Speer vs. sword?

[Giuliano Taverna]

Speer vs. sword? I have been thinking about it for a while and despite the fact that swords became the primary close combat weapon the spear has greater reach is easier to maintain and cheaper to make not to mention excellent at warding of cavalry. What over all makes a sword better? As far as I cam tell the spear s better yet the vast majority of forces in the ancient to middle ages always started with the spear but later switched to sword use.

Also man for man who do you think would win in a fight between one hoplite and one Marian legionary they both rely heavily on the formation of their unit so with out that which one would come out on top?

Another point the Achilles heel of the pike phalanx is its lack of flexibility but isn’t the classical Greek phalanx much more flexible or is that just due to the game play engine limitations? Shouldn’t in theory a well led Greek army beat a Macedonian one?

Also about the phalanx didn’t it break rank in several of Alexander’s battles and still defeat the Persian infantry? How strong are the foot companions out of formation compared to other units?

[Leão magno]

Wow lots of questions .. there are many previous threads about them as well.
For the first, Spear is useless if the legionaire could get near enought to use the Galdius.

Both Phalanx (greek and macedonian) were manouverable enough, what they lacked was the discipline and manouverability of the Cohorts, they lacked the good Sargent that could change orders and give new directions, this Sargent was the diference between Romans and Philis army in the Macedonian wars.

And if you really wants to inderstand why to ise a sword instead of a spear in one on one combat, well, try to use both and you will feel why though harder to use, when you learn how to use it, the sword gives you much more accuracy in attacking, flexibility and manuverability.

That is my opinion at least

[konny]

Yes, I would assume that for the experinced fighter the sword is the better weapon.

Also man for man who do you think would win in a fight between one hoplite and one Marian legionary they both rely heavily on the formation of their unit so with out that which one would come out on top?

Depends on who is the better fighter. Does the Legionar has his two pila?

Another point the Achilles heel of the pike phalanx is its lack of flexibility but isn’t the classical Greek phalanx much more flexible or is that just due to the game play engine limitations?

The classical and the Makedonian Phalanxes were basicly the same. The Maks used longer spears and smaller shields. The game engine does in fact display Hoplites in the wrong way: as "Maniples" of Hoplites. If you want to play them the correct way, you must place all Hoplites in your army in one long line.

Shouldn’t in theory a well led Greek army beat a Macedonian one?

Any army of the Ancient times was able to beat any other army. There was no guarantee for victory. The Greek had reformed their Phalanx. That variation (Iphikratian Phalanx) was adopted by the Makedonians and used to beat the Greek. The back bone of the Republican Roman army, on the other hand, was an old fashioned Hoplite Phalanx - and we know what they did to the Makedonians. Then again, Hannibal and Pyrrhos both used successor style armies and defeated the Romans.

The thing is, that you had sword, spear, axe, javelin, bow and sling - and that's it from the Bronze Age well into the 16th Century. There was no technical inovation that gave any army an advantage over the other, so we have basically only variations of the same weapon systems on both sides; what means that victory and defeat was determind by other factors than weaponary or equipement.

Also about the phalanx didn’t it break rank in several of Alexander’s battles and still defeat the Persian infantry?

Alexander won his battles with cavalry charges in the right moment.

[Leão magno]

Alexander won his battles with cavalry charges in the right moment.

And hipaspitas holding and advancing grounds

[chomskola]

incidnetally the hypaspists are one man armies, really hardcore in eb, and very pretty, were they really that pretty in reality? and that tough?

[Hells Bells]

the spear is an elegant weapon, deadly in experienced hands. Not only does it have greater reach, but it can be used to trip, prod, and smack an opponent. Also in a land that is densely packed with shrubs and brush that rise above a mans head, an agile man can clamber up his spear and gain the height necessary to survey the battlefield at leisure. Therefore a skilled spearman will have knowledge of the terrain and positions of the enemy, as well as having the other advantages attributed to the spear.

[Companion Cavalry]

Phalanx is quite powerful if you have adequate support:

On the sides should have 2-3 medium infantry and further along heavy infantry and in front of them, and also in front of the phalanx, archers. Divide the phalanx into two segment and put a combination of light skirmishers and medium infantry in the gap. Have 3-4 cavalry supporting at the left and right extremities and have the phalanx screened from the front by Peltasts. Add extra light infantry where enemy will be engaged the most.

This should enable the phalanx to be flexible enough to defeat the Greek warfare tactics

[Giuliano Taverna]

Phalanx is quite powerful if you have adequate support:

On the sides should have 2-3 medium infantry and further along heavy infantry and in front of them, and also in front of the phalanx, archers. Divide the phalanx into two segment and put a combination of light skirmishers and medium infantry in the gap. Have 3-4 cavalry supporting at the left and right extremities and have the phalanx screened from the front by Peltasts. Add extra light infantry where enemy will be engaged the most.

This should enable the phalanx to be flexible enough to defeat the Greek warfare tactics

Ah the light phalanx formation adopted by Pyrrhus right. I’ve use it a few times personally I adapted a slightly different formation that is sort of a cross between the quincunx and the formation of Alexander.

Sword-Pike-speer-speer-Pike-Sword

Take a Carthaginian army for example I usually have 2 sacred band in the middle 2 phalanx pike men on each side and 2 African or Iberian legionaries one the flanks. The next line is either 4 archer units or 4 slingers and if you have it artillery behind that I usually have Libyans, mercenaries, or allies behind the missile tropes like so:

Unit---space---Unit---space---Unit---Space---Unit

And usually heavy cavalry on the wings just behind the line
-------------------phalanx-----------------
archer--archer--slinger--slinger
--- --- --- ---line--- --- --- ---
c c
a a
v v
e e
l l
r r
y y


It’s generally a good all purpose successor formation in patched battle of course I also perform variations depending on the apposing force and the terrain.

In sieges I generally form columns and for an infantry block in the main path to the town square and slowly advance stop allow the defenders to launch a futile attack and rout then advance until I hit the square and then I either envelop the square or storm it depending on the number of remaining troops.

[Leão magno]

I just love the old days phalanx, that single spear line with the adition of Alexander flank shock units together with some good cavalry on the left wing, it works, it is easy to set up and to move, and it works

[Companion Cavalry]

Actually, I made this myself based on how the enemy goes around the sides,

requiring extra flexibility for my phalanx armies. Leao magno that strategy you

posted does not work on its own, if the cavalry are in any way defeated the

entire army has no chance, like playing roulette