Phalanxes in version 1.1

**antisocialmunky** · 01-14-2009, 19:24

You know, I can't dig it up right now but the wikipedia entry on the Achaean League cites Plutarch as saying that the Thureos's narrowness was a disadvantage in close combat. Granted if this paraphrase is accurate, Plutarch was a little late to the scene.

However it might just end up being a wash because Iphikratean hoplites had longer spears.

**Watchman** · 01-14-2009, 21:08

OTOH the thureos would have been a fair bit lighter and more versatile than the somehwat cumbersome and specialised aspis...

Anyway, NS, I'm pretty sure you're overlooking the little issue that Iphikrates' originals proved to be quite capable of taking on old-style hoplites in a straight-up frontal engagement, no ?

**Aper** · 01-14-2009, 21:38

Originally Posted by Watchman

Uh-huh.
Armour indeed went out of fashion among hoplites around the Peloponnesian War... and then came back into fashion. IIRC, in a somewhat heavier kit than previously too.

Around the same time hoplites (and other Greek soldiery) were also increasingly becoming full-time paid professionals if not outright mercenaries, and of course the elite formations (epilektoi) quite a few of the major communities had over the years - the most famous likely being the Theban Sacred Band - were naturally very well equipped and highly trained.

So meh.

Heavier than the old fashioned full bronze armor? I'm a little skeptical about this...
I don't know much about classical hoplites of 3° BC, I thought they were largely disappeared from battlefields ; if you can tell me some sources on the matter I'll be glad to learn myself.
However, I don't remember any greek power in 4° and 3° BC that could deploy entire armies of well-armored and well-trained men... and few hundreds of epilektoi couldn't match the professional army of the Maks (who had their own elites anyway).
According to EB the greeks in 3° trained their men in the Makedonian manner, even the spartans, I can't think any better evidence of the superiority of the sarissa on the old glorious dory... even without the support of good cavalry,that in greece traditionally was scarce.

Back on topic, in my games I noticed only a slight advantage for tweaked units against vanilla ones : it seems strange to me that a little radius reduction makes a unit overpowered... I think it's better to test a little more, maybe giving units a radius reduction based on morale to portrait the different level of training, as I suggested. However, as you can probably imagine, I think Iphikratean should perform well against Classicals, not slaughter them, but winning more than not is in order IMO (obviously if they have similar protections and morale)

**antisocialmunky** · 01-15-2009, 00:04

They would win if you could increase the effective range of Iphs. However, you can't do that short of phalanx mode on the TW engine....

EDIT

However, if you could use something that prevents enemies from attacking like knockback, that might work:

If you had a high attack unit with low lethality and fast attack, and you stick the unit in guard mode to keep formation then that might work. Really, that's actually pretty much what the phalanx is, fast attacking, low lethality pushing thing that uses knockback and mass.

It would probably be overpowered though.

**NeoSpartan** · 01-15-2009, 05:14

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

....
However, if you could use something that prevents enemies from attacking like knockback, that might work:

If you had a high attack unit with low lethality and fast attack, and you stick the unit in guard mode to keep formation then that might work. Really, that's actually pretty much what the phalanx is, fast attacking, low lethality pushing thing that uses knockback and mass.

It would probably be overpowered though.

hum... you might be on to something there munky

**Watchman** · 01-15-2009, 18:05

Faster attacks are a "no can do", at least without going to mess around with the animations which I sure don't know how to do. I can test the knockback idea, although I expect the results to be right strange...

**NeoSpartan** · 01-15-2009, 18:49

Originally Posted by Watchman

Faster attacks are a "no can do", at least without going to mess around with the animations which I sure don't know how to do....

oh.... forgot about the animations. Yah I take that back. It would look and sound wierd too.

**antisocialmunky** · 01-15-2009, 18:57

Well, knockback, low lethality, and high attack rating might work. I think others have done it before and it makes things a little OP/weird.

**Novellus** · 01-17-2009, 15:49

In the mean time, while people are experimenting with the radii of units, does anyone know how to return the phalanx ability?

**Aper** · 01-17-2009, 16:06

Originally Posted by Watchman

Faster attacks are a "no can do", at least without going to mess around with the animations which I sure don't know how to do. I can test the knockback idea, although I expect the results to be right strange...

I take the chance to ask (you are a member of EB team IIRC) something that puzzles me a bit : why don't you use the attack delay feature to portray the differences in weapon speed and in warriors' skill?
Why you use it only for lances and ranged weapons?

I'm taking care of the Paeninsula Italica EDU during the mod leader absence, and I found attack delay great in resolving balance issues, but I'm inexperienced as a modder, and this question haunts me costantly.

Thanks in advance.

**Watchman** · 01-18-2009, 21:14

There's not really too much difference in the overall "attack speed" of most melee weapons, and such as there are are mainly subsumed into the modifier they impose on the warriors' attack skill value. Dunno about the missiles - when I came on board the stat system had been established a long time ago so I'm not privy to the reasonings that went into it, my job's mainly "error-checking" the values in the EDU - but in any case I know the diverse lances have that nasty delay to counterbalance their very high lethality values and to help simulate the fact they're rather cumbersome and unwieldy weapons designed for the charge rather than the ensuing melee.

Side note: from the testing I've been doing with modified radius values on various units, I'll have to say that hot damn it's looking promising. Big thumbs-up for everybody who suggested and contributed to the idea (PraetorFigus and anybody else I may not be remembering ATM) - as the Soldier says in Team Fortress 2, "You deserve a medal!"

**antisocialmunky** · 01-18-2009, 21:17

Are you going to try a little bit of this for MIITW as well?

**Watchman** · 01-18-2009, 21:36

No idea, I'm not involved with EBII statting (yet, anyway) - only recently having bought M2TW and still only planning to purchase Kingdoms has a fair bit to do with that. But if it works out well for EB1, and the M2TW engine doesn't have any fundamental differences that disallowed it, I would assume it's going to at the very least get tested.

**PraetorFigus** · 01-28-2009, 21:45

Bump?

Uggh, I got caught up with RL...

With the pseudo-phalanxes I'm thinking of posting a modified edu in the EB UMP section when I get time to work on it, I want that to be soon,

unless someone else has started already, then I'll contribute to your work.

I expect to leave most stats alone with mods in the unit radius, formation spacing, defensive skill and lethality (maybe troop numbers also), open to modding others attributes for balancing if necessary.

I'll be open to any suggestions for any units and have been considering doing some things that were suggested about making hoplites fight more with pushing and less lethality, for example also.

The goal for the hoplites is trying to mimic the "shield-wall" effect that some of those units seem better suited for with their style of shield then how they work now as other spearmen that spread out against an enemy front without guard mode. But the planned mod is primarily for the pseudo-phalanxes.

Feel free to PM me.