javelin V phalanx

[konny]

How have you tested that?

Try it at siege, for example. When the enemy has a phalanx, or anything else with a good shield, behind the wall, place your slingers in range: they won't do any damage frontal or when the enemy is turning right (presenting you his shield arm) - but as soon as he is turning left or about face you will very well see the difference.

Therefore: Do not place your archers, slingers etc. behind the enemy, because you will hit your men as well; place them on your left wing and let them rip through the unproteced right side of the enemy.

[Watchman]

That's something I've been doing a long time whether the enemy is phalanxes or not - why batter at the shield when you can go around it ?

[Spoofa]

Try it at siege, for example. When the enemy has a phalanx, or anything else with a good shield, behind the wall, place your slingers in range: they won't do any damage frontal or when the enemy is turning right (presenting you his shield arm) - but as soon as he is turning left or about face you will very well see the difference.

Therefore: Do not place your archers, slingers etc. behind the enemy, because you will hit your men as well; place them on your left wing and let them rip through the unproteced right side of the enemy.

no, I think he meant how did he know that it have them 2x as much protection with phalanx mode.

[Sarkiss]

imo eastern archers, horse archers too should be slightly stronger. volley after volley with no effect whatsoever is a bit over the top.
i didnt mention them and only highlighted javelineers exclusively because the later's quantity versus quality issue (240 skirmishers to 160 archers) is more puzzling...
gents, remember, we are not talking about actuall killing ratio, but merely ability to inflict casualties that would cause disability to carry on fighting. this soldiers might be easily healed in the after battle scroll hence imo, improving missile attack just one slight bit will make it good and improve over all balance.

[konny]

no, I think he meant how did he know that it have them 2x as much protection with phalanx mode.

OK. In that case please forget my answer. I have read of the phalanx bonus somewhere myself, but cannot say that I had wittnessed any difference in survivabilty against missle fire depending on the selected formation.

[blank]

IIRC, the "240-man" skirmisher units are nearly all low-class peasant scum equipped with whatever crap they could get their grubby hands on. Now if you imagine those units in battle, they would just want to quickly get rid of their javelins and then retreat back to safety - i doubt they would even aim their shots, they'd just throw randomly and then run. Also their javelins would be crap - rough sticks with low-quality tips.

The better javelin units tend to be 160-man size, and some do have the AP attribute i think

[Dram]

i never understand these sort of complaints. i have always found ranged units, especially peltasts and slingers, to be very powerful when used properly. foot archers not so much.... they are rather lacklustre.

i remember as the romans I used some merc sarmatian horse archers in my armies against the selucids, who where pumping out elite silver shields and hypaspistai left and right, and even the horse archers with no AP or exp where killing at least 10 men per volley from behind, on large unit size (120 silver shield phalanx per unit). Usually when the phalanx was at 120 men they would kill 15 in the first volley, this was with 2 units of horse archers.

peltasts are very nasty against exposed sides. when playing as a barbarian faction im always careful to have eneough cav to deal with the peltasts, as even from the front they can kill alot of unarmoured men. with armoured infantry it isnt as big a deal, but you still have to deal with them before or during the time your lines meet, otherwise they do attack the flanks, and they ARE deadly even agianst armoured units, as long as they attack from the rear or non-shield side.

i have never encounted a unit that hasnt taken significant losses when attacked from the appropriate direction.

[Sarkiss]

IIRC, the "240-man" skirmisher units are nearly all low-class peasant scum equipped with whatever crap they could get their grubby hands on. Now if you imagine those units in battle, they would just want to quickly get rid of their javelins and then retreat back to safety - i doubt they would even aim their shots, they'd just throw randomly and then run. Also their javelins would be crap - rough sticks with low-quality tips.

The better javelin units tend to be 160-man size, and some do have the AP attribute i think

wouldnt adding a point or two to javelin attack WITHOUT giving them AP improve the balance?

as for aiming the javelins it is partially true but only when in skirmish with other similar troops. they would dodge rather than aim. i recommend "Cannae" by A. Goldsworthy, he describes skirmishing very lively and has good points there. however, why would they rash into safety when in front of them just a slow moving very densely packed formation that doesnt shoot back? they'd probably lavish the moment. heck, they could probably even afford to take their time aiming until the moment when phalanx breaks free in pursuit. good example is above mentioned Spartan defeat.

i do not argue that attacks from the rear are useless, but that they should imo be more damaging. and seeing hundreds of javelins fly in with no injuries at all is rather surprising to say the least.

[mcantu]

Javelin attacks from the rear are definately not useless. I have make the most elite phalanx units rout with well timed javelins fromthe rear. You just have to wait until they are a little tired or their morale has dropped a little first.

One other reason that missile fire from the front against phalanx units does so little is that EB has the shield value off all phalanx units at 5 no matter the actual size of their shield. IIRC, shield values are doubled against missile attacks from the front/left front.