Breaking Elite Phalanx units - how?

**Apázlinemjó** · 04-26-2009, 22:53

Originally Posted by seienchin

You believe the numbers of the battle of Pydna??

I doubt that any number of a antik battle is right. Especially the battles the roman won...

Yeah, like at the Battle of Chaeronea, Archeaus lost around 80 000 men, while the Romans lost 13 (Sulla claimed that).

**Seleukus** · 04-26-2009, 22:58

Originally Posted by Apázlinemjó

Yeah, like at the Battle of Chaeronea, Archeaus lost around 80 000 men, while the Romans lost 13 (Sulla claimed that).

Actually, he claimed only 12 - one of the missing soldiers returned after the battle

**antisocialmunky** · 04-27-2009, 03:39

Actually it was 14 lost but 2 came back.

**Banzai!** · 04-27-2009, 06:12

Apart from Pyrrhus did the Romans ever lose to a phalangite army with ~numerical parity?

**Macilrille** · 04-27-2009, 12:28

In all instances against Pyhhros, it was the elephants, not the Phalanx that decided the battle.

And as far as I can recall, the Romans never lost to a Phalangite army. There is an instance of a phalanx holding a breach, but that is hardly surprising that they could do that. A phalanx is virtually unbeatable from the front and in a position where it cannot be flanked it will hold for long.

**Watchman** · 04-27-2009, 16:00

I imagine the experiences with Pyrrhos taught the Romans enough of the working basics of how to deal with phalanxes that they didn't have overmuch trouble later. It was, after all, simple enough - try to force combat in rough terrain and flank as much as possible.

**seienchin** · 04-27-2009, 16:27

The Carthagenians used phalangitai...
But a classic alexander like army... No

**cmacq** · 04-28-2009, 09:48

Originally Posted by Seleukus

Actually, he claimed only 12 - one of the missing soldiers returned after the battle

I and others have looked at the Greek texts. Actually, it states that all went missing of which two returned. The two accounts never provide any number for the killed or wounded.

Here is the Greek text for Appian's Roman History: The Mithridatic Wars

Αππιανος Ῥωμαικα Μιτηριδατειοσ

Chapter 45
Αρψηελαοσ δε και ηοσοι αλλοι κατα μεροσ εχεπηυγον· εσ Ψηαλκιδα συνελεγοντο· ου πολυ πλειουσ μυριὀν εκ δὀδεκα μυριαδὀν γενομενοι, Ρηὀμαιὀν δε εδοχαν μεν αποτηανειν πεντεκαιδεκα ανδρεσ· δυο δ᾿ αυτὀν επανὑλτηον, τουτο μεν δὑ Συλλαι και Αρψηελαὀι τὀι Μιτηριδατου στρατὑγὀι τὑσ περι Ψηαιρὀνειαν μαψηὑσ τελοσ ὑν· δι᾿ ευβουλιαν δὑ μαλιστα Συλλα και δι᾿ απηροσυνὑν Αρψηελαου τοιονδε ηεκατερὀι γενομενον, Συλλασ δε πολλὀν μεν αιψημαλὀτὀν πολλὀν δ᾿ ηοπλὀν και λειασ κρατὀν· τα μεν αψηρεια σὀρευτηεντα· διαζὀσαμενοσ ηὀσ ετηοσ εστι Ρηὀμαιοισ· αυτοσ ενεπρὑσε τοισ ενυαλιοισ τηεοισ· αναπαυσασ δε τὑν στρατιαν επ᾿ ολιγον· εσ τον Ευριπον συν ευζὀνοισ επι τον Αρψηελαον ὑπειγετο, Ρηὀμαιὀν δε ναυσ ουκ εψηοντὀν· αδεὀσ τασ νὑσουσ περιεπλει τα παραλια πορτηὀν, Ζακυντηὀι δ᾿ εκβασ παρεστρατοπεδευσεν, και τινὀν Ρηὀμαιὀν· ηοι επεδὑμουν· νυκτοσ επιτηεμενὀν αυτὀι· κατα ταψηοσ εσβασ αυτηισ ανὑγετο εσ Ψηαλκιδα· λὑιστευοντι μαλλον ὑ πολεμουντι εοικὀσ,

Now, the part in question...
Αρψηελαοσ δε και ηοσοι αλλοι κατα μεροσ εχεπηυγον· εσ Ψηαλκιδα συνελεγοντο· ου πολυ πλειουσ μυριὀν εκ δὀδεκα μυριαδὀν γενομενοι, Ρηὀμαιὀν δε εδοχαν μεν αποτηανειν πεντεκαιδεκα ανδρεσ· δυο δ᾿ αυτὀν επανὑλτηον,

I Render as...
Archelaus and all the others excaped divided, in Chalcis from a multitude of one hundred twenty thusand, collected [the] remaining ten thusand. However on the other hand, the Ramans suposed fifteen men [were] dead, of these two returned [alive],

In Plutarch's Σύλλας its:

ὁ δὲ Σύλλας λέγει τέσσαρας καὶ δέκα ἐπιζητῆσαι τῶν αὐτοῦ στρατιωτῶν, εἶτα καὶ τούτων δύο πρὸς τὴν ἑσπέραν παραγενέσθαι.

Which I render as...

'That Sulla says he missed fourteen of his soldiers, and of these when towards evening, two became present'.

So Plutarch's Σύλλας has ἐπιζητῆσαι and in the Ῥωμαικα its αποτηανειν. I don't understand why the two accounts don't jive better?

CmacQ

**Yarema** · 05-03-2009, 23:38

I don't play EB for long but i noticed that phalanx is pretty tough. However there is a very easy way to beat the phalanx: do it the same way as Romans did it in history, that's exactly what i do

1. Use troops that throw javelins before the engagement and make sure that your units throw all or at least most of their javelins before the fighting bergins. The Phalanx is very slow, so you shouldn't have any problems evading their attack until you weaken them with javelns

2. You have to manoeuver yourt units and provoke the enemy to make mistakes - phalanx is very slow, so just move your wwwhole line without breaking formation. the enemy will try to respond to your manoeuvering, but his phalanx is slower then legionary or barbarian troops (i love aunderlining the low speed and clumsinass of the phalanx, hehe

). For short moments, gaps will open u in his ranks and flanks will be left uncovered. Exploit hese few short moments: strike within the gaps, use them to get into the enemy's rear if possible, send your caavalry to attack him from the flanks (the enemy might try to counter it with his own cavalry, so be careful and sen some good spearmen at them).

This is how the Romans dealt with the phalanx - they took advantage of the fact that ti was hopelessly slow and they outmanoevered it. Even if you play against a human player commanding phalanx and even if he knoes what your up to,teh slow speed of his phalanx may be his unoding.

The Romans used similar tactics in, for example, battles of Cynscephalae and Magnesia: they disorganized the enemy's ranks by manoeuvering (Cynoscephalae) or by repelling chariots and aelephants and driving them back at the phalanx (Magnesia). Then they quite simply attacked into the gap (or more than one gaps) in the phalanx formation andliterally cut through their ranks (i know i simplifiedthe desciption of those two battles but this is not a thread entirely about them). That's what i do hile playing the romans and works, even no vh/vh difficulty level. It also worked form me while playing barbarians in custom battles against phalanx. Cutting them down with heavy cavalry and horse archers is very similar: deplete them with arrows, ride around to tire them make them and break their ranks, surround them and finish them off one by one.