Your favorite "Pikemen" nation and why

[Ca Putt]

Chaonion agema may be the Strongest Pike unit but personally I think other factors are more important to make the BEST unit. the Makedonian Military can rely on a much greater basis of recruits(AOR as mentioned above) and also has an additional pikeman unit that makes them the faction with most pikemen ^^ meaning five opposed to one, three and four.

similar case is for the Pontic bronzeshields (good ole third place for elite pikemen^^) who may be somewhat weaker than silvershields but are much cheaper aswell and thus actually make a fairly good unit , funny enough they are actually identical to the reformed phalangites of the makedonians

ps: is it just the unit list or are Argys hardy and Chaonians not?

[fomalhaut]

IMO the Chaonians are pretty ugly, they look made of plastic which is a common issue i have of many elites. way too clean for my tastes

I don't like the Hound motifs either. Macedonias reformed Phalanx is the only unit you need once you get them due to their effectiveness and just how nice and simple they look, form some silver shields to roleplay your veterans forming a corps but that's it.

Chaonian can be recruted in the capital only im pretty sure, while Makedonian Deuteroi, Pezhetairoi and Agryaspidai can be recruited in many lands.

Macedonia is just a better faction I think. And this is coming from the Eagle's biggest fan

[Ksifos]

Well the team has done a great job and I will trust them.I just think that pike-phalanx was about discipline and arms, something the "poor greco-Illyrians" probably lacked.

Fomalhaut - Chaeonion Agema is a nice design.Ok maybe it's not realistic but elites should look ...elites :-P
In fact many unit designs are great and way better than vanilla that's for sure.So no major complaints from me.
About Macedonia I tend to agree with you.I guess it should have a strong story like KH, right? Like cities wanting to join my glorious nation ,etc.I have the feeling Macedonia would be a good role-playing experience, so maybe I lower the difficulty and instead of being a maniac butcher, play as a patrician :-)

OFFTOPIC: I had some "complications" with Romani in my Casse campaign, havent' finished it yet.They gangbanged me only one city before the end, got mad with them and now I am burning and plundering their homeland.Time to pay back :-P
Btw I started the Casse campaign, just to get the grasp of a barbarian nation but now, being almost to the end, I cant believe how much FUN it is.Only when you see a "3 silver chevron" Kluddargos , charging a Pedite and hitting 15 kills on contact (Pedite routes :-D) you can feel the british might in all its glory, hehe.

[fomalhaut]

I don't care about the visual distinction, i mean the silver shields were named such for a reason and i'm sure the elite of any nation would be conspicously armored in a way to show off their prestigous status. i'm just saying in particular the chaonion are a little too action figurey for my tastes

well think of the history of the Antigonid dynasty! great story. the great Antigonos the One Eyed is your grandfather and it was your dynasty that lasted all the way until it was ended by the Romans. but under your rule that won't happen ;)

plus you get to fight the usurper Pyrrhus! but to Pyrrhus you are the usurper

[A_Dane]

@Ksifos, I don't really see why Epeiros should be lacking in Discipline?

[fomalhaut]

Molossians are not poor greco Illyrians you take that back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:'(
:'(

plus, at least under Pyrrhus, the Epirote kingdom were probably just as, or even more than, disciplined and trained than the Macedonians. Macedonia was pretty unstable until Gonatas, right? So any military they had weren't exactly Philip II material. And Macedonians weren't turncoating to Pyrrhus if they thought Molossians were some lower people.

they are a noble people, just not one that particularly interest me gameplay wise compared to Macedonia

[Ksifos]

A_Dane - IMHO Illyrians resemble more to the local units (like pirates, skirmishers and light cavalry) rather than having the top pikemen unit in the game.Illyria as a geographical place is a mountain area and wouldnt make sense to have such armies - ok maybe in an enlighted period of these people's history a more organized army was formed, wtih the influence of the neighbouring Macedons to whom have been vassals (?).
I need to dig more in my history books, but IIRC Illyrian were famous "guerilla tactics" troopers, rather than organized /disciplined ...agemas.
But maybe I am wrong since the team has made such an extensive research so let's just put off the history arguments :-)

Fomalhaut - Don't take me wrong.I didn't use the term the offensive way you interpreted it :-)
I just wanted to emphasize that in terms of wealth, organization and tactics, Macedons were superior traditionally .But tradition doesn't always make the difference ;-)
As you rightly state under a great leadership a nation can stand out on top.

[fomalhaut]

Illyrians in general and the Kingdom of Epirus are pretty distinct though! though obviously they have their similarities

we will never know though, Macedon in it's prime never fought against Epirus due to their long standing alliance through marriage (its why if you look at a map of Alexander's conquests there's always that conspicous chunk missing in greece). And Post Alexander Epirus was under Pyrrhus who had a macedonian style army probably composed of many macedonians!

I know next to nothing on the Epirote culture though, i hope in EBII their culture can be expanded upon because i think they are more than just greco-barbarians. quisque est, after all

[TheLastDays]

Just to take the thread into a whole other direction but still stay on topic:

I like Baktria a lot, when it comes to Pike nations.Yes they lack the elite phalanx but they get a levy one and two medium phalanxes that hold pretty well. They have great supporting troops, an incredibly versatile roster... Good skirmishers and archers, elephants, if you like them. Good heavy infantry, a nice royal guard, hoplite unit... and a good and versatile cavalry including everything from light skirmisher cav, to armored horse archers and heavy cataphracts :)

So you get the phalanx and every support for it you could ever ask for, other than a tank maybe ^^

[fomalhaut]

elite phalanx means so much though -_-

[Drewski]

Even more slightly off topic. Phalanx units are almost bugged in RTW. Try a custom battle, with 2 equal Phalanx units (or a line of equal units) facing off, but with one unit (or line) on very, very slightly higher ground. The higher ground unit, will take hardly any, and sometimes zero casualties, while the lower unit will eventually rout after massive losses. And I'm not talking about huge 45% slopes here. Just very small differences in elevation.

It isn't in any way EB's fault, its a broken game mechanic.

[Ca Putt]

well basically it means that you won't win a phalanx pushing match against the big ones(or pontos when they get their bronzeshields(whom I fancy the best looking elite phalangites, eventho they are identical to the not elite reformed phalangites^^)), UNLESS you charge in their back with your superior and better used cavalry, but when having played KH you know that feeling ;).
I like bactria but more for it's diversity than it's phalangites.

oh and culturally epirotes are not that far off from makedonians, to some extent I'd say they are to illyrians what the Makedonians are to thracians. just that while the makedonians got their "reform" some generations ago in which they imported a lot of greek culture the Epirotes had that "reform" just some years ago and failed in their attempt to conquer "ye known world"

[A_Dane]

@Kfisos; the fact that the majority of a nation dosn't fight in a "disciplined" way, dosn't mean that the upper elites couldn't be disciplined? And considering Pyrrhus fought the romans/Macedonians/greeks for so long, there must have been some sort of disciplin in his army...

[TheLastDays]

Yeah I also like Baktria for their diversity, as I stated, but they are a "phalanx nation", so I guess they apply ;)
and yeah, you don't win a pushing match against armies that field elites... in most cases that will be the Arche for you and later maybe Pontos and the Ptolies but you have superior flanking troops against almost all of them and thats both cavalry and infantry.... and elephants :P

[CashMunny]

It makes sense that the pikemen on a hill would slaughter those below them. That's a big increase in reach and it's much easier to push a pike downhill than uphill. Plus, the guys below can't bring their shields up as quickly or even as high to block incoming pike heads.

[fomalhaut]

I just played a HUGE battle last night and... wow, i didn't realize that PHALANXES ARE BROKEN ON SLOPES. My units were facing probably a 25* slope upward and Sabean Bodyguards rush my KLEROUCHON AGEMA, my goddamn nobles who were probably joking about these sweet smelling desert people and how much of their land they will take, got MASSACRED. i use caps because i was in total disbelief:


The Sabeans literally just walked through (not fight through like heavy units can do) the entire pike wall on my entire front forcing my guys to engage in melee. NOT ONE of my phalangites even attempted the stabbing motion but immediately went to sword. It ruined, literally, everything.

every time i think i understand the phalanx in game mechanic terms, i learn something new.

I understand that Phalanx are at a disadvantage in real life on uneven terrain, but in real life the entire formation wouldn't just say "since i am standing on a slight slope i will not use this 12 foot pike in my hand"

expletive expletive expletive expletive Creative Assembly, you should be happy the EB team doesn't have a better engine to use their superior game on. what a PATHETIC engine. absolute trash. what were they thinking? did they not do an uneven terrain battle during their 20 minutes of testing before Sega rushed the flaming pig infested game out?

[TheLastDays]

iirc correctly RTW wasn't originally published under SEGA, I might be wrong though ;)

[Drewski]

It makes sense that the pikemen on a hill would slaughter those below them. That's a big increase in reach and it's much easier to push a pike downhill than uphill. Plus, the guys below can't bring their shields up as quickly or even as high to block incoming pike heads.

I'm seriously not talking big slopes here. A tiny incline, almost imperceptible, will have very similar results. Maybe a 2% slope.

I just played a HUGE battle last night and... wow, i didn't realize that PHALANXES ARE BROKEN ON SLOPES. My units were facing probably a 25* slope upward and Sabean Bodyguards rush my KLEROUCHON AGEMA, my goddamn nobles who were probably joking about these sweet smelling desert people and how much of their land they will take, got MASSACRED. i use caps because i was in total disbelief:


The Sabeans literally just walked through (not fight through like heavy units can do) the entire pike wall on my entire front forcing my guys to engage in melee. NOT ONE of my phalangites even attempted the stabbing motion but immediately went to sword. It ruined, literally, everything.

every time i think i understand the phalanx in game mechanic terms, i learn something new.

I understand that Phalanx are at a disadvantage in real life on uneven terrain, but in real life the entire formation wouldn't just say "since i am standing on a slight slope i will not use this 12 foot pike in my hand"

expletive expletive expletive expletive Creative Assembly, you should be happy the EB team doesn't have a better engine to use their superior game on. what a PATHETIC engine. absolute trash. what were they thinking? did they not do an uneven terrain battle during their 20 minutes of testing before Sega rushed the flaming pig infested game out?

I feel your pain.

Playing as Mak yesterday, I had the slight slope vs AS. They had a full stack plus 2 little reinforcements, I had a balanced full stack. My main line of 4 Pez and 2 Elite Phalanx, took I think 8 casualties. Their 7 Units (1694 men)were totally wiped out.
In the drips and drabs of reinforcements, they had a Hellenic Med Phalanx, which stopped, not knowing what to do. I ordered one of my Elite Phalanx to engage it, so it marched in that very slow zombie style towards it, while I occupied myself with the remaining smallish skirmish battles and chasing routers. Less than a minute (or so) later I checked back on their progress. The HMP of AS had 241/242 men, my triple bronze Elites were down to 90 men! I hadn't notice that the HMP was on a very slight upslope. Naturally, one charge from The Heteroi had them routing, but I'd lost most of a valuable unit (a Loooong way from home).

I rest my case (for now) ;)

[Ksifos]

OFFTOPIC: Just to clarify on my early comment, Epiros was of pure greek origin and tradition.In fact it was the Illyrians that were of "barbarian" (in the meaning of not greek) culture, and the ones hunted both by Macedones and later Romans.So I take back the "poor greco-Illyrians", as it is not correct ;-)

ONTOPIC: About the phalanx and rough terrains.Phalanx was designed to perform in open, flat fields.That's where it showed its full potential.Most phalanx battles both of Phillipe and later Alexander, are on such terrains strategically chosen by them.Phalanx was at a big disadvantage on sloppy, rough terrains for the simple reason it couldn not maintain its 'disciplined formation', hence gaps would occur.
A very good example of that handicap is the Battle of Cynoscephalae where the Roman general Titus Quinctius Flaminius took advantage of it and soundly defeated Philip V of the Antigonids.Please refer to that battle for details.

IMO it's not so much of an engine flaw. rather than an effort of CA to put that element inside the engine.Do not forget we speak of a game released on 2003, hence developed some years before.Let's not be harsh with it ;-)

[fomalhaut]

trust me i understand the battle of dog heads but that is really giving CA the benefit of the doubt. what makes you think they were trying to be 'historically accurate' about this nuance of late hellenistic warfare and not about flaming pigs, roman ninjas, etc?

it's poor programming, nothing more.

[TheLastDays]

We're not harsh... or not too harsh ;)
just talking... And, well, sure a phalanx needs to have good, stable, flat ground to deply and function properly but still, fighting an inferior unit, on a 2% slope uphill shouldn't result in losing 3/4 of your unit while killing 2-3 men, that's definitely not how it would have turned out in real life...

[fomalhaut]

exactly. alexander had to fight uphill and across a river and that didn't seem to affect much. i understand phalanx warfare historically speaking, and a 10 PERCENT SLOPE SHOULD NOT = YOUR ENTIRE UNIT AND THEIR 12 FOOT SPEARS BECOMING USELESS

:(

[Ksifos]

Hehe ok.
Btw Casse campaign is finished, so it's Phalanx time baby :-P

I made up my mind and gonna start a Macedonia campaign with role playing in mind, so lower difficulty settings.What do you suggest?
M/H or maybe H/H, or H/M? What would be ideal for role playing?

[Trax]

The effects of terrain are exaggerated and so is the terrain itself.
Many of the slopes are such that it would be impossible to stand there not to mention fighting.
Such mountainsides should be impassable terrain imho.

[fomalhaut]

Ksifos i say M/M unless you like unbalanced battles (H/H)

kill the usurper! kill the tyrant Pyrrhus! just be sure you take auto fire from your akontistai specifically for those elephants because they WILL end your career early

yeah Trax i've found the amount of hills and such to be kind dumb, i cherish the few flat fields i can find. Athens has the best battlefield

[A_Dane]

I alter between H/H or H/M. I've been arguing with my self whether or not to switch to M/M, but that means no AI mercenaries, and then I just feel like I'm cheating :/

But really, I prefer it being somewhat biased in the AI's favour statwise, without going totally overboard. (my only VH/VH campaign ended when my elite phalanx was torn to pieces by a head on charge by an Hetairoi cavalry unit -.-. (And yes I had slight elevation in my favour). I want a challenge, but I don't want it to be ridicolous :)

(Ps: Pyrrhus ftw ;))

[Ksifos]

Hmm the AI not recruiting mercs? That's something I wouldn't like since it is unrealistic.Is there a some sort of info describing what differences exist between difficulty levels?

[Drewski]

The ai doesn't recruit Mercs on Medium. I ONLY will play medium campaign now, maybe getting older, but I got bored of fighting endless repetitive battles, and especially ones full of whatever the local merc pool is. Where's the fun in that? If I'm Mak, I want to fight AS in Phalanx wars, not full stacks of galatians/karian/cappo etc. mercs.

If you're going to blitz, then of course go hard or very hard campaign.

Plus on medium campaign, you can also even sometimes get ceasefires with a shared border ai (shockhorror), and diplomacy actually vaguely makes some kind of sense.

To doubters, Medium campaign plays very well, you just have to give the ai a chance to develop and use some roleplay/house rules yourself. If you actually enjoy the non stop battles, then I wouldn't bother. They'll come, but later in the game, when some of the ais have developed and started to dominate.

EDIT: Actually the ai does recruit Mercs on Medium, (I saw Rome doing it in a recent campaign) but rarely, and never more than the odd unit.

[fomalhaut]

anything above medium on either is far too unbalanced in my opinion. stat inbalance isn't my idea of fun

[Ca Putt]

I'd say it depends on what you played your KH campaign on, and how easily you could play that one - so either maintain the difficulty or go up with the campaign difficulty by one. - if you played KH on H/M now play on VH/M unless you can't handle phalangites(like myself).

as now you've got all the little tricks it needs to play a western hellenic faction in EB.^^