Results 1 to 30 of 85

Thread: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Come to daddy Member Geoffrey S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Shell Beach
    Posts
    4,028

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    Quote Originally Posted by konny
    They will not hold the line against two other phalanxes, that's the point. It doesn't matter that they will hold out longer than any other Phalanx in the given situation before they break.
    Did you even read what I said? They are meant to be used in the main battle line as any other phalanx unit, where they will usually not face more than one enemy unit except if the rest of the line collapses, not alone against too many opponents. They do exactly what other phalanx units but better and more reliably, but suffer from exactly the same fatal problem, namely vulnerability to flank attacks. Use them to either hold a strong central part of the line, or as an anchor on one or both of the flanks for cavalry to attack around.
    "The facts of history cannot be purely objective, since they become facts of history only in virtue of the significance attached to them by the historian." E.H. Carr

  2. #2
    Whatever Member konny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Germania Inferior
    Posts
    1,787

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
    Did you even read what I said? ....
    You are absolutly missing the point of this discussion. How to use a phalanx is not the topic, but if it is preferable to raise two medicore units instead of one elite.



    But since you insist on talking of phalanx warfare:

    They are meant to be used in the main battle line as any other phalanx unit, where they will usually not face more than one enemy unit except if the rest of the line collapses, not alone against too many opponents.
    The enemy phalanx in my example is 8 units long while yours numbers just 4 of (better) units. How do you manage to have each of your phalanxes to face just one of the enemy phalanx? The units on the wings are facing two enemy phalanxes each and there is still one more enemy phalanx standing next to these flankers to fight off your mobile forces and cavalry, what the enemy has too.

    This tactical nightmare is achived by deciding for Phalangitai Deuteroi instead of Argyraspides.

    Disclaimer: my posts are to be considered my private opinion and not offical statements by the EB Team

  3. #3

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    In my opinion, anything more than Deuteroi level phalanxes against non-phalanx enemies is a waste of money.

    Against other Diadochoi, maybe I can get some Pezhetairoi, but the Deuteroi seem to hold the line enough until I can hit them with my cavalry. Cavalry, not UBER phalanxes, is my greatest asset when fighting against Diadochi, KH or anyone that uses phalanxes broadly.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    Uhm... Konny you seem to be talking purely theory, and practical issues be discarded.

    Now on the other hand consider this. 20 units = 20 units?

    At some stage you will reach the luxury of affording elite troops. Then the choice is yours: do you make an army of 20 crappy units and another army of 20 equally crappy units? Or do you go the other way around: dividing your elite forces over multiple armies and adding some manpower in the form of crappy units?

    That way you'll likely end up with two armies of 15 units each... Respectable armies at that. And I would take the 15 unit armies over the 20 unit ones - because a lil' math tells me the unit ratio is 3:4 which is quite possible to win. Then consider the 3 units have 1 unit which is good enough to hold 2 from the front (and therefore can be spread over a much larger area if need be)... I do think the 3 would beat the 4 hands down.

    (A frequent strategy I use against the numerous but crappy stacks of AI levies: make sure to have your main line a bit curved so the AI will need to maintain a longer line than you have (unit wise) to avoid being outflanked from the get go. (Elite) phalanx units are particularly useful for this kind of tactics.)
    - Tellos Athenaios
    CUF tool - XIDX - PACK tool - SD tool - EVT tool - EB Install Guide - How to track down loading CTD's - EB 1.1 Maps thread


    ὁ δ᾽ ἠλίθιος ὣσπερ πρόβατον βῆ βῆ λέγων βαδίζει” – Kratinos in Dionysalexandros.

  5. #5
    Come to daddy Member Geoffrey S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Shell Beach
    Posts
    4,028

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    I think Tellos Athenaios has said pretty much all there is to say, but...
    Quote Originally Posted by konny
    You are absolutly missing the point of this discussion. How to use a phalanx is not the topic, but if it is preferable to raise two medicore units instead of one elite.

    The enemy phalanx in my example is 8 units long while yours numbers just 4 of (better) units. How do you manage to have each of your phalanxes to face just one of the enemy phalanx? The units on the wings are facing two enemy phalanxes each and there is still one more enemy phalanx standing next to these flankers to fight off your mobile forces and cavalry, what the enemy has too.

    This tactical nightmare is achived by deciding for Phalangitai Deuteroi instead of Argyraspides.
    ...who's talking about one elite against two mediocre units, or four against eight? They're not meant to be cost effective, they're meant to be available when enough money is available to replace one of the mediocre units. Elites are not massively better than regulars but they can make all the difference when used in a regular battle line.

    And in history, that's what elites did: they were a minority in a regular line, holding a particular (often crucial) part of it or used for breaking a specific part of the enemy line. So, not only are you missing the point of this discussion, I think you're also missing the point of elites in armies.
    "The facts of history cannot be purely objective, since they become facts of history only in virtue of the significance attached to them by the historian." E.H. Carr

  6. #6
    Whatever Member konny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Germania Inferior
    Posts
    1,787

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
    ...who's talking about one elite against two mediocre units, or four against eight?
    Sakkura, Blank and me from post #25 of this thread onward. I am sorry that you managed to miss the enitre discussion that you joined in, but I can't help it: phalanxes were a pure example.


    The same is for Tellos Athenaios:

    At some stage you will reach the luxury of affording elite troops. Then the choice is yours: do you make an army of 20 crappy units and another army of 20 equally crappy units? Or do you go the other way around: dividing your elite forces over multiple armies and adding some manpower in the form of crappy units?
    It would be helpfull if you take the time to read the previous posts of this discussion (it's not a 20 pages thread after all), then you might not start teaching me things that I had allready pointed out on the previous page:

    Quote Originally Posted by konny
    That depends very much of the situation.

    When you have the money to either field for example two units of Phalangitai Deuteroi or one unit of Argyraspides you should always decide for the cheaper, weaker units because two of them will certainly beat one elite unit of the same type. That can be when you are short of money/income per turn or need to field more than one main stack at a time.

    When you have enough money or, due to the strategic situation, can limited yourself to one main army, the 20-slots limit becomes more important. In this situation you should always take the better unit, even if the cost-efficinecy isn't as good because of the much higher price with only slightly better stats.

    Disclaimer: my posts are to be considered my private opinion and not offical statements by the EB Team

  7. #7
    Member Member Cyclops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    968

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    I enjoy this mod so much because there is quite a good balance and if I don't like it they tell me how to mod stats.

    I particularly like it when I make a mistake and the AI makes me pay. I look back at a bloody nose the Eleutheroi gave my Epirotes in Patavium, and I feel satisfaction at the victory I took in round 2 with the same units plus 2 mercs hired to counter their Gesaetae.

    As a historical simulation it does an enjoyable job given the hard-coded limits, and gives a good idea why people in 272 felt the Antigonids were easy meat and Pyhrros was on track to be Big Al 2.
    Last edited by Cyclops; 11-14-2007 at 03:12.
    From Hax, Nachtmeister & Subotan

    Jatte lambasts Calico Rat

  8. #8

    Default Re: Why do certain players think that some factions are underpowered?

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
    Did you even read what I said? They are meant to be used in the main battle line as any other phalanx unit, where they will usually not face more than one enemy unit except if the rest of the line collapses, not alone against too many opponents. They do exactly what other phalanx units but better and more reliably, but suffer from exactly the same fatal problem, namely vulnerability to flank attacks. Use them to either hold a strong central part of the line, or as an anchor on one or both of the flanks for cavalry to attack around.
    Use Argyraspidai to anchor the flanks, if your centre caves in you bring your flanks together to perform the classic double envelopment. It worked for Militiades and Hannibal, it works for me, it will work for you. The only time I'd consider positioning my elites in the centre is if I'm badly outnumbered and gambling on a rapid breakthrough, not something I'm comfortable with. Of course, if the elites aren't in the battle-line but in reserve, then I usually place them in the centre, unless I anticipate being outflanked by cavalry.


    To reply to the "1 elite vs. 2 levies" debate, I've certainly betaten two units of Hoplitai Haploi with one of Epilektoi Hoplitai, and also one unit of Hoplitai Haploi and one of Phalangiti Deteroi with the same unit of Epilektoi Hoplitai bodyguards. However, it was a difficult fight, if my opponent had been an experienced human rather than the AI, I certainly would have lost.
    Last edited by CirdanDharix; 11-15-2007 at 18:48.

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