Pikemen resistance to missiles

[4th Regiment]

This is old issue with RTW engine, where Macedonian style phalanx is almost totally invulnerable to missiles from the front side. In MTW2 engine it is solved ,so as it was realistically, tactic of choice is to shoot at pikemen (if they do not have proper missile unit protection). Also, in MTW2 engine, heavy infantry in prolonged melee can penetrate frontal rows of pikes (as it should be realistically)

So, is it somehow possible to fix at least this missile resistance in EB game? I was thinking to strip of the phalanx special abilityfrom pikemen, so they will be like Greek phalanxes are now in the game – just spearmen with longer spears. But it is very non elegant way, making some other problems. Do you have an elegant cure, since I really do not like this feature, due to the realism, especially because pikes are one of the main infantry formations in this time frame?

PS. I have never played with chariots in my campaign game now, but in custom battle, they have remained “fire and forget” ultimate anti cavalry weapon like it was in 0.8. Just charge them in group of cavalry and it is blood bath. I wrote back then, about this issue and moders have promised it will be fixed.
Thanks

[Entropy Judge]

For the Missile issue, you could lower their Shield Value, as that's doubled against Missiles (and only affects the front and left side) - but remember that if you do make them vulnerable to missiles, you've essentially made pikes useless. They're slow-moving in Phalanx, so missiles are the normal answer, and if you increase their vulnerability, you've completely shot (no pun intended) any potential use for them since they will die so easily. And if (as you say), pikes form a major infantry formation (as opposed to ...?), you'll have completely eradicated any point to it.

Also, in MTW2 engine, heavy infantry in prolonged melee can penetrate frontal rows of pikes (as it should be realistically)

I've had this happen pretty often. Principes are good at it, as are any other heavily-armoured (or high Defense Skill) units. Pikes don't kill infantry very well unless said infantry are hit from the front and a side, so a heavy infantry push to the front will work, just bloodily (as is realistic). Principes tend to take more-or-less half casualties doing it.

[4th Regiment]

Thanks for the feedback.

So, shield defense against missiles doubles in phalanx formation? Well, maybe it will be not great but good enough option. I do not know why it will make pikes useless? It will make them more realistic – I really hate to see pikes under rain of missiles suffer almost no casualties. Historically, it was best way to deal with them, causing confusion, panics, and gaps for heavy infantry to move in – in game, even if some solder fall down, formation remain perfect…. On the contrary, standard tactics in the game is outflanking and charge from behind - which was very rare event in 1-3km long battle lines real major battles. Not to tell in reality it was much easier for rear rows of pikes to turn back 180 degrees – rise pike up and turn on your toe on command in second – thing you learn in first day in army (for those who were in army) Greek phalanx should be much more difficult to turn due to shield overlapping and much tighter formation - but in game it is opposite…We know that Swiss pikemen were even forming squares with pikes facing all directions..

Also, I am thinking to lower primary weapon attack for pikes, because it basically difficult to manipulate with such a long pike, unless some stupid unarmored no shield opponent is just charging on it to be impaled. Actually due to the law of lever, opponent can easily move tip of the pike sideway, up/down by using minimal power..and move forward..

Principes…well in contrary to MTW2 engine I have not seen heavy armored infantry penetrating pikes formation frontally...but maybe it can be

Cheers, rep +

[athanaric]

So, shield defense against missiles doubles in phalanx formation?

I dunno about that, but shield always counts twice against missiles. Even units like Parthian Spearmen or Gestikapoinann are pretty resistant to arrows from the front - thanks to their 4 defense shields.

Principes…well in contrary to MTW2 engine I have not seen heavy armored infantry penetrating pikes formation frontally...but maybe it can be

Try the Indian Guild Warriors, they tend to make mincemeat of pikemen. The Elite Thracians are similar.

[Dargaron]

So, shield defense against missiles doubles in phalanx formation? Well, maybe it will be not great but good enough option. I do not know why it will make pikes useless? It will make them more realistic – I really hate to see pikes under rain of missiles suffer almost no casualties. Historically, it was best way to deal with them, causing confusion, panics, and gaps for heavy infantry to move in – in game, even if some solder fall down, formation remain perfect….

Actually, the reason why the pikemen in the rear ranks held their pikes at an angle was to act as an unorthadox "shield" against arrows, that's why, if you look at the pikemen's stats, you'll see that they have a rather high shield bonus to represent this. Also, if arrows were the phalangite's weakness, how in the world did Alexander beat the Persians? Herodotus is quoted as saying,

The Persians educate their children, beginning at age five and going on to twenty, in three things only: in riding, in shooting and in speaking the truth -Herodotus

But in the end, at the battle of Pydna, it was Roman heavy infantry, exploiting the gaps in the phalanx formation, that won the day. This seems pretty similar to the tactics that (I at least) use in EB, which is to isolate each phalanx unit, and hammer them from both sides. I'd be willing to say that this is probably how most people beat a phalanx in EB, (unless their using cavalry ).

On the contrary, standard tactics in the game is outflanking and charge from behind - which was very rare event in 1-3km long battle lines real major battles. Not to tell in reality it was much easier for rear rows of pikes to turn back 180 degrees – rise pike up and turn on your toe on command in second – thing you learn in first day in army (for those who were in army) Greek phalanx should be much more difficult to turn due to shield overlapping and much tighter formation - but in game it is opposite…We know that Swiss pikemen were even forming squares with pikes facing all directions..

Actually, it's because phalanxes can turn so darned quickly that I have to use two units to outflank them. I'm not sure Pydna-like tactics can be used in RTW, because there isn't a good way to simulate the formation breaking down, therefore = no gaps to be exploited in a single phalanx unit. And about the hoplite phalanx, tuck shield under arm and turn on your toe on command in second .

Also, I am thinking to lower primary weapon attack for pikes, because it basically difficult to manipulate with such a long pike, unless some stupid unarmored no shield opponent is just charging on it to be impaled. Actually due to the law of lever, opponent can easily move tip of the pike sideway, up/down by using minimal power..and move forward..

Have you tried manuvering a 21ft pole? Have you been drilled in it for months/years? I'm fairly certain that, even if you couldn't thrust and weave with a sarrisa, you could probably line it up for a pretty nasty stab. And if you hit the enemy's shield, good luck to him getting your pike out of his shield. If you hit him, congrats, first kill. For one of the battles in the Macedonian-Roman wars, I'm pretty sure whoever was writing it (Polybius, perhaps?) described the pikes getting stuck in the legionnaries' shields. So they had to have some degree of aim.

[Entropy Judge]

But in the end, at the battle of Pydna, it was Roman heavy infantry, exploiting the gaps in the phalanx formation, that won the day.

I haven't read that particular explanation (recently, and even then it was over in the VV), but I think those gaps were actually caused by the infantry pressuring the pikemen and disrupting their formation, as pike phalanxes were more dependent on coherent formations than the Romans.

I'm fairly certain that, even if you couldn't thrust and weave with a sarrisa, you could probably line it up for a pretty nasty stab.

(See below, however ...)
As long as he isn't lowering them *too* much (as pikes and spears already get a penalty against infantry units), I'd say he's pretty good. Pikes are pretty heavy due to their length, and as an additional side-effect of that length, they bend - it's not a rigid pole. Moreover, it's the dense wall of pikes that make them dangerous - a single pikeman against someone with a shorter weapon and any sort of maneuvering room (IE, not stuck in a hallway) is going to lose.

So, shield defense against missiles doubles in phalanx formation?

No, just Shield Defense in general is doubled against missiles, like athanaric said. Although it doesn't seem to help much against siege equipment ... :devil:

I do not know why it will make pikes useless?

Because everyone gets ranged units - Slingers, Archers, and Javelin-casters (the last are the most dangerous, because their attacks are much higher than the other two). Pikes are only dangerous if you try to close with them frontally, in which case it's the higher number of attacks you get subjected to that does the damage - there are at least 3 lines of pikes to the front of the formation, and Pike units have more men per unit than most other units, so you're getting attacked at a *much* higher rate than other units can put out.

Making Pike units vulnerable to missiles makes their one advantage (higher rate of attack) null, as you've killed more of them before they can close, which also highlights their melee disadvantage: Once you get infantry into close-combat, the pikemen begin switching to their swords (which don't have a penalty vs Infantry), which are weaker, and they tend to die in droves since they're no longer projecting attacks forward.

Well, the above and the fact that the EB team did spend a lot of time making sure that units were balanced, and Pikes were pretty dominant weapons: Pyrrhus managed to kill a lot of Romans with Pikemen, and Alex didn't do too badly himself.

We know that Swiss pikemen were even forming squares with pikes facing all directions..

True enough, although I recall reading somewhere that the Swiss pike formations used shorter pikes than the sarissa, and had a higher percentage of bills and halberds for dealing with closer enemies, so it would be less unwieldy than the Macedonian phalanx.

Also, I am thinking to lower primary weapon attack for pikes, because it basically difficult to manipulate with such a long pike, unless some stupid unarmored no shield opponent is just charging on it to be impaled. Actually due to the law of lever, opponent can easily move tip of the pike sideway, up/down by using minimal power..and move forward..

Well, the leverage and 'stupid' arguments don't really hold water, as it's the *number* of pikes pointing forward and jabbing at the attacker that presents the problem - one pikeman is a dead pikeman, but start with 4-5 pikes jabbing at someone when he's trying to push another pike out of the way, and he can't go forward without getting stabbed.

Principes…well in contrary to MTW2 engine I have not seen heavy armored infantry penetrating pikes formation frontally...but maybe it can be

You aren't, by any chance, playing on Hard or Very Hard Battle Difficulty are you? EB is balanced for Medium Battle Difficulty, and pushing it up will give you wonky combat results.

That said, with my Principes example I was not going up against Elite units, just the normal ones:
Polybian Principes (or Pedites Extraordinarii work better, but are Elite units)
vs
Pezhetairoi
And again - nasty fight, but they did it.

[Dargaron]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargaron
But in the end, at the battle of Pydna, it was Roman heavy infantry, exploiting the gaps in the phalanx formation, that won the day.

I haven't read that particular explanation (recently, and even then it was over in the VV), but I think those gaps were actually caused by the infantry pressuring the pikemen and disrupting their formation, as pike phalanxes were more dependent on coherent formations than the Romans

Hm, the way I heard it, the Romans attacked, and the Pikemen did their job, holding the Romans in place, and pushing them back. Although they did this without causing many casualties, due to the big shields used by the Romans.

Unfortunately for the Macedonians, they pushed the Romans back over rough terrain (Hilly, boulders etc.) and that disrupted the formation as phalangites had to go around the obstacles, which lead to gaps, and then dead Hellens.

However, I don't actually have the source material, just heard this in a history course. I'm guessing the original writer's (translated) work been published, so it's probably not on the internet.

Yes, one pikeman vs pretty much anything else loses, (unless they have a secondary weapon), sorry, I was thinking in terms of hitting just the guy in front of you, when there are lots of available targets.
PS. What's VV?

[Entropy Judge]

Unfortunately for the Macedonians, they pushed the Romans back over rough terrain (Hilly, boulders etc.) and that disrupted the formation as phalangites had to go around the obstacles, which lead to gaps, and then dead Hellens.

Eh, it's something of a crapshoot. The Historians we have to rely on seem to contradict themselves in places (sure Pikemen don't like broken ground - but neither does any other heavy infantry), with one passage, IIRC, actually stating the phalangites charging downhill at the Romans ....

PS. What's VV?

Vestigia Vetustatis. It's the History board here, pretty good stuff:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=7

[Satapatiš]

Well, i did test.
Epirote phalangitai deuteroi vs camilian roman.
RTW 1.5 exe, battle difficulty medium, Romani were upgraded weapon/armour gold/gold (to match them in cost with phalangites).

I played with phalanx. Romani were computer controlled.

And outcome:



In simple frontal attack, without flanking, after repeated charges and pila attacks (pila attacks killed lot of pikemen), Romani penetrated phalanx. With heavy casualties, but, they won.

So, phalanx can be frontally defeated with heavy infatry.

That was against Romani.
In my Pahlava campaign phalanxes were often slaughtered with horse archers. Because pikemen are so slow, they were shooted in rear or flanks.
For missiles they are hard target from the front, but in reality pikes shafts from rear ranks would act as an arrow deflectors. Massed archery usually shooted at angle, with volley fire.
Imho phalanxes in EB are well balanced. And i used to play against phalanx armies, not with them.

[Drewski]

I lowered all Phalanx shield stats, to either 2 for non Elites (including Pez) and 3 for Elites. I've been using this for a long time now, playing both with and against Phalanx armies. It's just about as good a compromise as can be achieved.

The phalanxes now have what I feel to be a reasonable defence against missiles. They now take a few casualties, but not many. They still perform admirably in frontal melee combat as they should.

For an example of the damage, in a recent "clear up battle" my full army went against one unit, a Hellenic Medium Phalanx. The 3 units of Silver Eastern Slingers threw all stones before any melee engagement took place (battle on level ground). They killed around half the enemy unit (approx 65 of 122 men). The enemy unit just stood there in phalanx formation the whole time. With the default 5 shield (doubled to a ridiculous 10 in phalanx mode), the casualties would have been probably 20 or less.

[Dargaron]

@Drewski: I thought that shield defense was automatically doubled against missles, as Entropy Judge said?
Also, slings have a pretty low attack, so I'd think that they wouldn't do very much damage against enemies that don't rely on their armor for survivability. I thought the main use for slingers was to counter things like armoured horse archers and heavy infantry. (Not that they were included for that reason, just that their stats seem to point in that direction).

[Drewski]

@Drewski: I thought that shield defense was automatically doubled against missles, as Entropy Judge said?
Also, slings have a pretty low attack, so I'd think that they wouldn't do very much damage against enemies that don't rely on their armor for survivability. I thought the main use for slingers was to counter things like armoured horse archers and heavy infantry. (Not that they were included for that reason, just that their stats seem to point in that direction).

To be honest, no-one's really sure. I'm basing it off what others have said, and experience. Phalanx mode does seem to have some extra def vs missiles.

The example I used, is 3 units of Silver Chevron AP Slingers vs a "standard" Phalanx. That's 180 x 35 = 6300 AP Stones to make 65 casualties. Try the same on Triarii, or any other `Elites`, and I'll bet you almost wipe the Elite unit out. Why give a basic Phalanx some kind of invisible shield, that they don't merit, and didn't have? Note that the Elite Phalanx units, are still virtually bullet proof, even with shield down to 3 from 5.

Attacking with arrows from the front, will still cause almost negligable casualties to even native Phalanx units. It's the AP missiles that make the difference. Arrows or Sling Bullets from Behind, of course ignore the shield and cause regular level casualties.

Just my opinion btw:; and wasn't originally my idea (someone at the Org -sorry can't remember who- pointed me in that direction), but I can honestly say that it works very well in gameplay.

[Entropy Judge]

To be honest, no-one's really sure. I'm basing it off what others have said, and experience. Phalanx mode does seem to have some extra def vs missiles.

Might it be some kind of Shield overlap? Since the Shield bonus covers the Front-to-Left arc, maybe Phalangites (since their formation is closer than other units') get a doubled Shield defense ... just a thought, and I don't have Rome installed right now to check (with the Shield Wall formation from BI as a third test).

[Drewski]

Might it be some kind of Shield overlap? Since the Shield bonus covers the Front-to-Left arc, maybe Phalangites (since their formation is closer than other units') get a doubled Shield defense ... just a thought, and I don't have Rome installed right now to check (with the Shield Wall formation from BI as a third test).

Sounds a logical explanation for the observed effects, and may well be correct.

It's a terrible shame, that the original RTW programmers weren't as willing to divulge the inner workings, as in many other large selling PC Strat Games. It makes it very tough for modders, when they don't actually know for certain how core parts of a game actually function...

For instance : Still on the Phalanx topic, I fought a very lazy battle the other day (one of those again "mop up exercises, where you've taken the province, and there are several 3 or 4 unit ai armies hanging around getting in the way)

I sent a couple of Hellenic Medium Phalanxes , and some light infantry to mop up 3 native phalanx units. The first 2 were quickly surrounded and dispatched, the 3rd, I'd left to one of the Med Phalanxes on its own. I said it was a very lazy battle and I was half watching TV, when I noticed my Phalanx rout, and the enemy lesser unit had taken ZERO casualties!

On mousing over the enemy, I noticed "feeling secure on the hill". It took ground level camera and much squinting into the distance, to even discern any slope at all, but apparently the game had decided this was a hill, and as we all know, the higher phalanx is untouchable in a straight phalanx engagement. The slope advantage, seems to so overrule any other factors to such an extent, that it doesn't matter if the lower unit is triple Gold Argies, vs a Panta Phalanx on the marginally higher slope, they are doomed.

I have no idea why this was coded in such a way. Yes, a bonus for higher ground, but NOT something that makes armor, skill and everything else redundant...Again, this seems particular to phalanx units, others will get the higher ground bonus, but not become untouchable in the same way....

Ah well

[Entropy Judge]

I am so very, very glad I don't play Phalanx factions. The closest I come are the Speutogardoz (spelling) and the Vanilla Germanic Spear Warband. That is ridiculous.

[Watchman]

Might it be some kind of Shield overlap? Since the Shield bonus covers the Front-to-Left arc, maybe Phalangites (since their formation is closer than other units') get a doubled Shield defense ... just a thought, and I don't have Rome installed right now to check (with the Shield Wall formation from BI as a third test).

Pikemen don't overlap shields. And aren't particularly closely ranked, either.

[4th Regiment]

Is it somehow possible to lower down phalanx formation bonus to shield from 2x, to let say 1.2x?


How Alex has dilled with Persian archers...well...he protected his phalanx with lot of slingers, archers and light troops, and was trying to engage Persian line as soon as possible, not giving them time to shoot their arrows. For example in my recent game with Pontos, Armenians backstabbed me, and I was defending mountain pass with one native phalanx unit. 2/3 stack Army of Armenians attacked, I have retreated to corner of map and they suffered only few casualties after rain of all Armenian missiles. It happened in few turns in row…I am sorry, not so well armored unit as native phalanx, with one foot shield attached to the arm will be in serious problems only after one volley of javelins...

About attack against well armored heavy infantry…well, I really do not know how spear can penetrate big curved shield, and good body armor. Only vulnerable place on attacker is practically face…Pikemen should have minimal ability in killing heavy infantry frontally with pikes – they should just holding the line until other units do the job/flanking etc. So, lowering attack for primary weapon sounds reasonable..

I always play at H/H. As far as I remember from old MTW1, at H, AI use all its tricks and only in VH get unrealistic moral bonuses. But maybe I am wrong

[athanaric]

About attack against well armored heavy infantry…well, I really do not know how spear can penetrate big curved shield, and good body armor. Only vulnerable place on attacker is practically face…Pikemen should have minimal ability in killing heavy infantry frontally with pikes – they should just holding the line until other units do the job/flanking etc. So, lowering attack for primary weapon sounds reasonable..

IMO you should lower lethality rather than attack. Right now, sarissae have a lethality of 0.17, which is the highest of all infantry spears. High attack, low lethality => plenty of "knock-backs", few kills (like as with shortsword units). Which more or less represents holding the line.

I always play at H/H. As far as I remember from old MTW1, at H, AI use all its tricks and only in VH get unrealistic moral bonuses.

Alas, no. AI doesn't get smarter at all, rather it gets some boni on Hard and more on VH difficulty. IIRC Aradan said that it gets attack and defense boni.

[4th Regiment]

IMO you should lower lethality rather than attack. Right now, sarissae have a lethality of 0.17, which is the highest of all infantry spears. High attack, low lethality => plenty of "knock-backs", few kills (like as with shortsword units). Which more or less represents holding the line.

Thanks! Rep + In which folder to change that? Considering battle performance, I use change only export_decr_unit folder so far

Alas, no. AI doesn't get smarter at all, rather it gets some boni on Hard and more on VH difficulty. IIRC Aradan said that it gets attack and defense boni.

Is there any certain data/info about that? I have read few opinions considering this issue

[Satapatiš]

Phalanx penetrating power may comes from so called "othismos", or crowd pressure.
http://hollow-lakedaimon.blogspot.com/
Still, it`s only hypothesis.