Imperial/Marian Army Formations?

[Che Roriniho]

I'm currently making what I hope will one day be a possible manual for EB (completely unofficial), an I'm having some difficulty in finding out the correct Historical formations for Rome, after they abandoned the Quincux. I'm going with a slightly edited version of QS's guide for army composition, but it is not there, and neither is the layout for the Imperial Armies (I'm guessing they are the same.)
There are the 4 Legions (I say 4, one is just a unit of Artillery, but there are 3 FM's there, but one is a Local Yokel General.)

Thanks in advance for any help, I'm really hoping that this project will turn out nice. I could even edit it for EBII, when that comes out.

Also, does anyone know where I could find Historical Layouts for all the factions? Big ask I know, but I'm a bit lost, especially with the 'Barbarian' Factions, where most sources just say they charged in great hordes, and the ones that don't don't give enough info.

[Celtic_Punk]

most northern european armies would line up, scream a rousing warcry signaling the impending enemy's doom and charge forth!

there would be tactics depending on the situation of the battle obviously, but most didnt have formations, they believed in the ability of the individual warrior.

[Che Roriniho]

most northern european armies would line up, scream a rousing warcry signaling the impending enemy's doom and charge forth!

True for some armies, but most were fairly organized. not quite on the level of SPQR, but reasonably enough. It was less 'CHARGE!', and more, 'That group of Naked people with the big swords, CHARGE!'

That's something I'm trying to get accross.

BTT, I remember finding this completely immense thread, either here or somewhere else in the Guild, about historical army formations. It had the lot, the Romans, the Carthaginians, Hannibal's Cannae, The lot. Any help finding it will be rewarded by COOKIES!

[Ludens]

most northern european armies would line up, scream a rousing warcry signaling the impending enemy's doom and charge forth!

there would be tactics depending on the situation of the battle obviously, but most didnt have formations, they believed in the ability of the individual warrior.

:sigh: Although Celtic warriors tended to be individualistic, it doesn't take a genius to see that soldiers in formation work better. For example, Polybius mentions that at Telamon the Romans were impressed by the order of the Celtic host. The impression that Celtic armies were simple mobs mostly comes from battles like Watling street, where the Romans fought what was essentially a horde of enraged farmers.

[Che Roriniho]

:sigh: Although Celtic warriors tended to be individualistic, it doesn't take a genius to see that soldiers in formation work better. For example, Polybius mentions that at Telamon the Romans were impressed by the order of the Celtic host. The impression that Celtic armies were simple mobs mostly comes from battles like Watling street, where the Romans fought what was essentially a horde of enraged farmers.

OOOOH ARRRRRRRRRRRRR! Sorry, Don't judge me.

But seriously, It's true.

[Celtic_Punk]

well yeah, there are cases where celts used formations, especially later celts, like robert the bruce, who created the legendary SCHILTRON! (stupid BI is only a few hundred years off :rolls eyes: )

[Skandinav]

Both celtic and germanic peoples used formations, shield-walls and such were common and some like the germanic spearmen, EB´s Speutogardaz were known for their tight phalanx-like formation for example as was the helvetii for theirs ( EB´s Mori Gaesum ). The written accounts are numerous, you could look up Caesar´s commentaries on his Gallic Wars for more information on these north-european ones, and I do not believe any EB faction to not have utilized army formations, at least not with their professional armies.

The late ( in EB´s time frame ) roman army formations were not very much unlike the manipulatory tactics from earlier republican times but still often, as before but perhaps even more so, the three battle-lines were joined before the engagement and before the skirmishers had retreated behind them. This was, as before, not a rigid tactic, nor was it used rigidly, but the three-line system, with veterans in the back and initial quincunx pattern deployment of the cohorts did survive into the imperial age.

[lobf]

well yeah, there are cases where celts used formations, especially later celts, like robert the bruce, who created the legendary SCHILTRON! (stupid BI is only a few hundred years off :rolls eyes: )

Now, I know little about Celts, but I would imagine it was not rare that they used formations. Are you basing your assertion off of anything you have read, or is this simply what you believe?

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm currently making what I hope will one day be a possible manual for EB (completely unofficial), an I'm having some difficulty in finding out the correct Historical formations for Rome, after they abandoned the Quincux. I'm going with a slightly edited version of QS's guide for army composition, but it is not there, and neither is the layout for the Imperial Armies (I'm guessing they are the same.)
There are the 4 Legions (I say 4, one is just a unit of Artillery, but there are 3 FM's there, but one is a Local Yokel General.)

There's no formations for Marian legions in my guide, because there were no longer "standard" ones. Sometimes they'd use the three-line quincunx, other times deploy in two or even one line. With standardisation of equipment came increased flexibility of tactics.

[AlexanderSextus]

so when would they use the quincunx instead of regular battle lines (and vice versa)?

[QuintusSertorius]

so when would they use the quincunx instead of regular battle lines (and vice versa)?

Whenever the general deemed it appropriate. That's why I didn't include any; reading the reports of late Republican battles, different generals did all kinds of different things at different times.

[Skandinav]

so when would they use the quincunx instead of regular battle lines (and vice versa)?

Your question sound as if within the boundaries of the theory stating that the quincunx formation was held even after the armies had clashed; the mainstream view on the quincunx though is that the three battle-lines was joined ( probably with small intervals between the units ) before the battle, and that the maniples were only for temporary maneuvering.
So the quincunx and regular battle lines are actually part of the same system, the triplex acies quincunx, although they have been used both together and apart.

Regarding standardization of tactics, none such existed in pre-marian times either, although some, like the abovementioned system, was commonly used.
Battle-reports, the few we have in such detail, indeed suggests that manipular/manipulatory tactics were used less frequently in the late republic but also that the romans still favoured multiple lines of engagement.

[Che Roriniho]

Going by this then QS, How would your 4 legion system (I have doubled up everything in the Socii, and an Allied General to keep them under control) work as a quincunx? Thanks so much for everything btw.

Righto, anyone know where I can find what a Makedon army would look like? (Not sure if they have a reform, if so, before and after if possible.)

[QuintusSertorius]

Your question sound as if within the boundaries of the theory stating that the quincunx formation was held even after the armies had clashed; the mainstream view on the quincunx though is that the three battle-lines was joined ( probably with small intervals between the units ) before the battle, and that the maniples were only for temporary maneuvering.
So the quincunx and regular battle lines are actually part of the same system, the triplex acies quincunx, although they have been used both together and apart.

Goldsworthy categorically rejects the idea that the quincunx was for deployment/movement only, and that they were joined together in battle. I find his reasoning persuasive that arraying troops takes a lot of time, and it's a further waste of time to deploy them in the quincunx only to collapse the gaps once battle starts.

Going by this then QS, How would your 4 legion system (I have doubled up everything in the Socii, and an Allied General to keep them under control) work as a quincunx? Thanks so much for everything btw.

Still the same as the Camillian/Polybian ones - Romans in the centre, Allies on the flanks/wings. If we go with a three-unit legion (one Aquila, one regular, one "veteran"), two of those in the centre with units of allies outside them. Allies for all your skirmishers and cavalry, too.