but they're fairly small and only protect the torso.

Try editing the EDU and give phalangites -1 on the shield bonuses and hoplites +1, you'll see a noticable difference in missile casualties. If you want you can compensate this loss/gain with the armour or defense skill values.

[soibean]

the only time Ive seen casualties like that is if the missile units attack from the flank when the phalanx is engaged

[Intranetusa]

personally, I think the phalangite pikemen are way over-armored.
They're suppose to be lightly armored soldiers with small shields...yet I can fire hundreds of rounds of arrows into them and only kill 3-4 soldiers.

I agree that the phalanx formation in .81/.81a version gives the phalangites a ridiculously high level of protection against missile weapons. I mean, how the hell are levy phalangites surviving cretan archer barages while my classical hoplites are getting torn to shreds?

[Watchman]

The pikes had a habit of entangling projectiles, I understand. Imagine trying to fire an arrow through several successive fences and you should get the idea.

As for the Classicals, didn't they once adopt the technique of running the last hundred meters or so just to clear the "kill zone" of Persian archers ASAP ? And that was not during the Peloponnesian War period of leaving body armour off...

[mAIOR]

That's right. I have to counter the fact that phalangites wore little armor. they would be regularly equiped with a linen/leather cuirass and the shield was enough. Later, in medieval Europe, several people managed to achieve great results with pike formations without shields. the reformed phalanx of the Macedonians had chain mail to protect themselves thus gaining much more endurance than their predecessors. All in all, I don't think hoplites have such a disadvantage as I've never seen the casualties you've faced (not saying it can't happen but I guess the odds are pretty low).


Cheers...

[Intranetusa]

^ if a metal arrowhead struck the wooden pike, wooden that splinter or shatter the pike? Pikes being able to stop/entagle arrows would also mean pikes getting damaged/destroyed

[fallen851]

Shield points are more effective against missiles then armour points, especially slingers.

This is entirely wrong. It is the opposite. Shield points 7/8th effective as armour points vs missiles.

[Afro Thunder]

That's odd. I figured that since slingers are "Effective Against Armour", armor points would be less effective than shield points.

[Kralizec]

This is entirely wrong. It is the opposite. Shield points 7/8th effective as armour points vs missiles.

Do you have anything to back that up? My experience with EB leads me to a different conclusion. I noticed in a Casse campaign I once compared Calawre and Kluddargos. The first has decent, but not outstanding armour and a reasonable shield. The latter has mail armour and no shield. If you add the shield value, they IIRC have an equal protection value (from the front and left side, of course) but in practice the Kludargos suffer worse when confronted with javelins and arrows - not to speak of sling bullets.

[Fondor_Yards]

I know it's historical that they fought overhand and whatnot, but since the phalanx formation has been removes, Greek hoplites take huge damage against archers, slingers and ESPECIALLY javelineers...

I just started my first campaign with a hoplite using faction, the Greeks, and i notice that my hoplites get torn up by the above mentioned missle units... Even Spartan hoplites!

Now, this may be historically accurate, as i understand large numbers of skirmishers became the order of the day in the later years due to the casualties they could inflict, but this is putting the Greeks at an unfair disadvantage against phalangites, which CAN form a phalanx.

Phalanx formation reduces missle damage so much that whole units of skirmishers can loose 10 volleys into them and not kill even 1 man, despite the phalangites being more lightly armoured and having smaller shields than hoplites...

A full unit of 160 Greek classical hoplites will get butchered by a unit of akontistai... If all volleys are thrown, the hoplites will take over 1/4 losses, sometimes more, even Spartans... Whereas a mediocre unit of phalangites, if all volleys are thrown, will take around 1/20 damage, if that... The better phalangites don't take any damage at all frontally from skirmishers, or if they do it's just one or two men.

Is there no way to make the phalangites weaker to missles while still retaining their current defence valued in hand to hand?

I'v personally never seen that, most troops with hoplite level armour/shield or more take like zero missile damage unless I have like 4-5 slingers on them. But to be fair, it could happen, ask the spartans at the Battle of Lechaeum.