Legion vs. Phalanx online tournament

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

I am bringing it up with the other judges:

If a player gets into a box the battle should be considered a loss for that player IF the enemy is able to surround them.

This would be the result in a real battle, because no commander would assault such a monstrosity, and if they could surround it, no army could escape.

The definitions that I am giving them are that "Surrounded" would mean that at least 4 main infantry units and at least 2 other units of any type are stationary and physically touching each other to form a "ring" of sorts that encircles the "boxed" enemy.

We'll see what the judges vote on.

[IrishHitman]

I am bringing it up with the other judges:

If a player gets into a box the battle should be considered a loss for that player IF the enemy is able to surround them.

This would be the result in a real battle, because no commander would assault such a monstrosity, and if they could surround it, no army could escape.

The definitions that I am giving them are that "Surrounded" would mean that at least 4 main infantry units and at least 2 other units of any type are stationary and physically touching each other to form a "ring" of sorts that encircles the "boxed" enemy.

We'll see what the judges vote on.

I would argue in favour of a time limit before that.
A box still contains a reasonable amount of fighting power anyway, give the player a few mins to launch an attack from the box formation.

You are kidding us right??? The EB phalanxes are near invincible. Please, someone help me out here. RTW phalanxes are ultra easy to get through, while the EB ones seem to employ some sort of magic to hold back just about anything excpet heavy cavalry.

Tell that to the RTW vanilla boxes, which are pretty much invincible.
Even to heavy cav. RTW vanilla phalanx formations don't break up as easily is why.

[Potocello]

I am bringing it up with the other judges:

If a player gets into a box the battle should be considered a loss for that player IF the enemy is able to surround them.

This would be the result in a real battle, because no commander would assault such a monstrosity, and if they could surround it, no army could escape.

The definitions that I am giving them are that "Surrounded" would mean that at least 4 main infantry units and at least 2 other units of any type are stationary and physically touching each other to form a "ring" of sorts that encircles the "boxed" enemy.

We'll see what the judges vote on.

I would have to agree with this because after a while the boxed in guys would either have to attack or die of starvation or suicide or something... I think that if you make a box you have to formulate an attack or you lose.

[antisocialmunky]

I think something like this happenedi n one of the Syrian Wars(Battle of Raphia) where the Seleucids formed a box. It worked alright until the Elephants inside the box panicked.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

I would have to agree with this because after a while the boxed in guys would either have to attack or die of starvation or suicide or something... I think that if you make a box you have to formulate an attack or you lose.

I believe the box you can form in TW can´t be formed in real life because unlike TW you can´t have all the perimeter protected with pikes since you can´t put one unit inside of the other. For this reason and the others already pointed, i agree with Potocello. Btw, i´ve been seeing the battles and i must say they´re pretty nice and i didn´t think this tournament could be so fun

[IrishHitman]

I believe the box you can form in TW can´t be formed in real life because unlike TW you can´t have all the perimeter protected with pikes since you can´t put one unit inside of the other. For this reason and the others already pointed, i agree with Potocello. Btw, i´ve been seeing the battles and i must say they´re pretty nice and i didn´t think this tournament could be so fun

Ah, but in real life, you can form a circle.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

Ah, but in real life, you can form a circle.

True. But imagine how hard would be to form a circle and mainten it´s consistency ( 10 sarissas for one scutum, for example). As far as i know the phalanks weren´t suppose to form a circle. I could be wrong but i don´t think the phalanks circle is a valid formation.

[IrishHitman]

True. But imagine how hard would be to form a circle and mainten it´s consistency ( 10 sarissas for one scutum, for example). As far as i know the phalanks weren´t suppose to form a circle. I could be wrong but i don´t think the phalanks circle is a valid formation.

It would just require the lines further back to fill the gaps.
With enough people, it is theoretically possible.

Practically, it would be too hard to form in battle.

[antisocialmunky]

I wouldn't mind joining but I'd only be able to play on Saturdays. I wouldn't mind doing some sort of glorious laggy 3 vs 3.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

It would just require the lines further back to fill the gaps.
With enough people, it is theoretically possible.

Practically, it would be too hard to form in battle.

Perhaps you´re right but i still beleive that this circle would not be as strong as the normal phalanks line.
What do you think about the other reasons they posted? My opinion is that the box should not be a valid formation for this tournament or valid as long the boxed player lauchs an attack. Just form a box without proper counter-attack is not feasible. Any thoughts?
Thx

[IrishHitman]

Potocello (Roman Republic) vs. IrishHitman (Kingdom of Makedonia)

http://www.mediafire.com/?jinlmugqzq5

Victory to IrishHitman.

A good battle, could have went either way.
Engaged the Roman line, the battle went to the flanks (as it usually does when playing with Mak), and I eventually destroyed the Roman centre, and used the remaining troops to rout the rest.

A rematch soon.

[antisocialmunky]

So what is it?
(Hellens, Draws, Romans)
3-2-0?

[Potocello]

I think these are just test games so we can work out the kinks. But Rome has defiantly won more with Tolg so i don't know that to score is.

[IrishHitman]

I think these are just test games so we can work out the kinks. But Rome has defiantly won more with Tolg so i don't know that to score is.

3-2-3 maybe?
When he played against me, it was one draw and one defeat for him.
(Thank you again Phalanx for saving my ass in the defeat of Tolg and Bure).

Anyway, the second match:
http://www.mediafire.com/?mat01xyoday

Potocello vs. IrishHitman
Same factions as the first.

Another victory for me, won in a similar way to the last one, except more emphasis on cavalry.
He attack the rear of my phalanx with infantry, my cavalry charged them, and routed them.

The third match:

Potocello (Kingdom of Makedonia) vs. IrishHitman (Roman Republic)

I was soundly beaten by Poto.
Raped would be a less polite but more accurate term.

Poto has the replay for that.

[Potocello]

Me vs Irish this was our third game. He won twice as Makedonia, I lost twice as Rome. Third game i beat Irishhitman

Here's the replay file.
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LDFUR4JD

He tried to flank me but i split up my forces and isolated his two flanks. I was able to kill his general early on and hammer and anvil one of his flanks to cause a mass rout. I then moved my forces to help out the other flank and another rout was caused.

Good games to Irishhitman.

[antisocialmunky]

I'm surprised not more Romans are buying Samnites or Ligurians to act as flank guards. You have those Massilians too. Ligurians come with more men and Massilians carry swords and spears. Also don't forget Camillian Triarii are better than Polybians. :-D

Have you guys also played with those Ligurian or Campanian cavalry?

[A Very Super Market]

What. Camillan troops superior to their successors? Blasphemy!

Skirmisher cavalry is a waste. Not enough men for a rush, not enough javelins to last.